Status of Funds for the Merida Initiative
Gao ID: GAO-10-253R December 3, 2009Violence along the U.S.-Mexico border has escalated in recent years because of drug trafficking and related organized crime activities, with over 12,000 fatalities since 2006. At the same time, gang activity in Central America has increased, further fueling the violence within the region. In an effort to confront the challenges posed by criminal violence, in October 2007, the United States and Mexico announced the Merida Initiative, a $1.4 billion counternarcotics and anticrime assistance package for countries in the region. The Merida Initiative brings a shift in both scale and scope to U.S. assistance to the region, particularly Mexico. For example, under Merida, the average annual counternarcotics and related law enforcement assistance to Mexico increased from about $57 million from 2000 through 2006 to $400 million for fiscal year 2008. Similarly, collaboration between the United States and Mexico has intensified, providing an unprecedented opportunity to address the mutual threat of drug trafficking and organized crime affecting the region. In response to Congressional concerns regarding the pace of assistance, we are providing information on the status of funding provided under the Merida Initiative as of September 30, 2009. Specifically, we describe how much has been appropriated, obligated, and expended. We also identify factors affecting the delivery of major equipment, services, and training; and we provide a timeline of key events related to the initiative. On the basis of Congressional request, we are also conducting a more comprehensive programmatic review of the Merida Initiative to be completed in the summer of 2010. To determine the status of the Merida Initiative assistance funds, we reviewed the Department of State's (State) spending plans for Merida; State budget documents; bilateral agreements between the United States and Mexico, the United States and each of the Central American countries, as well as with Haiti and with the Dominican Republic; and interagency agreements between State and other U.S. agencies implementing Merida-related programs. We also interviewed officials at State and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). We conducted our work from September 21, 2009, to December 3, 2009, in accordance with all sections of GAO's Quality Assurance Framework that are relevant to our objectives.
State funds Merida Initiative activities primarily from three appropriations accounts. As of September 30, 2009, State had planned to provide nearly $1.3 billion in appropriated funds to the initiative. According to information provided by State, about two-thirds, or approximately $830 million, had been obligated by the end of September, and about 2 percent, or $26 million, had been expended. We identified several factors that have affected the timing of the Merida funding process and the delivery of assistance to Mexico and Central America: (1) statutory conditions on the funds, (2) challenges in fulfilling administrative procedures, and (3) the need to enhance institutional capacity on the part of both recipient countries and the United States to implement the assistance. Some equipment and technical assistance have been provided, but State could not provide us with a schedule of future assistance deliveries.
GAO-10-253R, Status of Funds for the Merida Initiative
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-10-253R
entitled 'Status of Funds for the Mérida Initiative' which was released
on December 3, 2009.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
GAO-10-253R:
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
December 3, 2009:
The Honorable Eliot L. Engel:
Chairman:
The Honorable Connie Mack:
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere:
Committee on Foreign Affairs:
House of Representatives:
Subject: Status of Funds for the Mérida Initiative:
Violence along the U.S.-Mexico border has escalated in recent years
because of drug trafficking and related organized crime activities,
with over 12,000 fatalities since 2006. At the same time, gang activity
in Central America has increased, further fueling the violence within
the region. In an effort to confront the challenges posed by criminal
violence, in October 2007, the United States and Mexico announced the
Mérida Initiative, a $1.4 billion counternarcotics and anticrime
assistance package for countries in the region.
The Mérida Initiative brings a shift in both scale and scope to U.S.
assistance to the region, particularly Mexico. For example, under
Mérida, the average annual counternarcotics and related law enforcement
assistance to Mexico increased from about $57 million from 2000 through
2006 to $400 million for fiscal year 2008. Similarly, collaboration
between the United States and Mexico has intensified, providing an
unprecedented opportunity to address the mutual threat of drug
trafficking and organized crime affecting the region.
In response to your concerns regarding the pace of assistance, we are
providing information on the status of funding provided under the
Mérida Initiative as of September 30, 2009. Specifically, we describe
how much has been appropriated, obligated, and expended. We also
identify factors affecting the delivery of major equipment, services,
and training; and we provide a timeline of key events related to the
initiative. On the basis of your request, we are also conducting a more
comprehensive programmatic review of the Mérida Initiative to be
completed in the summer of 2010.[Footnote 1]
To determine the status of the Mérida Initiative assistance funds, we
reviewed the Department of State's (State) spending plans for Mérida;
State budget documents; bilateral agreements between the United States
and Mexico, the United States and each of the Central American
countries,[Footnote 2] as well as with Haiti and with the Dominican
Republic; and interagency agreements between State and other U.S.
agencies implementing Mérida-related programs. We also interviewed
officials at State and the U.S. Agency for International Development
(USAID). We conducted our work from September 21, 2009, to December 3,
2009, in accordance with all sections of GAO's Quality Assurance
Framework that are relevant to our objectives. For a more complete
description of our scope and methodology, see enclosure I.
Summary:
State funds Mérida Initiative activities primarily from three
appropriations accounts.[Footnote 3] As of September 30, 2009, State
had planned to provide nearly $1.3 billion in appropriated funds to the
initiative.[Footnote 4] According to information provided by State,
about two-thirds, or approximately $830 million, had been obligated by
the end of September, and about 2 percent, or $26 million, had been
expended. We identified several factors that have affected the timing
of the Mérida funding process and the delivery of assistance to Mexico
and Central America: (1) statutory conditions on the funds, (2)
challenges in fulfilling administrative procedures, and (3) the need to
enhance institutional capacity on the part of both recipient countries
and the United States to implement the assistance. Some equipment and
technical assistance have been provided, but State could not provide us
with a schedule of future assistance deliveries.
Background:
Since the 1970s, the United States has collaborated with Mexican
authorities and provided assistance to Mexico for counternarcotics
programs and activities. Similarly, U.S. military and law enforcement
agencies have provided assistance to Central American countries to
combat drug trafficking through the region. The goal over the years has
been to disrupt the operations of drug traffickers, making it more
difficult for traffickers to produce and transport illicit drugs to the
United States.
In 2007, we reported that U.S. assistance had helped Mexican
counternarcotics efforts, such as strengthening Mexico's capacity to
combat illicit drug production and trafficking; however, we also noted
that significant quantities of illicit drugs continued to flow into the
United States across the Southwest border.[Footnote 5] According to a
recent Congressional Research Service (CRS) report, Mexico continues to
be a major producer and supplier to the U.S. market of heroin,
methamphetamine, and marijuana and the major transit country for
cocaine sold in the United States.[Footnote 6] A small number of
Mexican drug trafficking organizations (DTO), often referred to as drug
cartels, control the most significant drug distribution operations
along the Southwest border. Mexican DTOs are increasingly expanding
their operations into Central America, a region with less capacity than
Mexico to combat these activities.
