    Human Trafficking: Monitoring and Evaluation of International
    Projects Are Limited, but Experts Suggest Improvements
    (26-JUL-07, GAO-07-1034).

    Human trafficking--a worldwide crime involving the exploitation
    of men, women, and children for others' financial gain--is a
    violation of human rights. Victims are often lured or abducted
    and forced to work in involuntary servitude. Since 2001, the U.S.
    government has provided about $447 million to combat global human
    trafficking. As GAO previously reported, estimates of the number
    of trafficking victims are questionable. In this report, GAO
    examines (1) collaboration among organizations involved in
    international antitrafficking efforts, (2) U.S. government
    monitoring of antitrafficking projects and difficulties in
    evaluating these projects, and (3) suggestions for strengthening
    monitoring and evaluation. GAO analyzed agency documents;
    convened an expert panel; interviewed officials; and conducted
    fieldwork in Indonesia, Thailand, and Mexico.
    -------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
    REPORTNUM:   GAO-07-1034
        ACCNO:   A73431
      TITLE:     Human Trafficking: Monitoring and Evaluation of
    International Projects Are Limited, but Experts Suggest
    Improvements
         DATE:   07/26/2007
      SUBJECT:   Children
    	     Crime prevention
    	     Crime victims
    	     Evaluation methods
    	     Federal aid to foreign countries
    	     Foreign governments
    	     Human rights violations
    	     International cooperation
    	     International relations
    	     Program evaluation
    	     Strategic planning

    ******************************************************************
    ** 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-07-1034

         * [1]Report to Congressional Requesters

              * [2]July 2007

         * [3]HUMAN TRAFFICKING

              * [4]Monitoring and Evaluation of International Projects Are
                Limited, but Experts Suggest Improvements

         * [5]Contents

              * [6]Results in Brief
              * [7]Background

                   * [8]Human Trafficking Cases Often Follow a Similar Pattern
                   * [9]U.S. Government and Multilateral Organizations' Projects
                     Focus on Three Areas
                   * [10]U.S. Agency and International Organizations' Monitoring
                     and Evaluation Requirements Vary

              * [11]Organizations Have Taken Steps to Collaborate, but Continue
                to Face Challenges

                   * [12]Global, Regional, and Country-Level Organizations
                     Recognize the Importance of Collaborating to Effectively
                     Combat Human Trafficking
                   * [13]Organizations Face Challenges in Collaborating to Combat
                     Trafficking
                   * [14]Organizations Have Taken Steps to Strengthen
                     Collaboration, but Challenges Remain at the Global,
                     Regional, and Country Levels

                        * [15]Global and Regional Collaboration Efforts Have
                          Recently Been Initiated
                        * [16]Country-Level Organizations Have Taken Some Steps
                          to Strengthen Collaboration, but Continue to Face
                          Difficult Challenges

              * [17]U.S. Government- Funded Antitrafficking Projects Lack Some
                Key Monitoring Elements; Little Is Known about Project Impact Due
                to Difficulties in Conducting Evaluations

                   * [18]U.S. Government-Funded Antitrafficking Projects Lack
                     Some Important Monitoring Elements; State Is Taking Steps to
                     Strengthen Monitoring
                   * [19]Factors Impede Evaluations of Antitrafficking Projects
                     and Little Is Known about Project Impact

                        * [20]Lack of Project-Level Baseline Estimates Limits
                          Evaluations
                        * [21]Elements of Project Design Impede Evaluations
                        * [22]Little Is Known about Project Impact

              * [23]Expert Panel Identified Ways to Address the Difficulties of
                Monitoring and Evaluating Antitrafficking Projects

                   * [24]Conduct Research on the Nature and Severity of Human
                     Trafficking
                   * [25]Address Monitoring and Evaluation Weaknesses in the
                     Design of Antitrafficking Projects

              * [26]Conclusions
              * [27]Recommendations for Executive Action
              * [28]Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

         * [29]Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
         * [30]Selected International Organizations Involved in Combating Human
           Trafficking
         * [31]Methods Suggested by Expert Panel to Estimate the Number of Human
           Trafficking Victims
         * [32]Comments from the Department of State

              * [33]GAO Comments

         * [34]Comments from the Department of Labor

              * [35]GAO Comments

         * [36]Comments from the United States Agency for International
           Development
         * [37]Comments from the Department of Health and Human Services
         * [38]GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
         * [39]PDF6-Ordering Information.pdf

              * [40]Order by Mail or Phone

    Report to Congressional Requesters

    July 2007

    HUMAN TRAFFICKING

    Monitoring and Evaluation of International Projects Are Limited, but
    Experts Suggest Improvements

    Letter

    Contents

    Tables

    July 26, 2007

    The Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
    Ranking Member
    Committee on Foreign Affairs
    House of Representatives

    The Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.
    House of Representatives

    Human trafficking--a worldwide crime involving the exploitation of men,
    women, and children for others' financial gain--is a violation of
    fundamental human rights. Victims are often lured or abducted from their
    homes and subsequently forced, through various means, to work in
    prostitution, sweatshops, agricultural settings, or domestic service,
    among other types of servitude. In addition to inflicting grave personal
    damage upon its victims, trafficking undermines government authority,
    fuels organized criminal groups and gangs, and imposes social and public
    health costs. As we have previously reported, estimates of the number of
    trafficking victims are questionable due to data and methodological
    weaknesses.^1

    To combat global human trafficking, the U.S. government directly
    implements projects overseas and contributes financial support to the
    United Nations (UN) and other international organizations. The U.S.
    government has strongly supported antitrafficking efforts and, since 2001,
    has provided approximately $447 million in foreign assistance to
    nongovernmental organizations (NGO), international organizations, and
    foreign governments to combat and help eliminate human trafficking.^2 In
    addition, since the mid-1990s, the United States has played a leading role
    in putting human trafficking on the international community's agenda. In
    2000, Congress enacted the Trafficking Victims Protection Act^3 (TVPA) to
    combat trafficking in persons; in 2003 and 2005, Congress reauthorized the
    act,^4 which is due for reauthorization in 2007. In December 2005, the
    United States became a party to the United Nations' Protocol to Prevent,
    Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children,
    Supplementing the United Nations Convention Against Transnational
    Organized Crime,^5 which entered into force in 2003 and, as of July 2007,
    has 117 signatories and 113 party nations.

    ^1GAO, Human Trafficking: Better Data, Strategy, and Reporting Needed to Enhance U.S.
    Antitrafficking Efforts Abroad, GAO-06-825 (Washington, D.C.: July 18, 2006).

    ^2In 2003, the President announced the launch of a $50 million initiative to support
    organizations active in combating trafficking and child sex tourism, and in rescuing women
    and children.

    ^3Pub. L. No. 106-386.

    This review is part of a larger body of work that you requested on U.S.
    and international efforts to combat human trafficking in the United States
    and abroad.^6 To review efforts to combat human trafficking, we examined
    (1) collaboration among organizations involved in international
    antitrafficking efforts, (2) U.S. government agencies' monitoring of
    antitrafficking projects and difficulties in evaluating these projects,
    and (3) suggestions for strengthening monitoring and evaluation.

    To address these objectives, we reviewed relevant planning, funding, and
    project documents on human trafficking from the Departments of State,
    Justice, Labor, Homeland Security (DHS), and Health and Human Services
    (HHS) and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). We also
    reviewed planning and project documents from relevant UN and other
    international agencies and offices, including the UN Office on Drugs and
    Crime (UNODC), International Labor Organization (ILO), International
    Organization for Migration (IOM), United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF),
    and UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). In addition, we discussed
    international antitrafficking efforts with officials from the above
    agencies and organizations, as well as foreign government officials and
    NGO representatives, in Washington, D.C., and during our fieldwork in
    Indonesia, Thailand, and Mexico. We selected these countries on the basis
    of the amount of U.S. funding provided for international antitrafficking
    projects and the number of U.S. government agencies and international
    organizations working in each country. In April 2007, we worked with the
    National Academy of Sciences to organize a 2-day expert panel on
    challenges and alternative strategies for monitoring and evaluating
    international antitrafficking projects. We conducted our review from
    August 2006 to June 2007 in accordance with generally accepted government
    auditing standards. Appendix I provides a detailed description of our
    objectives, scope, and methodology.

    ^4Congress amended and reauthorized this act�the Trafficking Victims Protection
    Reauthorization Act of 2003 and the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of
    2005. (Pub. L. Nos. 108-193 and 109-164.)

    ^5This agreement, also known as the Palermo Protocol, seeks to prevent trafficking, protect
    victims, and promote antitrafficking cooperation among nations. The protocol supplements
    the U.N. Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime. It was opened for signature in
    Palermo, Italy, in December 2000.

    ^6We issued our first report, GAO-06-825, in July 2006. See also Human Trafficking: A
    Strategic Framework Could Help Enhance the Interagency Collaboration Needed to
    Effectively Combat Trafficking Crimes, GAO-07-915 (Washington, D.C.: July 26, 2007),
    which addresses U.S. federal law enforcement agencies� efforts to investigate and prosecute
    human trafficking crimes in the United States.

    Results in Brief

    While governments, international organizations, and NGOs have recognized
    the importance of collaborating and have established some coordination
    mechanisms and practices, they will need to overcome challenges that have
    impeded collaboration in the past for their efforts to be successful. The
    UN General Assembly passed a resolution in December 2006 recognizing that
    broad international cooperation is essential for combating trafficking,
    and UNODC launched the Global Initiative to Fight Human Trafficking in
    March 2007. In two of the three countries we visited, we found that host
    governments--which bear ultimate responsibility for combating trafficking
    within their borders--have passed national antitrafficking laws and
    enacted national action plans. However, organizations continue to face
    numerous challenges when collaborating to combat human trafficking,
    including varying levels of government commitment and capacity. For
    example, some governments treat foreign trafficking victims as illegal
    immigrants and deport rather than protect them. In addition, according to
    officials in two of the three countries we visited, the ministries
    responsible for coordinating antitrafficking efforts have limited
    authority and operational capacity.

    U.S. government-funded antitrafficking projects often lack some important
    elements that allow projects to be monitored, and little is known about
    project impact due to difficulties in conducting evaluations. Project
    documents we reviewed generally include monitoring elements, such as an
    overarching goal and related activities, but they often lack other
    monitoring elements such as targets for measuring performance. To oversee
    antitrafficking projects, State officials told us they need to supplement
    their efforts with assistance from U.S. embassy staff, but they have not
    established written guidance for oversight. Officials said that they are
    working to improve performance measures and develop monitoring guidance.
    Conducting impact evaluations of antitrafficking projects is difficult due
    to several factors, including questionable project level estimates of the
    number of trafficking victims. These estimates are needed for baselines by
    which to evaluate how effectively specific interventions are reducing
    trafficking. In addition, elements in the design of certain
    antitrafficking projects, such as short time frames and objectives that
    are too broad, further impede evaluation. Because of these difficulties,
    few evaluations that determine impact have been completed. As a result,
    little is known about the impact of antitrafficking interventions.

    A GAO-convened panel of experts identified and discussed ways to address
    the factors that make it difficult to monitor and evaluate antitrafficking
    projects. Panelists' suggested approaches included improving information
    on the nature and severity of human trafficking and addressing monitoring
    and evaluation weaknesses in the design of antitrafficking projects. To
    improve information on the nature and severity of human trafficking,
    panelists suggested several sampling methods that have been used to sample
    other hard-to-reach populations, including the homeless, hidden migrants,
    missing and exploited children, and domestic violence victims. One
    suggested method is sampling of "hot spots"--an intensive search for
    victims in areas known to have high concentrations of victims or in areas
    to which many victims return. To address weaknesses in project design that
    impede monitoring and evaluation, panelists suggested that officials
    design projects that clearly link activities to intended outcomes,
    identify measurable indicators, and establish procedures for setting and
    modifying targets. Panelists further advised officials to determine which
    projects are ready to be evaluated before conducting an evaluation.

    To improve the monitoring and evaluation of antitrafficking projects, we
    are making two recommendations to the Secretaries of State and Labor and
    the Administrator of USAID because they provided the most U.S. funding for
    projects to combat global human trafficking. First, to improve information
    about project impact on the nature and severity of human trafficking, we
    are recommending that these three officials consider several actions,
    where appropriate, such as developing better data about the incidence of
    trafficking at the project level and applying rigorous evaluation
    methodologies. Second, to address monitoring and evaluation weaknesses in
    the design of antitrafficking projects, we are recommending that these
    three officials consider other actions, such as developing frameworks that
    clearly link activities with project-level goals, indicators, and targets;
    conducting "evaluability assessments" to determine whether a project is
    ready to be evaluated; and building evaluation into project design before
    the project is implemented.

