October 4, 2022

ACN Center

Area Control Network

Secretary Antony J. Blinken With Sonia Dridi of France 24

22 min read

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

Washington, D.C.

QUESTION: (Via translation)  Thank you again, Mr. Secretary, for this interview, as you have just held a ministerial meeting to coordinate global efforts in the fight against COVID.  Why hold such a meeting at this time?  What are the concerns?  What commitments were made by the United States and other participants?

SECRETARY BLINKEN: (Via translation)  Indeed, there were twenty countries represented today, including France, the EU, countries in Africa, like South Africa and Senegal, and countries around the world.  A leadership group is what is needed now to fill in the gaps.  We have established a very concrete action plan where we have jointly identified what is missing and together, we are determined to act, to use the unique skills of different countries and institutions to focus on addressing shortcomings.  For example, a huge international effort went into vaccine manufacturing.  Now we must distribute them better and make sure that they actually end up in the arms of those who need them.

This is due to supply chain problems as everything needed for vaccines and their distribution must be manufactured and on time.  There is also a problem of misinformation and disinformation.  We see people around the world who are susceptible to disinformation and so they do not take the vaccines that are available.  There is also the issue of supporting those working on the front lines and making sure they have what they need to be protected.  And finally, we must build a more efficient system for the future.

Of these areas, of our six lines of effort, we must work together because without this coordination, in the end, everyone will do their duty, but to truly be effective we must identify, together, the shortcomings and work together to try to fill in the gaps.

QUESTION: (Via translation)  Speaking of challenges that remain in Africa, the vaccination rate hovers at 10 percent.  Scientists in South Africa recently produced a copy of the Moderna vaccine.  However, as long as patents remain, vaccination efforts in Africa are slowed down, and the end of the global pandemic is also slowed.  So, the United States had declared last year their support for waiving patent protections.  What can you do in the meantime, and is it possible to waive patent protections soon?

SECRETARY BLINKEN: (Via translation)  This is an ongoing effort that we support.  However, we already see impressive results in Africa when there is a focused, coordinated effort.  In Uganda, for example, the vaccination rate in November was 11 or 12 percent.  There was a concerted effort with international partners, and after six weeks of effort, the rate is now 50 percent among adults.  This is what is possible when we identify what is needed in each case — each case is different.  Regarding patents, local production in addition to manufacturing in the United States or India is very important.  The issue of patents for the future is important, because, unfortunately, we know that there will be another pandemic.  We need to be better prepared and more effective.  For the moment, we are certain that we can put an end to COVID-19 when we work closely together to fill in the gaps.

QUESTION: (Via translation)  You visited the Institut Pasteur in Dakar, Senegal last November.  The Institut will manufacture COVID-19 vaccines with U.S. support thanks to a $3 million investment.  Can you give us an update on that project?

SECRETARY BLINKEN: (Via translation)  I was very impressed by this visit to Senegal and the Institut Pasteur.  It showed not only the need, but also the production capacity that exists at the national and regional level around the world.  This will make it much more effective in the future to not be dependent on global supply chains and be able to shorten supply chains to be able to immediately respond during a crisis.

QUESTION: (Via translation)  The other big topic today is Ukraine.  According to several officials quoted by American media, the United States expects an invasion of Ukraine by Russia on Wednesday.  So, are you expecting an invasion this Wednesday?

SECRETARY BLINKEN: (Via translation)  Alas, it is quite possible because President Putin has put in place everything necessary to carry out an act of aggression against Ukraine.  We see more and more Russian forces surrounding Ukraine: over 100,000 troops.  This is extremely worrying, including what is happening with the deployment in Belarus to the north of Ukraine.  It would be very easy for President Putin to indicate that he is ready to take the path of diplomacy.  That would start with de-escalating, by reducing the troops that are surrounding Ukraine, without provocation.  There is no reason for Russia to act like this. The only explanation we see is another act of aggression.  We also need to see this in the context of history.  This happened before, in 2014, with the annexation of Crimea and the intervention in Eastern Ukraine.  Knowing that history, we are very concerned when we see what is happening at Ukraine’s borders.

