Additional Details on FY 2003 Performance Results - Strategic Goal 5: International Crime and Drugs

FY 2003 Performance and Accountability Report
Bureau of Resource Management
December 2003
Report

Performance Goal 1: Disruption of Criminal Organizations

Initiative/Program #1: Counterdrug Initiative

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR #1: FOREIGN CULTIVATION OF COCA, OPIUM POPPY, AND MARIJUANA
Initial FY 2003 Target Revised Target FY 2003 Result FY 2003 Performance Ratings
1. Coca: 192,000 1. Coca revised to 180,000 hectares. 1. Data not available at this point, although early projections indicate that declines in coca and opium poppy cultivation will reach targets. 1. N/A
2. Opium Poppy: 125,000 2. N/A 2. Data not available at this point, although early projections indicate that declines in coca and opium poppy cultivation will reach targets. 2. N/A
3. Marijuana: 5,600 3. N/A 3. Data not available at this point, although early projections indicate that declines in coca and opium poppy cultivation will reach targets. 3. N/A
Details of 2003 Results
  • Reason for Target #1 Revision: To reflect progress in reducing cultivation in 2002.
  • Data Reliability: Cultivation data for coca, opium poppy, and marijuana (Mexico only) is produced by the CIA's Crime and Narcotics Center (CNC). CNC data comes from overhead photography (both satellite and aircraft) and limited ground verification, depending on locale.
  • Data Availability: Estimates for coca cultivation in Peru and Bolivia year have been completed but the estimates for Colombia, the world's largest producer, will not be available until late February or early March.
  • Data Validation: The CNC estimate is a yearly, carefull-analyzed snapshot of cultivation that provides a consistent and comparable trend indicator of coca, heroin, and marijuana production.
  • Partners: The Department coordinates with the White Office Office of Drug Control Policy, the Departments of Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security (various offices), DEA and CIA.
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR #2: POTENTIAL PRODUCTION OF COCAINE AND HEROIN IN KEY SOURCE COUNTRIES
Initial FY 2003 Target Revised Target FY 2003 Result FY 2003 Performance Ratings
1. Cocaine: 800 1. 759 1. TBD 1. N/A
2. Heroin: 240 2. N/A 2. TBD 2. N/A
Details of 2003 Results
  • Reason for Target #1 Revision: This reduction reflects the decline in cultivation.
  • Data Validation: Production data (versus cultivation) is critical because it can account for differences in yield (e.g., individual poppy plants in Afghanistan yield more opium than do Burmese plants). This data is extremely valuable when used in conjunction with cultivation data.
  • Data Availability: FY 2003 data is not yet available because the CIA's Center for Narcotics and Crime provides estimates for cultivation of coca and opium poppy based on overhead photography and limited ground verification. Preliminary data suggests that Afghan opium poppy (heroin) production will rise slightly while production in Burma (the second largest producer) will continue to decline. Preliminary date indicates that cocaine production will decline in 2003.
  • Partners: Department coordinates with the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, the Departments of Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security, DEA, and CIA.
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR #3: SEIZURES OF COCAINE (HCI/BASE)(COLOMBIA, PERU, BOLIVIA) IN METRIC TONS
Initial FY 2003 Target Revised Target FY 2003 Result FY 2003 Performance Ratings
Cocaine: 110 N/A TBD N/A
Details of 2003 Results
  • Data Reliability: Statistics are provided by host governments, supplemented to some extent by records of U.S. law enforcement agencies. Data is subject to error in the form of double counting (i.e., state versus national police), exaggeration, or non-counting.
  • Data Validation: Increases or decreases in seizures are not necessarily indicative of the flow of drugs. Seizures might increase, for example, because trafficking itself has increased or because police have become more efficient. Increases do, however, indicate increased costs to traffickers.
  • Partners: Department coordinates with White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, the Departments of Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security, as well as DEA and CIA.

 

Initiative/Program #2: Improve Anti-Trafficking Prosecutorial and Protection Capacities

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR #4: PROGRESS TOWARD THE ELIMINATION OF TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS
Initial FY 2003 Target Revised Target FY 2003 Result FY 2003 Performance Ratings
1. Thirty percent of Tier 2 and 3 countries use Department assistance to develop or further anti-trafficking initiatives.[1] 1. N/A 1. Thirty percent of Tier 2 and Tier 3 countries use Department assistance to develop or further anti-trafficking initiatives. 1. On Target
2. Expand TIP report to include twenty additional countries with significant number of trafficking victims. 2. N/A 2. Third TIP Report was issued and includes 26 additional countries for a total of 116. 2. Above Target
3. Promote best practices via five new bilateral and regional initiatives among source, transit, and destination countries. 3. N/A 3. Promoted "best practices" through five new bilateral and regional initiatives among source, transit, and destination countries. 3. N/A
4. Twenty-five countries ratify UN Trafficking in Persons Protocol. 4. N/A 4. Forty-five countries ratified UN Trafficking in Persons Protocol. 4. Significantly Above Target
Details of 2003 Results
  • Reason for Significantly Exceeding Performance Target: The annual Trafficking in Persons Report has motivated many governments to take action against trafficking and be more forthcoming with information on their efforts. There is increasing collaboration between governments and civil society groups to prosecute traffickers and protect victims. There is also increasing coordination among governments of source, transit, and destination countries.
  • Data Reliability: The reliability of data varies considerably by country. The biggest problem is the lack of data in many countries.
  • Data Validation: Improved ability to provide country-specific and regional approaches.
  • Data Availability: Lack of consistent reporting by missions abroad and some funding recipients continues to be problems. This is due in part to great variations in quality and detail of data gathered by host governments.
  • Partners: Department coordinates with USAID and the Departments of Labor and Justice.