Since assuming power in December 2006, Mexican President Felipe
Calderón has made the war on drugs a centerpiece of his administration,
mobilizing the Mexican military and law enforcement in a series of
large-scale counternarcotics operations throughout the country. These
efforts have targeted areas, particularly along the U.S.-Mexican
border, where DTOs have exerted most influence. The Mexican
government's efforts to disrupt drug trafficking operations have
generated increased violence against law enforcement and other security
forces, and appears to have intensified conflicts among DTOs over
access to lucrative trafficking routes to the United States. The result
has been a record-breaking escalation of drug-related assassinations,
kidnappings, and other violent crimes over the past 3 years.
Recognizing the threat posed by mounting criminal violence, at the
Mérida Summit held in March 2007, Presidents George W. Bush and Felipe
Calderón agreed on the need to expand bilateral and regional
cooperation to combat crime in the region. The result was the
development of the Mérida Initiative, a multiyear security assistance
package for Mexico and Central America. Under the initiative, Mexico
was set to receive $1.4 billion, but a specific dollar target was not
set for Central America. Subsequently, Congress added funding for Haiti
and the Dominican Republic to address concerns about increased drug
trafficking in the Caribbean (see fig. 1). According to State, as part
of the Mérida Initiative discussions, the United States agreed to do
its part to reduce domestic demand for drugs and to interdict illicit
arms trafficking and repatriation of drug proceeds. The initiative also
complements broader efforts by the governments of Mexico and Central
America, to engage on every front in the battle against organized
crime.
Figure 1: Countries Receiving Mérida Initiative Funding:
[Refer to PDF for image: map of Cental America and the Caribbean]
Belize:
Costa Rica:
Dominican Republic:
El Salvador:
Guatemala:
Haiti:
Honduras:
Mexico:
Nicaragua:
Panama:
Sources: State Department data; Map Resources (Map).
[End of figure]
Characteristics of the Mérida Initiative:
The four primary goals of the Mérida Initiative are to (1) break the
power and impunity of criminal organizations; (2) strengthen border,
air, and maritime controls; (3) improve the capacity of justice systems
in the region; and (4) curtail gang activity and diminish the demand
for drugs in the region.
Funding provided under the Mérida Initiative is planned to support:
* nonintrusive inspection equipment, ion scanners and canine units for
Mexico and Central America to interdict trafficked drugs, arms, cash,
and persons;
* technologies to improve and secure communications systems that
collect criminal information in Mexico;
* technical advice and training to strengthen the institutions of
justice in Mexico, including vetting for the new national police force,
case management software to track investigations through the criminal
system, new offices of citizen complaints and professional
responsibility, and witness protection programs;
* aircraft to support surveillance and interdiction activities, and
rapid response of security forces for counternarcotics missions in
Mexico;
* equipment, training, and community action programs in Central
American countries to implement antigang measures and expand the reach
of these measures; and:
* equipment, training, and logistical support to Central American
countries to increase maritime domain awareness and interdiction
capacity.
Approximately Two-Thirds of Appropriated Funds Have Been Obligated, but
Little Has Been Delivered:
As of September 30, 2009, State had planned to provide $1.295 billion
in appropriated funds to the Mérida Initiative.[Footnote 7] According
to data provided by State, nearly two-thirds, or $830.42 million, had
been obligated and about 2 percent, or $26.27 million, had been
expended (see table 1). Enclosure II provides the status of funds by
appropriations account. Various factors have affected the timing of the
Mérida funding process, including statutory conditions on the funds,
challenges meeting administrative processes, and the need to build
institutional capacity. These factors have also affected the delivery
of goods and services, and State officials told us most programs and
equipment obligated under Mérida had not been delivered as of the end
of September.
Table 1: Mérida Funding Status as of September 30, 2009 (Dollars in
millions):
Mexico: FY08 Supplemental[C];
Appropriated[A]: $400.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $375.1;
Expended balance: $24.2.
Mexico: FY09 Omnibus;
Appropriated[A]: $300.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $41.0;
Expended balance: $0.
Mexico: FY09 Supplemental;
Appropriated[A]: $420.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $336.5;
Expended balance: $0.
Mexico total;
Appropriated[A]: $1,120.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $752.6;
Expended balance: $24.2.
Central America: FY08 Supplemental[C];
Appropriated[A]: $60.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $57.92;
Expended balance: $2.07.
Central America: FY09 Omnibus;
Appropriated[A]: $105.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $14.9;
Expended balance: $0.
Central America: FY09 Supplemental;
Appropriated[A]: [Empty];
Obligated balance[B]: [Empty];
Expended balance: [Empty].
Central America total;
Appropriated[A]: $165.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $72.82;
Expended balance: $2.07.
Caribbean[D]: FY08 Supplemental[C];
Appropriated[A]: $5.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $5.0;
Expended balance: $0.
Caribbean[D]: FY09 Omnibus;
Appropriated[A]: $5.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $0;
Expended balance: $0.
Caribbean total;
Appropriated[A]: $10.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $5.0;
Expended balance: $0.
Mérida total;
Appropriated[A]: $1,295.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $830.42;
Expended balance: $26.27.
Source: GAO analysis of State Department data.
Note: Appropriated funds give budget authority to incur obligations and
to make payments from the Treasury for specified purposes. Obligations
are commitments that create a legal liability of the U.S. government
for the payment of goods and services ordered or received. Expenditures
are funds that have been spent.
[A] Includes amounts appropriated "to combat drug trafficking and
related violence and organized crime, and for judicial reform,
institution building, anti-corruption, rule of law activities" in these
countries, amounts congressionally directed for programs in these
countries, and amounts allocated by State to fund Mérida activities.
For the purposes of this report, we consider "to combat drug
trafficking and related violence and organized crime, and for judicial
reform, institution building, anti-corruption, rule of law activities"
to be Mérida activities.
[B] Although the Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement
Affairs (INL) reports both its bulk obligations and sub-obligations to
the Office of Management and Budget, its bulk obligations, as the first
record of a legal liability to pay for goods and services, are what we
are reporting as its obligations. Obligated balance refers to
unliquidated obligations.
[C] In the Fiscal Year 2008 Supplemental Appropriations Act (Pub. L.