    We received written comments on a draft of this report from State, Labor,
    USAID, and HHS, which are reprinted in appendixes IV, V, VI, and VII,
    along with our responses to specific points. State said that the report
    confirms several challenges inherent in foreign assistance efforts,
    including antihuman trafficking programs. However, State disagreed with
    our finding that monitoring is limited, stating that monitoring is in
    place at the department and improving. While we recognize that State and
    other U.S. agencies have certain elements of monitoring in place, we
    report that most projects lack other important elements, including a logic
    model that clearly explains how activities are linked to project goals and
    targets that will establish benchmarks for measuring performance. Labor
    said the report provides a good overall assessment of international
    cooperation regarding antitrafficking efforts and the need to enhance
    collaboration, and highlights important areas for improving monitoring and
    evaluation. However, Labor stated that the report does not fully reflect
    several mechanisms it uses, including audits and process evaluations, to
    monitor and oversee antitrafficking projects. In response, we revised the
    text to further clarify Labor's monitoring and evaluation efforts. USAID
    commented that it is concerned with the challenges of coordination,
    monitoring, and evaluation, and agreed to continue working to make
    improvements in these areas. State agreed to implement our
    recommendations, while Labor and USAID did not directly respond to our
    recommendations. HHS said that the report substantively covers the range
    of programs and services available to combat human trafficking.

    Background

    Human trafficking generally involves the use of force, fraud, or coercion
    to enslave individuals in situations that are exploitative and often
    illegal and dangerous. Since 2001, the U.S. government has contributed
    approximately $447 million worldwide to foreign governments, NGOs, and
    international organizations--such as UNODC, ILO, and IOM--to combat human
    trafficking. U.S. agency and international organization projects generally
    aim to prevent trafficking, protect victims, and prosecute traffickers.
    Organizations have different requirements for monitoring and evaluating
    their antitrafficking projects.

    Human Trafficking Cases Often Follow a Similar Pattern

    Although the crime of human trafficking can take different forms in
    different regions and countries around the world, most human trafficking
    cases follow a similar pattern--that is, traffickers use acquaintances or
    false advertisements to recruit men, women, and children in or near their
    homes, and then transfer them to and exploit them in another city, region,
    or country.^7  According to the TVPA, victims of severe forms of
    trafficking include those who are recruited or transported for labor
    through the use of force, fraud, or coercion and for the purpose of
    subjecting them to involuntary servitude.^8 The use of fraud, force, or
    coercion typically distinguishes human trafficking victims from
    individuals who are smuggled. In some cases, individuals may enter freely
    into agreement with and pay smugglers to help them cross international
    borders. After arriving at their destination, however, individuals who do
    not understand the destination country's language or culture may be
    exploited by individuals who take advantage of their vulnerability.

    Traffickers control their victims' living and working conditions by
    physically confining them, taking away their identity documents, and
    threatening their families. Traffickers also exploit victims' fears that
    authorities will prosecute or deport them if they seek help. Victims may
    be forced to work in legal or illegal and often dangerous areas, including
    brothels, sweatshops, agricultural businesses, and people's homes.
    Documented human trafficking cases have involved victims such as children
    forced to beg for money in cities, work in carpet shops, and participate
    in pornography and sex acts with adults; women held in slavery-like
    conditions as domestic servants, strip club dancers, and prostitutes; and
    men forced to perform work in the agricultural sector and on fishing
    vessels.

    ^7The Palermo Protocol defines trafficking in persons as the recruitment, transportation,
    transfer, harboring, or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other
    forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a
    position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the
    consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation.
    Exploitation includes, at a minimum, the exploitation or the prostitution of others or other
    forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, or practices similar to slavery,
    servitude, or the removal of organs.

    ^8Under the TVPA, victims of severe forms of trafficking are defined as those persons subject
    to (1) sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion,
    or in which the person induced to perform such acts is under age 18 or (2) the recruitment,
    harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or services, through
    the use of force, fraud, or coercion, for the purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude,
    peonage, debt bondage, or slavery. The TVPA does not specify movement across
    international boundaries as a condition of trafficking; it does not require the transportation
    of victims from one locale to another. (Pub. L. No. 106-386.)

    U.S. Government and Multilateral Organizations' Projects Focus on Three
    Areas

    To combat the diverse forms of global human trafficking, 5 U.S.
    departments, USAID, and at least 15 international organizations have
    provided assistance to governments and civil society organizations in more
    than 100 countries. Assistance generally aimed to enhance efforts to

    1.prevent human trafficking through public awareness, outreach, education,
    and advocacy campaigns;

    2.protect and assist victims by providing shelters as well as health,
    psychological, legal, and vocational services; and

    3.investigate and prosecute human trafficking crimes by providing training
    and technical assistance for law enforcement officials, such as police,
    prosecutors, and judges.

    These categories of interrelated victim-centered assistance
    activities--prevention, protection, and prosecution--are commonly referred
    to as "the three p's." Each type of assistance is viewed as critical for
    reducing the incidence of human trafficking.

    Since 2001, U.S. government agencies have provided approximately $447
    million in foreign assistance to international organizations, NGOs, and
    foreign governments to combat human trafficking (see table 1). Of the U.S.
    agencies, State, Labor, and USAID have provided the most funding to combat
    global human trafficking.

    Table 1: U.S. Funding Obligated for Activities to Combat Global Human
    Trafficking, Fiscal Years 2001-2006

           Dollars in
            millions
                          FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006   Total
    State               $11.47  $23.01  $28.13  $33.36  $34.41  $18.36 $148.74
    USAID                 6.74   10.72   15.42   27.59   21.34   27.31  109.12
    Labor ^a             22.26   32.93   48.31   18.65   35.90   28.05  186.10
    Justice^b                0       0       0    0.20       0       0    0.20
    HHS                      0       0       0       0    2.20       0    2.20
    DHS^c                  n/a       0       0    0.20       0       0    0.20
    Total               $40.47  $66.66  $91.86  $80.00  $93.85  $73.72 $446.56

    Source: GAO analysis of data provided by the Department of State's Office
    to Combat and Monitor Trafficking in Persons and the Department of Labor.

    Note: Funding is reported upon obligation by agencies in the year in which
    it is obligated.

    ^aIn response to inquiries from GAO, Labor reclassified projects funded in
    2001 and 2005 and subsequently revised figures for these years. In
    addition to the $28,048,000 allocated for projects to combat trafficking
    in 2006, Labor provided $300,000 for a trafficking research project.

    ^bIn addition to the $200,000 in Justice funding, State provided
    additional funding to the department's Office of Overseas Prosecutorial
    Development, Assistance and Training and International Criminal
    Investigative Training Assistance Program to conduct training overseas. In
    fiscal year 2004, State provided a total of $6.50 million to the two
    Justice programs; in fiscal year 2005, it provided $2.08 million. In
    fiscal year 2006, State and USAID provided $1.90 million. These amounts
    are reflected in the State total in this table.

    ^cDHS officials stated that additional funds used to carry out
    antitrafficking activities, including law enforcement activities, come
    from its regular budget and cannot be broken out.

    As we have previously mentioned, U.S. agencies support antitrafficking
    projects implemented worldwide by various international organizations,
    which also receive funding from other donor governments and organizations.
    As shown in table 2, for UNODC, ILO, and IOM, total resources allocated to
    combating trafficking since 2000 totaled about $255 million. The U.S.
    government provided about $122  million to UNODC, ILO, and IOM to combat
    human trafficking, according to data provided by these organizations and
    State's Office to Combat and Monitor Trafficking and Persons (G/TIP). In
    addition, according to UNICEF's annual reports, between 2003 and 2005,
    UNICEF allocated more than $453 million to its worldwide child protection
    program, which includes projects to combat trafficking and the sexual
    exploitation of children.^9

    Table 2: Selected International Organizations' Funding for Antitrafficking
    Projects

         Dollars in millions
                               U.S. government funding          Total funding for
                                   for antitrafficking   antitrafficking projects
                                            projects^a from the United States and
                                                                     other donors
    Worldwide organizations
    UNODC ^b                        $5.28 (2002-06)   $18.16 (2002 to present)
    ILO ^c                  46.35 (2000 to present)    84.47 (2000 to present)
    IOM ^d                  70.10 (2000 to present)   152.18 (2000 to present)
    Total                                   $121.73                    $254.81
    Regional organizations
    Organization for              $0.69 (2004-2006)          $5.50 (2004-2006)
    Security and
    Cooperation in Europe
    (OSCE)^e
    Organization of          1.21 (2000 to present)     1.40 (2000 to present)
    American States (OAS)^f
    Multilateral
    development banks
    Inter-American                                                       $1.43
    Development Bank
    (IDB)^g
    Asian Development Bank                                                1.69
    (ADB)^h

    Source: GAO analysis of data provided by State, UN agencies, multilateral
    development banks, and regional organizations.

    Note: Organizations included in this table were able to separate funding
    amounts for trafficking-specific projects. Information on other
    international organizations involved in combating human trafficking--but
    for which funding information for trafficking-specific projects was not
    available--is included in appendix II.

    ^aAmounts reflect U.S. government extrabudgetary support specifically for
    antitrafficking projects. Amounts do not reflect the U.S. government's
    regular contributions to these organizations.

    ^bAmount of U.S. government funding to UNODC was based on GAO analysis of
    data provided by State G/TIP. Amount of total UNODC funding for
    antitrafficking projects was based on GAO analysis of data provided by
    State and UNODC.

    ^cAmounts of U.S. government funding and total ILO funding were provided
    by ILO.

    ^dAmounts of U.S. government funding and total IOM funding were provided
    by IOM. Totals were calculated, in part, on the basis of U.S. dollar
    amounts converted from other currencies using exchange rates as of May
    2007.

    ^eAmounts reflect donor pledge amounts provided by OSCE for a 2-year
    period (2004-2006), as of May 2007. Funding amounts in Euros--552,617 and
    4,387,454--were converted to U.S. dollars using a weighted average annual
    exchange rate for the period beginning 2004 and ending March 2007.
    According to GAO analysis of State G/TIP data, total U.S. funding for OSCE
    antitrafficking projects for the 4-year period from 2002 to 2006 was
    approximately $1.5 million.

    ^fAmounts reflect funding data provided by OAS's Department of Public
    Security for its antitrafficking projects. In addition, according to State
    G/TIP data, USAID provided $367,150 to the OAS Inter-American Commission
    on Women for antitrafficking projects in fiscal year 2003, and G/TIP
    provided $405,548 to implement an OAS coordinator's antitrafficking
    activities in fiscal year 2004.

    ^gIDB also funded two countries' security programs, one capacity-building
    project and one gender mainstreaming project, that each included
    antitrafficking components.

    ^hAccording to ADB, this amount was allocated to trafficking-specific
    activities included in five technical assistance projects. In addition,
    ADB included human trafficking prevention components in 16 transport
    projects totaling $2.3 billion. The amount of trafficking-specific
    components in these projects was not available.

    ^9UNICEF was not able to break out budget data for trafficking-specific projects or activities.
    According to State G/TIP data, U.S. government support to UNICEF for antitrafficking
    projects from fiscal years 2002 to 2006 totaled $7.14 million.

    Some U.S. agencies and international organizations have provided
    assistance that, although not specifically related to human trafficking,
    may help to combat trafficking by reducing individuals' vulnerability to
    becoming victims and by strengthening countries' judicial systems. For
    example, USAID, the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, and the
    Inter-American Development Bank have implemented projects to root out
    corruption, build host governments' legal systems, and improve the
    economic conditions of vulnerable populations in developing countries. See
    appendix II for additional information on international organizations'
    missions and antitrafficking activities.

    U.S. Agency and International Organizations' Monitoring and Evaluation
    Requirements Vary

    Monitoring and evaluation are important tools for managing projects and
    should be considered when designing projects. Performance measurement
    involves developing a logic framework to explain how an intervention is to
    achieve its intended outcomes. Monitoring helps agencies determine whether
    the project is meeting its goals, update and adjust interventions and
    activities as needed, and ensure that funds are used responsibly.
    Monitoring includes, among other things, the development of indicators
    that are linked as closely as possible to the variables identified in the
    logic framework. These indicators are to be used throughout implementation
    to assess whether the project is likely to achieve the desired results.
    Monitoring also involves the choice of baseline and target values for each
    indicator and includes plans for periodic performance reports and data
    quality reviews. Evaluation is needed to assess a project's impact or
    effectiveness. Project evaluation involves the development of a
    methodology that will be used to assess the project's impact and describes
    plans for collecting baseline, interim, and final data on project results.