Note 1: Tier 1, 2 and 3 ratings: A rating scale used to designate levels of governmental efforts to combat trafficking on the basis of minimum standards. First tier countries are those that are in full compliance with standards. Third tier countries neither fully comply with the minimum standards nor make significant efforts to do so.

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR #5: PARTIES TO THE 1988 UN DRUG CONVENTION
Initial FY 2003 Target Revised Target FY 2003 Result FY 2003 Performance Ratings
170 N/A 170 On Target
Details of 2003 Results
  • Data Reliability: Data is provided by the United Nations.
  • Data Validation: Data is valid and based on UN records.
  • Other Issues: Most countries have now ratified the Convention, which means that they are legally obligated to carry out the provisions of the Convention. The remaining states are either not likely to ratify in the foreseeable future or are not important in terms of drug trafficking. Therefore, beginning in FY 2004, this indicator was discontinued.

Performance Goal 2: Law Enforcement and Judicial Systems

Initiative/Program #3: Support Investigations of Major International Criminals

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR #1: STATUS OF UN CONVENTION AGAINST TRANSNATIONAL ORGANIZED CRIME (TOC) AND SUPPLEMENTAL PROTOCOLS(E.G., TRAFFICKNG IN PERSONS PROTOCOL AND THE MIGRANT SMUGGLING PROTOCOL)
Initial FY 2003 Target Revised Target FY 2003 Result FY 2003 Performance Ratings
Forty states ratify TOC treaty, which enters into force. N/A Fifty-six states have ratified the TOC and forty-five states have ratified the Trafficking in Persons Protocol. Forty states have ratified the Migrant Smuggling Protocol. All have entered into force. Above Target
Details of 2003 Results
  • Data Reliability: Data is provided by the United Nations.
  • Data Validation: Data is valid for tracking the progress of the TOC as it moves into force. Additional indicators may be desirable to track implementation.
  • Partners: The Department coordinates primarily with the Department of Justice.

 

Initiative/Program #4: International Law Enforcement Academies

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR #2: NUMBER OF OFFICIALS TRAINED AT INTERNATIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ACADEMIES (ILEAS) AND THROUGH OTHER PROGRAMS
Initial FY 2003 Target Revised Target FY 2003 Result FY 2003 Performance Ratings
1. ILEA: 2,100 1. N/A 1. ILEA: 2,200 1. Above Target
2. Other: 15,000 2. N/A 2. Other: 4,500 2. N/A
Details of 2003 Results
  • Data Reliability: Data produced by Department of State and is based on official records.
  • Data Validation: While this data does not measure an outcome (e.g., a reduction in crime in a given country), it is a good measure of increased institutional capability of law enforcement bodies in select countries.
  • Partners: Department coordinates with the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, and Treasury.
  • Other Issues: "Other" training is now embassy-determined and project-driven and is no longer useful as a performance indicator. Henceforth, the Department will no longer report on "other training" as currently defined.
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR #3: NUMBER OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS RECEIVING COUNTERNARCOTICS TRAINING
Initial FY 2003 Target Revised Target FY 2003 Result FY 2003 Performance Ratings
1,800 N/A No data collected during FY 2003. N/A
Details of 2003 Results
  • Data Reliability: In the past, the Department has tracked and recorded the data based on central files and input from missions abroad.
  • Data Validation: This indicator has become increasingly invalid as counternarcotics and general law enforcment training, including some counterterrorism training, have become more integrated. Department training data no longer discriminates sufficiently between counternarcotics and non-counternarcotics training to make this indicator useful. In addition, training is increasingly at post discretion and is increasingly integrated into program projects. Under these changing circumstances, setting targets in this area is largely meaningless.
  • Other Issues: After FY 2002, the Department discontinued tracking this information because this information was no longer pertinent to performance. Per the Department's planning cycle, the indicator was developed in late FY 2002, but discontinued shortly thereafter.

 

Initiative/Program #5: Anticorruption

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR #4: STATUS OF UN CONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTION
Initial FY 2003 Target Revised Target FY 2003 Result FY 2003 Performance Ratings
Consensus reached on text of all major provisions. N/A Agreement reached on text of convention. Signing ceremony set for December. On Target
Details of 2003 Results
  • Data Reliability: Data will be provided by the United Nations.
  • Data Validation: Data is valid for tracking progress of instrument toward becoming an international treaty.
  • Partners: The Department coordinates primarily with the Departments of Justice and Commerce.
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR #5: STATUS OF REGIONAL ANTICORRUPTION FRAMEWORKS
Initial FY 2003 Target Revised Target FY 2003 Result FY 2003 Performance Ratings
Number of mechanisms increased to six by addition of African Union. N/A African Union (AU) Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption was adopted by the African Union General Assembly at the AU Summit in Maputo on July 11, 2003. The Convention is now open to signature for 42 AU member States. AU is working with Transparency International to develop a monitoring and assistance mechanism related to The New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD). On Target
Details of 2003 Results
  • Data Reliability: Data is reliable in terms of marking the agreement that sets up the regional anti-corruption agreement.
  • Data Validation: Data is valid for this performance indicator. In the future, indicator may be adjusted to reflect progress in implementation.
  • Partners: INL is coordinating closely with USAID and non-USG donors to gauge potential for supporting and funding this mechanism.