October 18, 2021

News

News Network

Afghanistan Reconstruction: Progress Made in Constructing Roads, but Assessments for Determining Impact and a Sustainable Maintenance Program Are Needed

10 min read
<div>The Afghan government, the United States, and other donors consider road reconstruction a top development priority for Afghanistan. Almost 20 percent of the U.S. Agency for International Development's (USAID) $5.9 billion in assistance to Afghanistan has been for roads. The Department of Defense (Defense) has committed about $560 million for roads, of which Commander's Emergency Response Program (CERP) funds account for over half. GAO examined (1) the status of road reconstruction and challenges affecting project implementation, (2) U.S. agencies' efforts to evaluate the impact of road projects, and (3) efforts to develop a sustainable road maintenance program. GAO reviewed U.S. and Afghan governments' planning, evaluation, and funding documents and interviewed relevant stakeholders in Afghanistan.The United States and other donors have completed construction of several regional and national highways since 2002, but the status of other roads is uncertain and various challenges have delayed construction. The Afghan government and international donors planned to complete the high-priority regional highways by the end of 2008, and as of February 2008, about 60 percent of these roads were built. USAID has completed its portion, but completion of other portions is not expected until late 2009. Donors have committed to construct over 30 percent of national highways, which connect provincial capitals to the regional highways, and only USAID has completed portions of these highways. Detailed information on the status of provincial and rural roads is lacking. Although Defense reported committing CERP funds for 1,600 kilometers of roads, data on the roads were incomplete and Defense has not reported information on these roads to USAID, as required. Poor security, project implementer limitations, and starting construction with limited planning have contributed to project delays and cost increases. U.S. agencies have not conducted sound impact evaluations to determine the degree to which projects achieved the objective of economic development. Limitations of USAID's funding, data collection, and frameworks to assess results have impeded its ability to evaluate project impact. Defense has not conducted any impact evaluations and lacks clear guidance on project evaluation. However, agency officials have noted some anecdotal examples of road construction impact, such as reduced travel times and increased commerce. Moreover, no other donor has performed impact evaluations. A sustainable road maintenance program has not been established, although it is a goal of the Afghan government and international donors. The Afghan government's support of this goal has been limited due to factors such as a lack of resources and a fragmented institutional organization. As a result, international donors have agreed to temporarily fund road maintenance to protect their investments. While USAID plans to maintain about 1,500 kilometers of roads it built, it did not meet its 2007 target to maintain 100 kilometers of reconstructed roads.</div>
United States Agency for International Development To improve evaluation as well as efficiency and effectiveness of USAID funded road reconstruction projects, the Administrator of USAID should improve the results framework to ensure that it is based on expected benefits from a cost-benefit analysis with clearly stated goals, indicators, and targets.

Closed – Implemented

In response to the GAO recommendation, USAID began to ensure that performance monitoring plans include indicators of impact. For example, in its performance monitoring plans, one revised in March 2009 and one covering 2010-2015, USAID included a results framework that includes clearly stated goals and indicators that help track progress toward the goals. USAID also sets annual targets to establish expected benefits and to compare against actual results. USAID also said they perform feasibility studies and have made efforts to increase staff and strengthen its estimation and analysis of project costs. In September 2010, a USAID contractor completed a cost-benefit analysis that developed and implemented an analysis framework that attempted to quantify the expected benefits of the Strategic Provincial Roads in Southern and Eastern Afghanistan program, but also to “provide a replicable evaluation methodology that can be adopted and applied to other, comparable, road developments in Afghanistan.”

United States Agency for International Development To improve evaluation as well as efficiency and effectiveness of USAID funded road reconstruction projects, the Administrator of USAID should, in coordination with other donors, consider building impact evaluations into project design and perform such evaluations after project implementation.

Closed – Implemented

In response to the GAO recommendation, USAID took a number of actions, including the completion of several impact assessments of completed road projects. After GAO issued this recommendation, USAID completed socio-economic impact assessments for the Kabul-Kandahar Road, Kandahar-Herat Road, Keshim-Fayzabad Road, and its Provincial and District Roads program. In addition, USAID completed a socio-economic baseline study for its Bamyan-Dushi Road. According to a cost-benefit analysis released by USAID in September 2010, USAID?s contractor developed a “replicable evaluation methodology that can be adopted and applied to other, comparable, road developments in Afghanistan.”