    The TVPA requires the President's Interagency Task Force to Monitor and
    Combat Trafficking in Persons to measure and evaluate the progress of the
    U.S. government's efforts to combat trafficking. The Trafficking Victims
    Protection Reauthorization Act of 2003 (TVPRA 2003) includes a
    congressional finding that additional research is needed to fully
    understand the phenomenon of trafficking in persons and to determine the
    most effective strategies for combating trafficking. The TVPRA 2003 also
    requires an annual report from the U.S. Attorney General to Congress to
    provide information on U.S. government activities to combat trafficking in
    persons. In addition to these reports, Justice began preparing annual
    assessments of U.S. government activities to combat trafficking in persons
    in 2003. All six U.S. organizations' guidelines also require implementers
    to monitor and report on project performance. In addition, Labor also
    requires independent midterm and final evaluations for all international
    antitrafficking projects.

    Organizations Have Taken Steps to Collaborate, but Continue to Face
    Challenges

    Global, regional, and country-level organizations recognize the importance
    of collaborating to effectively combat human trafficking. Although
    organizations involved in combating trafficking--governments, multilateral
    organizations, and donors--have implemented some practices to strengthen
    collaboration, to succeed they will need to overcome challenges that can
    impede collaboration, including varying levels of government commitment
    and capacity.

    Global, Regional, and Country-Level Organizations Recognize the Importance
    of Collaborating to Effectively Combat Human Trafficking

    At the global level, several UN organizations have acknowledged the
    importance of collaborating to effectively combat human trafficking. The
    UN Chief Executives Board^10  recognized the challenges in countering
    human trafficking and proposed establishing an interagency mechanism to
    strengthen coordination in 2005. In July 2006, a UN Economic and Social
    Committee resolution requested that UNODC organize a meeting to coordinate
    the technical assistance that UN and other intergovernmental organizations
    provide. In December 2006, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution
    recognizing  that broad international cooperation between member states
    and intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations is essential for
    effectively countering the threat of human trafficking, and underlined the
    importance of bilateral, subregional, and regional partnerships,
    initiatives, and actions. This resolution further encouraged member states
    to initiate and develop working-level contacts among countries of origin,
    transit, and destination, especially among police, prosecutors, and social
    authorities.

    Organizations at the regional level have also recognized the importance of
    collaboration. For example, in a September 2006 report, the Organization
    for Security and Cooperation in Europe's (OSCE) antitrafficking unit noted
    that, since trafficking is a transnational crime, collaboration is crucial
    to enable transnational mechanisms of communication and cooperation among
    governments, law enforcement, judiciary, and NGOs. In addition, six
    countries in the Mekong subregion of Southeast Asia have called for
    strengthened cooperation to combat human trafficking under a process
    called the Coordinated Mekong Ministerial Initiative Against Trafficking
    (COMMIT).

    ^10The Chief Executives Board furthers coordination and cooperation on substantive and
    management issues facing UN system organizations. The board brings together on a regular
    basis the executive heads of the organizations of the UN system, under the chairmanship of
    the UN Secretary General.

    At the country level, donor governments and UN organizations have also
    recognized the need to establish coordination mechanisms to, among other
    things, share information and leverage the comparative advantages of each
    organization. The Paris Declaration of Aid Effectiveness^11 establishes
    the importance of donor coordination, stating that excessive fragmentation
    of aid at the global, country, or sector level impairs its effectiveness.
    It further states that a pragmatic approach to the division of labor and
    burden sharing increases complementarity and can reduce costs. Through the
    declaration, donors committed to make use of their respective comparative
    advantage at a sector or country level by delegating authority to lead
    donors for the execution of projects, activities, and tasks. To draw on
    the collective strengths of the UN agencies and programs operating in a
    country, UN country teams and the host government develop a national
    analysis, called a common country assessment. They subsequently produce a
    national development assistance framework, which describes the collective
    UN response and the expected results to achieve national priorities.

    For U.S. government agencies, a 2002 presidential directive stated that
    strong coordination among agencies working on domestic and foreign policy
    is crucial.^12 The directive called for departments and agencies to
    coordinate U.S. foreign assistance programs, including those that provide
    funding to governmental or nongovernmental organizations to combat
    trafficking in persons. State officials told us that this is done through
    the Senior Policy Operating Group (SPOG), which, among other activities,
    facilitates a review by SPOG programming agencies of each other's grant
    proposals for antitrafficking projects.

    ^11The Paris Declaration, endorsed on March 2, 2005, is an international agreement under the
    Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development that aims to provide a practical,
    action-oriented road map to improve the quality of aid and its impact on development. The
    56 partnership commitments are organized around 5 key principles: ownership, alignment,
    harmonization, managing for results, and mutual accountability. The United States is one of
    the participating countries.

    ^12National Security Presidential Directive 22 (signed on Dec. 16, 2002).

    Organizations Face Challenges in Collaborating to Combat Trafficking

    Organizations--governments, multilateral organizations, and NGOs--face
    several challenges in collaborating to combat human trafficking, including
    the following:

    oGovernment commitment varies. State's annual Trafficking in Persons
    Report, which  analyzes and ranks foreign governments' compliance with
    minimum standards to combat trafficking, as outlined in the TVPA,
    illustrates governments' varied efforts to address the issue. For example,
    governments might not recognize trafficking as a problem. They may treat
    foreign trafficking victims as illegal immigrants and deport them back to
    their home countries, rather than protect them. They also may not
    recognize trafficking within their own borders as a problem. Moreover,
    some government officials are themselves involved in human trafficking.

    oGovernment capacity varies. Governments with greater resources and more
    established institutions have a greater capacity to address trafficking
    than countries that are poorer or less stable. In addition, changes in
    government leadership and personnel, due to elections, coups,
    assassinations, or other events, may result in the loss of expertise in
    combating human trafficking. Furthermore, governments may put trafficking
    under the purview of ministries with limited authority, such as women's
    ministries.

    oOrganizations that combat trafficking vary in perspective and may be in
    competition for limited funds. Combating trafficking involves
    organizations--at the international and country levels--with expertise in
    raising awareness, assisting child and adult victims, and investigating
    trafficking cases, among other areas. Organizations may view trafficking
    through their own mandates or viewpoints and may perceive each other not
    only as collaborators but also as competitors for scarce resources. As
    such, they may not share information, which could lead to duplication and
    waste of funds.^13

    oUnderstanding of trafficking varies across languages and cultures.
    Countries approach trafficking in different ways. For example, some
    countries' national antitrafficking strategies do not include men as
    potential trafficking victims; also, in some countries, parents in
    villages often sell their children to work as domestic servants in large
    cities. Furthermore, translation issues can complicate establishing a
    common understanding of what constitutes trafficking. For example,
    although the legal term in Spanish for human trafficking is "trata de
    personas," English speakers have translated human trafficking into Spanish
    as "trafico de personas," which in fact means human smuggling.

    ^13UN Chief Executives Board High Level Committee on Programs, Follow-up to CEB/HLCP
    decisions: Curbing Transnational Crime, CEB/2004/HLCP/VIII/CRP (Sept. 9, 2004).

    Organizations Have Taken Steps to Strengthen Collaboration, but Challenges
    Remain at the Global, Regional, and Country Levels

    Global and Regional Collaboration Efforts Have Recently Been Initiated

    Organizations at the global level have defined a common outcome--to end
    human trafficking and slavery--and have recently initiated various efforts
    to strengthen collaboration. In March 2007, UNODC launched the Global
    Initiative to Fight Human Trafficking to generate political will, an
    action plan, and financial resources to combat trafficking worldwide. The
    steering committee of the initiative includes the six leading
    international organizations involved in combating trafficking in persons:
    UNODC, ILO, IOM, UNICEF, OSCE, and the Office of the United Nations High
    Commissioner for Human Rights. UNODC also created the Interagency
    Cooperation Group Against Trafficking in Persons in September 2006 with
    the intended outcome of improving coordination between UN agencies and
    other international organizations, and to facilitate a holistic approach
    to preventing and combating human trafficking. The group's functions
    include exchanging information and promoting the effective and efficient
    use of resources.

    Most existing regional coordination efforts that we reviewed have defined
    a common outcome and established action plans for carrying out
    antitrafficking activities. These efforts vary regarding whether they are
    specifically directed against trafficking or are included in discussions
    on migration or smuggling. In addition, they vary in number of
    participating members from as few as 6 countries in the Mekong subregion
    to as many as
    56 countries in Europe, Asia, and North America. For example, the
    governments involved in a UN project that specifically focused on
    strengthening cooperation to combat trafficking in the Mekong subregion
    have agreed to undertake 18 actions to combat human trafficking, as part
    of an effort called the COMMIT process. Officials stated that this
    agreement strengthens these countries' incentives to undertake the actions
    through mutual accountability. In addition, COMMIT developed an action
    plan that groups existing activities into a single framework delineating
    roles and responsibilities of UN organizations, implementing partners, and
    governments in the six Mekong countries. Officials contrasted the COMMIT
    process, which includes a small group of countries in one region with
    interconnected trafficking problems, to larger organizations such as the
    Bali Process, which approaches trafficking issues in conjunction with
    issues related to smuggling in the Asia-Pacific region and has a larger
    geographic scope, consisting of 38 governments across several regions.
    These officials stated that having a larger geographic scope makes it more
    difficult for the governments of these countries to hold each other
    accountable for implementing the regional action plan. In addition to
    these examples, OSCE initiated the Alliance against Trafficking in
    Persons, which established a partnership with major actors working to
    combat human trafficking to, among other things, develop joint strategies
    and provide OSCE participating states and others with harmonized
    decision-making aids. In Southeastern Europe, the International Center for
    Migration Policy Development has begun a project to facilitate the
    creation of a transnational referral mechanism by 10 governments in the
    region and national NGOs to improve transnational case management and
    victim protection. Furthermore, in the western hemisphere, the
    Organization of American States (OAS) held a conference in 2006 that
    resulted in guidelines for the 34 member states and OAS to combat human
    trafficking.

    Organizations continue to face obstacles as they work on global and
    regional initiatives to collaborate to combat trafficking. For example,
    governments disagree on whether there is a difference between "forced" and
    "voluntary" prostitution. Such disagreements can hinder collaborative
    efforts in combating sex trafficking. These global and regional
    initiatives may eventually implement additional practices to enhance
    collaboration, but it is too early to determine the success of the current
    initiatives.

    Country-Level Organizations Have Taken Some Steps to Strengthen
    Collaboration, but Continue to Face Difficult Challenges

    Although organizations--including host governments, UN organizations, U.S.
    government agencies, and other donor governments--in the three countries
    we visited have implemented practices to strengthen collaboration in
    combating trafficking, they continue to face challenges. None of the three
    countries has mechanisms to coordinate the efforts of all organizations
    involved in combating trafficking. Host governments bear ultimate
    responsibility for combating trafficking within their borders, and
    governments of the countries we visited have taken some steps to
    collaborate. For example, the Indonesian and Thai governments have passed
    national antitrafficking laws and enacted national action plans that
    define common outcomes, outline strategies, and assign roles and
    responsibilities. However, neither government's action plan includes
    trafficking of men in its definition of human trafficking. Officials in
    Indonesia stated that they expect to revise the plan to include the
    trafficking of men, as well as women and children, based on legislation
    passed in 2007. Although both the Indonesian and Thai governments hold
    interagency meetings, the ministries responsible for coordinating
    antitrafficking efforts have limited authority and operational capacity,
    according to officials we interviewed. Unlike Indonesia and Thailand,
    Mexico has neither a national antitrafficking law nor an action plan.
    Mexican officials stated that they convened one interagency meeting on
    human trafficking and plan to institute additional coordination mechanisms
    after the government passes a national antitrafficking law.

    In Indonesia and Thailand, UN organizations, in conjunction with host
    governments, have developed country assessments and assistance frameworks
    to articulate overall development goals--including combating
    trafficking--joint strategies, and roles and responsibilities. UN
    organizations working on trafficking in Thailand also meet as part of the
    Mekong regional project that we previously discussed; although, according
    to one donor government official, attendance among UN organizations is
    sporadic. UN officials in Indonesia told us that they share information
    informally, but do not meet on a regular basis to discuss trafficking.

