September 28, 2021


News Network

Special Briefing with Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Brian P. McKeon, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Principal Advisor to the Administrator Mark Feierstein, and Experts On the Administration’s Budget Proposal for the Department of State and USAID for Fiscal Year 2022

31 min read

Brian P. McKeon, Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources

Mark Feierstein, Principal Advisor to the Administrator, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)

Via Teleconference

MR ICE: Thank you, and good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for joining us for this on-the-record briefing on the details of the Fiscal Year 2022 budget request for the State Department and USAID that was released earlier today. With us on the line are State Department Deputy Secretary for Management and Resources Brian McKeon and the USAID Administrator’s Principal Advisor Mark Feierstein.

Also joining us today is Director Douglas Pitkin of the State Department’s Bureau of Budget and Planning; Dr. Tracy Carson, Acting Director of the State Department’s Office of Foreign Assistance; and USAID Budget Director Tricia Schmitt.

To start us off, I’ll be turning the call over to Deputy Secretary McKeon and Advisor Feierstein for their opening remarks, and then afterward our participants will take a few of your questions.

Again, just as a quick reminder, this briefing is on the record, but the contents of the call are embargoed until the conclusion of the call.

And with that, let’s go to Deputy Secretary McKeon. Sir.

DEPUTY SECRETARY MCKEON: Thank you, JT. Good afternoon, everybody. Thanks for joining us. You’re doing great service, working hard on the afternoon before Memorial Day weekend.

As Secretary Blinken noted in his press release, the FY22 Presidents’ budget request includes historic investments across the interagency that will lay the foundation for shared growth and prosperity for decades to come.

I want to share a few toplines from the request for the State Department and USAID, starting with a number of $58.5 billion, a more than 5 billion – or 10 percent – increase over the FY 2021 level. I am pleased to be joined on this call by Mark Feierstein, the Principal Advisor to Administrator Power, who will speak to the budget request for USAID. The relationship between our department and AID is critical in achieving the President’s foreign policy and development goals, and we’re fortunate to have such effective partners. And all the senior leaders here and at AID know each other very well, so we don’t have to build a working relationship, because we already have it.

The first thing I want to highlight is the investment this budget makes in our workforce, which is our greatest asset. As one of the President’s earliest national security memoranda states, quote, “the revitalization of our national security and foreign policy institutions is essential to advancing America’s security, prosperity, and values, accelerating our domestic renewal, and delivering results for all Americans.” End quote. That’s why this budget includes the largest staffing increase for the Department in a decade, covering both the Foreign and Civil Service.

But it’s not just about adding new positions. It’s about ensuring that we recruit and – this is essential – retain the right people: a workforce that represents the full diversity and talent of the United States. The Secretary’s appointment of Ambassador Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley as the Department’s first ever Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer is just one step in that effort. We are taking steps to revitalize the Department by ensuring that our employees have the tools and training they need to be successful.

We are also investing in the programs and capabilities we need to address the challenges of our time. For example, the budget includes: $10 billion for global health programs, including $1 billion to strengthen pandemic preparedness, which is an $800 million increase; 2.5 billion across the interagency to address climate change, more than quadruple the FY21 level, in close coordination with Special Presidential Envoy Former Secretary Kerry; and increases in democracy and governance programs to stem the tide of rising authoritarianism.

Our State and USAID budget directors will provide additional details on these sectors and other key investments, including the inclusion of more predictable resources to sustain consular services for Americans traveling, working, and living overseas, and additional investments in our cybersecurity and other technology modernization efforts.

We are also requesting the resources we need to support our commitments to key allies and partners, both in this budget and in separate requests. For example, we will be working with the Congress to seek an additional 8,000 Afghan Special Immigrant Visas to meet our commitment to those who have supported our efforts in Afghanistan at great risk to themselves and their families. We are working with the interagency to accelerate SIV processing so we can make use of those visas. We are also continuing to work with the international community on the provision of additional assistance to the Afghan people and government toward a shared goal of prosperity and security for the country.

Finally, this budget is a demonstration of renewed U.S. leadership in the international community. It fully funds our commitments to UN peacekeeping and other international organizations and provides more than $10 billion in humanitarian assistance, including to support a refugee admissions level of up to 125,000. We cannot advance our interests by withdrawing from the world stage. We need to be in the room working with our partners and competitors alike, fighting for our interests.

We will have more to say about the budget over the coming weeks and months about how it reflects and resources our goals and our values as we work with the Congress to secure this funding. I’ll stop here now and turn it over to Mark.