Department of Defense To ensure the evaluation of CERP-funded roads, the Secretary of Defense should require impact evaluations of these projects where applicable.

Closed – Implemented

DoD took steps just prior to our report issuance to implement this recommendation by including a requirement for project evaluation upon updating its Commander’s Emergency Response Program (CERP) guidance. Specifically, the June 2008 CERP-guidance required project proposals to include performance metrics and indicators; these indicators were to be used as part of the project close-out process for evaluating projects upon completion.

United States Agency for International Development Until the Afghan government is able to establish a road maintenance program, the Administrator of USAID should work with the Afghan government to take steps to address urgent maintenance needs, such as formulating and enforcing vehicle weight standards, while continuing to take steps to address long-term maintenance needs, such as by developing a maintenance implementation plan.

Closed – Implemented

To demonstrate USAID’s continued work with the Afghan government in addressing maintenance needs, USAID met with Afghan ministry officials in 2010 to discuss, for example, USAID and Afghan government joint efforts to institutionalize and fund road maintenance. USAID and Afghan officials reviewed the action plan for creating a national road authority and road fund and the timing of activities was clarified. USAID committed to provide technical legal assistance to help establish them. USAID and Afghan officials also discussed site tours for senior Afghan government officials to see how maintenance was being successfully implemented by Afghan contractors. These meetings follow other steps USAID has taken to implement our recommendation. For example, USAID helped establish a Road Maintenance Unit (RMU). According to USAID, consultants work with Ministry counterparts at the RMU to plan and implement performance-based road maintenance contracts. USAID said about 48 provincial staff from the Ministry of Public Works were involved in monitoring the road conditions and field related works and received two days of training each month on topics such as performance-based contracting, procurement procedures, road maintenance, development of a multi-year investment plan, and cost estimation. USAID said they have discussed other issues with Afghan government officials, including a gas tax, vehicle licensing, and truck weigh station fees as possible revenue streams to fund road maintenance.

United States Agency for International Development Until the Afghan government is able to establish a road maintenance program, the Administrator of USAID should require that future agreements for road reconstruction projects include plans detailing options for funding road maintenance.

Closed – Implemented

In April 2012, USAID reported that no new road construction contracts had been awarded since the recommendations of GAO’s audit were made final, because USAID’s development focus in Afghanistan has changed. However, USAID has shown an effort to write road maintenance into contracts to protect its investments in roads. In addition to a $10 million task order to develop a road maintenance program, USAID awarded a 90-day contract on March 11, 2012 to specifically address maintenance issues on the road from Gardez to Khost.

Department of Defense To ensure that Defense and USAID officials have adequate information to make effective future project management decisions, the Secretary of Defense should require that data for Defense’s CERP-funded road projects be reported for inclusion in USAID’s database, as required by CERP guidance.

Closed – Implemented

DoD concurred with GAO’s recommendation and issued revised guidance that required the DoD officials to ensure that a project is documented in all required databases at completion.

More from:

News Network

  • Warfighter Support: DOD Needs to Improve Its Planning for Using Contractors to Support Future Military Operations
    In U.S GAO News
    Contractors provide a broad range of support to U.S. forces deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq, with the number of contractors at times exceeding the number of military personnel in each country. The Department of Defense (DOD) has acknowledged shortcomings in how the role of contractors was addressed in its planning for Iraq and Afghanistan. In its report accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, the Senate Armed Services Committee directed GAO to assess DOD's development of contract support plans. This report examines (1) what progress DOD has made in developing operational contract support annexes for its operation plans, (2) the extent to which contract requirements are included in other sections of operation plans, and (3) DOD's progress in establishing a long-term capability to include operational contract support requirements in operation plans. GAO reviewed DOD policies, selected operation plans and annexes, and interviewed officials at the combatant commands, the Joint Staff, and Office of the Secretary of Defense.Although DOD guidance has called for combatant commanders to include an operational contract support annex--Annex W--in their operation plans since February 2006, we found only four operation plans with Annex Ws have been approved and planners have drafted Annex Ws for an additional 30 plans. According to combatant command officials, most of the annexes drafted to date restated broad language from existing DOD guidance on the use of contractors to support deployed forces. Several factors help explain the difficulties planners face in identifying specific contract support requirements in Annex Ws. For example, most operation plans contained limited information on matters such as the size and capabilities of the military force involved, hindering the ability of planners to identify detailed contract support requirements. In addition, shortcomings in guidance on how and when to develop contract support annexes complicate DOD's efforts to consistently address contract requirements in operation plans and resulted in a mismatch in expectations between senior DOD leadership and combatant command planners regarding the degree to which Annex Ws will contain specific information on contract support requirements. Senior decision makers may incorrectly assume that operation plans have adequately addressed contractor requirements. As a result, they risk not fully understanding the extent to which the combatant command will be relying on contractors to support combat operations and being unprepared to provide the necessary management and oversight of deployed contractor personnel. According to combatant command officials, detailed information on operational contract support requirements is generally not included in other sections or annexes of the operation plans. Although DOD guidance underscores the importance of addressing contractor requirements throughout an operation plan, including the base plan and other annexes as appropriate, GAO found that nonlogistics personnel tend to assume that the logistics community will address the need to incorporate operational contract support throughout operation plans. For example, combatant command officials told GAO that they were not aware of any assumptions specifically addressing the potential use or role of operational contract support in their base plans. Similarly, according to DOD planners, there is a lack of details on contract support in other parts of most base plans or in the nonlogistics (e.g., communication or intelligence) annexes of operation plans. DOD has launched two initiatives to improve its capability to address operational contract support requirements in its operation plans, but these initiatives are being refined and their future is uncertain. DOD has placed joint operational contract support planners at each combatant command to assist with the drafting of Annex Ws. In addition, the department has created the Joint Contingency Acquisition Support Office to help ensure that contract support planning is consistent across the department. For both initiatives, a lack of institutionalization in guidance and funding and staffing uncertainties have created challenges in how they execute their responsibilities.
    [Read More…]
  • Immigration Detention: ICE Should Enhance Its Use of Facility Oversight Data and Management of Detainee Complaints
    In U.S GAO News
    The Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other DHS entities use, in part, inspections to oversee detention facilities and address identified deficiencies. As shown below, in fiscal year 2019, most of ICE's 179 facilities that housed adults for over 72 hours underwent inspections by contractors or its Office of Detention Oversight, while smaller facilities conducted self-assessments. ICE also conducted onsite monitoring at facilities. Further, two DHS offices conducted inspections related to certain aspects of facilities. ICE collects the results of its various inspections, such as deficiencies they identify, but does not comprehensively analyze them to identify trends or record all inspection results in a format conducive to such analyses. By ensuring inspection results are recorded in a format conducive to analysis and regularly conducting comprehensive analyses of results, ICE would be better positioned to identify and address potential trends in deficiencies. Detention Facility Oversight by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Other Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Entities at 179 Facilities, Fiscal Year 2019 ICE and DHS entities have various mechanisms for receiving and addressing detention-related complaints from detainees and others. However, while some of these entities conduct some analyses of the complaint data they maintain, ICE does not