    According to U.S. government officials in Indonesia and Thailand, donor
    governments have made sporadic and informal efforts to leverage resources
    and avoid duplication of effort.^14 For example, as a result of informal
    coordination, Justice and French government officials worked together on a
    criminal justice training project in Indonesia. In Thailand, according to
    a U.S. official, although most of the major donors attend the Mekong
    regional project's meetings, these meetings are generally focused on UN
    activities, with little opportunity for donors to coordinate. Officials in
    Indonesia and Thailand acknowledged the need to establish regular
    bilateral donor coordination efforts on trafficking issues and, at the
    time of our fieldwork, had begun discussing the establishment of regular
    coordination meetings.

    ^14The United States is the only government donor that implements antitrafficking
    projects in Mexico.

    While U.S. government agencies overseas have developed some collaboration
    mechanisms to combat trafficking, they continue to face challenges in
    coordinating their efforts. The U.S. embassies in the three countries we
    visited, Indonesia, Thailand, and Mexico, include trafficking in persons
    in their mission performance plans, which establish combating trafficking
    as a component of the U.S. government's overall strategy in each country.
    U.S. officials in these countries told us they organize
    trafficking-specific meetings that include U.S. government agencies and
    their implementing partners, primarily to share information. The U.S.
    government officials who were involved in antitrafficking issues were
    responsible for other issues as well. In Indonesia, for example, the
    primary U.S. embassy contact for trafficking was also temporarily assigned
    deputy chief of mission in East Timor. In Mexico, one agency official,
    whose responsibilities consisted solely of human trafficking issues, had
    been named to also serve as coordinator and primary contact for all U.S.
    antitrafficking efforts. After this official's departure in December 2006,
    her portfolio was added to the existing portfolio of another official from
    the same U.S. agency. At the time of our visit in February 2007, State,
    USAID, and DHS officials, who also covered other issues, were holding
    meetings to coordinate their antitrafficking efforts internally. However,
    a new U.S. antitrafficking coordinator for Mexico had not been designated.
    Consequently, some Mexican government officials expressed uncertainty
    about which U.S. agency official had the role of lead U.S. government
    coordinator for trafficking in Mexico.

    Furthermore, some U.S. government officials noted challenges in
    coordinating between officials in Washington, D.C., and those overseas.
    For example, a U.S. official in Thailand was unaware of a U.S.-funded
    project in the country until that project hosted a conference and
    requested additional funding from the U.S. embassy. The project had not
    been included in the list of antitrafficking activities in Thailand that
    the official received from State's trafficking office, which is based in
    Washington. According to some agency officials overseas, not knowing what
    other agencies and bureaus plan to spend on antitrafficking activities in
    a particular country makes it difficult for them to determine how much of
    their budgets to allocate to antitrafficking activities. Although State's
    new Office of Foreign Assistance has begun to address the issue of better
    coordinating all U.S. foreign assistance by bringing together core State
    and USAID teams to discuss U.S. development priorities in each recipient
    country, some U.S. officials expressed uncertainty regarding which part of
    the U.S. government would be responsible for outlining a new country-level
    strategy and budget for combating trafficking.

    U.S. Government-Funded Antitrafficking Projects Lack Some Key Monitoring
    Elements; Little Is Known about Project Impact Due to Difficulties in
    Conducting Evaluations

    Antitrafficking project documents we reviewed generally include monitoring
    elements, such as an overarching goal and related activities; however,
    they often lack other monitoring elements, such as targets for measuring
    performance. Various other factors also make it difficult to evaluate the
    impact of antitrafficking projects. These factors include questionable
    estimates of the number of trafficking victims at the project level, which
    are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of specific antitrafficking
    interventions. Certain project elements may further impede evaluations,
    including short time frames and overly broad objectives. Because of these
    factors, few evaluations that determine impact have been completed. As a
    result, little is known about the impact of antitrafficking interventions.

    U.S. Government-Funded Antitrafficking Projects Lack Some Important
    Monitoring Elements; State Is Taking Steps to Strengthen Monitoring

    Most of the project documents we reviewed generally include one or more
    monitoring elements, but lack others. We reviewed documents for 23 U.S.
    government-funded antitrafficking projects in Indonesia, Thailand, and
    Mexico, which generally include statements of project goals and a
    description of activities.^15 However, the majority of these documents
    lack a logic framework that clearly links activities with project-level
    goals, indicators, and targets. Specifically:

    ^15To inform our site visits in Mexico, Indonesia, and Thailand, we requested project
    documents for U.S.-funded antitrafficking projects that were being implemented during the
    time of our review. These documents are not generalizable to a larger universe. We received
    documents for 23 projects. The projects are illustrative of the U.S. agencies' currently
    applied monitoring practices. The 23 projects were funded or implemented by 6 U.S.
    agencies: State (11), Labor (4), USAID (3), Justice (2), HHS (2), and DHS (1).

    oEighteen of the 23 projects do not clearly explain how activities will
    achieve stated goals. For example, the project proposal for a State-funded
    project in Thailand does not provide clear linkages demonstrating how the
    training of local officials and screenings of a public awareness video
    will achieve the project's overall goal of reducing trafficking among
    vulnerable adolescents and women. In contrast, all 4 Labor-funded projects
    in Indonesia, Mexico, and Thailand clearly link project goals and
    activities. For example, 1 goal of a project in Mexico is to develop a
    system to identify networks of exploiters. Activities to achieve this goal
    include developing computer software and training government officials in
    its use.

    oTwenty-one of the 23 projects identify indicators, but of these, only 10
    specify targets by which performance is measured. For example, a
    State-funded project in Thailand included the "number of victims rescued"
    and the "number of arrests of traffickers" as performance indicators, but
    did not set numerical targets for measuring performance. In contrast, a
    State-funded project implemented by IOM in Indonesia established an
    expected result that 500 victims of trafficking receive rehabilitation and
    reintegration assistance. For the 13 projects that did not specify
    targets, the performance standards to which grantees were held accountable
    were not clear. Of the 10 projects that did specify targets, 5 explained
    how targets were set. These 5 projects included all 4 of the Labor
    projects we reviewed.

    Another element of monitoring project performance is to supplement
    implementing partners' reporting of programmatic and financial progress
    with independent review through site visits at the field level. For
    example, Labor officials reported that the International Labor Affairs
    Bureau's Office of Child Labor, Forced Labor, and Human Trafficking has
    engaged ILO's external auditor to conduct audits of a sample of ILO's
    international program for the elimination of child labor projects. This
    office also has contracted with a certified public accounting firm to
    conduct independent attestation engagements of its Education Initiative
    projects. Among the objectives of these audits and attestation engagements
    is an assessment of the accuracy and reliability of performance data from
    grantees' progress reports.

    State G/TIP has 4 Washington, D.C.-based staff members who are responsible
    for overseeing projects in approximately 70 countries.^16 G/TIP officials
    stated that because they cannot visit all of the projects, they rely on
    U.S. embassy staff to provide additional field-level oversight. However,
    the office has not established written guidance for conducting such
    oversight. During our fieldwork, an embassy official expressed frustration
    at the lack of clear guidance and procedures. Embassy officials also told
    us that they meet with project staff, but have other responsibilities that
    limit the time they can devote to overseeing antitrafficking projects.
    According to State's Bureau of Population, Refugees,and Migration (PRM)
    officials, the bureau has only 3 staff to monitor and oversee its
    antitrafficking projects currently being implemented in over 20 countries,
    and these staff cannot conduct site visits to all projects. PRM staff also
    stated that they review progress reports submitted by project
    implementers, but do not have a database or system for compiling the
    information they receive from the field.

    To address some of these concerns, State officials told us that they are
    taking steps to strengthen monitoring, including developing new indicators
    and written guidance for monitoring antitrafficking projects. State G/TIP
    officials told us that they are developing a system of key indicators to
    better inform management decision making that would be consistently used
    for each of the three main types of antitrafficking programs--prevention,
    protection, and prosecution. State PRM and IOM, its key implementing
    partner, have also been involved in an effort to develop and standardize
    an indicator framework across IOM missions, although this effort was not
    completed during the time of our review. Officials stated that this effort
    will serve as a way to exchange ideas about best practices in different
    parts of the world and will provide managers with information on
    implementation needed to make decisions about current or future projects.

    Factors Impede Evaluations of Antitrafficking Projects and Little Is Known
    about Project Impact

    Various factors impede impact evaluations of antitrafficking projects.
    First, data on human trafficking are questionable, including estimates of
    the number of trafficking victims, making it difficult to determine a
    preproject baseline. Second, elements of project design, such as overly
    broad objectives or short project duration, diffuse potential impact.
    Because of these factors, it has been difficult to evaluate the
    effectiveness of antitrafficking interventions, and few evaluations that
    determine impact have been completed. As a result, little is known about
    the impact of antitrafficking interventions.

    ^16State G/TIP officials told us that the office has had 4 program officers for only a few
    months. For more than a year, the office had 2 or fewer officers.

    Lack of Project-Level Baseline Estimates Limits Evaluations

    The lack of accurate baseline estimates of the number of trafficking
    victims is a limitation to conducting evaluations. As we have previously
    reported, the accuracy of current estimates is questionable.^17 Without
    estimates of the scope of human trafficking to use as baselines in project
    locations, it is very difficult to determine where interventions are most
    needed or where interventions would have the greatest impact. Developing
    baseline estimates is difficult for the following reasons:

    oVictims are a hidden population. Victims may be unaware, unwilling, or
    unable to acknowledge that they are trafficking victims. Therefore, it is
    difficult to reach them to collect information using standard sampling
    techniques.

    oService providers may be unwilling to share victim data due to
    confidentiality concerns. For example, the global database maintained by
    IOM^18 is not publicly available since assisted victims are in a
    precarious position and revealing their identity could have a detrimental
    effect on their safety.^19

    oThe definition of the term "trafficking in persons" is broad and varies
    in meaning across different languages. As we previously discussed, the
    understanding of trafficking varies across languages and cultures. These
    variations in definition hinder the comparability of data across countries
    and organizations.

    oThere are no commonly agreed-upon criteria for identification of human
    trafficking victims. This lack of criteria hinders the ability to identify
    victims, create consistent statistical databases, and design analytical
    tools for surveys and estimates.^20

    ^17GAO-06-825.

    ^18IOM has the only global database, which contains systematically collected standardized
    data on actual victims assisted by IOM. According to IOM, 30 missions input data into the
    global database in 2007. The information covers information about trafficked victims from
    more than 100 source and destination countries.

    ^19In commenting on a draft of this report, IOM noted that it can share with external parties
    nonpersonal aggregate data from the database upon written request. The IOM Counter-
    Trafficking Division also produces quarterly statistical reports based on the data from the
    database.

    oExisting data may not be reliable. Developing countries, which are
    typically the countries of origin, have limited capacity for data
    collection, and their governments' commitment to combating trafficking may
    be insufficient. Thus, sufficiently reliable data needed for estimating
    trafficking incidence may not be available.

    Elements of Project Design Impede Evaluations

    Elements in the design of certain antitrafficking projects, including a
    tendency to focus on very broad, high-level objectives across a diverse
    range of activities, diffuse projects' potential impact and create
    challenges for evaluations.

    When projects focus on overly broad objectives and contain too many types
    of activities, their potential impact is diffused, which makes them
    difficult to evaluate.^21 For example, some antitrafficking projects have
    very high-level goals or objectives, such as "creating an environment for
    effective action against trafficking," or "strengthening the initiatives
    of government and others against human trafficking" and contain activities
    covering 2 or more of the 3 key types of antitrafficking
    interventions--prevention, protection, and prosecution. Of 153 U.S.
    international antitrafficking projects funded in fiscal year 2004, 2005,
    or 2006, 56 percent included 2 or more of these interventions and 29
    percent included all 3 interventions. Activities included public awareness
    campaigns, victim assistance, and training for law enforcement officials.

    While projects funded with greater resources could lead to more noticeable
    longer-term changes, the impact of a shorter-term, smaller-scale
    intervention may be difficult to attribute and quantify. Antitrafficking
    projects vary significantly in terms of their time frames and funding
    levels. For example, the projects we reviewed varied in duration from 1
    year to about 4 years, and projects' funding levels varied from $15,000 to
    $6 million. Officials stated that some organizations, such as State G/TIP,
    tend to fund smaller, shorter-term projects, while Labor usually funds
    larger, longer-term projects. Overall, experts told us that organizations
    also have generally limited funding for impact evaluations and for
    research on the nature and scope of human trafficking.