MR FEIERSTEIN: Well thank you, Brian, and good afternoon, everybody, and thanks so much for joining. I am very pleased to be joining my friend and State Department colleague, Brian McKeon, to discuss the Biden-Harris administration’s Fiscal Year 2022 budget request. We at USAID are grateful for Deputy Secretary McKeon’s partnership and commitment to the notion that our diplomacy and development efforts abroad are complementary and interdependent.

The FY22 budget request includes 27.7 billion for the U.S. Agency for International Development’s fully and partially managed accounts. It signals President Biden’s commitment to reassert the United States’s role as a leader in global development and humanitarian assistance.

From day one, President Biden made clear that development, alongside defense and diplomacy, is critical to American foreign policy. This is not only reflected in the FY 2022 budget request, but also in the President’s decision to elevate the USAID administrator as a standing member of the National Security Council.

This budget also reflects the nature and complexity of the challenges that we face in the 21st century – those that cannot be confined within national borders and require multilateral efforts to confront. Simply put, building back better at home also requires building back better overseas.

By fighting COVID-19 abroad, we stem the rise of variants that can lead to outbreaks at home. When incomes rise in developing countries, those countries become more self-reliant and less dependent on U.S. support. When we deliver aid to those affected by natural disasters or humanitarian crises, we demonstrate the best of American values and build the goodwill that inspires action and cooperation from our allies.

The ongoing pandemic illustrates the importance of USAID’s efforts to bolster health systems globally. We must fight COVID-19 everywhere it exists and work to prevent, prepare for, and respond to future infectious disease outbreaks.

We also face an urgent climate crisis which literally poses a threat to some countries’ existence and is also a threat to our own national security. The impacts of climate change lead to conflict, hunger, displacement, and other extreme weather events that cost lives and damage critical infrastructure at home.

Accompanying the existential threats of climate change and the spread of infectious disease is the threat posed by the rise of malign actors undermining the rule of law and democratic norms. Amid the 15-year democratic decline globally documented by Freedom House, nine more countries slipped into a state of autocracy in the last five years alone. USAID’s democracy programming confronts authoritarianism and combats corruption and misinformation through partnerships with government reformers and civil society actors seeking to hold illiberal regimes accountable.

Poverty, violence, and misrule often lead people to leave their countries in search of better opportunities abroad. In Central America, USAID is committed to addressing the root causes of irregular migration by tackling the violence, corruption, and lack of opportunity that drive so many to risk their lives and the lives of their children. Our approach includes a greater emphasis on building economic resilience, identifying and addressing conditions in emigration hot spots, and improving living conditions by promoting good governance.

The United States is also the world’s largest donor for global humanitarian assistance, and we will continue to leverage our contributions to get other countries to do more. The budget request includes 6.3 billion to address needs resulting from man-made emergencies in countries like Yemen, Ethiopia, and Venezuela, as well as natural disasters such as earthquakes, typhoons, and volcano eruptions like we’ve seen recently in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. And we’ll not just respond to crises, but invest in resilience and risk reduction efforts that reduce the economic and human cost of disasters.

Now, none of this work would be possible without an investment in our workforce, which is why this request includes $1.9 billion to boost our Civil Service and Foreign Service staffing and create a workforce that reflects the diversity of our country. We are committed to building the most diverse, and most talented, workforce in USAID history.

In sum, the President’s Budget Request released today reflects the reality that America’s security is inextricably linked to that of other nations around the world. This budget proposal is a reflection of the critical importance of development and humanitarian assistance in advancing U.S. interests and upholding American values.

Thank you and we look forward to your questions.

MR ICE: Okay. And with that, just a quick reminder to dial 1-0 to get into our question queue. And let’s go to the line of Matt Lee.

OPERATOR: You are open, Mr. Lee.

QUESTION: Okay, thanks. Happy Memorial Day weekend, almost. I’ve got two things, they’re both very brief. The first one is – and forgive me, because my math is absolutely atrocious – but a little back-of-the-envelope addition just from the fact sheets and what you’ve said on this call suggests that almost a third of the total is taken up by climate change, health, staffing, and other – and other things like that, including – let me see, I had it written down. Anyway, I just want to know: Is that correct? I mean, it seems like a substantial percentage of this budget – oh, humanitarian assistance was the other one. Is that – am I correct that that’s almost 30 billion of the total 58.5?

And then just one other thing, and that is: Already some human rights groups are talking about how this is – how the foreign military financing for Egypt contradicts the administration’s “no blank check” policy. Is it – it’s always been my understanding that that funding level was – is relatively static and isn’t something that you guys just change in the request; it’s something that Congress weighs in on. Is that correct, as well? Thank you.