regularly analyze detention-related complaint data across all of its relevant offices. By regularly conducting such analyses, ICE could identify and address potential trends in complaints. Additionally, ICE does not have reasonable assurance that Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) field offices—which oversee and manage detention facilities—address and record outcomes of detention-related complaints referred to them for resolution, or do so in a timely manner. For example, GAO's analysis of data from one referring office—the Administrative Inquiry Unit—indicated that for certain noncriminal complaints the unit refers, ERO field offices did not provide resolutions back to the unit for 99 percent of referrals. Without requiring that ERO field offices record any actions taken on, and the resolutions of, detention-related complaints, ICE does not have reasonable assurance that field offices are addressing them. ICE is the lead agency responsible for providing safe, secure, and humane confinement for detained foreign nationals in the United States. ICE has established standards for immigration detention related to complaint processes, medical care, and other areas. The joint explanatory statement accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019, includes a provision for GAO to review ICE's management and oversight of detention facilities and detention-related complaints. This report examines ICE and other DHS entities' mechanisms for (1) overseeing compliance with immigration detention facility standards and how ICE uses oversight information to address any identified deficiencies; and (2) receiving and addressing detainee complaints, and how ICE uses complaint information. GAO analyzed documentation and data on inspections and complaints at facilities that held detainees for over 72 hours during the last 3 fiscal years—2017 through 2019; visited 10 facilities selected based on inspection results and other factors; and interviewed officials. GAO is making six recommendations, including that ICE ensures oversight data are recorded in a format conducive to analysis, regularly conducts trend analyses of oversight data and detention-related complaint data, and requires that ERO field offices record the resolutions of detention-related complaints. DHS concurred. For more information, contact Rebecca Gambler, (202) 512-8777) or gamblerr@gao.gov.
    [Read More…]
  • On the 6th Anniversary of the 709 Crackdown in China
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Antony J. Blinken, [Read More…]
  • Aviation Services: Information on Airports Exercising Their Right as the Sole Provider of Fuel
    In U.S GAO News
    What GAO Found Based on GAO's survey, 588 of the nearly 2,000 airports responding to the survey reported exercising their proprietary exclusive right (the right to be the sole service provider) for aviation fuel services. While airports are generally prohibited from granting an exclusive right to any party to provide aviation services, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has determined that an airport can be the exclusive provider of such services, thereby precluding other parties from providing those services at the airport. Most (567) of these airports are general aviation airports—airports that have no scheduled commercial service or have scheduled service but fewer than 2,500 passenger boardings per year. The 588 airports are located in 45 of the 48 contiguous states and in all of the FAA regions covering these states. Location of Airports that Reported Using the Proprietary Exclusive Right on GAO Survey, by Federal Aviation Administration Region Note: An airport sponsor may elect to provide any or all of the aeronautical services at its airports and be the exclusive provider of those services. This is known as the proprietary exclusive right. GAO's survey and interviews with selected airports found most airports that report exercising their proprietary exclusive right do so based largely on attracting users to the airport, providing a high level of reliable customer service, and generating airport revenue. Over 90 percent of the 588 airports responded that attracting users to the airport and generating revenue were very important or somewhat important to their decision to provide fuel service. Further, officials from 17 of the 26 airports GAO interviewed explained that the resulting revenue was a main factor in their decision to provide fuel service. For example, one airport manager said the revenue allows the airport to invest in capital projects, such as building hangars, to help attract users to the airport. The revenue can also help an airport become as financially self-sustaining as possible, which is a requirement to receive federal airport grants. Airports also cited providing consistent customer service as a key factor in exercising their proprietary exclusive right. For example, one airport manager GAO spoke to said complaints about the former private fuel provider's customer service and prices prompted the airport to become the sole service provider. Why GAO Did This Study FAA, through federal airport grants, helps fund airports' capital development and is responsible for overseeing airports' compliance with federal requirements incorporated in airport grant agreements. Under these agreements, airports are generally not allowed to grant exclusive rights to any person or entity to provide aeronautical services—such as fuel—on airport grounds. FAA has determined, however, that airports themselves can opt to be the exclusive provider of such services by exercising their proprietary exclusive right. The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 included a provision for GAO to examine airports that have exercised their proprietary exclusive right. This report addresses what is known about the number and characteristics of airports that are currently exercising their proprietary exclusive right to provide fuel and the factors airports consider when deciding whether to exercise this right to provide fuel. GAO reviewed relevant federal statutes, FAA policies and guidance, airport documents and websites, and conducted a web survey of all 3,010 public use airports in the contiguous United States. GAO interviewed officials at a non-generalizable sample of 26 airports that self-identified as exercising their proprietary exclusive right and at 10 airports that are not exercising their proprietary exclusive right, selected based on a mix of characteristics, including the amount of fuel sales. GAO also interviewed FAA compliance staff at headquarters and regional offices. For more information, contact Heather Krause at (202) 512-2834 or krauseh@gao.gov.
