Freedom Guide: PUBLIC INTELLIGENCE: GAO REPORT STRENGTHENING TRAINING EFFORTS TO COUNTER VIOLENT EXTREMISM

Thursday, November 15, 2012

PUBLIC INTELLIGENCE: GAO REPORT STRENGTHENING TRAINING EFFORTS TO COUNTER VIOLENT EXTREMISM

GAO Report: Strengthening Training Efforts to Counter Violent Extremism

November 13, 2012 in Government Accountability Office

The following report was released by the Government Accountability Office on October 18, 2012.

Countering Violent Extremism: Additional Actions Could Strengthen Training Efforts

70 pages
October 2012

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has identified and is communicating to its components and state and local partners topics that the training on countering violent extremism (CVE) it provides or funds should cover; in contrast, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has not identified what topics should be covered in its CVE-related training. According to a DHS official who leads DHS’s CVE efforts, identifying topics has helped to provide a logical structure for DHS’s CVE-related training efforts. According to DOJ officials, even though they have not specifically identified what topics should be covered in CVE-related training, they understand internally which of the department’s training is CVE-related and contributes either directly or indirectly to the department’s training responsibilities under the CVE national strategy. However, over the course of this review, the department generally relied upon the framework GAO developed for potential CVE-related training topics to determine which of its existing training was CVE-related. Further, because DOJ has not identified CVE-related training topics, DOJ components have had challenges in determining the extent to which their training efforts contribute to DOJ’s responsibilities under the CVE national strategy. In addition, officials who participated in an interagency working group focusing on ensuring CVE-related training quality stated that the group found it challenging to catalogue federal CVE-related training because agencies’ views differed as to what CVE-related training includes.
The majority of state and local participant feedback on training that DHS or DOJ provided or funded and that GAO identified as CVE-related was positive or neutral, but a minority of participants raised concerns about biased, inaccurate, or offensive material. DHS and DOJ collected feedback from 8,424 state and local participants in CVE-related training during fiscal years 2010 and 2011, and 77—less than 1 percent—provided comments that expressed such concerns. According to DHS and DOJ officials, agencies used the feedback to make changes where appropriate. DOJ’s Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and other components generally solicit feedback for more formal, curriculum-based training, but the FBI does not require this for activities such as presentations by guest speakers because the FBI does not consider this to be training. Similarly, DOJ’s United States Attorneys’ Offices (USAO) do not require feedback on presentations and similar efforts. Nevertheless, FBI field offices and USAOs covered about 39 percent (approximately 9,900) of all participants in DOJ CVE-related training during fiscal years 2010 and 2011 through these less formal methods, yet only 4 of 21 FBI field offices and 15 of 39 USAOs chose to solicit feedback on such methods. GAO has previously reported that agencies need to develop systematic evaluation processes in order to obtain accurate information about the benefits of their training. Soliciting feedback for less formal efforts on a more consistent basis could help these agencies ensure their quality.
DOJ and DHS have undertaken reviews and developed guidance to help improve the quality of CVE-related training. For example, in September 2011, the DOJ Deputy Attorney General directed all DOJ components and USAOs to review all of their training materials, including those related to CVE, to ensure they are consistent with DOJ standards. In addition, in October 2011, DHS issued guidance that covers best practices for CVE-related training and informs recipients of DHS grants who use the funding for training involving CVE on how to ensure high-quality training. Since the departments’ reviews and efforts to implement the guidance they have developed are relatively new, it is too soon to determine their effectiveness.
…
Identifying Concerns about CVE-Related Training
To determine what concerns, if any, participants raised about CVE-related training, we reviewed course evaluations completed by participants of CVE-related training offered by DHS I&A, DHS Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, DOJ BJA, and the FBI, and identified complaints or concerns about CVE-related training made formally in writing. We limited our analysis to training that was provided or funded by DHS or DOJ during fiscal years 2010 or 2011 and provided to a state or local entity (e.g., police department, community group, or fusion center). Two analysts independently reviewed 8,424 course evaluations from six training programs to consistently determine which ones included concerns or complaints. The analysts also assessed the nature of the concerns and complaints and assigned each complaint to one of three categories: (1) politically or culturally biased, (2) offensive, or (3) inaccurate. Where there were discrepancies between the analysts, they were resolved through supervisory review.
To identify formally submitted or documented complaints or concerns participants expressed, we asked DHS and DOJ to identify those submitted in writing to DHS or DOJ, or articulated to DHS or DOJ through other means but subsequently documented by the agency, from fiscal years 2010 through 2011. We also conducted keyword searches using LexisNexis and Google to identify concerns that were raised by either individuals or advocacy groups that were submitted in writing to DHS or DOJ. In addition, we interviewed representatives, including leaders, of select advocacy groups that raised concerns about CVE-related training to identify what concerns and complaints, if any, they submitted in writing to DHS or DOJ on behalf of training participants. The advocacy and civil liberties organizations we interviewed included the American Civil Liberties Union, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, the Council on American Islamic Relations, and the Muslim Public Affairs Council. We selected these organizations based on their leadership in raising concerns we identified (e.g., by virtue of being the primary signatories) and upon the recommendation of other advocacy groups. These interviews also enabled us to confirm or obtain additional views on the formally documented complaints DHS or DOJ provided. Through these approaches, we identified a total of six letters of complaint regarding 18 alleged incidents of biased CVE and counterterrorism training that DHS or DOJ provided or funded during fiscal years 2010 and 2011. Given that the scope of this review is limited to CVE-related training provided to state and local officials and community members, and not training that is exclusively provided to federal officials, we determined that 7 of the alleged incidents described in five of the letters were relevant to this review. We also interviewed relevant DHS and DOJ officials to obtain their perspectives on the concerns raised in the written complaints and information on any actions agencies took in response to these incidents.
…