MR FEIERSTEIN: I’m going to defer to the deputy secretary on the – and Tracy Carson and Tricia Schmitt on the one-third piece since they’re steeped in all the numbers, and I’m as good at math as you are, Matt.

MR PITKIN: This is Doug Pitkin. I’ll start, I guess. Certainly on the climate and the health, those are certainly large elements of the request. While the workforce is an element, it is – in terms of dollar terms, it’s not the most significant number increase. Another key priority in the request is an increase of $600 million to pay our contributions to the UN, including peacekeeping as well as arrears from prior years. So I think in terms of the workforce numbers between State and AID, the increase is probably closer to about 350 million all told, including AID.

But certainly, climate, health, and international contributions are relatively larger amounts, as well as, I believe, Central America. So I’ll let Tracy clarify further.

MS CARSON: Absolutely. The health, humanitarian assistance, and climate total is roughly 21.6 million. So there’s 10 million for health, there’s 10 million for humanitarian assistance, and then there’s – I’m sorry, there’s 10 billion for health, 10 billion for humanitarian assistance, and then 1.6 billion for climate. And Doug is absolutely correct – Central America is $861 million, and so they do constitute a sizeable amount of the foreign assistance request.

MR ICE: Okay. With that, let’s go to the line of Jennifer Hansler. Jennifer?

QUESTION: Thank you for doing the call. I was wondering if you could get into more specifics about the funding for increasing cybersecurity here, especially in light of today’s latest cyber attack? Thank you.

MR PITKIN: This is Doug Pitkin. I can start with the State portion. For the State Department we’re requesting a total increase of approximately 160 million in cybersecurity funding over our current levels. And this reflects a combination of ongoing programs managed by our chief information officer and our Bureau of Diplomatic Security, as well as a number of specific initiatives to respond to the threats identified by the SolarWinds incidents over the last few months. And so for State it’s a topline increase of $160 million for cybersecurity over current levels.

MR FEIERSTEIN: Tricia, do you want to speak to the cyber level for USAID and what the full amount is?

MS SCHMITT: Sure. For our overall operational expenses account at USAID, it is 1.9 billion, which includes increases for our staffing, our – it does include our increased investments for information technology and modernization. The funding will include upgrades to support our – again, the modernization pieces but the actual IT piece as well with ’21 enacted.

MR ICE: Let’s go to the line of Simon Ateba.

QUESTION: Thank you for taking my question. This is Simon Ateba with Today News Africa in Washington, D.C. The Trump administration defunded several programs that were taking place in Africa. I was wondering if you can talk a little bit more about how the Biden administration’s budget will benefit programs and interventions by USAID and State Department in Africa. And will those interventions be dependent on human rights, democracy, and so on? And how much exactly is going to Africa? Thank you.

DEPUTY SECRETARY MCKEON: Go ahead, Tracy or Tricia.

MS CARSON: Yeah, I’ll take that. The request for Africa is $7.6 billion across a range of accounts. It includes the robust support for democracy, rights, and governance, as well as support for economic growth activities, as well as some of our supports to help with civilian security assistance around a range of countries on the continent. You’ll see notable increases for – are in – you’ll see notable increases for engagement, especially with democracy, rights, and governance, (inaudible) USAID core requirement.

I’ll turn to (inaudible) if you’ve got anything else.

MR FEIERSTEIN: Yeah, I’m happy to speak to that as well. So first, thank you for the question. And Africa is of course of utmost importance to USAID. We with State have a joint regional strategy that focuses on four goals. First is to increase economic growth. Second to – is to promote security. Third is to strengthen democracy and human rights. And fourth is to promote inclusive country-level development.

We have some programs that are specific to Africa, such as Prosper Africa. We’re investing $80 million there, and that program is designed to connect U.S. and African businesses with new buyers, suppliers, and investment opportunities. We also have a Power Africa program which began in the Obama administration. For that we’re requesting $57.5 million, and we’re going to use that to continue to promote sub-Saharan Africa’s transition to cleaner and renewable energy. And then we have global programs like Feed the Future, where we promote agricultural development and our investments in Africa are quite significant under that. Similarly, we have health programs that are fairly generous on the African continent. So overall, we – I think we – this very much speaks to the needs that the – that Africa has these days.

But I don’t if, Tricia, do you want to – have anything?

MS SCHMITT: No, that’s it. Thank you.