No. 110-252), Congress appropriated $352 million into various accounts
"to combat drug trafficking and related violence and organized crime,
and for judicial reform, institution building, anti-corruption, rule of
law activities" in Mexico during the first year of the Mérida
Initiative, in addition to $48 million for the same purposes during the
second year of the Mérida Initiative, which is referred to as the
Fiscal Year 2009 Supplemental Bridge.
[D] The Caribbean participants in the Mérida Initiative are Haiti and
the Dominican Republic.
[End of table]
Funding Process:
The United States and Mexico issued a Joint Statement announcing the
Mérida Initiative on October 22, 2007, and State first provided funding
for the initiative from appropriations made available in the
Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2008, signed on June 30, 2008
[Footnote 8] (see figure 2). This act appropriated $400 million for
Mexico and $65 million for Central America, Haiti, and the Dominican
Republic for Mérida activities. Subsequently, the 2009 Omnibus
Appropriations Act,[Footnote 9] signed on March 11, 2009, appropriated
for Mérida activities $300 million for Mexico and $105 million for
Central America.[Footnote 10] Further, on June 24, 2009, the
Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009 appropriated $420 million for
Mérida activities in Mexico.[Footnote 11]
Figure 2: Overall Timeline of the Mérida Initiative:
[Refer to PDF for image: timeline]
Mérida Initiative Joint Statement: October 2007.
Congressional actions:
First appropriation: June 2008;
First funds available for obligation: October 2008;
Second appropriation: March 2009;
Third appropriation: June 2009.
Reports to Congress:
State‘s first spending plan: September 2008;
First Mérida human rights report for Central America: April 2009;
State‘s second and third spending plans: August 2009;
Second human rights report for Central America: August 2009;
First human rights report for Mexico: August 2009.
Source: GAO analysis of Department of State data.
[End of figure]
Funding for Mérida Initiative programs is derived from three
appropriations--the International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement
(INCLE) account, the Economic Support Fund (ESF), and the Foreign
Military Financing (FMF) account.[Footnote 12] State administers these
appropriations accounts and allocates these appropriations to different
bureaus within State to administer. The Bureau for International
Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) administers INCLE. The
Bureau for Western Hemisphere Affairs administers ESF, although USAID
manages the actual implementation of the account. Similarly, the Bureau
for Political-Military Affairs administers the FMF account, although
the Department of Defense (DOD) manages the actual implementation.
[Footnote 13] State shares accountability with USAID and DOD for the
administration of ESF and FMF funds, respectively. Enclosure III
provides a summary of the planned procurement activity from each
account for Mexico, Central America, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic
under the Mérida Initiative.
Tracking Mérida Funds Is Difficult:
Mérida assistance, including obligations and expenditures, is difficult
to track because each of the three State bureaus has a different method
for tracking Mérida funds. Each uses different budgeting terms as well
as separate spreadsheets for the Mérida funds it administers, and State
currently has no consolidated database for these funds. For example,
each of the three accounts with funds for Mérida uses a different
mechanism to reach obligation, and the three bureaus do not all refer
to this stage of incurring legal liability to pay for services with the
term "obligation." INL officials, for instance, told us they consider
legal liability incurred at two separate stages in their funding
process. In the first of these stages, INL designates funds as "bulk
obligated" once a Letter of Agreement, detailing planned activity and
funding figures, has been signed with the recipient government. INL
officials also told us that legal liability to pay is incurred when
individual task orders or agreements between State and other U.S.
agencies providing equipment or services are signed after the Letter of
Agreement is in place, a stage INL designates as "sub-obligation."
[Footnote 14] In contrast, FMF funds, by law, are considered obligated
once they are apportioned to DOD.[Footnote 15] It is after obligation,
then, that DOD and the recipient country sign a Letter of Offer and
Acceptance.
This lack of standardized budgeting terms and different obligation
mechanisms makes comparing data across accounts difficult. In trying to
compile these data, State could not provide us with a comprehensive
document that contained an accurate status of Mérida funds across all
accounts. Rather, we received separate spreadsheets and reconciled each
to determine the status of Mérida funds overall. We are continuing to
pursue this issue in our ongoing review, and we will report on it
later.
Factors Affecting the Timing of the Funding Process:
State officials acknowledged that certain factors have affected the
availability and delivery of funds under the Mérida Initiative,
including statutory conditions, challenges meeting administrative
procedures, and lack of institutional capacity.
Statutory Conditions:
Congress requires State to submit reports before some of the funds used
to finance Mérida activities in specific countries can become available
for obligation. Specifically, some of the funds are not available for
obligation until State meets a statutory requirement to submit a report
detailing Mexican and Central American government progress in several
human rights areas.[Footnote 16] For example, in the Supplemental
Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2008, 15 percent of the funds made
available to Mexico under the INCLE and FMF accounts are not available
for obligation until State reports on various issues, including whether
the government of Mexico is ensuring that members of the federal police
and military forces who have been credibly alleged to have committed
violations of human rights are appropriately investigated and
prosecuted. These human rights reports are sometimes referred to as the
15 percent reports, as 15 percent of certain INCLE and FMF funds may
not be obligated until State submits the reports.[Footnote 17]
Under other conditions, State may have to comply with notification
requirements regarding planned uses of appropriations as established by
law. For example, under 22 U.S.C. § 2413(a), State is required to
notify Congress regarding the type of assistance and level of funding
to be provided to individual countries and international organizations.
This is commonly known as the 653(a) consultation process.[Footnote 18]
Similarly, in the Supplemental Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2008,
Congress required State to submit a spending plan for funds
appropriated or otherwise made available for Mexico within 45 days of
enactment of the appropriations act.[Footnote 19] To comply with this
particular requirement, State must submit a detailed spending plan that
shall include a strategy with concrete goals, actions to be taken,
budget proposals, and anticipated results.
Administrative Procedures:
Administrative requirements have also affected the pace of delivery of
Mérida funding. Administrative procedures such as negotiating
agreements with beneficiary governments, reaching understanding with
other U.S. agencies on implementation logistics, and putting contracts
for equipment out to bid can require considerable time. For example, a
State official told us it typically takes between 3 to 6 months to
negotiate and sign a contract for the provision of aircraft.
Furthermore, once a contract has been signed, the aircraft are then
built to the beneficiary country's specification. According to this
State official, helicopters typically take 12 to 18 months to be built,
and airplanes require 18 to 24 months.
U.S. officials have taken some steps to try to expedite some
administrative procedures for the Mérida Initiative. For example,
Administration officials have taken measures to expedite the
procurement of five Bell helicopters for Mexico to be purchased with
Fiscal Year 2008 Supplemental funds appropriated to the FMF account.