    [Read More…]
  • Residents of Florida, Georgia and North Carolina Indicted for Promoting Tax Fraud Scheme
    In Crime News
    A federal grand jury in Orlando, Florida, returned an indictment April 21, 2021, charging residents of Florida, Georgia and North Carolina with promoting a tax fraud scheme.
    [Read More…]
  • Judge Julia Gibbons Receives 2021 Devitt Award
    In U.S Courts
    Judge Julia Smith Gibbons, former budget chair for the U.S. Judicial Conference who was a pioneering woman judge in her home state of Tennessee, is the recipient of the 2021 Edward J. Devitt Distinguished Service to Justice Award. Gibbons serves on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.  
    [Read More…]
  • On the Passing of John Pombe Magufuli
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Ned Price, Department [Read More…]
  • Acting Assistant Secretary of State Joey Hood Travels to Algeria, Morocco, and Kuwait
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Office of the [Read More…]
  • Situation in Tunisia
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Ned Price, Department [Read More…]
  • Iranian National Sentenced for Illegally Exporting Military Sensitive Items
    In Crime News
    An Iranian national was sentenced today to 63 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release for violating the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
    [Read More…]
  • Olympic Security: Better Planning Can Enhance U.S. Support to Future Olympic Games
    In U.S GAO News
    The 2006 Winter Games in Turin, Italy, were the second Olympic Games to take place overseas since September 11, 2001. The United States worked with Italy to ensure the security of U.S. citizens, and it expects to continue such support for future Games, including the 2008 Games in Beijing, China. GAO was asked to (1) discuss the U.S. approach for providing security support for the 2006 Winter Games and how such efforts were coordinated, (2) identify the roles of U.S. agencies in providing security support for the Games and how they financed their activities, (3) review lessons learned in providing security support and the application of prior lessons learned, and (4) identify U.S. efforts under way for providing security support to the 2008 Beijing Games.In 2004, the United States began planning to provide a U.S. security presence in Italy and security support to the Italian government, and based much of its security strategy on its understanding of Italy's advanced security capabilities. The United States provided Italy with some security assistance, mostly in the form of crisis management and response support. To coordinate U.S. efforts, the U.S. Mission in Italy established an office in Turin as a central point for security information and logistics, and to provide consular services to U.S. citizens during the Games. The U.S. Ambassador to Italy, through the U.S. Consulate in Milan, coordinated and led U.S. efforts in-country, while the Department of State-chaired interagency working group in Washington, D.C., coordinated domestic efforts. While the interagency working group has been a useful forum for coordinating U.S. security support to overseas athletic events, State and Department of Justice (DOJ) officials have indicated that formal guidance that articulates a charter; a mission; and agencies' authorities, roles, and responsibilities would help in planning for security support to future Games. Nearly 20 entities and offices within several U.S. agencies provided more than $16 million for security support activities for the Turin Games. The roles of these agencies--which included the Departments of State, Justice, Homeland Security, Defense, and Energy--included providing crisis management and response support through personnel, equipment, and training and providing security advice and other assistance to U.S. athletes, spectators, and commercial investors. The U.S. Embassy in Rome initially paid for lodging and other administrative support needs, which were reimbursed by the participating agencies, although it struggled to do so. State and DOJ officials indicated that an interagency mechanism for identifying costs and addressing potential funding issues would be useful in providing U.S. security support to future Games. For the Turin Games, agencies applied key lessons learned from the 2004 Athens Games and identified additional lessons for future Games. Key lessons identified from the Turin Games included, the importance of establishing an operations center at the location of the Games, establishing clear roles and responsibilities for agencies in event planning and crisis response efforts, and planning early for several years of Olympic-related expenditures. These lessons learned were communicated by Washington, D.C.- and Italy-based personnel to their counterparts who are preparing for the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing. The United States is currently taking steps to identify the types of security support that agencies may provide to support China's security efforts for the 2008 Summer Games and to ensure the safety of U.S. athletes, spectators, and commercial investors.
    [Read More…]
  • After 40 Years of Progress, It Is Time to End the HIV Epidemic