MR ICE: Okay, let’s go to the line of Tracy Wilkinson with the Los Angeles Times.

QUESTION: Hi, thank you. I wanted to go back to the question of Central America for a minute and maybe a little more detail, if at all possible, on the 861 million being assigned there. Obviously, that’s the first part of the 4 billion that President Biden has offered the region. But as you know, there’s a lot of controversy about where that money should go, to whom, et cetera. And so to what extent did strings attach to this money or discussion about what – who it should go to, which government first and then – which governments first and then which organizations and different entities within the countries? I’m just curious if there was more discussion about that and anything put in writing about how to disburse these funds. Thank you.

DEPUTY SECRETARY MCKEON: So you packed a lot into your question, Tracy. Just at a high level, as you indicated, the President during the campaign promised 4 billion over four years. This is the first step in meeting that commitment. It’s going to focus on strengthening rule of law, democratic governance, strengthening civil society, and improving respect for human rights. I know from the experience of when a similar program was initiated at the end of the Obama-Biden administration and Vice President Biden was leading the effort for the administration, there was a fair amount of, shall we say, conditionality in conversations with the Central American governments, putting requests upon them on certain things that they were going to do in terms of their own investments but also conditions on – related to corruption and governance.

And so I expect we will have some similar conversations. But – and a lot of the funds at that time were disbursed to NGOs more than the governments, but I don’t know that we’ve got this all laid out in detail at this time. I’d defer to other colleagues if they want to add any thoughts.

MR FEIERSTEIN: Well, I would just speak to how we’re carrying this out in practice. And just to offer one example, you may have seen an announcement a few days ago from USAID with regard to funding in El Salvador. And we had been supporting the attorney general’s office there and the supreme court, but we were concerned about certain steps that were taken there, and that we have – we pivot that money towards civil society. So we recognize that in some cases we don’t have perfect development partners, but we’re confident that we can identify in Central America – and this is true around the world – that we can identify reformers within government, people who have the political will to carry out democratic reform. And we’re also confident we can identify civil society actors who can hold their governments accountable and carry out our mutual development objectives. Thank you.

MR ICE: And we do have some more questions in the queue, but I’m aware, sir, Mr. Deputy Secretary, that you have a hard stop with us this afternoon. Are you able to carry on or do you need to go, sir?

DEPUTY SECRETARY MCKEON: Can do one more, but I realize – and I apologize – didn’t address Matt Lee’s question on Egypt. Let me just do that quickly. You are correct, Matt; it is steady state funding. I think the FMF number’s been at $1.3 billion for several years. We’re going to have conversations with the Congress and the Government of Egypt on the best way to use our assistance to meet our interests, including on human rights. That’s what we’d say about that right now.

MR ICE: Thank you, sir. Let’s go to the line of Pearl Matibe.

QUESTION: Thank you very much. I really appreciate you taking the time. I really very quickly skimmed through the numbers here, so it’s possible that there’s something I’ve missed. Given everything that Biden has promised, State Department has promised, and how you might be different to past administrations – and when I say that I’m going as far back as Reagan administration – and you want to build back better. Can you respond with two things in focus? One, the African diaspora and the African – the indigenous African diaspora and the indigenous independent media. If you are to help support with your four goals Africa, are you saying here, besides the climate and the health portions, that you are going to try to do this without supporting indigenous African-led development here? Or can you point me to where that is in this budget request? Thanks.

DEPUTY SECRETARY MCKEON: USAID, this – think we’d defer to you to address this first.

MR FEIERSTEIN: Yeah, happy to take this. So look, everything that we do around the world is designed to support local actors, and that is certainly true in Africa as well. So we put together a strategy, we put together a budget that is based on consultations with governments, with civil society, with private sector in the region. And you mentioned diaspora, and diaspora is a very, very important element of this as well. In many cases, they are the – some of the leading actors and investors in their home countries. So we try to work with them as well, and the goal here, of course, is to leverage – use our technical assistance, use our resources to leverage the talents of others and to leverage the resources of others, and that certainly includes the diaspora communities. But thank you for the question.

MR ICE: Okay. Let’s quickly go to the line of David Wainer at Bloomberg.

QUESTION: Thank you for doing this. Could you please clarify the funding you mentioned for programs that help Afghans who worked with U.S. personnel? And just to clarify, are these translators, and what is the total cost of helping those people? And how is that request any different from the 2021 budget? Thank you.