According to State, high-level State officials interceded with DOD to
expedite the process. As a result, the contract negotiation took
approximately 3 weeks. Furthermore, while some manufacturers do not
build aircraft until a contract is in place, State told us Bell tends
to build helicopters prior to contracts and has stock available. DOD
was able, therefore, to have Bell modify premade stock, cutting down
the typical construction time. The Letter of Offer and Acceptance for
the five Bell helicopters was implemented April 22, 2009; the contract
was signed on June 1, 2009; and State officials estimate the
helicopters will be delivered by the end of December, 2009 (see fig.
3). Thus, instead of a possible 2-year wait from the beginning of
contract negotiations to the delivery of the helicopters, State
officials anticipate delivery of the five Bell helicopters will take
approximately 8 months. However, while the Bell helicopters are an
expedited case, the time lapse between funds being appropriated and a
deliverable on the ground will still be about 18 months.
Figure 3: Mexico Case Study Timeline for Bell Helicopters:
[Refer to PDF for image: timeline]
Mérida Initiative Joint Statement: October 2007;
First appropriation for $400 million to Mexico: June 2008;
State‘s first spending plan: September 2008;
Funds obligated for helicopters: October 2008;
Letter of Offer and Acceptance implemented: April 2009;
Helicopter contract signed: June 2009;
Estimated delivery: December 2009.
Source: GAO analysis of Department of State data.
[End of figure]
Furthermore, State officials told us that in recognition of the lengthy
procurement and other administrative processes for aircraft, Congress
appropriated more than what was requested by the Administration for the
Fiscal Year 2009 Supplemental Appropriations Act so that State would
have the funds available to start those processes sooner. The Obama
administration requested $66 million in INCLE assistance for Mexico
under Mérida, yet Congress appropriated $420 million for Mexico. Of
this, $160 million is INCLE funding, which State plans to use in part
to fund Black Hawk helicopters, and $260 million is FMF funding for
expedited aviation assistance to the Mexican Navy.
Institutional Capacity:
In preliminary discussions with U.S. officials, they pointed to the
initial lack of institutional capacity on the part of both recipient
countries and the United States as another factor affecting the
availability and delivery of funds under Mérida. For example, State
officials noted that capacity limitations in Central America have
played a role in the ability to provide funding. Some of these
countries have weak institutions that may not effectively be able to
implement the assistance. Given the political situations in Honduras
and Nicaragua, for example, some funding has been reprogrammed to other
countries for non-Mérida programs. With regard to Mexico, State
officials said that they have worked with the Mexican government to
develop a more solid foundation for U.S. assistance to be implemented
within the country, given the significant increase in the size and
scope of assistance and the unprecedented bilateral nature of program
implementation. According to State, U.S. assistance, as implemented in
Mexico, represents strategic value-added to existing Mexican efforts.
Further, State maintains that the need to coordinate U.S. inputs with
Mexican programs is being met with the development of implementation
working groups. This process is intended to improve bilateral and
interagency coordination. In addition, according to U.S. officials,
when the Mérida Initiative was launched, there were not sufficient
personnel to effectively manage the seven-fold increase in U.S. law
enforcement related assistance to Mexico on both the U.S. and Mexican
sides. For example, the U.S. Embassy in Mexico added personnel to
handle the day-to-day administrative activities of implementing the
initiative, and Mexican counterpart agencies were required to do the
same. Similarly, The Department of Homeland Security placed a Customs
and Border Protection staff member in Mexico in advance of receiving
funds under Mérida so its programs could be implemented more quickly
when the funds are available. However, U.S. officials note that
additional time required to improve institutional capacity was critical
for developing a sound framework to provide assistance in the future,
and work through changes in both the scale and scope of U.S. assistance
envisioned under Mérida. We plan to pursue these issues in our ongoing
review.
Deliverables Have Been Affected by the Time Frames of the Funding
Process:
Because of the factors affecting the funding process described above,
few programs have been delivered and limited funding has been expended
to date. State officials told us that as of the end of September 2009,
most of the equipment and programs that have been obligated under
Mérida have not been delivered. While major pieces of equipment, such
as helicopters, have not reached recipient countries, some progress has
been made (see enclosure IV for the status of selected Mérida
Initiative deliverables). Approximately 30 vehicles and ion scanners,
used to detect the presence of drugs, have been delivered to Mexico. In
addition, a broad range of training, exchange, and technical assistance
programs have been completed or initiated with the aim of strengthening
the capacity of law enforcement and justice sector institutions.
Further, five Bell helicopters are expected to be delivered to Mexico
by the end of December 2009, and a purchase order for a set of Black
Hawk helicopters, which typically take 12-18 months to build, was
signed in September 2009.[Footnote 20] Almost all assistance so far has
gone to Mexico. While some equipment and training have been delivered
to Central America, most has not yet been delivered.
Beyond the few estimations for some helicopters and other equipment
listed in enclosure IV, State officials could not tell us when they
planned to deliver the majority of Mérida goods and services. Although
State has submitted spending plans as required by each of the three
Appropriations Acts that provide funding for Mérida, none of the plans
contain estimated delivery time frames. We cannot, therefore, at this
point and time determine when most Mérida goods and services will be
delivered. State officials did tell us, however, that Mérida funding
requests to date have been focused more on equipment, since the
procurement process for equipment can be lengthy. Going forward, they
said they anticipate funding requests would focus more on institution
building, particularly law enforcement training.
Agency Comments:
We provided the Department of State with a draft of this report for its
review and comment. The agency provided written comments, which are
reproduced in enclosure V. State also provided additional information
on deliverables to Central America as well as other technical comments
that we incorporated as appropriate.
In commenting on our report, State emphasized that while Mérida
expenditures may be below expectations, they have spent considerable
time laying the groundwork with their Mexican and Central American
partners to ensure effective coordination and future disbursement of
assistance. State also commented that using expenditures as a
performance measure for U.S.-funded programs in general does not take
into account the nuances and delays in the procurement and billing
cycles, and therefore does not fully capture program activity. We agree
that laying the groundwork for coordination and effective disbursement
of assistance is important, and we plan to look at the effectiveness of
these efforts in our ongoing programmatic review of the Mérida
Initiative. We also plan to look at State's performance measures for
the initiative and their implementation in that review. Our purpose in
this report, however, was to report on the status of Mérida Initiative
funding as of September 30, 2009. We did not evaluate any performance
measures; rather, we reported what State had expended and what had been
delivered as of the end of September.
As agreed with your office, we are sending copies of this report to the
Secretary of State and interested congressional committees. In
addition, the report will be available at no charge on GAO's Web site
at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov].