QUESTION: (Via translation)  Apologies because we did not get a response to my question.  Are you saying, yes, it is possible?  I was asking about an attack on Wednesday —

SECRETARY BLINKEN: (Via translation)  Yes, an act of aggression starting this week is completely possible when we look at what is happening with the deployment of Russian forces in the areas surrounding Ukraine.

QUESTION: (Via translation)  Would President Biden make a visit to Ukraine, as the president of Ukraine is requesting?

SECRETARY BLINKEN: (Via translation)  President Biden is quite engaged in diplomacy right now.  He spoke today with President Zelenskyy.  He spoke previously with President Putin.  We will not speculate as we continue to pursue diplomacy.  However, it depends entirely on Russia.  Will they go ahead and withdraw forces from the areas surrounding Ukraine to allow for diplomacy to try to solve existing issues?  Or, on the contrary, will they continue not just to maintain but increase the forces already deployed around Ukraine and act with aggression as early as this week?

QUESTION: (Via translation)  And Washington has publicly exposed Russia’s intentions and even their plans.  The United States is running a fairly aggressive communications campaign.  Is this a strategy to disrupt Moscow’s calculations?

SECRETARY BLINKEN: (Via translation)  Yes, because people need to understand the tools that the Russians have used in the past and are still using today, including carrying out false flag operations to justify an intervention that they had planned in advance.  This is absolutely something they would do, and shedding light on it is perhaps a way to avoid it.

QUESTION: (Via translation)  Now we’re going to switch to English if we can have an answer on the question on COVID.

(In English)  What is the U.S. doing to support African countries, in the meantime, while you are waiting for the COVID?

SECRETARY BLINKEN:  We just completed a meeting on COVID with 20 leading countries and institutions including France, including Senegal, South Africa.  All coming together to try to advance what we’re calling a global action plan.  We’ve identified the gaps that exist in making sure that we can get to the end of COVID-19.  And, together, having identified the gaps, we’re determined to try to fill them.  So, it’s getting shots in arms.  We’ve been doing a good job on producing vaccines, now we have to get them into arms.

It’s making sure the supply chains that are necessary for all the different inputs are strong and resilient, and building those out.  It’s dealing with the problem of disinformation and misinformation so people feel confident in taking the vaccines.  It’s supporting the healthcare workers who are on the frontlines, making sure they have the protection they need to do their jobs.  It’s building back a stronger global health system.  All of these things together are –we know now what needs to be done.  The only way to do it effectively though is to do it in a coordinated way.  And that’s exactly what these 20 countries and institutions are doing.  When it comes to, for example, making sure as well, in the future, that vaccines can be produced locally, that we have manufacturing and the licensing that’s necessary to do that.  That’s something we’re also working on and determined to see happen.

QUESTION:  And so according to many reports the U.S. believes that Russia could invade Ukraine on Wednesday.  Is that still your assessment?  And what is the U.S. goal with making all this in the public?  Is it to call Putin’s bluff?

SECRETARY BLINKEN:  We’re deeply concerned that Russia could take action against Ukraine as early as this week.  Everything we’re seeing in terms of the deployment of Russian forces around Ukraine, on every side of Ukraine, leads us to that conclusion.  Russia, instead of de-escalating, has been escalating, putting more and more forces in.  And so we are deeply concerned about that.  The path to diplomacy remains open.  We are doing everything we possibly can to convince Russia that it should take the diplomatic path, the path of dialogue, to resolve whatever differences exist peacefully, but, if it pursues aggression, we’re fully prepared for that, in close coordination with all of our European allies and partners.

QUESTION:  (Via translation)  And hasn’t this crisis strengthened the ties between the United States and its European allies?  Because there was still a lack of trust in the United States at the beginning of the Biden administration due to the withdrawal from Afghanistan and the submarine crisis.  So, do you feel that you have regained the trust of your European allies?