DEPUTY SECRETARY MCKEON: So the program that I think folks are familiar with is called the Afghan Special Immigrant Visa program. Congress provides authorization for a certain number of visas each year. Typically, in the last few years, they’ve provided 4,000 slots. We’re asking for 8,000 this year. The spending is on – typically on the mandatory side of the budget, not the discretionary. Obviously the cost of actually processing the visa applications, doing the interviews, and their initial resettlement – that’s kind of baked into the budget and how we do our work as a department. The Congress has set forth categories of prioritization in the SIV program. I don’t have the categories in front of me, but the translators, interpreters are in – I believe in tier one of the categories.

MR ICE: And I think we have time for just one last quick question. Let’s go to Rachel Oswald at Congressional Quarterly.

QUESTION: Hi, thank you. Can you hear me?

MR ICE: Yes, we have you.

QUESTION: Can you talk a little bit about what funding is directed toward refugee assistance, specifically rebuilding capacity for admissions domestically?

DEPUTY SECRETARY MCKEON: Tracy, I don’t have the PRM number at my fingertips – several billion dollars, but I don’t have the exact number. Tracy, do you have that?

MS CARSON: My apologies. I was on – I was talking on mute. The PRM number for refugee assistance is (inaudible) billion dollars, and this includes support for up to 125,000 refugees as well as support to reinitiate humanitarian assistance via UNRWA.

DEPUTY SECRETARY MCKEON: I – you were boxed out for a second, Tracy. I couldn’t hear the number – the billion dollars.

MS CARSON: Oh, $3.8 billion for refugee assistance, and that includes support for up to 125,000 refugees as part of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program.

DEPUTY SECRETARY MCKEON: Right. And more broadly to your question, the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration is taking steps to rebuild the infrastructure here in the United States with the local resettlement agencies, helping them with financial assistance, and staffing up its own bureau because they need some additional positions to meet the ambitious target that the President has set for us.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR ICE: Okay, very well. So we’re actually over time now, three minutes after the hour. I would like to give a special thanks to our experts on the line today with us, Deputy Secretary McKeon, Principal Advisor Feierstein, Director Pitkin, Acting Director Dr. Carson, and Budget Director Tricia Schmitt. This does conclude our call today. With that, the embargo is lifted. Please have a great weekend.

More from: Brian P. McKeon, Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources, Mark Feierstein, Principal Advisor to the Administrator, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)