Tags: Domestic Terrorism, Government Accountability Office, Homegrown Violent Extremists, Radicalization No Comments »

Related Material From the Archive:

No comments:

20 Rules-who follows them?

I'm placing these 2o rules someone posted for their group, and I want you to guess which one:

1. They are voracious in their infoseeking. If it takes all night long, or weeks, or years, they will look and look till they get what they have been looking for.

2. Whenever one of their associates or slaves needs something for a mission, Illuminati members make sure this person or persons get the material resources they need to get the job done, whether it be by contributions or whatever. Even if the person is disliked, all that is necessary is that the person has the skills for the job and the plan be workable. No whining on forums, no silly speeches, just gets done.

3. They know how to conserve their resources. They do not throw out all their chips all in on one go.

4. They trust their instincts.

5. If they see an opening, they do not hesitate to take advantage and exploit it.

6. They do not go into deep dark depressions just because they had one minor setback. They use everything they have to find out exactly what went wrong, and correct the problem.

7. They know how to organize themselves.

8. Among them, concepts of color, sexual orientation, and fame are meaningless. The goal goes first.

9. They know what TV is and does - they introduced it, you know! The goal comes before the TV or any of their other mind control devices, such as video games. Watching all those hours every day and being "awake" are like matter and anti-matter. They cannot be in the same place at the same time.

10. They know to not let anyone take what they have. If someone tried to CPS their kids there'd be hell on all involved in trying, even the person who made the call. Literally.

11. You can insult them all you want, call them anything, and they do not take it like Joe and Jane Public would. This is because they have absolutely no pride or morals, but anyone who does with intelligence can easily integrate this into their minds.

12. They would NEVER, under any circumstances, sell out themselves out by giving their family secrets out to the public for peanuts, like so many of the commoners do by selling out their countries and spying on and black opping their fellow humans.

13. In the public eye, wanting a lot of material resources is seen as something to be ashamed of. It is a damn good thing! Everyone should have all the material items they need to do everything they need to do, and should feel pride in having the self-love for holding that perspective and moving with it. This is the mindset the leadership of the Illuminati hold.

14. When information is placed before them that is obviously a threat to their well-being, they immediately take action about it and do not go rushing to drown life circumstances in a TV or bag of takeout, even if they do not know precisely what to do at the moment.

15. Even if all hope seems lost, and the odds are against them, they still keep on working at it 110%.

16. They know the value of building up networks.

17. They feel no guilt about defending themselves from legal, physical, or other attacks. At times I read about people I see acting nice to their agents, saying sorry to them, when it was the agent who had infringed upon their rights. Never be sorry and apologetic to them. It's a clear cut sign of victim mentality and is asking for trouble.

18. They are flexible, to an extent, and do not work with the controlled by them mainstream science and know the reality and value of homeopathy, energy and herbal healing, and do not hesitate to take full advantage of these using all the resources they have at their disposal.

19. They have always understood that they have their livelihood to defend, which is their pyramidal control system and all the luxury that comes with it. Humanity will learn from this, whether it be gently through information like this article, or the hard way. Everyone must understand that their livelihoods are also being threatened, and act upon this via exposure of the agenda.

20. They know to set aside their petty differences when business needs to be taken care of.

Who wrote this?

Nobody in the movement. Someone claiming to have affilliation with the "illuminati" but whether or not doesn't matter, anyone can see the enemy presents a united front against us.

Who lives by this?

Not too many in the movement, in fact most of the time it seems like nobody.

Could we live by this?

We could. It's a matter of doing.

Subscribe To Freedom Guide