SECRETARY BLINKEN:  I think this crisis has absolutely reinforced transatlantic solidarity.  We see that every single day.  And that’s a product of two things.  It’s a product of the threat, unfortunately, posed by Russian aggression.  But it’s also the product of the intense consultations and coordination that we’ve had throughout, going back several months.  We looked and added up and we’ve had just, in the last few weeks, more than 200 engagements—meetings, video conferences, telephone calls across the Atlantic with European partners, with the EU, with NATO, with the OSCE, with individual countries.  And all of this, I think, is pushing us closer together.  It’s a reminder of the values that we share, the interests that we need to defend together.

QUESTION: (Via translation)  Perfect, thank you very much, it was excellent. Your French is still as good as ever.

SECRETARY BLINKEN: (Via translation)  Oh, that’s nice.

QUESTION:  (Via translation)  And thank you for the time.  We know it’s a very busy week.

SECRETARY BLINKEN:  (Via translation)  Glad to see you again, thank you.

More from: Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

  • Secretary Blinken’s Call with South African Foreign Minister Pandor
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Office of the [Read More…]
  • Defense Logistics: Army and Marine Corps’s Individual Body Armor System Issues
    In U.S GAO News
    Since combat operations began in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. forces have been subjected to frequent and deadly attacks from insurgents using various weapons such as improvised explosive devices (IED), mortars, rocket launchers, and increasingly lethal ballistic threats. Since 2003, to provide protection from ballistic threats, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), which is responsible for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and other areas, has required service members and Department of Defense (DOD) civilians in its area of operations to be issued the Interceptor Body Armor (IBA) system. Used by all U.S. military service members and DOD civilians in the area of operations, the IBA consists of an outer tactical vest with ballistic inserts or plates that cover the front, back, and sides. As the ballistic threat has evolved, ballistic requirements have also changed. The vest currently provides protection from 9mm rounds, while the inserts provide protection against 7.62mm armor-piercing rounds. Additional protection can also be provided for the shoulder, throat, and groin areas. Concerns also regarding the level of protection and amount of IBA needed to protect U.S. forces have occurred in recent years, prompted by a number of reports, newspaper articles, and recalls of issued body armor by both the Army and the Marine Corps. In May 2005, the Marine Corps recalled body armor because it concluded that the fielded body armor failed to meet contract specifications, and in November 2005, the Army and Marine Corps recalled 14 lots of body armor that failed original ballistic testing. Additionally, in April 2005, we reported on shortages of critical force protection items, including individual body armor. Specifically, we found reasons for the shortages in body armor were due to material shortages, production limitations, and in-theater distribution problems. In the report, we did not make specific recommendations regarding body armor, but we did make several recommendations to improve the effectiveness of DOD’s supply system in supporting deployed forces for contingencies. DOD agreed with the intent of the recommendations and cited actions it had or was taking to eliminate supply chain deficiencies. Congress has expressed strong interest in assuring that body armor protects ground forces. Additionally, as part of our efforts to monitor DOD’s and the services’ actions to protect deployed ground forces, we reviewed the Army and Marine Corps’s actions to address concerns regarding body armor to determine if they had taken actions to address these concerns. Because of broad congressional interest in the adequacy of body armor for the ground forces, we prepared this report under the Comptroller General’s authority to conduct evaluations on his own initiative. Our objectives for this review were to determine to what extent the Army and Marine Corps (1) are meeting the theater requirements for body armor, (2) have the controls in place to assure that the manufacturing and fielding of body armor meet requirements, and (3) are sharing information regarding their efforts on body armor ballistic requirements and testing.In this review, we found that the Army and Marine Corps have taken several actions to meet theater requirements, assure testing, and share information on body armor. We also found that contractors and non-DOD civilians receive body armor if this provision is included in a negotiated contract. Specifically, we found that the Army and Marine Corps are currently meeting theater ballistic requirements and the required amount needed for personnel in theater, including the amounts needed for the surge of troops into Iraq; have controls in place during manufacturing and after fielding to assure that body armor meets requirements; and share information regarding ballistic requirements and testing, and the development of future body armor systems, although they are not required to do so. Regarding contractors or non-DOD civilians, we found that DOD Instruction 3020.41 allows DOD to provide body armor to contractors where permitted by applicable DOD instructions and military department regulations and where specified under the terms of the contract. CENTCOM’s position is that body armor will be provided to contractors if it is part of a negotiated contract.