News Network

  • Al Qaeda-Trained Jihadist Who Recruited Other Inmates to Join ISIS Sentenced to 300 Months
    In Crime News
    A 46-year-old international terrorist convicted of additional terrorist activity that he committed while an inmate of the U.S. Bureau of Prisons has been sentenced in the Eastern District of Texas, announced the Department of Justice.
    [Read More…]
  • U.S. Announces Humanitarian Assistance for Iraq
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Antony J. Blinken, [Read More…]
  • U.S. Department of State Concludes $6.6 Million Settlement of Alleged Export Violations by Keysight Technologies, Inc.
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Office of the [Read More…]
  • United Kingdom Travel Advisory
    In Travel
    Reconsider travel to the [Read More…]
  • On Transparency and Foreign Funding of U.S. Think Tanks
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Michael R. Pompeo, [Read More…]
  • Special Operations Forces: DOD’s Report to Congress Generally Addressed the Statutory Requirements but Lacks Detail
    In U.S GAO News
    What GAO Found GAO found that the Department of Defense’s (DOD) report to Congress on special operations forces (SOF) and U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) addressed or partially addressed each of the eight mandated reporting elements, but did not include additional details on the analysis that underpins the department’s conclusions on several reporting elements. Specifically:  Reporting Element 1: The organizational structure of SOCOM and each subordinate component. The report partially addressed this by concluding that the organizational structure of SOCOM is adequate to meet current assigned roles and responsibilities. The report does not provide analysis to justify how the department reached that conclusion. Reporting Element 2: The policy and civilian oversight structures for SOF within DOD. The report partially addressed this by concluding that the oversight and statutory structures and responsibilities meets statutory and assigned oversight responsibilities. The report does not discuss the alignment of resources, including human capital, as it pertains to the offices with oversight responsibilities.  Reporting Element 3: The roles and responsibilities of SOCOM and SOF under Title 10 of the U.S. Code. The report addressed this by concluding that SOCOM and SOF have sufficient statutory authorities to accomplish their roles and responsibilities under section 167 of title 10, United States Code. Reporting Element 4: The current and future special operations-peculiar requirements of the geographic combatant commands and the Theater Special Operations Commands.The report partially addressed this by concluding that current and future special-operations peculiar requirements can be met with current and planned resources.  The report does not specify the GAO found that the Department of Defense’s (DOD) report to Congress on special operations forces (SOF) and U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) addressed or partially addressed each of the eight mandated reporting elements, but did not include additional details on the analysis that underpins the department’s conclusions on several reporting elements. Reporting Element 5: The command relationships between SOCOM, its subordinate component commands, and the geographic combatant commands. The report partially addressed this by concluding that command relationships are adequate. The report includes information on the relationships between SOCOM, the geographic combatant commands, and the Theater Special Operations Commands, but does not discuss command relationships between SOCOM and its service component commands Reporting Element 6: The funding authorities, uses, acquisition processes, and civilian oversight mechanisms of Major Force Program-11. The report addressed this by concluding that these elements of Major Force Program-11 funding, which is used to organize, train, and equip forces to conduct special operations missions and acquire or modify service common systems for special operations when there is no broad conventional force need, are adequate and by including information on the budget development process and uses of Major Force Program-11 funding. The report also addressed the resolution of resourcing disputes between SOCOM and the services; DOD’s assessment of funding authorities and overseas contingency operations requirements; and civilian oversight mechanisms for Major Force Program-11 funding. Reporting Element 7: Changes to areas such as structure, authorities, and oversight mechanisms assumed in the 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review. The report partially addressed this by concluding that the structure, authorities, Major Force Program-11 funding, roles, and responsibilities are adequate. However, the report does not provide justification on how the department reached that conclusion.  Reporting Element 8: Any other matters the Secretary of Defense determined appropriate to ensure a comprehensive review and assessment. The report addressed this by including information on suicide prevention, health, and family readiness programs, and on initiatives to enhance the professionalization of SOF. Why GAO Did This Study Since 2001, DOD has deployed SOF to conduct a range of military operations, particularly in Afghanistan and Iraq. To meet an increase in operational demands for SOF, DOD has increased SOCOM’s funding and SOF force levels. DOD strategic guidance indicates that SOF will continue to play a prominent role in support of the defense strategy. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (the Act), Section 1086, required the Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense committees a report on SOF organization, capabilities, structure, and oversight. The Act further mandated GAO to submit to the congressional defense committees an evaluation of the DOD report no later than 60 days after the issuance of the DOD report. GAO examined the extent to which DOD’s report addressed the mandated reporting elements. To address this objective, GAO analyzed the Act to identify the reporting elements, assessed DOD’s report to determine whether each of the eight mandated reporting elements were addressed, and interviewed DOD officials.
    [Read More…]
  • Supplement Retailers Plead Guilty in Cases Involving Distribution of Designer Steroids as Dietary Supplements
    In Crime News
    Two men and a California business each pleaded guilty this week to conspiring to distribute consumer products that contained designer anabolic steroids.
    [Read More…]
  • Katy resident admits to fraud
    In Justice News
    A 47-year-old Katy woman [Read More…]
  • COVID-19: HHS Should Clarify Agency Roles for Emergency Return of U.S. Citizens during a Pandemic
