Summary

The $2.1 billion Diplomatic Security Construction program was started in 1986 to build secure new diplomatic facilities at high-risk posts around the world. Initially, the State Department took a number of steps to improve program execution, including reorganizing the Office of Foreign Buildings Operations and contracting with Sverdrup Corporation for construction support services. Moreover, the Office of Foreign Buildings Operations was authorized to add 133 new staff positions. Nevertheless, the State Department has made limited progress so far in implementing the program and still lacks reasonable assurances that its security construction program objectives are being met. Several factors have contributed to delays and cost increases. These include difficulties in filling authorized staff positions at the Office of Foreign Buildings Operations, the division of responsibilities between the Office of Foreign Buildings Operations and the Bureau of Diplomatic Security for construction security management, poor program planning, problems with site acquisition, changes in security requirements, and inadequate contractor performance. GAO concludes that the scope and magnitude of project delays and cost increases indicate systemic weaknesses in program management. The State Department has taken several recent steps to improve security construction.

GAO found that: (1) although State reorganized its Office of Foreign Buildings Operations (FBO), contracted for construction support services, and authorized FBO to add 133 new staff positions at the beginning of the Diplomatic Security Construction Program, it made only limited progress in implementing the program and did not have reasonable assurance that its security construction program objectives were being met; (2) as of September 1991, of 57 projects planned, only 7 had been completed, 8 were under construction, 14 were in site acquisition, under design, or out for architectural and engineering selection, and 28 were on hold, deferred, or cancelled; (3) such factors as difficulties in filling authorized FBO staff positions, the division of responsibility between FBO and the Bureau of Diplomatic Security for construction security management, poor program planning, difficulties in site acquisition, changes in security requirements, and inadequate contractor performance have contributed to program delays and cost increases; (4) although funding limitations have also contributed to State's inability to implement as many projects as it originally planned, the scope and magnitude of project delays and cost increases indicate systemic weaknesses in program management; and (5) to help improve security construction, State has given FBO full responsibility for implementing security policy and standards during construction, requested additional staff positions for FBO, and initiated other actions to improve construction programs.