    [Read More…]

  • Extradición histórica lleva a miembros del ELN a Texas por narcoterrorismo y distribución internacional de cocaína
    In Justice News
    Dos presuntos miembros [Read More…]
  • Three Individuals Affiliated With the Oath Keepers Indicted in Federal Court for Conspiracy to Obstruct Congress on Jan. 6, 2021
    In Crime News
    Three individuals associated with the Oath Keepers, a paramilitary organization focused on recruitment of current and former military, law enforcement, and first responder personnel, were indicted today in federal court in the District of Columbia for conspiring to obstruct Congress, among other charges.

    [Read More…]

  • Prescription Drugs: U.S. Prices for Selected Brand Drugs Were Higher on Average than Prices in Australia, Canada, and France
    In U.S GAO News
    What GAO Found GAO’s analysis of 2020 data found that, for 20 selected brand-name prescription drugs, estimated U.S. prices paid at the retail level by consumers and other payers (such as insurers) were more than two to four times higher than prices in three selected comparison countries. The U.S. prices GAO estimated for comparison reflect confidential rebates and other price concessions, which GAO refers to as net prices. Publicly available prices for the comparison countries were gross prices that did not reflect potential discounts. As a result, the actual differences between U.S. prices and those of the other countries were likely larger than GAO estimates. The price differences varied by drug. Specifically, while estimated U.S. net prices were mostly higher than the gross prices in other countries (by as much as 10 times), some were lower. The following figure illustrates comparisons for two of GAO’s selected drugs. GAO found similar differences in estimated prices paid by final payers at the manufacturer level. Estimated U.S. Net Prices and Selected Comparison Countries’ Gross Prices at the Retail Level for Two Selected Drugs and Package Sizes, 2020 GAO’s analysis found consumers’ out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs varied across and within all four countries but likely more within the U.S. and Canada where multiple payers had a role setting prices and designing cost-sharing for consumers, and not all consumers had prescription drug coverage. In Australia and France, prescription drug pricing was nationally regulated and prescription drug coverage was universal; thus, consumers’ out-of-pocket costs within these countries for each drug were generally less varied. For example, in Australia, consumers typically paid one of two amounts for prescription drugs—either about 5 or 28 U.S. dollars in 2020. In the U.S., potential out-of-pocket costs for consumers could have varied much more widely depending on the type of coverage they had. For example, for one drug in GAO’s analysis, considering only a few coverage options, consumers’ out-of-pocket costs in 2020 could have ranged from a low of about 22 to a high of 514 U.S. dollars. GAO provided a draft to the Department of Health and Human Services for review and incorporated the Department’s technical comments as appropriate. Why GAO Did This Study While spending on prescription drugs continues to grow worldwide, studies indicate the U.S. spends more than other countries. However, various factors—such as country-specific pricing strategies, confidential rebates to payers, and other price concessions—may obscure the actual prices of prescription drugs. GAO was asked to review U.S. and international prescription drug prices. This report (1) examines how prices at the retail and manufacturer levels in the U.S. compare to prices in three selected comparison countries—Australia, Canada, and France, and (2) provides information on consumers’ out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs in these countries. GAO analyzed 2020 price data for a non-generalizable sample of 41 brand-name drugs among those with the highest expenditures and use in the U.S. Medicare Part D program in 2017. Twenty of these drugs had price data available in all four countries. For U.S. prices, GAO estimated the net prices paid using data from various sources, including estimates of Medicare Part D rebates and other price concessions, and commercially available data. Prices for the selected comparison countries were obtained from publicly available government sources. National prices were not available for Canada, so GAO used the prices from Ontario, Canada’s most populous province, as a proxy for Canadian prices. GAO also reviewed country-specific guidance and other relevant information and interviewed researchers, manufacturers, and government officials. For more information, contact John E. Dicken at (202) 512-7114 or dickenj@gao.gov.