If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please
contact me at:
(202) 512-4268 or fordj@gao.gov. 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 enclosure VI.
Signed by:
Jess T. Ford:
Director:
International Affairs and Trade:
[End of section]
Enclosure I: Scope and Methodology:
To describe the status of the Mérida Initiative funding, we reviewed
the three laws that appropriated funds that the Department of State
(State) allocated to the initiative, primarily from three accounts--the
International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE) account,
the Economic Support Fund (ESF), and the Foreign Military Financing
(FMF) account.[Footnote 21] We collected data from each bureau at State
that administers those accounts--International Narcotics and Law
Enforcement, Western Hemisphere Affairs, and Political-Military
Affairs. We also collected data from the U.S. Agency for International
Development (USAID), which actually implements ESF. Each bureau
administers the accounts separately using its own spreadsheets and
budgeting terms. Although this made it difficult, we took several steps
to attempt to gather complete, accurate, and comparable data on the
status of funds. First, we interviewed officials in each bureau on
their budgeting processes and terms to determine the best method for
collecting comparable data across each account. Second, we carefully
reviewed the data, including detailed line item information by project,
and consulted with State officials on the accuracy and completeness of
the information. When we found discrepancies, such as data entry
errors, we brought them to State's attention and worked with State
officials to correct the discrepancies. Finally, where possible, we
checked the data against other information such as budget spreadsheets
arranged either by project or by country, project plans detailing
estimated expenses, and implementation agreements between State and
other U.S. agencies. Furthermore, to describe the funding process and
factors affecting the timing of the process as well as of delivery of
goods and services under the initiative, we interviewed State and USAID
officials, analyzed data provided to us, and reviewed several
documents.
As mentioned above, trying to compare data across accounts from
separate spreadsheets was difficult. The various steps we took,
however, led us to determine the data were sufficiently reliable for
our purpose.
We conducted our work from September 21, 2009, to December 3, 2009, in
accordance with all sections of GAO's Quality Assurance Framework that
are relevant to our objectives. The framework requires that we plan and
perform the engagement to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence to
meet our stated objectives and to discuss any limitations in our work.
We believe that the information and data obtained, and the analysis
conducted, provide a reasonable basis for any findings and
conclusions.
[End of section]
Enclosure II: Funding Tables by Country and Account:
Table 2: Mérida Funding Status for Mexico, by Account, as of September
30, 2009 (Dollars in millions):
Mexico:
International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE):
FY08 Supplemental[C];
Appropriated[A]: $263.5;
Obligated balance[B]: $252.6;
Expended balance: $10.2.
International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE):
FY09 Omnibus;
Appropriated[A]: $246.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $0;
Expended balance: $0.
International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE):
FY09 Supplemental;
Appropriated[A]: $160.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $76.5;
Expended balance: $0.
Total INCLE;
Appropriated[A]: $669.5;
Obligated balance[B]: $329.1;
Expended balance: $10.2.
Economic Support Fund (ESF):
FY08 Supplemental[C];
Appropriated[A]: $20.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $19.3;
Expended balance: $0.7.
Economic Support Fund (ESF):
FY09 Omnibus;
Appropriated[A]: $15.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $2.0;
Expended balance: $0.
Economic Support Fund (ESF):
FY09 Supplemental;
Appropriated[A]: $0;
Obligated balance[B]: $0;
Expended balance: $0.
Total ESF;
Appropriated[A]: $35.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $21.3;
Expended balance: $0.7.
Foreign Military Financing (FMF):
FY08 Supplemental[C];
Appropriated[A]: $116.5;
Obligated balance[B]: $103.2;
Expended balance: $13.3.
Foreign Military Financing (FMF):
FY09 Omnibus;
Appropriated[A]: $39.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $39.0;
Expended balance: $0.
Foreign Military Financing (FMF):
FY09 Supplemental;
Appropriated[A]: $260.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $260.0;
Expended balance: $0.
Total FMF;
Appropriated[A]: $415.5;
Obligated balance[B]: $402.2;
Expended balance: $13.3.
Mexico total;
Appropriated[A]: $1,120.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $752.6;
Expended balance: $24.2.
Source: GAO analysis of State Department data.
Note: Appropriated funds give budget authority to incur obligations and
to make payments from the Treasury for specified purposes. Obligations
are commitments that create a legal liability of the U.S. government
for the payment of goods and services ordered or received. Expenditures
are funds that have been spent.
[A] Includes amounts appropriated "to combat drug trafficking and
related violence and organized crime, and for judicial reform,
institution building, anti-corruption, rule of law activities" in these
countries, amounts congressionally directed for programs in these
countries, and amounts allocated by State to fund Mérida activities.
For the purposes of this report, we consider "to combat drug
trafficking and related violence and organized crime, and for judicial
reform, institution building, anti-corruption, rule of law activities"
to be Mérida activities.
[B] Although the Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement
Affairs reports both its bulk obligations and sub-obligations to the
Office of Management and Budget, its bulk obligations, as the first
record of a legal liability to pay for goods and services, are what we
are reporting as its obligations. Obligated balance refers to
unliquidated obligations.
[C] In the Fiscal Year 2008 Supplemental Appropriations Act (Pub. L.
No. 110-252), Congress appropriated $352 million into various accounts
"to combat drug trafficking and related violence and organized crime,
and for judicial reform, institution building, anti-corruption, rule of
law activities" in Mexico during the first year of the Mérida
Initiative in addition to $48 million for the same purposes during the
second year of the Mérida Initiative, which is referred to as the
Fiscal Year 2009 Supplemental Bridge.
[End of table]
Table 3: Mérida Funding Status for Central America, by Account, as of
September 30, 2009 (Dollars in millions):
Central America:
International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE):
FY08 Supplemental;
Appropriated[A]: $24.8;
Obligated balance[B]: $23.2;
Expended balance: $1.7.
International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE):
FY09 Omnibus;
Appropriated[A]: $70.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $0;
Expended balance: $0.
Total INCLE;
Appropriated[A]: $94.8;
Obligated balance[B]: $23.2;
Expended balance: $1.7.
Economic Support Fund (ESF):
FY08 Supplemental;
Appropriated[A]: $25.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $24.85;
Expended balance: $0.05.
Economic Support Fund (ESF):
FY09 Omnibus;
Appropriated[A]: $18.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $0;
Expended balance: $0.
Total ESF;
Appropriated[A]: $43.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $24.85;
Expended balance: $0.05.
Foreign Military Financing (FMF):
FY08 Supplemental;
Appropriated[A]: $4.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $3.98;
Expended balance: $0.02.