    ^20G/TIP, in collaboration with PRM, IOM, and other organizations, is currently developing
    core indicators in an attempt to work toward commonly agreed-upon criteria for victim
    identification and assistance as well as for data collection and analysis.

    ^21In commenting on a draft of this report, ILO suggested that it is useful to clearly define the
    scope of the impact that can be measured within the time frame and levels of results. For
    example, the expected impact on trafficking differs depending on whether one is looking at
    one project only, a collection of projects from one source of funding within a country, all of
    the projects and activities within a country, or the impact of all projects in all countries from
    one source of funding.

    Experts stated that another factor impeding evaluations is that little
    attention has generally been devoted at the start of projects to
    evaluation design. For example, questions related to determining the
    control group, the type of design for impact evaluation, the data that
    would be collected, and the analytical methods that would be most suitable
    are often not addressed before implementation. Furthermore, experts stated
    that although projects target several groups of beneficiaries, it is
    generally unclear how they can be reached and to which group they would be
    compared. As a result, it is difficult to determine what would constitute
    successful project implementation.

    Little Is Known about Project Impact

    Because of the difficulties in evaluating antitrafficking projects, the
    few evaluations that have been completed are qualitative rather than
    quantitative, focus on process rather than impact, and rarely trace
    victims over time.

    The few evaluations completed used qualitative methods that are valuable
    for documenting victims' perceptions and experiences, but, unlike
    quantitative methods, they cannot be used to generalize results to broader
    populations.^22 For example, IOM's Office of Inspector General has carried
    out impact evaluations of a select number of antitrafficking projects. Our
    review of these evaluations shows that they covered interventions in
    various parts of the world funded by different donors. All of the
    available evaluations applied qualitative methodologies, consisting of
    document reviews, site visits, interviews, and focus groups with
    stakeholders. In addition, in a USAID-funded assessment of child
    trafficking victims residing at a shelter in Nepal, an evaluator used
    qualitative methods, such as observations and interviews, to collect
    information on their daily lives, needs, and preparation for reintegration
    into the community. The evaluator concluded that skill-based training
    provided by the shelter does not adequately prepare the girls for their
    reintegration into their communities; however, this qualitative result
    could not be generalized to the national level.

    ^22Agencies have required or employed various qualitative methodologies such as interviews,
    focus group discussions, direct observation techniques, and rapid assessment techniques

    Completed evaluations also typically focused on process rather than
    impact.^23 Process evaluations are an important tool for improving service
    delivery and assessing program effectiveness by assessing whether
    activities conform to program design. Impact evaluations assess the net
    effect of a program by comparing program outcomes with an estimate of what
    would have happened in the absence of the program. However, impact
    evaluations are an emerging field in antitrafficking interventions. For
    example, a process evaluation of a Labor-funded project aimed at reducing
    the victimization of minors who have been trafficked or are at risk of
    being trafficked in Thailand focused on the project's planning,
    implementation, and management. This process evaluation was designed to
    monitor implementation and assess project outcomes. However, the
    evaluation did not ultimately assess the project's impact in reducing the
    victimization of minors.

    Finally, our review identified few evaluations that track individual
    victims who have been reintegrated into their communities over time. For
    example, ILO is currently pilot-testing an application of a tracer study
    methodology in the context of trafficking prevention. In addition,
    according to Labor officials, in some cases the office has conducted
    follow-up studies that examine a sample of beneficiaries to document
    changes that have occurred. Furthermore, IOM officials noted that several
    of its missions provided statistical information to gauge the success of
    its victim reintegration efforts over time based on specific
    indicators.^24 According to experts, such evaluations are costly and
    time-consuming. Tracking victims by country can also be difficult because
    country boundaries are permeable and many trafficking routes cross
    national borders.

    ^23According to GAO�s Performance Measurement and Evaluation: Definitions and
    Relationships, GAO-05-739SP (Washington, D.C.: May 2005), there are four types of
    evaluations: process, outcome, impact, and cost-benefit analysis.

    ^24For example, according to IOM officials, IOM�s mission in Kiev uses indicators such as
    employment rates, reinsertion into the educational system, return abroad, and retrafficking
    as tools for its caseload management by identifying more-effective mechanisms for victim
    identification and referral.

    Expert Panel Identified Ways to Address the Difficulties of Monitoring and
    Evaluating Antitrafficking Projects

    A GAO-convened panel of experts identified and discussed ways to address
    the factors that make it difficult to monitor and evaluate antitrafficking
    projects. Panelists suggested approaches to improve the monitoring and
    evaluation of antitrafficking projects, by improving information on the
    severity of human trafficking and addressing weaknesses in the design of
    antitrafficking projects.

    Conduct Research on the Nature and Severity of Human Trafficking

    Panelists acknowledged that the lack of existing data on the nature and
    severity of human trafficking limits evaluations of antitrafficking
    projects, and suggested ways to improve information on the nature and
    severity of human trafficking. According to the panelists, researchers
    need to gather evidence to answer the following questions:

    oWhat is the nature and severity of human trafficking? Panelists stated
    that it is necessary to understand the nature of trafficking in terms of
    its underlying conditions and the types of traffickers and victims.
    Trafficking is a multidimensional, complex problem that involves a wide
    range of victims; recruiters, brokers, and intermediaries; and abusive
    employers and sexual exploiters. Understanding the incentives of the
    people engaged in trafficking is an important first step.

    The severity of human trafficking can be measured by using qualitative and
    quantitative methodologies. Panel members suggested several sampling
    methods that have been used to sample other hard-to-reach populations,
    including the homeless, hidden migrants, missing and exploited children,
    domestic violence victims, inmates, and drug users. One suggested method
    is sampling of "hot spots"--an intensive search for victims in areas known
    to have high concentrations of victims or in areas to which many victims
    return. Other methods include adaptive cluster, double, indirect, and
    snowball sampling. (For a more detailed discussion of sampling methods,
    see app. III.) These methods could be used individually or in combination.
    Panelists further emphasized that, whenever feasible, it is important to
    use methodologies that are appropriate for the location sampled. In
    addition, it is critical to determine whether the results are unique to a
    certain location or whether they can be generalized to other locations.
    Panelists recommended that research start at the local level. Such
    research would identify successful small-scale interventions, increase the
    knowledge of victims' needs, and develop meaningful performance measures.
    Lessons learned at the local level could then be expanded to national and
    regional levels.

    oWhat is the projects' estimated effect on the nature and severity of
    human trafficking? Panelists emphasized the necessity of designing
    rigorous methods to evaluate antitrafficking projects, such as randomized
    control trials.^25 For example, as baseline estimates in trafficking hot
    spots are obtained and interventions are undertaken in that location to
    reduce trafficking, the use of "place-randomized trials"^26 for evaluation
    would become possible. To determine the interventions' impact, data
    obtained from interventions in hot spots could then be compared with
    locations where there had been no interventions. Although randomized
    trials may be difficult to execute for many trafficking projects, they are
    important ways to generate evidence about interventions' effectiveness.
    Randomized trials should be pilot-tested in carefully chosen settings so
    that the evaluator can identify and correct any problems encountered
    before expanding the trials to larger populations or areas. Panelists
    pointed out that such rigorous evaluation has occurred in the fields of
    public health and criminal justice. For example, a randomized study was
    done of brothels in Thailand to obtain information on the HIV/AIDS rates
    of prostitutes.

    ^25According to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), randomized control trials meet
    the highest standards of impact evaluation and should be used whenever feasible. As
    defined by OMB�s guidance, a randomized controlled trial is �a study that measures an
    intervention�s effect by randomly assigning individuals or other units into an intervention
    group, which receives the intervention, and into a control group, which does not. At some
    point following intervention, measurements are taken to establish the difference between
    the intervention group and the control group.� However, randomized controlled trials are
    not suitable for every program and generally can be employed only under special
    circumstances. See OMB, �What Constitutes Strong Evidence of a Program�s Effectiveness?�
    (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/part/2004_program_eval.pdf).

    ^26A place-randomized trial is a study in which a number of places are randomly assigned to
    two or more interventions to learn which intervention works best.

    Address Monitoring and Evaluation Weaknesses in the Design of
    Antitrafficking Projects

    To address weaknesses in project design that impede monitoring and
    evaluation, such as projects with very broad, high-level objectives,
    panelists made the following recommendations:

    oDevelop a logic framework. Given the weaknesses of some antitrafficking
    projects that have overly broad objectives across a diverse range of
    activities, panelists suggested that officials design projects with a
    logic framework that has clear objectives and narrow the focus of
    interventions. They also recommended that officials design projects that
    clearly link activities to intended outcomes, identify measurable
    indicators, and establish procedures for setting and modifying targets.
    Measurable indicators with mutually agreed-upon targets allow project
    officials to assess how a project is achieving its overall goals and
    objectives. For example, a Labor-funded project implemented by ILO in
    Mexico includes a logic framework that links project activities and
    outputs to outcome objectives, and includes clear indicators and means of
    verification. The project's overall goal of eliminating the commercial
    sexual exploitation of children in Mexico links to four immediate
    objectives that, in turn, link back to project activities and outputs. One
    objective--that at least 300 child victims of sexual exploitation or
    at-risk children and their families receive assistance--is linked to 28
    activities and 8 outputs, such as increasing families' employment
    opportunities. These 28 activities include disseminating employment
    promotion programs, organizing employment training, and monitoring and
    analyzing the impact of these dissemination and training efforts.
    Panelists emphasized that donors and implementers should agree on the
    project's logic framework during the design phase.

    oDetermine whether a project is ready to be evaluated. Given the
    significant variance in project duration and funding levels, panelists
    emphasized that evaluators would not be able to evaluate all existing
    projects, but should first determine which projects are ready to be
    evaluated. In conducting such "evaluability assessments," evaluators
    determine, among other things, whether (1) the project is large enough,
    has sufficient resources, and has been implemented long enough to make an
    impact; (2) the project is reaching its target population; (3) project
    documents specify and clearly link objectives, goals, and activities; and
    (4) sufficient information exists to determine impact. For example,
    larger, long-term projects are more likely to have an impact and, thus,
    may be better candidates for evaluation than smaller, short-term projects.
    Because larger antitrafficking projects generally include a diverse range
    of interventions, panelists suggested narrowing the evaluation to focus on
    discrete interventions or aspects of the project.

    oBuild monitoring and evaluation into project design. Given that
    evaluation is not generally considered during design, panelists emphasized
    that project officials should consider how the project will be evaluated
    before the project is implemented. Most importantly, organizations need to
    define the project's intended impact and how that impact will be measured.
    To do this, organizations would have to determine the project
    beneficiaries and to which group they would be compared, the data they
    would have to collect, and how they would analyze those data. Management
    would not only need to collect data during implementation to monitor if
    the project works according to plan, but also collect data before and
    after implementation to determine what works best.

    Conclusions

    The United States has played an important role in combating global human
    trafficking and spurring other governments to increase their efforts in
    doing so. As organizations around the world increasingly collaborate in
    combating trafficking, their ultimate success will depend on the extent to
    which they are able to overcome difficult challenges, such as varying
    levels of government commitment and capacity, that have impeded
    collaboration in the past. More than 7 years after the passage of the UN
    protocol, little is known about which interventions have been the most
    effective in preventing human trafficking, protecting victims, and
    prosecuting traffickers.

    The United States and other governments, international organizations, and
    NGOs continue their efforts to fight trafficking, but there is little
    information available to inform their decisions about project
    implementation and selection. Although antitrafficking projects contain
    some important elements for monitoring, they often lack other important
    elements for measuring performance on a real-time basis, such as targets.
    Such elements are critical in monitoring project performance to determine
    whether interventions are being implemented as expected, or whether they
    need to be changed to better combat human trafficking. Evaluation is also
    important in determining whether antitrafficking projects have been
    effective. However, few impact evaluations have been completed due to the
    difficulties involved. As a result, little is known about the impact of
    antitrafficking interventions.

    Given the grave personal suffering of victims and negative impacts on
    society that human trafficking creates, strengthening collaboration,
    monitoring performance, and evaluating impact are important to ensure that
    organizations fund antitrafficking interventions with the greatest impact,
    where they are most needed, and through the effective and efficient use of
    resources.

    Recommendations for Executive Action

    We recommend that the Secretaries of State and Labor and the Administrator
    of USAID improve the monitoring and evaluation of their projects to combat
    global human trafficking by considering the following actions, where
    appropriate:

    1.Improve information about project impact on the nature and severity of
    human trafficking, including

    odeveloping better data about the incidence of trafficking at the project
    level and

    oapplying rigorous evaluation methodologies.