    [Read More…]

  • The Kingdom of Thailand’s National Day
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Michael R. Pompeo, [Read More…]
  • Military Lodging: DOD Should Provide Congress with More Information on Army’s Privatization and Better Guidance to the Military Services
    In U.S GAO News
    What GAO Found Since privatizing its domestic on-base hotels, referred to as lodging, the Army has made a variety of improvements, including the replacement of lodging facilities with newly constructed hotels (see fig.). However, improvements have taken longer than initially anticipated, development plans have changed, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) has not included key information about these delays and changes in reports to Congress. If OSD were to provide this additional information, Congress would be better able to determine whether the Privatized Army Lodging (PAL) program has achieved its intended objectives or fully consider whether the other military services should privatize their respective lodging programs. Room at an Army Lodging Facility before Privatizing and Room at the New Candlewood Suites Hotel Built at Yuma Proving Ground, AZ, in 2013 The Army does not estimate cost savings from the PAL program, but instead produces an annual cost avoidance estimate to demonstrate some of the financial benefits resulting from the privatization of its lodging program. Army officials stated that they calculate cost avoidance by comparing the room rate it charges for its lodging—which is limited to 75 percent of the average local lodging per diem rate across its installations—to the maximum lodging per diem that could be charged for that location. However, by using this approach, the Army is likely overstating its cost avoidance, because off-base hotels do not always charge 100 percent of per diem. Until the Army evaluates the methodology it uses to calculate its cost avoidance, decision makers in the Department of Defense (DOD) and Congress cannot be sure that the reported financial benefits of privatization have actually been achieved. OSD’s oversight of lodging programs has been limited in some cases. First, OSD and the military services lack standardized data that would be useful for making informed decisions about the lodging programs. Second, DOD requires both servicemembers and civilian employees to stay in on-base lodging when on official travel, with some exceptions. Yet, according to OSD, many travelers are staying in off-base lodging, and OSD has not done the in-depth analysis needed to determine why and how much it is costing the government. Without an analysis that assesses the extent to which travelers are inappropriately using off-base lodging and why it is occurring, as well as a plan to address any issues identified, neither DOD nor Congress can be sure that the department is making the most cost-effective use of taxpayer funds. Why GAO Did This Study In 2009, the Army began to privatize its lodging with the goal of addressing the poor condition of facilities more quickly than could be achieved under continued Army operation. The Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force currently have no plans to privatize their lodging programs. The Senate Armed Services Committee report accompanying a bill for the Fiscal Year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act included a provision for GAO to review improvements made to Army lodging, among other things. This report examines the extent to which (1) the Army has improved its lodging facilities since privatizing; (2) OSD reported complete information about the Army’s development plans to Congress; (3) the Army has reliably determined any cost savings or cost avoidance as a result of its privatized lodging program; and (4) there are limitations in OSD’s oversight of the military services’ lodging programs. GAO reviewed policies and guidance; analyzed lodging program data for fiscal years 2017 through 2019 (the 3 most recent years of complete and available information); and interviewed DOD officials.