Foreign Military Financing (FMF):
FY09 Omnibus;
Appropriated[A]: $17.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $14.9[C];
Expended balance: $0.
Total FMF;
Appropriated[A]: $21.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $18.88;
Expended balance: $0.02.
Non-proliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining, and Related Programs
(NADR):
FY08 Supplemental;
Appropriated[A]: $6.2;
Obligated balance[B]: $5.89;
Expended balance: $0.3.
Non-proliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining, and Related Programs
(NADR):
FY09 Omnibus;
Appropriated[A]: $0;
Obligated balance[B]: $0;
Expended balance: $0.
Total NADR;
Appropriated[A]: $6.2;
Obligated balance[B]: $5.89;
Expended balance: $0.3.
Central America total;
Appropriated[A]: $165.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $72.82;
Expended balance: $2.07.
Source: GAO analysis of State Department data.
Note: Appropriated funds give budget authority to incur obligations and
to make payments from the Treasury for specified purposes. Obligations
are commitments that create a legal liability of the U.S. government
for the payment of goods and services ordered or received. Expenditures
are funds that have been spent.
[A] Includes amounts appropriated "to combat drug trafficking and
related violence and organized crime, and for judicial reform,
institution building, anti-corruption, rule of law activities" in these
countries, amounts congressionally directed for programs in these
countries, and amounts allocated by State to fund Mérida activities.
For the purposes of this report, we consider "to combat drug
trafficking and related violence and organized crime, and for judicial
reform, institution building, anti-corruption, rule of law activities"
to be Mérida activities.
[B] Although the Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement
Affairs reports both its bulk obligations and sub-obligations to the
Office of Management and Budget, its bulk obligations, as the first
record of a legal liability to pay for goods and services, are what we
are reporting as its obligations. Obligated balance refers to
unliquidated obligations.
[C] Given the political situations in Honduras and Nicaragua,
approximately $2.1 million of appropriate funds has been reprogrammed
to other countries for non-Mérida programs.
[End of table]
Table 4: Mérida Funding Status for Haiti and the Dominican Republic, by
Account, as of September 30, 2009 (Dollars in millions):
Caribbean[C]:
International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE).
FY08 Supplemental;
Appropriated[A]: $5.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $5.0;
Expended balance: $0.
International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE).
FY09 Omnibus;
Appropriated[A]: $5.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $0;
Expended balance: $0.
Caribbean total;
Appropriated[A]: $10.0;
Obligated balance[B]: $5.0;
Expended balance: $0.
Source: GAO analysis of State Department data.
Note: Appropriated funds give budget authority to incur obligations and
to make payments from the Treasury for specified purposes. Obligations
are commitments that create a legal liability of the U.S. government
for the payment of goods and services ordered or received. Expenditures
are funds that have been spent.
[A] Includes amounts appropriated "to combat drug trafficking and
related violence and organized crime, and for judicial reform,
institution building, anti-corruption, rule of law activities" in these
countries, and amounts congressionally directed for programs in these
countries to fund Mérida activities. For the purposes of this report,
we consider "to combat drug trafficking and related violence and
organized crime, and for judicial reform, institution building, anti-
corruption, rule of law activities" to be Mérida activities.
[B] Although the Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement
Affairs reports both its bulk obligations and sub-obligations to the
Office of Management and Budget, its bulk obligations, as the first
record of a legal liability to pay for goods and services, are what we
are reporting as its obligations. Obligated balance refers to
unliquidated obligations.
[C] The Caribbean participants in the Mérida Initiative are Haiti and
the Dominican Republic.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Enclosure III: Summary of Planned Procurement by Account:
Table 5: Planned Procurement, Mexico:
Account: International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE);
Major area of focus: INCLE funds will support the development of the
government of Mexico's (GOM) institutional capacity to detect and
interdict illicit drugs, explosives and weapons, trafficked/smuggled
persons, and individuals seeking to enter the United States to conduct
criminal activities. For example, INCLE funds will be used to acquire
three Black Hawk helicopters for Mexico's civilian Public Security
Secretariat (SSP) to improve air capacity to deploy federal police
agents quickly. INCLE funds will also be used to expand and modernize
information system capacity. For instance, INCLE funding will be used
to improve inspection and security systems for key mail facilities,
provide secure communications for law enforcement agencies, and enhance
data management and analysis capabilities of the Mexican intelligence
service (CISEN). Furthermore, INCLE will be used to purchase mobile
nonintrusive inspection equipment to improve overall law enforcement
infrastructure.
Account: Foreign Military Financing (FMF);
Major area of focus: FMF funds will be used to improve surveillance and
land and maritime interdictions. FMF funds will purchase up to four
CASA 235 maritime patrol aircraft, up to five Black Hawk helicopters,
and up to eight Bell Helicopters to support efforts of the Mexican Navy
(SEMAR) and Mexican Army/Air Force (SEDENA) to control their national
territory. Funding for the aircraft also includes transition training
(training for experienced pilots to fly a new type of aircraft) for
Mexican pilots, and initial spare parts and maintenance packages. FMF
funds will also purchase ion scanners to help detect illicit drug and
arms trafficking through remote areas of Mexico and support GOM's
effort to mount effective interdiction operations on land routes.
Account: Economic Support Fund (ESF);
Major area of focus: ESF funds will be used to promote rule of law and
human rights by supporting Mexico's justice sector reforms and respect
for human rights. For example, to assist in implementing the justice
sector reforms, ESF funding will support professional peer exchanges
between Mexican and U.S. judges at the federal and state levels.
Funding will also support technical assistance to help Mexican
prosecutors' offices as they implement justice sector reforms at the
state and federal levels. In addition, funding will provide training
and technical support to justice sector personnel (judges, prosecutors,
and public defenders) and human rights nongovernmental organizations
(NGO) to expand the use of alternative case resolutions such as first
offender's programs, mediation, and restorative justice. Moreover,
funding will provide training to human rights NGOs and civil society on
the code of criminal procedures, as well as on international, regional,
and national laws protecting human rights in order to build NGO
capacity to properly monitor and document human rights violations.
Source: State Department data.