    2.Address monitoring and evaluation weaknesses in the design of
    antitrafficking projects, including

    odeveloping a framework that clearly links activities with project-level
    goals, indicators, and targets;

    oconducting "evaluability assessments" to determine whether a project is
    ready to be evaluated; and

    obuilding monitoring and evaluation into project design before the project
    is implemented.

    We are addressing our recommendations to State, Labor, and USAID because
    they provided the most U.S. funding for projects to combat global human
    trafficking.

    Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

    We requested comments on a draft of this report from the Secretaries of
    State, Justice, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, and Labor;
    the Administrator of USAID; and cognizant officials at UNODC, IOM, ILO,
    OAS, OSCE, the World Bank, IDB, and ADB or their designees. We received
    written comments from State, Labor, USAID, and HHS, which are reprinted in
    appendixes IV, V, VI, and VII along with our responses to specific points.

    In its comment letter, State noted that it will implement the
    recommendations in the report in ways that are relevant and appropriate to
    the mandates of the State offices working on antitrafficking efforts.
    State further noted that the recommendations are entirely consistent with
    the department's current activities and direction. State also generally
    agreed that the antitrafficking field is well-served by more information
    about the nature and severity of human trafficking and recognized that
    effective project design is critical to successful project implementation
    and program monitoring and can lay the foundation for evaluation. However,
    State disagreed with our finding that monitoring is limited, stating that
    monitoring is in place at the department and improving. While we recognize
    that State and other U.S. agencies have certain elements of monitoring in
    place, we report that they lack others. For example, we found that for the
    23 antitrafficking projects we reviewed, the majority do not have a logic
    model that clearly explains how activities are linked to project goals. In
    addition, the majority of these projects do not specify targets that will
    establish benchmarks for measuring performance. State also emphasized that
    many of its projects are designed to be of more limited size, scope, and
    duration than those of other agencies, such as Labor. State further noted
    that these projects of limited duration are worthy of funding, but are not
    necessarily appropriate for evaluation. In the report, we state that the
    impact of a shorter-term, smaller-scale intervention may be difficult to
    attribute and quantify.

    Labor commented that the report provides a good overall assessment of
    international cooperation and the need to enhance collaboration among key
    agencies and governments regarding antitrafficking efforts. Labor also
    commented that the report highlights important areas for improving
    monitoring and evaluation of U.S.-funded antitrafficking programs.
    However, Labor stated that the report does not fully reflect efforts
    particular federal agencies are taking in the monitoring and evaluation of
    antitrafficking projects. As an example, Labor stated that it uses several
    mechanisms, including audits and process evaluations, in its monitoring
    and oversight of international technical assistance projects, including
    antitrafficking projects, to ensure that U.S. funds lead to planned
    outputs and results. In response, we made additions or revisions to the
    text to further clarify Labor's monitoring and evaluation efforts. We
    believe the overall monitoring of antitrafficking projects is limited
    because the projects funded by the other five agencies did not have the
    elements of monitoring we found in Labor's projects.

    USAID said it appreciates the thoughtfulness of GAO's report. USAID also
    commented that it is concerned with the challenges of coordination,
    monitoring, and evaluation, and that while it has made considerable
    efforts to coordinate within the U.S. government and with other
    organizations, it will continue to work within the interagency process in
    Washington and in the field. USAID also agrees that monitoring and
    evaluation of its antitrafficking efforts are very important and that they
    rely on the availability of both human and financial resources. USAID
    further agrees that the issues inherent in the evaluation of
    antitrafficking activities are particularly challenging because there is
    no baseline against which to measure progress.

    HHS said the report is a sound document that substantively covers the wide
    range of programs and services available to combat human trafficking.

    We also received technical comments from Justice and DHS, as well as from
    UNODC, IOM, ILO, OAS, OSCE, the World Bank, IDB, and ADB, which we have
    incorporated in the report as appropriate.

    We are sending copies of this report to interested congressional
    committees; the Secretaries of State, Justice, Health and Human Services,
    Homeland Security, and Labor; the Administrator of USAID; ILO; IOM; and
    UNODC. We will also provide copies to others on request. In addition, the
    report will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at
    [41]http://www.gao.gov .

    If you or your staffs have any questions about this report, please contact
    me at (202) 512-9601. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional
    Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report.
    GAO staff who made major contributions to this report are listed in
    appendix VIII.

    Thomas Melito
    Director, International Affairs and Trade

    Appendix I:  Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

    Our objectives were to examine (1) collaboration among organizations
    involved in international antitrafficking efforts, (2) U.S. government
    agencies' monitoring of antitrafficking projects and difficulties in
    evaluating these projects, and (3) suggestions for strengthening
    monitoring and evaluation.

    To examine collaboration among organizations involved in international
    antitrafficking efforts, we reviewed relevant planning, funding, and
    project documents on human trafficking from the Departments of State,
    Justice, Labor, Homeland Security, and Health and Human Services and the
    U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). We reviewed planning
    and project documents from relevant United Nations (UN) and other
    international agencies and offices, including the UN Office on Drugs and
    Crime (UNODC), International Labor Organization (ILO), International
    Organization for Migration (IOM), United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF),
    and UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). We also reviewed UN reports
    and resolutions that address coordination as well as documents from
    regional organizations, such as the Organization for Security and
    Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Coordinated Mekong Ministerial
    Initiative Against Trafficking (COMMIT), and the Regional Conference on
    Migration.

    In addition, we reviewed documents from and discussed international
    antitrafficking efforts with officials from the above agencies and
    organizations as well as officials from host government, donor government,
    and nongovernmental organizations (NGO), in Washington, D.C., and during
    our fieldwork in Indonesia, Thailand, and Mexico. We also reviewed
    documents describing these countries' national mechanisms to combat
    trafficking, including legislation and action plans, where applicable. We
    selected Thailand because it is the country with the largest number of
    international organizations working to combat human trafficking. We
    selected Indonesia and Mexico because they receive a large amount of U.S.
    funding for international antitrafficking projects and have a relatively
    large number of U.S. government agencies and international organizations
    working in each country. All 3 countries are origin, transit, and
    destination countries for human trafficking victims and have projects
    addressing prevention, protection, and prosecution.

    To examine organizations' monitoring and evaluation of antitrafficking
    programs, we reviewed documentation from 23 projects in the 3 countries we
    visited and illustrative projects from other countries. We worked with
    U.S. agency officials in Washington and in the field to identify
    U.S.-funded antitrafficking projects in Indonesia, Thailand, and Mexico
    that were ongoing during the time of our review (August 2006 to June
    2007). We requested project documents--including proposals, grant
    agreements, and progress reports--from these U.S. officials for projects
    identified in these countries. In response to this request, we received
    documents for 23 antitrafficking projects that were funded or implemented
    by 6 U.S. agencies involved in international antitrafficking efforts. We
    examined the project documents for the following elements: statement of
    goals or objectives, statement of activities, identification of indicators
    and targets, explanation of how targets were selected, and inclusion of a
    logic model or framework. While we recognize that these 23 projects may
    not be the complete universe of antitrafficking projects in these 3
    countries, we consider these 23 projects sufficient for the purposes of
    our review.^1 Although we cannot assume that the issues we identified
    exist across all projects, they nevertheless represent areas for
    improvement in monitoring antitrafficking projects. We also reviewed a set
    of 4 State Office to Combat and Monitor Trafficking in Persons (G/TIP)
    antitrafficking projects in India, Israel, Afghanistan, and Costa Rica.
    These projects were selected to illustrate some current monitoring and
    evaluation practices for existing projects in different parts of the world
    and different types of exploitation. They showed the variation in
    monitoring practices that can only increase with sample size. Thus, the
    projects provided the background information and context needed to
    understand State G/TIP's current efforts to standardize monitoring
    requirements. The reviewed documents for all projects included proposals,
    applications for assistance, project descriptions, strategy papers,
    concept papers, causal models, cooperative or grant agreements, and
    periodic and final reports.

    We also reviewed articles and books on monitoring, evaluation, and
    statistics, such as Sampling by Steven K. Thompson, Wiley Series in
    Probability and Mathematical Statistics (1992); Adaptive Sampling by
    Stephen K. Thompson and George A.F., Seber, Wiley Series in Probability
    and Mathematical Statistics (1996); Better Evaluation for Evidence-Based
    Policy: Place Randomized Trials in Education, Criminology, Welfare, and
    Health by Robert Baruch, The Annals of the American Academy of Political
    and Social Science (2005), vol. 599, 6-18; Program Evaluation Methods:
    Measurement and Attribution of Program Results, Third Edition, Treasury
    Board of Canada, Secretariat; and Monitoring and Evaluation: Some Tools,
    Methods and Approaches, the World Bank (2004).

    ^1We could not determine the universe of projects currently being implemented in these three
    countries because multiple U.S. agencies are involved in international antitrafficking efforts
    and there is no one central repository to identify all U.S.-funded projects.

    To examine suggestions for strengthening monitoring and evaluation, we
    worked with the National Academy of Sciences to organize a 2-day expert
    panel on challenges and alternative strategies for monitoring and
    evaluating the results of international antitrafficking programs and
    projects in April 2007. We invited the following groups of panel
    participants:

    oExperts with broad-based, subject-area knowledge of human trafficking.

    oExperts with specialized knowledge of monitoring and evaluation of
    programs aimed at hidden populations similar to trafficking victims, such
    as the homeless and irregular migrants. This group included experts with
    specific knowledge of baseline data estimation of such populations.

    Panelists had backgrounds in academia, research, consulting, and project
    implementation in the field. Using a nominal group technique, panelists
    chose to focus on the intervention "safe return" as a starting point for
    discussion. Experts provided presentations and participated in a
    discussion and cross-fertilization of ideas. Using a nominal group
    technique, panel members also ranked two topics in order of importance to
    the human trafficking field--estimating the number of trafficking victims
    and evaluability assessments. None of the panel members were compensated
    for their work on this project. The following experts participated in the
    panel:

    oRichard Berk, Professor of Criminology and Statistics, Department of
    Criminology, University of Pennsylvania

    oRobert Boruch, University Trustee Chair Professor, Graduate School of
    Education and Statistics Department, Wharton School, University of
    Pennsylvania

    oMario Thomas Gaboury, Professor and Chair of Criminal Justice, University
    of New Haven

    oAdele Harrell, Consultant

    oKristiina Kangaspunta, Chief, Anti-Human Trafficking Unit, United Nations
    Office on Drugs and Crime

    oJonathan Martens, Counter-Trafficking Project Specialist,
    Counter-Trafficking Division, International Organization for Migration

    oJeffrey S. Passel, Senior Research Associate, Pew Hispanic Center

    oLisa Rende-Taylor, Technical Advisor to the United Nations Inter-Agency
    Project on Human Trafficking in the Greater Mekong Subregion

    oPeter Reuter, Professor, School of Public Policy, Department of
    Criminology, University of Maryland

    oW. Courtland Robinson, Assistant Professor, Center for Refugee and
    Disaster Response, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

    oDebra Rog, Associate Director, Westat Corporation

    oJane Nady Sigmon, Senior Coordinator for International Programs, Office
    to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons, U.S. Department of State

    We conducted our review from August 2006 to June 2007 in accordance with
    generally accepted government auditing standards.

    Appendix II:  Selected International Organizations Involved in Combating Human
    Trafficking

    This appendix describes the general mission and antitrafficking activities
    of 15 international organizations that implement international
    antitrafficking projects.

    Table 3: Selected International Organization Missions and Activities to
    Combat Human Trafficking

         Organization/General mission     Activities to combat human trafficking
    Worldwide organizations
    United Nations Office on Drugs    As the Secretariat of the Conference of
    and Crime (UNODC): Assist member  the Parties to the UN Convention against
    countries to combat illicit       Transnational Organized Crime and its
    drugs, crime, and terrorism.      protocols, including the Trafficking in
                                         Persons Protocol, UNODC is required to
                                         "ensure the necessary coordination with
                                         the secretariats of relevant
                                         international and regional
                                         organizations."