    In U.S GAO News
    What GAO Found At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. returned, or repatriated, about 1,100 U.S. citizens from abroad and quarantined them domestically to prevent the spread of COVID-19. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) experienced coordination and safety issues that put repatriates, HHS personnel, and nearby communities at risk. This occurred because HHS component agencies—the Administration for Children and Families, the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention—did not follow plans or guidance delineating their roles and responsibilities for repatriating individuals during a pandemic—an event these agencies had never experienced. While they had general repatriation plans, there was disagreement as to whether the effort was in fact a repatriation. This led to fundamental problems for HHS agencies and their federal partners, including at the March Air Reserve Base quarantine facility in California where the first repatriated individuals were quarantined prior to widespread transmission of COVID-19 in the U.S. These problems included the following: Lack of clarity as to which agency was in charge when the first repatriation flight from Wuhan, China, arrived at the quarantine facility, which caused confusion among the HHS component agencies. Coordination issues among HHS component agencies resulted in component agencies operating independently of each other, and led to frustration and complications. HHS's delay in issuing its federal quarantine order, during which time a repatriate tried to leave the quarantine facility. HHS personnel's inconsistent use of personal protective equipment (PPE), and HHS officials' disagreement on which agency was responsible for managing infection prevention and control. An HHS official also directed personnel to remove their PPE as it created “bad optics,” according to an HHS report that examined the repatriation effort. The National Response Framework, a guide to how the U.S. responds to disasters and emergencies, instructs agencies to understand their respective roles and responsibilities, know what plans apply, and develop appropriate guidance for emergency responses. Until HHS revises or develops new plans that clarify agency roles and responsibilities during a repatriation in response to a pandemic, it will be unable to prevent the coordination and health and safety issues it experienced during the COVID-19 repatriation response in future pandemic emergencies. HHS also did not include repatriation in its pandemic planning exercises. As a result, agencies lacked experience deploying together to test repatriation plans during a pandemic, which contributed to serious coordination issues. GAO has previously reported that exercises play an important role in preparing for an incident by providing opportunities to test response plans and assess the clarity of roles and responsibilities. Until HHS conducts such exercises, it will be unable to test its repatriation plans during a pandemic and identify areas for improvement. Why GAO Did This Study HHS provides temporary assistance to U.S. citizens repatriated by the Department of State (State) from a foreign country because of destitution, illness, threat of war, or similar crises through the U.S. Repatriation Program. In January and February 2020, HHS assisted State in repatriating individuals from Wuhan, China, and the Diamond Princess cruise ship in Yokohama, Japan, to the U.S. HHS quarantined repatriates at five Department of Defense (DOD) installations to ensure they did not infect others with COVID-19. GAO was asked to examine HHS's COVID-19 repatriation efforts to ensure the health and safety of those involved in the response. This report examines HHS's coordination and management of its COVID-19 repatriation response. GAO reviewed relevant documentation from HHS, State, and DOD related to repatriation planning, including documentation on pandemic planning exercises. GAO also interviewed officials from HHS, State, and DOD.
    [Read More…]
  • Briefing With Coordinator for Counterterrorism Ambassador Nathan A. Sales On Terrorist Designations of Al-Shabaab Leaders
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Nathan A. Sales, [Read More…]
  • North Carolina Tax Preparer Sentenced to Prison for Conspiring to Defraud the IRS
    In Crime News
    A North Carolina return preparer was sentenced today to 15 months in prison for conspiring to defraud the IRS.
    [Read More…]
  • U.S. Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Travel Card Program FAQs
    In Travel
    Content currently [Read More…]
  • DOJ Announces Coordinated Law Enforcement Action to Combat Health Care Fraud Related to COVID-19
    In Crime News
    The Department of Justice today announced criminal charges against 14 defendants, including 11 newly-charged defendants and three who were charged in superseding indictments, in seven federal districts across the United States for their alleged participation in various health care fraud schemes that exploited the COVID-19 pandemic and resulted in over $143 million in false billings.
    [Read More…]
  • Operation Legend: Case of the Day
    In Crime News
    Each weekday, the Department of Justice will highlight a case that has resulted from Operation Legend. Today’s case is out of the Eastern District of Michigan. Operation Legend launched in Detroit on July 29, 2020, in response to the city facing increased homicide and non-fatal shooting rates.
    [Read More…]
  • Olympic Security: U.S. Support to Athens Games Provides Lessons for Future Olympics
    In U.S GAO News
    The 2004 Summer Olympics in Athens, Greece, were held against the backdrop of growing concerns about international terrorism. Despite widespread fears of a potential terrorist attack on the Olympics, Greece hosted a safe and secure event with no terrorist incidents. To assist Greece in securing the 2004 Games, U.S. government agencies provided training and other support in the four years leading up to the Games. In addition, the U.S. government provided some security and other assistance to American athletes, spectators, and commercial investors, and expects to continue such support for future Olympics, including the upcoming 2006 Winter Olympics in Turin, Italy. GAO was asked to (1) determine the U.S. approach and coordination efforts for providing security assistance to the 2004 Summer Olympics; (2) examine the roles of U.S. agencies in Athens Olympics security and their financial outlays; and (3) review lessons learned in providing security assistance in support of the Olympics and how they are being incorporated into preparations for future Olympics. The Departments of State, Homeland Security, Defense, and