[End of table]
Table 6: Planned Procurement, Central America, Haiti, and the Dominican
Republic:
Account: International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE);
Major area of focus: INCLE funds will strengthen the ability of law
enforcement institutions to fight crime, violence, and trafficking in
drugs and arms. For instance, it will support developing law
enforcement units, such as vetted units and drug information systems,
to fight drug trafficking organizations. INCLE funds will also support
an expansion of a prison management initiative, technical assistance to
enhance prosecutorial capacity, and encourage cooperation among
prosecutors, judges, and police. In addition, INCLE funds will fund a
pilot program in Panama and Guatemala for mobile inspection x-ray units
in vans equipped with disassembly tools and other inspectional
equipment to intercept smuggled narcotics, weapons, bulk cash, and
other contraband. INCLE funds will also support the Haitian and
Dominican Republic national police as they transition to professional
civilian law enforcement agencies as well as capabilities for
interdicting illegal trafficking across their borders. In addition,
these funds will support the Dominican Republic's recent transition
into a new judicial system with training and assistance in criminal
investigation and procedures.
Account: Foreign Military Financing (FMF);
Major area of focus: FMF funds will strengthen the maritime
interdiction capabilities of Central American countries. FMF funds will
be used for new interceptor boats, refurbishing existing patrol and
interdiction boats, and communication equipment, and related training
and ancillary equipment, and initial maintenance packages, including
spare parts. For example, for Costa Rica FMF funding will be used to
purchase maritime operations and maintenance training, radios, and
other communications equipment that will facilitate better
communication among Costa Rican Coast Guard entities, but would also
facilitate combined operations with U.S. and regional forces.
Account: Economic Support Fund (ESF);
Major area of focus: ESF funds will be used to promote economic and
social development and good governance in targeted low-income areas,
including rural communities vulnerable to drug trafficking, gang
violence, and organized crime. ESF funds in Central America will
contribute to breaking the power and impunity of criminal
organizations, strengthening border controls, improving the capacity of
justice systems and curtailing gang activity, and reducing the demand
for drugs.
Account: Non-proliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining, and Related
Programs (NADR);
Major area of focus: NADR funds will be used to deter and detect drug
smuggling, bulk currency smuggling, and other transborder criminal
activity. For example, NADR funds will train and equip personnel and
border crossing in all seven Central American countries as part of the
Mérida Initiative and provide two mobile inspection points per country.
In addition, to counter arms trafficking in the region, funds will
support the implementation of the Spanish-language version of eTrace
software that will enable law enforcement officials to trace suspects
to firearms and identify patterns in international arms trafficking.
Source: State Department data.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Enclosure IV: Status of Selected Mérida Initiative Deliverables, by
Strategic Objective, as of September 2009:
Mérida strategic objective: Break the power and impunity of criminal
organizations;
Deliverable status: Equipment:
* 26 armored vehicles, delivered May 2009.
* 30 ion scanners, delivered September 2009.
* 5 x-ray vans, delivered August 2009.
* 5 Bell helicopters, estimated delivery December 2009.
Deliverable status: Training:
* 6 canine trainers trained October 2009.
Mérida strategic objective: Assist the governments of Mexico and
Central America in strengthening border, air, and maritime controls;
Deliverable status: Equipment:
* Document verification software, delivered September 2009.
* Rescue communication equipment, estimated delivery October 2009.
Deliverable status: Training:
* Workshop to Combat Illicit Trafficking in Arms, conducted July
2009[A].
Mérida strategic objective: Improve the capacity of justice systems in
the region;
Deliverable status: Equipment:
* Forensic lab equipment delivered.
* 14 drug test kits delivered[A].
* Range of police equipment procured, estimated delivery between now
and February 2010[A].
Deliverable status: Training:
* Various types of training provided to law enforcement and
correctional officials; Example: 1,300 Mexican Secretariat of Public
Security (SSP) investigators trained.
Deliverable status: Judicial reform:
* Various types of judicial exchanges, training, and technical
assistance conducted; Example: technical assistance provided to the
Mexican Office of the Attorney General in the design and implementation
of a modern and efficient case management and court administration
system.
Deliverable status: Human rights:
* United Nation's human rights project, inaugurated July 2009.
Mérida strategic objective: Curtail gang activity in Mexico and Central
America and diminish the demand for drugs in the region;
Deliverable status: Drug demand reduction:
* Various types of training and agreements finalized; Example: pledge
of funds to certify drug counselors and strengthen the national
accreditation board of Mexico.
* 3 Vice-Ministerial conferences[A].
* Installation of Automated Fingerprint Identification System in El
Salvador[A].
Deliverable status: Exchange:
* 52 students selected for U.S. study, Summer 2009[A].
Source: GAO analysis of State Department data.
Note: Unless otherwise noted, Mexico is the recipient of all
deliverables.
[A] Applies to Central America.
[End of table]
Enclosure V: Comments from the Department of State:
United States Department of State:
Global Financial Services:
PO Box 150008:
Charleston, SC 20415-5008:
843-308-5576:
November 24, 2009:
Ms. Jacquelyn Williams-Bridgers:
Managing Director;
International Affairs and Trade:
Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street, N.W.
Washington, D C. 20548-0001:
Dear Ms. Williams-Bridgers:
We appreciate the opportunity to review your draft report, "Status of
Funds for the Merida Initiative," GAO Job Code 320715.
The enclosed Department of State comments are provided for
incorporation with this letter as an appendix to the final report.
If you have any questions concerning this response, please contact Pat
Yorkman, Procurement Specialist, International Narcotics and Law
Enforcement Affairs at (202) 776-8806.
Sincerely,
Signed by:
James L. Millette:
cc:
GAO: Jess Ford:
INL: David T. Johnson:
State/OIG: Mark Duda:
[End of letter]
Department of State Response to GAO Draft Report:
Status of Funds for the Merida Initiative (GAO-10-253R, GAO Code
320715):
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on your draft correspondence
entitled "Status of Funds for the Merida Initiative." While the level
of "expended funds" for Mexico, Central America and Haiti and the
Dominican Republic are below our initial expectations, there are the
significant levels of activity that have occurred in laying the
groundwork for the effective coordination and disbursement of
assistance under the Merida Initiative. In order to ensure that U.S.
Government (USG) assistance accurately addresses the threats of the
region, we have invested significant time with our Mexican and Central
American partners in jointly identifying and scoping out the threats
that challenge citizen safety in the region. This bilateral and
regional harmonization of strategic objectives will enable us to
implement programs, acquire equipment, and focus limited USG resources
in areas where there is a high probability for success and high
potential for host nation sustainability of our joint initiatives.
The use of "expended funds" as a measure of performance for USG-funded
programs does not capture all program activity because of procurement
cycle, billing and reporting systems of the Departments of State
(State) and Defense (DoD). Officially, funds are considered expended
when payment has been made from the U.S. Treasury. This action can be
delayed significantly beyond the actual delivery of goods and services
due to a variety of factors, including incomplete documentation, slow
vendor invoicing, or other issues.