                                         UNODC's Global Program to Combat
                                         Trafficking in Persons comprises data
                                         collection, assessment, and technical
                                         cooperation.
    International Labor Organization  The International Program on the
    (ILO): Promote social justice and Elimination of Child Labor aims to
    internationally recognized human  eliminate child labor by strengthening
    and labor rights. The ILO         national capacities and creating a
    Declaration on Fundamental        worldwide movement to combat it.
    Principles and Rights at Work
    expresses the commitment of       The Special Action Program to Combat
    governments and employers' and    Forced Labor seeks to
    workers' organizations in four
    areas, including the elimination  oraise global awareness and
    of forced, compulsory, and child  understanding of forced labor;
    labor.
                                         oassist governments to develop and
                                         implement new laws, policies, and action
                                         plans;

                                         odevelop and disseminate guidance and
                                         training materials on forced labor and
                                         trafficking; and

                                         oimplement programs that integrate
                                         policy, institutional capacity building,
                                         and direct support for the prevention of
                                         forced labor and identification and
                                         rehabilitation of victims.
    International Organization for    IOM's counter-trafficking projects
    Migration (IOM): Ensure the       primarily aim to prevent human
    orderly and humane management of  trafficking, and to protect victims
    migration, to promote             while offering options of safe and
    international cooperation on      sustainable reintegration and/or return.
    migration issues; to assist in    Activities include:
    the search for practical
    solutions to migration problems;  oInformation campaigns that educate the
    and to provide humanitarian       public about human trafficking and equip
    assistance to migrants, including vulnerable populations with the
    refugees and internally displaced information necessary to protect
    people.                           themselves from the recruitment tactics
                                         of traffickers.

                                         oResearch on human trafficking that
                                         explores routes and trends, the causes
                                         and consequences of human trafficking as
                                         well as the structures, motivations, and
                                         modus operandi of organized criminal
                                         groups.

                                         oDirect assistance to trafficking
                                         victims that provides accommodation in
                                         safe places, medical and psychosocial
                                         support, skills development and
                                         vocational training, reintegration
                                         assistance, and the options of voluntary
                                         and dignified return to the country of
                                         origin or resettlement to a third
                                         country in extreme cases.

                                         oTechnical cooperation that builds the
                                         capacity of government and civil society
                                         institutions to better address the
                                         challenges posed by human trafficking
                                         through specialized training and
                                         technical support in the development of
                                         counter-trafficking policies and
                                         procedures, legal frameworks, and
                                         infrastructural upgrades.
    United Nations Children's Fund    UNICEF's Child Protection Program
    (UNICEF): Advocate for the        focuses on
    protection of children's rights,
    help meet children's basic needs, ogovernment commitment and capacity;
    and aim to expand their
    opportunities.                    olegislation and enforcement;

                                         oattitudes, customs and practices;

                                         oopen discussion;

                                         ochildren's life skills, knowledge, and
                                         participation;

                                         ofamily and community capacity;

                                         oessential services, including
                                         prevention, recovery, and reintegration;
                                         and

                                         oeffective monitoring, reporting, and
                                         oversight.
    Joint United Nations Program on   Using a human rights approach, UNAIDS
    HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS): Support        aims to address the root causes of human
    efforts of 10 UN system           trafficking, including poverty, limited
    organizations to help the world   access to education and jobs, and social
    prevent new HIV/AIDS infections,  and cultural attitudes and practices
    provide care for those already    that devalue women, girls, and children.
    infected, and mitigate the impact UNAIDS promotes law enforcement and
    of the epidemic.                  other activities to prevent trafficking;
                                         protect victims; punish traffickers; and
                                         target demand for the services of
                                         trafficked workers, women, and girls.
                                         UNAIDS also advocates for voluntary
                                         counseling and testing, the provision of
                                         HIV care and treatment services, and the
                                         elimination of stigma and
                                         discrimination.
    United Nations Development        UNDP approaches trafficking as a
    Program (UNDP): Increase          voluntary and involuntary migration
    knowledge, experience, and        issue. UNDP aims to identify the factors
    resources to developing countries that increase women's and girls'
    in such areas as poverty,         vulnerability to trafficking and to
    HIV/AIDS, energy and the          develop responses for the facilitation
    environment, democratic           of safe mobility.
    governance, and crisis prevention
    and recovery. Focus on
    encouraging human rights and
    women's empowerment.
    United Nations Educational,       UNESCO undertakes policy-oriented
    Scientific, and Cultural          research on specific factors leading to
    Organization (UNESCO): Promote    the trafficking of women and children in
    international cooperation in the  pilot countries in Africa and Asia.
    fields of education, science,
    culture, and communication.       The Project to Fight Human Trafficking
                                         in Africa aims to promote effective and
                                         culturally appropriate policymaking to
                                         combat trafficking in Western and
                                         Southern Africa. It organizes training
                                         workshops for policymakers, NGOs,
                                         community leaders, and the media to
                                         raise awareness and inspire innovative
                                         policymaking.

                                         The Trafficking and HIV/AIDS Project
                                         attempts to solve the problems of
                                         HIV/AIDS, trafficking, and
                                         nontraditional drug use in the Greater
                                         Mekong subregion, by researching,
                                         developing, and implementing programs
                                         that work to support sustainable,
                                         locally managed projects with ethnic
                                         minorities.
    United Nations Development Fund   UNIFEM addresses the trafficking of
    for Women (UNIFEM): Provide       women within the context of violence
    financial and technical           against women--as a violation of their
    assistance to programs and        human rights and as a development issue.
    strategies to foster women's
    empowerment and gender equality.
    Cover the gender issues of
    HIV/AIDS, poverty, economics, and
    violence.
    United Nations High Commissioner  UNHCR provides a safeguard to the rights
    for Refugees (UNHCR): Coordinate  and well-being of refugees so that they
    international action to protect   can exercise the right to seek asylum
    refugees and resolve refugee      and find safe refuge in another country,
    problems worldwide.               with the option to return home
                                         voluntarily, integrate locally, or
                                         resettle in a third country.
    Regional organizations
    Organization for Security and     The Office of the Special Representative
    Cooperation in Europe (OSCE):     and Coordinator for Combating
    Address a wide range of security  Trafficking in Human Beings supports the
    concerns, including arms control, development and implementation of
    confidence- and                   antitrafficking policies in OSCE
    security-building, human rights,  participating countries. In addition,
    national minorities,              the office coordinates the activities of
    democratization, policing         OSCE bodies, promotes cooperation among
    strategies, counterterrorism,     the participating states, and raises the
    antitrafficking, and economic and public and political profile of
    environmental activities.         trafficking in persons.

                                         The Office for Democratic Institutions
                                         and Human Rights assists countries in
                                         preventing trafficking and protecting
                                         victims by

                                         osupporting the establishment of
                                         national referral mechanisms,

                                         oimproving victim identification and
                                         assistance, and

                                         oenhancing trafficking victims'
                                         awareness of their rights.

                                         The Office of the Coordinator of OSCE
                                         Economic and Environmental Activities
                                         aims to address both the demand and
                                         supply side of trafficking in human
                                         beings by

                                         opromoting self-regulation of the
                                         private sector;

                                         oraising the awareness of trafficking in
                                         countries of destination, in particular
                                         in western countries; and

                                         ocreating economic empowerment
                                         opportunities for potential victims of
                                         trafficking in countries of origin.

                                         The OSCE Secretariat's Action Against
                                         Terrorism Unit, Conflict Prevention
                                         Center, Strategic Police Matters Unit,
                                         Border Unit, the Office of the Senior
                                         Gender Adviser, and field offices are
                                         also engaged in combating human
                                         trafficking.
    Organization of American States   The Anti-Trafficking in Persons
    (OAS): Strengthen cooperation on  Section's goals are to carry out
    democratic values, defend common  antitrafficking efforts with a regional
    interests, and debate the major   perspective that allows OAS to address
    issues facing the western         human trafficking in a way that is
    hemisphere and the world.         difficult for any single national
                                         government. The section provides the
                                         necessary logistical information for
                                         training seminars, technical assistance
                                         to governments, exchange of information,
                                         and proposals. Also, the section
                                         develops new information, monitors new
                                         literature in the field, and catalogues
                                         existing reports and documents. The
                                         focus of antitrafficking efforts
                                         consists of

                                         obroadening awareness and understanding
                                         of trafficking in persons,

                                         osharing information with governments
                                         and civil society,

                                         oidentifying policies that will reduce
                                         human trafficking,

                                         oworking with officials on implementing
                                         concrete antitrafficking measures, and

                                         oidentifying new partners and financial
                                         resources for fighting trafficking in
                                         the hemisphere.

                                         Four key areas of action are to

                                         ofoster national action by governments;

                                         oadvance effective antitrafficking best
                                         practices in prevention, protection,
                                         investigation, and prosecution;

                                         ogain new allies for the hemisphere; and

                                         oimplement existing antitrafficking
                                         projects and training programs as well
                                         as develop new ones.
    Association of Southeast Asian    In 1997, ASEAN member countries signed
    Nations (ASEAN): Accelerate       the Declaration on Transnational Crime,
    economic growth, social progress, which commits members to taking measures
    and cultural development for the  to combat transnational crimes,
    participating countries in the    including human trafficking. The
    southeast region of Asia. Promote organization's work program to implement
    regional peace and stability      this declaration includes actions to
    through respect for justice and   enhance information exchange, increase
    the rule of law.                  awareness of trafficking, support the
                                         criminalization of trafficking, and
                                         develop regional training programs.

                                         In 2004, ASEAN member countries signed
                                         the Declaration Against Trafficking in
                                         Persons, Particularly Women and
                                         Children, which commits members to
                                         establishing a regional focal network to
                                         combat trafficking and adopting measures
                                         to prevent the fraudulent use of
                                         identity documents, among other things.
    Multilateral development banks
    World Bank: Provide financial and The World Bank conducts analytical work
    technical assistance to           on topics, such as gender or migration,
    developing countries to promote   that may address the incidence of and
    education, health,                factors leading to human trafficking and
    infrastructure, and               child labor.
    communications to reduce global
    poverty and improve living        The International Finance Corporation
    standards.                        supports job creation and skills
                                         improvement projects in Asia that assist
                                         vulnerable populations, including human
                                         trafficking victims. In addition, the
                                         corporation applies its performance
                                         standard related to child labor to the
                                         projects it finances, in an effort to
                                         help client companies assess and manage
                                         these issues.
    Asian Development Bank (ADB):     ADB conducts regional research
    Reduce poverty in Asia and the    addressing the incidence and factors
    Pacific. ADB helps improve the    leading to the trafficking of women and
    quality of people's lives by      children in Asia. Where trafficking
    providing loans and technical     vulnerabilities are identified, ADB
    assistance for a broad range of   recommends that its borrowers include an
    development activities.           antitrafficking component (normally
                                         involving community and laborer
                                         awareness raising, targeted poverty
                                         reduction program for women and
                                         children, and capacity building of NGOs
                                         and community groups) often in
                                         conjunction with an HIV/AIDS prevention
                                         component. ADB also facilitates policy
                                         dialogues within and among countries in
                                         Asia, especially through its active
                                         regional cooperation assistance.
    Inter-American Development Bank   IDB seeks opportunities within its
    (IDB): Contribute to the          Poverty Reduction and Social Equity and
    acceleration of the process of    Social Development Strategies to address
    economic and social development   the issue of human trafficking in its
    of the regional developing member borrowing member countries. IDB promotes
    countries.                        mainstreaming the subject in the
                                         traditionally financed operations in the
                                         areas of violence, social exclusion,
                                         attention to vulnerable groups, gender,
                                         citizen security, justice reform, and
                                         corruption. IDB encourages countries to
                                         include human trafficking in their
                                         country strategies and provides
                                         technical assistance grants and citizen
                                         security loans with trafficking
                                         elements. In addition, IDB has launched
                                         communications campaigns to improve
                                         awareness and visibility of human
                                         trafficking and promote the use of
                                         emergency hotlines, which are also used
                                         to gather information on origin and
                                         destination locations of trafficking
                                         victims and trafficking routes.

    Sources: International organizations and development banks.

    Appendix III:  Methods Suggested by Expert Panel to Estimate the Number of Human
    Trafficking Victims

    This appendix describes the sampling methods suggested by a GAO-convened
    panel of experts to estimate the number of human trafficking victims.