Justice concurred with the report or had no comments.In 2001, the United States began planning its security assistance for the 2004 Summer Olympics, responding to the heightened worldwide anxiety following the September 11 attacks and Greece's request for international advice on its security plan. The United States based much of its security assistance on knowledge gained through Greece's participation in the Department of State's Antiterrorism Assistance Program and through the staging of a major U.S. military exercise in March 2004. Based on these assessments, the United States employed a coordinated approach in providing security assistance to Greece for the Olympics. The U.S. Ambassador in Greece coordinated and led the U.S. interagency efforts in-country, while the State-chaired interagency working group in Washington, D.C., coordinated domestic contributions. Furthermore, the United States participated in a seven-country coordination group that aimed to identify potential areas of cooperation on security and support for Greece. Almost 20 entities and offices within a number of U.S. agencies provided more than $35 million in security assistance and support to the government of Greece. The Departments of State, Homeland Security, Defense, and Justice provided security training to various elements of the Greek government; the Departments of Energy and Justice provided crisis response assistance during the Olympics; and the State Department also provided special security and other assistance to U.S. athletes, spectators, and corporate sponsors. Following the 2004 Summer Games, these U.S. agencies identified a number of lessons learned, such as the importance of assessing host governments' security capabilities early to assist in planning U.S. support, appointing key personnel to craft unified messages for the U.S. security efforts, and coordinating with multilateral and other organizing entities. These lessons were then communicated by Washington, D.C.- and Athens-based personnel to U.S. officials in Italy who are preparing to support the 2006 Winter Olympics in Turin.
    [Read More…]
  • Nevada Bottled Water Companies and Owners Ordered to Stop Distributing Adulterated and Misbranded Water Products
    In Crime News
    A federal court permanently enjoined a Henderson, Nevada, company from preparing, processing, and distributing adulterated and misbranded bottled water.
    [Read More…]
  • Aviation Sanitation: FDA Could Better Communicate with Airlines to Encourage Voluntary Construction Inspections of Aircraft Galleys and Lavatories
    In U.S GAO News
    Most commercial aircraft undergo voluntary inspections to ensure that galleys and lavatories are constructed and assembled to meet the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) sanitation standards, according to industry representatives. Twenty-seven percent of the inspections FDA conducted between fiscal years 2015 and 2019 found objectionable conditions. But in nearly all of these instances, the conditions identified, such as the need for additional sealant in areas where there was a gap or seam, were corrected by the airline or aircraft manufacturer during the inspection. However, some regional airline representatives told GAO that their aircraft do not receive these construction inspections, either because larger airlines with which they have contracts told them the inspections were unnecessary or because they did not believe the inspections were relevant to them. FDA provides these inspections free of charge, upon request of aircraft manufacturers or airlines, and aircraft passing inspection receive a certificate of sanitary construction. Representatives of one aircraft manufacturer said they view the certificate as beneficial because their customers see it as a guarantee that the aircraft was constructed in a way that decreases the likelihood of microbial contamination, pests, and insects. While the construction inspections are important, they are not required, and FDA does not proactively encourage airlines to request them. By developing a process for communicating directly to all U.S.-based commercial airlines, including regional airlines, to encourage them to receive construction inspections, FDA could better ensure that aircraft meet FDA sanitation standards to protect passenger health. An Airline Representative Applying Additional Sealant in Response to an FDA Inspection FDA faces several challenges in providing construction inspections and is taking steps to address these challenges. For example, the demand for inspections by manufacturers and airlines is unpredictable, and FDA inspectors are responsible for inspections at multiple locations. To help mitigate these challenges, officials we interviewed from four FDA field offices said they usually request advance notice from industry to allow the agency time to allocate the necessary resources for construction inspections. Voluntary construction inspections are the primary mechanism by which FDA oversees compliance with its required sanitation standards for the construction of aircraft galleys and lavatories. A report accompanying the House 2019 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill included a provision for GAO to review FDA's process for ensuring proper sanitation in aircraft galleys and lavatories. This report (1) examines the extent to which aircraft are inspected to ensure compliance with FDA's sanitation standards, and (2) discusses challenges FDA faces in providing aircraft inspections and how FDA is addressing such challenges. GAO reviewed FDA guidance, interviewed FDA officials in headquarters and four selected field offices with high volumes of construction inspections, conducted site visits to meet with FDA inspectors, and interviewed representatives of selected aircraft manufacturers and airlines. GAO recommends that FDA develop a process for communicating directly with all U.S.-based commercial airlines to encourage them to request construction inspections. FDA generally agreed with our recommendation. For more information, contact Steve Morris (202) 512-3841
    [Read More…]
  • Passing of Niger’s Ambassador to the United States
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Cale Brown, Principal [Read More…]
  • Florida Man Sentenced for $1.3 Million Securities Fraud Scheme
    In Crime News
    A Florida man was sentenced today to more than four years in prison for operating an investment scheme in which he used investor funds to repay other investors and misappropriated funds for himself.
    [Read More…]
  • The Ortega Regime’s New Authoritarian Law Undermines Democracy
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Michael R. Pompeo, [Read More…]

You may have missed

Network News © 2005 Area.Control.Network™ All rights reserved.