For example, in Mexico, five Bell Helicopter BH-412 helicopters (at a
total cost of $66 million) were ordered for the Government of Mexico in
June 2009 and are scheduled for delivery in December 2009. Funds are
being expended as the vendor submits progress payments or DoD incurs
administrative expenses. To date, $23.4 million has been expended. The
remaining funds will be paid as the helicopters are delivered. However,
DoD's accounting system will not necessarily reflect the current status
of the funds until the accounting system catches up with events on the
ground nor would these funds be captured in State's accounting system.
Nonetheless, those funds are committed to a contract that is being
executed. The USG has also provided $5.7 million in non-intrusive
inspection equipment (NIIE) such as x-ray machines and ion scanners to
the Government of Mexico. [See comment 1] Although delivery of these
items has occurred, invoices for payment have yet to be received from
some vendors and processing is still underway on other invoices due to
small errors, which must be corrected before payment can be made. Under
the Merida Initiative, we have trained over 3,000 new college educated
Mexican Federal Police investigators, who will be the vanguard of
Mexico's new Federal police in a remarkable international effort at San
Luis Potosi, This $3.5 million effort is not reflected in the current
"expended funds" balance. Meanwhile the new investigators are on the
street. [See comment 2]
Total Merida funding supporting active projects is $219,985,564.
Deliveries from these active projects depend on the complexity of the
item being ordered (e.g., most NIIE must be constructed to order).
GAO Response to Agency Comments
The following are GAO's comments on the Department of State's letter.
1. We discuss in our report the details of the progress that has been
made toward the procurement of the Bell helicopters. The contract,
however, is in the process of being executed and the helicopters have
not yet been delivered. We were asked to report on the status of Mérida
funding as of September 30, 2009.
2. In our report, we note both the delivery of nonintrusive inspection
equipment and training provided.
[End of section]
Enclosure VI: Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
GAO Contact
Jess T. Ford (202) 512-4268 or fordj@gao.gov.
Acknowledgments
In addition to the contact named above, Juan Gobel, Assistant Director;
Marc Castellano; Grace Lui; Jacqueline Nowicki; Marisela Perez; Erin
Saunders Rath; and Judith Williams made key contributions to this
report.
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1]In addition, GAO is currently conducting a review of U.S. efforts to
combat gangs with connections to Central America and plans to issue its
report early next year.
[2] The Central American countries include Belize, Costa Rica, El
Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama.
[3] These accounts are the International Narcotics Control and Law
Enforcement (INCLE) account, the Economic Support Fund (ESF), and the
Foreign Military Financing (FMF) account.
[4] According to State's spending plans for the Mérida Initiative,
State intends to provide all of these funds toward Mérida programs,
even though, as of September 30, 2009, State had not yet allotted all
of the Fiscal Year 2009 Omnibus and Fiscal Year 2009 Supplemental
appropriations toward Mérida programs.
[5] GAO, Drug Control: U.S. Assistance Has Helped Mexican
Counternarcotics Efforts, but Tons of Illicit Drugs Continue to Flow
into the United States, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-1018] (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 17,
2007).
[6] CRS, Mérida Initiative for Mexico and Central America: Funding and
Policy Issues, R40135 (Washington, D.C., Aug. 21, 2009).
[7] According to State's spending plans for the Mérida Initiative,
State intends to provide all of these funds toward Mérida programs,
even though, as of September 30, 2009, State had not yet allotted all
of the Fiscal Year 2009 Omnibus and Fiscal Year 2009 Supplemental
appropriations toward Mérida programs.
[8] Pub. L. No. 110-252, 122 Stat. 2323.
[9] Omnibus Appropriations, 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-8, § 7045, 123 Stat.
524, 886-887.
[10] Haiti and the Dominican Republic were also each allocated $2.5
million, as directed by the accompanying Explanatory Statement.
[11] Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-32, Title
XI, 123 Stat. 1859, 1893.
[12] State also allocated $6.2 million from the Fiscal Year 2008
Supplemental Appropriations Act Non-proliferation, Anti-terrorism,
Demining, and Related Programs (NADR) account to fund activities for
Mérida activities in Central American countries. We reflect this amount
in table 1, but given the relatively small size of the appropriations
and the fact that they did not receive any subsequent NADR
appropriations for the Mérida Initiative, we are not including NADR in
our description of the general funding process for Mérida.
[13] While State develops and supervises the programs that provide
security assistance to foreign governments, once Congress authorizes
the programs and funds, DOD implements the programs through the Defense
Security Cooperation Agency. This includes procuring and transferring
military equipment and training.
[14] Although INL reports both its bulk obligations and sub-obligations
to the Office of Management and Budget, its bulk obligations, as the
first record of a legal liability to pay for goods and services, are
what we are reporting as its obligations.
[15] See, e.g., Pub. L. No. 111-8, 123 Stat. 856. Funds are apportioned
by the Office of Management and Budget when it distributes the amounts
available for obligation to the fund account. In this case, FMF funds
are apportioned directly to DOD.
[16] See, e.g., Pub. L. No. 110-252, §§ 1406-07.
[17] In the Fiscal Year 2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act, ESF funds for
Mexico are also subject to the human rights conditionality. In the
Fiscal Year 2009 Supplemental Appropriations Act, none of the funds are
statutorily subject to the human rights conditionality.
[18] This process is named after Section 653(a) of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961, now codified at 22 U.S.C. §2413(a). This
section states that no later than 30 days after the enactment of a law
appropriating funds to carry out a provision of this act (other than
section 451 or 637 of the Arms Export Control Act), the President shall
notify Congress of each foreign country and international organization
to which the U.S. government intends to provide any portion of the
funds under such law and the amount of funds under that law, by
category of assistance, that the U.S. government intends to provide to
each.
[19] Pub. L. No. 110-252, § 1406.
[20] The purchase order is for three Black Hawk helicopters with INCLE
funds.
[21] State also allocated $6.2 million from the Fiscal Year 2008
Supplemental Appropriations Act Non-proliferation, Anti-terrorism,
Demining, and Related Programs (NADR) account to fund activities for
Mérida activities in Central American countries. We reflect this amount
in table 1, but given the relatively small size of the appropriations
and the fact that they did not receive any subsequent NADR
appropriations for the Mérida Initiative, we are not including NADR in
our description of the general funding process for Mérida.
[End of section]
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 [hyperlink, http://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 [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]
and select "E-mail Updates."
Order by Phone:
The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO‘s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO‘s Web site,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm].
Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537.
Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional
information.
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4400:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4800:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