    In Human Health, Resources and Services
    As we mark the 40th [Read More…]
  • Justice Department Settles with Iowa-Based Nursing Home and Management Company to Resolve Immigration-Related Discrimination Claim
    In Crime News
    The Department of Justice announced today that it reached a settlement with JP Senior Healthcare LLC and JP Senior Management LLC, resolving the department’s claims that these companies violated the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) by discriminating against a Latino employee based on assumptions that the worker was not a U.S. citizen.
    [Read More…]
  • Low-Income Workers: Millions of Full-Time Workers in the Private Sector Rely on Federal Health Care and Food Assistance Programs
    In U.S GAO News
    The 12 million wage-earning adults (ages 19 to 64) enrolled in Medicaid—a joint federal-state program that finances health care for low-income individuals—and the 9 million wage-earning adults in households receiving food assistance from the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) shared a range of common labor characteristics. For example, approximately 70 percent of adult wage earners in both programs worked full-time hours (i.e., 35 hours or more) on a weekly basis and about one-half of them worked full-time hours annually (see figure). In addition, 90 percent of wage-earning adults participating in each program worked in the private sector (compared to 81 percent of nonparticipants) and 72 percent worked in one of five industries, according to GAO’s analysis of program participation data included in the Census Bureau’s 2019 Current Population Survey. When compared to adult wage earners not participating in the programs, wage-earning adult Medicaid enrollees and SNAP recipients in the private sector were more likely to work in the leisure and hospitality industry and in food service and food preparation occupations. Estimated Percentage of Wage-Earning Adult Medicaid Enrollees and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Recipients Working at Least 35 Hours per Week, by Number of Weeks Worked in 2018 GAO’s analysis of February 2020 program data from 15 agencies—six Medicaid agencies and nine SNAP agencies—across 11 states shows that a majority of working adult Medicaid enrollees and SNAP recipients in these states worked for private sector employers. GAO’s analysis also shows that the percentage of working adult Medicaid enrollees and SNAP recipients working for any one employer did not exceed 4 percent in any state that provided data. Most working adults in the programs worked for private sector employers concentrated in certain industries, including restaurants, department stores, and grocery stores. Smaller percentages of working adults in each program in these states worked outside the private sector. For example, less than 10 percent worked for public sector employers, such as state governments, the U.S. Postal Service, or public universities; others worked for nonprofit organizations, such as charities, hospitals, and health care networks, or were self-employed. In October 2020, GAO issued a report entitled Federal Social Safety Net Programs Millions of Full-Time Workers Rely on Federal Health Care and Food Assistance Programs (GAO-20-45.) This testimony summarizes the findings of that report, which examined (1) what is known about the labor characteristics of wage-earning adult Medicaid enrollees and SNAP recipients, and (2) what is known about where wage-earning adult Medicaid enrollees and SNAP recipients work. To answer these questions, GAO analyzed recent Census Bureau data on the labor characteristics of working adults in the two programs. GAO also analyzed recent (Feb. 2020) non-generalizable data on the employers of working adult Medicaid enrollees and SNAP recipients obtained from 15 state agencies across 11 states. GAO selected state agencies that (1) collected, verified, and updated the names of Medicaid enrollees’ and SNAP recipients’ employers; and (2) could extract reliable data. GAO made no recommendations. For more information, contact Cindy S. Brown Barnes at (202) 512-7215 or brownbarnesc@gao.gov.  
    [Read More…]
  • The Jones/Hill Joint Venture
    In U.S GAO News
    A joint venture protested the solicitation cancellation of a Department of the Navy contract for base operations and support services, contending that the Navy's (1) study resulting in its decision to cancel the solicitation was biased by a conflict of interest, (2) study was unjustified, (3) in-house management plan was misevaluated, and (4) assertion that in-house performance was comparable to contracted performance was unreasonable. GAO held that the Navy's study was flawed in several areas and could not be used as a reason to cancel the solicitation. Accordingly, the protest was sustained and GAO recommended that the Navy (1) issue a new solicitation drafted by individuals who will not also be drafting the in-house management plan, (2) prepare a new management plan with supporting documentation, (3) present the new plan for private sector solicitation, and (4) reimburse the protester for all expenses associated with filing the protest.
    [Read More…]
  • Sierra Leone National Day
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Antony J. Blinken, [Read More…]
  • Elections in El Salvador
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Ned Price, Department [Read More…]
  • Security at the 2019 Women’s World Cup nearing the final goal
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Angela French, DSS [Read More…]
  • The United States and Japan Expand Indo-Pacific Economic Cooperation
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Office of the [Read More…]
  • Public Designation of Oligarch and Former Ukrainian Public Official Ihor Kolomoyskyy Due to Involvement in Significant Corruption
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Antony J. Blinken, [Read More…]
Network News © 2005 Area.Control.Network™ All rights reserved.