    Table 4: Sampling Methods Suggested by Expert Panel to Estimate the Number
    of Human Trafficking Victims

               Method           Description of method      Application to human
                                                               trafficking
    Stratified random      The population is divided  Geographic areas are
    sampling to oversample into subgroups, and random divided into subareas,
    rare units             samples are selected from  which allows for a
                              each subgroup.             more-intensive search of
                                                         cases in trafficking
                                                         "hot spots."
    Double sampling        After selecting a sample   First, a preliminary
                              of primary units to obtain estimate of human
                              preliminary estimates, a   trafficking cases is
                              sample of secondary units  obtained from reported
                              is selected to obtain more cases in certain
                              accurate counts.           geographic areas.
                                                         Second, a more precise
                                                         estimate of actual
                                                         victims is obtained by
                                                         focusing on the areas
                                                         with a higher
                                                         concentration of
                                                         reported cases.
    Adaptive cluster       After an initial set of    After an initial
    sampling               units is selected,         trafficking case is
                              additional units in its    identified, additional
                              neighborhood are added to  cases in its "vicinity"
                              the sample.                are identified. The goal
                                                         is to find clusters that
                                                         are usually defined
                                                         geographically.
    Capture-recapture      Two random samples are     Two random samples of
    sampling               independently drawn, and   reported trafficking
                              the number of common and   cases are independently
                              different units is used to drawn, and the number of
                              estimate the size of the   common and different
                              population.                cases is used to
                                                         estimate the total
                                                         number of reported
                                                         cases.^a
    Indirect sampling      A "sisterhood approach" to Relatives or friends of
                              sampling involves sampling trafficking victims are
                              a related population that  interviewed, and an
                              is not as difficult to     estimate is obtained on
                              sample as the population   the basis of the
                              of interest. An estimate   relationship between the
                              is obtained by using the   two groups.
                              relationship between the
                              "hard-" and
                              "easy-to-reach"
                              populations.
    Sentinel site          A nonrandom sample of      Sites with higher
    surveillance           sites is selected over     concentrations of
                              time to observe changes in trafficking cases can be
                              characteristics.           identified and observed
                                                         over time to determine
                                                         whether there is a
                                                         change in the number of
                                                         victims found or
                                                         rescued, or both.
    Snowball sampling      An initial observation is  An identified victim
                              taken and augmented by the identifies other victims
                              participants. This is a    with whom he or she has
                              participant-driven         been in contact. In
                              approach.                  turn, these victims
                                                         identify others.
    Model-based estimator  A model of human           Based on the underlying
                              trafficking is developed,  relationships of a human
                              followed by empirical work trafficking model, a
                              aimed at obtaining         multiplier of identified
                              parameter estimates.       cases is used to
                                                         extrapolate to a total
                                                         or aggregate estimate.
    Use of decoys          Decoys are used to         An initial estimate of
                              estimate an elusive        reported victims can be
                              population. For example,   adjusted on the basis of
                              the U.S. Census Bureau     the number of decoys
                              used decoys in studies of  that are not found by
                              the homeless to estimate   the enumerators to
                              how many of the homeless   account for victims who
                              were not found.            may have been missed.
    Random approximation   This procedure is an       Every 5^th or 10^th
                              approximation of and is    employment
                              more practical than true   establishment,
                              random sampling. For       household, or
                              example, systematic random reintegrated trafficking
                              sampling requires random   victim is selected to
                              sampling in the first      generate an estimate
                              step, while the units in   that can be used without
                              the second step are        losing the ability to
                              selected in some           generalize.
                              systematic fashion.
    Sampling with          Particular units are       Some geographic areas
    certainty              removed from the sampling  with a known high
                              design to reduce the       incidence of trafficking
                              variation in the           can be included in the
                              estimates. These units are estimation with
                              selected "with certainty," certainty, while
                              while the "noncertainty"   sampling procedures can
                              units are randomly         be applied in other
                              selected.                  parts of a country or
                                                         region.

    Source: GAO analysis of expert panel proceedings.

    ^aThis procedure was used by ILO to obtain its global estimate of forced
    labor. For a detailed discussion, see Patrick Belser, Michaelle de Cock,
    and Ferhad Mehran, ILO Minimum Estimate of Forced Labour in the World, ILO
    (Geneva: April 2005).

    Appendix IV:  Comments from the Department of State

    The following are GAO's comments on the Department of State letter dated
    July 13, 2007.

    GAO Comments

    1.State said that the report's title is not apt because program monitoring
    is in place and improving. We believe that monitoring is limited for the
    following reasons: for the 23 projects we reviewed, the majority did not
    have a logic model that clearly explains how activities are linked to
    project goals; the majority of these projects also did not specify targets
    that establish benchmarks for measuring performance; of the 10 projects
    that did specify targets, only 5 explained how targets were set; and,
    finally, State lacked written guidance for field-level oversight.

    2.State noted that many of its projects are designed to be of more limited
    size, scope, and duration, and that such projects are not necessarily
    suitable for evaluation. They also added that larger and longer-term
    projects are more suitable candidates for impact evaluation than shorter
    projects. Finally, State commented that a relatively short time frame for
    projects is not a design weakness. In the report, we state that the impact
    of a shorter-term, smaller-scale intervention may be difficult to
    attribute and quantify.

    3.State noted that baseline data are not required for all interventions.
    We disagree. In the report, we state that baseline and target values of
    indicators are needed to assess project performance. For example,
    baselines for a victim assistance program could include the number of
    victims served or assisted, or the number of vocational training sessions
    held. Moreover, project-level estimates are needed for baselines by which
    to evaluate how effectively interventions are reducing trafficking. For
    this type of baseline, panelists suggested methods for baseline
    estimation, such as gathering data in trafficking hot spots, that would
    allow for more rigorous impact evaluations.

    Appendix V:  Comments from the Department of Labor

    The following are GAO's comments on the Department of Labor letter dated
    July 13, 2007.

    GAO Comments

    1.Labor noted that federal agencies are carrying out monitoring and
    evaluation activities or are making efforts to improve monitoring and
    evaluation of antitrafficking activities. Labor also provided details of
    its monitoring policies, procedures, and activities. We recognize that
    Labor has monitoring procedures and activities in place, and we revised
    text in several locations to provide further clarification on Labor's
    activities. We clarified that all four Labor projects in Indonesia,
    Mexico, and Thailand clearly link goals and activities, specify targets,
    and explain how targets were set. We added language stating that Labor
    engaged ILO's external auditor to conduct audits of a sample of ILO's
    projects to eliminate child labor and contracted with a certified public
    accounting firm to conduct independent attestation engagements of its
    Education Initiative projects. We believe the overall monitoring of
    antitrafficking projects is limited because the projects funded by the
    other five agencies did not have the elements of monitoring we found in
    Labor's projects.

    2.Labor stated that it requires midterm and final evaluations for its
    technical assistance projects, and that, in some cases, it engages in
    longer-term follow-up studies. We revised the text to further clarify and
    recognize Labor's evaluation requirements and activities. In addition, we
    added text specifying that Labor funds follow-up studies to document
    changes that have occurred to a sample of beneficiaries over time.

    3.Labor agreed with the need to carry out more systematic impact
    evaluations, but also emphasized that process evaluations are an important
    prerequisite of impact evaluations. Labor further commented that
    randomized trials are not appropriate for all projects, and requested that
    we specify where agencies should conduct randomized trials and where other
    methods would be more appropriate. We agree that process evaluations are
    important and revised the text to further differentiate process
    evaluations from impact evaluations. We believe each agency should
    determine whether randomized trials are appropriate for the specific
    project they are evaluating.

    4.We made changes to the draft of this report on the basis of Labor's
    specific technical comments, where appropriate.

    Appendix VI:  Comments from the United States Agency for International
    Development

    Appendix VII:  Comments from the Department of Health and Human Services

    Appendix VIII:  GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

    Thomas Melito (202) 512-9601 or [42]melitot@gao.gov

    Cheryl Goodman, Assistant Director; Jeremy Latimer; Christina Werth; Todd
    M. Anderson; Gergana Danailova-Trainor; Terry Richardson; and Debbie Chung
    made key contributions to this report. In addition, Elizabeth Curda, Bruce
    Kutnick, Mary Moutsos, Barbara Stolz, and Susanna Kuebler provided
    technical or legal assistance.

    (320444)

    [43]www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-1034 .

    To view the full product, including the scope
    and methodology, click on the link above.

    For more information, contact Thomas Melito at (202) 512-9601 or
    melitot@gao.gov.

    Highlights of [44]GAO-07-1034 , a report to congressional requesters

    July 2007

    HUMAN TRAFFICKING

    Monitoring and Evaluation of International Projects Are Limited, but
    Experts Suggest Improvements

    Human trafficking--a worldwide crime involving the exploitation of men,
    women, and children for others' financial gain--is a violation of human
    rights. Victims are often lured or abducted and forced to work in
    involuntary servitude. Since 2001, the U.S. government has provided about
    $447 million to combat global human trafficking. As GAO previously
    reported, estimates of the number of trafficking victims are questionable.
    In this report, GAO examines (1) collaboration among organizations
    involved in international antitrafficking efforts, (2) U.S. government
    monitoring of antitrafficking projects and difficulties in evaluating
    these projects, and (3) suggestions for strengthening monitoring and
    evaluation. GAO analyzed agency documents; convened an expert panel;
    interviewed officials; and conducted fieldwork in Indonesia, Thailand, and
    Mexico.

    [45]What GAO Recommends

    GAO recommends that the Secretaries of State and Labor and the
    Administrator of USAID consider taking actions to

    (1) improve information about project impact on human trafficking and (2)
    address monitoring and evaluation in project design. In their comments,
    State agreed to implement the recommendations. While agreeing that
    monitoring and evaluation are important, Labor and USAID did not directly
    respond to GAO's recommendations.

    While governments, international organizations, and nongovernmental
    organizations have recognized the importance of collaborating and have
    established some coordination mechanisms and practices, they will need to
    overcome challenges that have impeded collaboration in the past for their
    efforts to be successful. In two of the three countries GAO visited, it
    found that host governments--which bear ultimate responsibility for
    combating trafficking within their borders--have passed national
    antitrafficking laws and enacted national action plans. However,
    organizations continue to face numerous challenges when collaborating to
    combat human trafficking, including varying levels of government
    commitment and capacity. For example, some governments treat foreign
    trafficking victims as illegal immigrants and deport rather than protect
    them. In addition, according to officials in two of the three countries
    GAO visited, the ministries responsible for coordinating antitrafficking
    efforts have limited authority and capacity.

    U.S. government-funded antitrafficking projects often lack some important
    elements that allow projects to be monitored, and little is known about
    project impact due to difficulties in conducting evaluations. Project
    documents GAO reviewed generally include monitoring elements, such as an
    overarching goal and related activities, but often lack other monitoring
    elements, such as targets for measuring performance. To oversee projects,
    State officials supplement their efforts with assistance from U.S. embassy
    staff, but have not established written guidance for oversight. Officials
    said that they are working to improve performance measures and develop
    monitoring guidance. Conducting impact evaluations of antitrafficking
    projects is difficult due to several factors, including questionable
    project-level estimates of the number of trafficking victims. These
    estimates are needed for baselines by which to evaluate how effectively
    specific interventions are reducing trafficking. Elements in the design of
    certain projects, such as objectives that are too broad, further impede
    evaluation. Because of these difficulties, few impact evaluations have
    been completed, and little is known about the impact of antitrafficking
    interventions.

    A GAO-convened panel of experts identified and discussed ways to address
    the factors that make it difficult to monitor and evaluate antitrafficking
    projects. Panelists' suggested approaches included improving information
    on the nature and severity of trafficking and addressing monitoring and
    evaluation in project design. To improve information on trafficking,
    panelists suggested methods that have been used to sample other
    hard-to-reach populations, including domestic violence victims. One
    suggested method is sampling of "hot spots"--an intensive search for
    victims in areas known to have high concentrations of victims. To address
    weaknesses in project design that impede monitoring and evaluation,
    panelists suggested that officials design projects that clearly link
    activities to intended outcomes, identify measurable indicators, and
    establish procedures for setting and modifying targets.

    GAO's Mission

    The Government Accountability 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.

    Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony

    The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
    is through GAO's Web site ( [46]www.gao.gov ). Each weekday, GAO posts
    newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To
    have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
    [47]www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."

    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. Government Accountability 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, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs

    Contact:

    Web site: [48]www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
    E-mail: [49]fraudnet@gao.gov
    Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

    Congressional Relations

    Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [50]JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 U.S.
    Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 Washington,
    D.C. 20548

    Public Affairs

    Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [51]AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800
    U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
    Washington, D.C. 20548

    References

    Visible links
      41. http://www.gao.gov
      42. mailto:melitot@gao.gov
      43. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-1034
      44. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-1034
      46. http://www.gao.gov/
      47. http://www.gao.gov/
      48. http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
      49. mailto:fraudnet@gao.gov
      50. mailto:JarmonG@gao.gov
      51. mailto:AndersonP1@gao.gov
    *** End of document. ***