In response to increasing threats to U.S. personnel and facilities at overseas diplomatic posts since 1998, the Department of State (State) has taken a number of steps to enhance its risk management and security efforts. State's Bureau of Diplomatic Security (Diplomatic Security) leads many of these efforts with assistance from other bureaus and U.S. government agencies. Given the ongoing threats and the amount of resources needed to counter them, GAO has identified 11 key issues regarding Diplomatic Security that warrant significant Congressional oversight to monitor the cost, progress, and impact: Diplomatic Security Funding: Diplomatic Security funding has increased considerably in reaction to a number of security incidents overseas and domestically. In fiscal year 2016, total funding for Diplomatic Security operations--which includes its bureau managed funds as well as other funding such as personnel salaries--was almost $4.8 billion. Diplomatic Security Staffing Challenges: Diplomatic Security's workforce--including 3,488 direct-hire, 1,989 other U.S. government, and 45,870 contract personnel--continues to grow. However, potential challenges exist regarding the distribution of domestic and overseas positions, posting fully qualified individuals in the assignments with the greatest needs, and ongoing efforts to fill language-designated positions. Physical Security of U.S. Diplomatic Facilities: Diplomatic Security and the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations collaborate to meet safety standards when constructing new embassies and mitigating risks at existing facilities. However, GAO made recommendations to address gaps in State's security related activities and processes. Physical Security of Diplomatic Residences and Other Soft Targets: State has taken steps to address residential security vulnerabilities and manage risks at schools and other soft targets overseas. However, GAO recommended actions to address weaknesses in State's efforts. Security Training Compliance: While State has robust security training requirements, it lacks consistent monitoring and enforcement processes, particularly for its Foreign Affairs Counter Threat training and for security refresher briefings at posts. Embassy Crisis and Evacuation Preparedness: Gaps in State's implementation and monitoring of crisis and evacuation preparedness could endanger staff assigned to overseas posts and the family members accompanying them. GAO has recommended actions to address these issues. Department of Defense (DOD) Support to U.S. Diplomatic Missions: Following the Benghazi attacks, DOD increased its support to U.S. diplomatic missions by creating dedicated military forces to respond to crises and expanding the Marine Security Guard program at overseas missions. However, State and DOD reported that they have experienced some logistical and other challenges. Dissemination of Threat Information: State has processes for communicating threat information to post personnel and U.S. citizens in-country. However, post personnel--including locally employed staff--have not always received important information in a timely manner. GAO has recommended steps State needs to take to address this concern. Countering Human Intelligence Threats: Foreign intelligence entities from host nations and third parties are motivated to collect information on U.S. operations and intentions. State has established measures to counter the human intelligence threat and works with other U.S. government agencies to identify and assess this threat. Ensuring Information Security: GAO has designated federal information security as a government-wide high-risk area and made recommendations to address these issues. State faces evolving threats and challenges to maintaining obsolete technology, defining clear roles and responsibilities for information security, and overseeing technology contractors. Status of Recommendations Made in Reports following the Benghazi Attack: In response to the Benghazi attack, State formed interagency teams to evaluate the security at 19 dangerous posts, convened an Accountability Review Board (ARB) to investigate the attack, and established panels to conduct further assessments. As of June 2017, State reported having addressed recommendations as follows: 268 of 287 made by the interagency teams, 26 of 29 by the ARB, and 64 of 75 by the panels. Terrorist attacks against U.S. diplomats and personnel overseas have led to increased attention of State's diplomatic security efforts. In this special publication, GAO identifies key issues affecting Diplomatic Security for Congressional oversight. These issues were identified from a body of related GAO work and State and other reports. GAO also interviewed U.S. officials from State and other agencies to obtain their views on key issues, obtain updated information and data, and follow up on actions they have taken on past GAO and other oversight report recommendations. What GAO Recommends: While State has taken steps to close recommendations made in past GAO reports, GAO identified 27 open recommendations from these reports (as of August 2017) that it believes should be given high priority for implementation. Of the 27 priority recommendations, 24 were related to diplomatic security.

U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Adolph Dubs was commuting from his residence to the U.S. Embassy in Kabul on February 14, 1979, when four men abducted him. A man dressed as a policeman stopped the Ambassador's car and said that he had orders to search it. Aiming a gun at the chauffeur's head, the “policeman” ordered the chauffeur to remain still while he and three men got into the car. At gunpoint, the chauffeur drove to the Kabul Hotel, arriving at about 8:50 a.m. The kidnappers ordered Dubs out of the car and took him to a second floor room. The chauffeur was instructed to go to the U.S. Embassy and inform the Americans of the situation. A large number of Afghan police, military, and fire department personnel quickly surrounded the hotel. Three Foreign Service Officers (FSOs) from the U.S. Embassy arrived, as did four Soviet officials. During the next four hours, U.S. Officials repeatedly urged Afghan officials to exercise restraint to ensure the Ambassador's safety. According to FSOs on site, the four Soviet officials held repeated discussions with Afghan authorities and appeared to serve as advisors. At 12:50 p.m. Afghan forces stormed the second-floor room, and Ambassador Dubs was killed during the ensuing gunfire.The abduction and death of Ambassador Dubs highlighted the importance of diplomatic security and prompted U.S. Department of State officials to reexamine the security measures that they had in place. The United States has always had some form of diplomatic security, yet the threats to U.S. diplomacy and the measures that the Department of State has employed to counter them have changed considerably over time. This history explores how diplomatic security at the Department of State has evolved from the American Revolution to the post- Cold War era.The Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS) is the security and law enforcement arm of the U.S. Department of State. DS is a world leader in international investigations, threat analysis, cyber security, counterterrorism, security technology, and protection of people, property, and information.The Bureau of Diplomatic Security is responsible for providing a safe and secure environment for the conduct of U.S. foreign policy. Every diplomatic mission in the world operates under a security program designed and maintained by Diplomatic Security. In the United States, Diplomatic Security personnel protect the Secretary of State and high-ranking foreign dignitaries and officials visiting the United States, investigates passport and visa fraud, and conducts personnel security investigations. Operating from a global platform in 25 U.S. cities and 159 foreign countries, DS ensures that America can conduct diplomacy safely and securely. DS plays a vital role in protecting U.S. embassies and personnel overseas, securing critical information systems, investigating passport and visa fraud, and fighting the war on terror.

State Department's (State) Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS) is responsible for the protection of people, information, and property at over 400 foreign missions and domestic locations. DS must be prepared to counter threats such as crime, espionage, and passport fraud, technological intrusions, political violence, and terrorism. This report assesses: (1) how DS's mission has evolved since 1998; (2) how its resources have changed over the last 10 years; and (3) the challenges it faces in conducting its missions. The auditor analyzed DS data; reviewed relevant documents; and interviewed officials at several domestic facilities and 18 international missions. Includes recommendations. Charts and tables.