    [Read More…]

  • The United States Condemns the Attack on Eritrea by the Tigray People’s Liberation Front
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Michael R. Pompeo, [Read More…]
  • South Texas man sentenced for harboring over 200 in inhumane conditions
    In Justice News
    A 35-year-old [Read More…]
  • Secretary Antony J. Blinken at a Press Availability
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Antony J. Blinken, [Read More…]
  • Higher Education: Children’s Savings Account Programs Can Help Families Build Savings and Envision College
    In U.S GAO News
    Eighty-two Children’s Savings Account (CSA) programs operated and had collectively enrolled about 700,000 children in 2019, according to survey data from the nonprofit organization Prosperity Now. These programs—operated by states, cities, and other organizations—use a variety of strategies to enroll families, especially those with lower incomes, and help them save and prepare for college. For example, CSA programs enroll families by partnering with trusted organizations (e.g., schools) or through automatic enrollment, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and CSA experts. In addition, these programs help families build savings once children are enrolled by, for example, providing initial deposits or financial education. While experts GAO interviewed said savings may be modest given lower-income families’ and programs’ limited resources, CSA programs also aim to help lower-income families prepare for college, such as by increasing financial knowledge. There is evidence that CSA program strategies have positive short-term effects on families, including those with lower incomes. These effects include increased CSA program enrollment and participation, amounts saved, and educational expectations, based on research GAO reviewed (see figure). For example, strategies such as automatically enrolling families and providing financial contributions (e.g., initial deposits) may help CSA programs reach more families and encourage saving. Several studies of a CSA program that used both these strategies found increases in the number of children enrolled and the amount saved by enrolled families. One study found that families who were enrolled for 7 years saved over four times more of their own money, on average, than families who were not enrolled—$261 compared to $59. When including financial contributions from the CSA program, enrolled families had about six times more total savings ($1,851) compared to other families ($323). Enrollment and participation in CSA programs may also increase families’ educational expectations for their children. For example, a study found that parents with children enrolled in one CSA program were nearly twice as likely to expect their children to attend college. However, information on college enrollment and other long-term effects on families participating in CSA programs is limited because most of the children have not yet reached college age. Effects of CSA Program Strategies in Three Commonly Assessed Areas Rising college costs have outpaced federal grant aid and placed more of the financial burden on students and their families. CSA programs help families, especially lower-income families, save for college—and other postsecondary education—by providing financial contributions and possibly other supports. A Senate Appropriations Committee report included provisions for GAO to examine various aspects of college savings account programs and their effectiveness. This report examines (1) the number of CSA programs and how they use strategies to help families, especially lower-income families, save and prepare for college; and (2) what is known about the effects of these strategies on families, including lower-income families. GAO reviewed 2016–2019 annual CSA program survey data collected by the nonprofit Prosperity Now. GAO also analyzed CFPB documents and the findings of 33 peer-reviewed studies from 2010 through 2019—and one working paper from 2017—that met GAO’s criteria for inclusion, for example, used data from the United States. In addition, GAO interviewed officials from CFPB, the Department of Education, and four organizations that have expertise on these programs. For more information, contact Melissa Emrey-Arras at (617) 788-0534 or emreyarrasm@gao.gov.

    [Read More…]

  • Netherlands Travel Advisory
    Reconsider travel to the [Read More…]
  • Princess Cruise Lines Pleads Guilty to Second Revocation of Probation
    In Crime News
    Princess Cruise Lines Ltd. (Princess) has pleaded guilty to a second violation of probation imposed as a result of its 2017 criminal conviction for environmental crimes because it failed to establish and maintain an independent internal investigative office.

    [Read More…]

  • NASA’s Perseverance Rover Spacecraft Put in Launch Configuration
    Stacking spacecraft [Read More…]
  • Human Trafficking: Monitoring and Evaluation of International Projects Are Limited, but Experts Suggest Improvements
    In U.S GAO News
    Human trafficking–a worldwide crime involving the exploitation of men, women, and children for others’ financial gain–is a violation of human rights. Victims are often lured or abducted and forced to work in involuntary servitude. Since 2001, the U.S. government has provided about $447 million to combat global human trafficking. As GAO previously reported, estimates of the number of trafficking victims are questionable. In this report, GAO examines (1) collaboration among organizations involved in international antitrafficking efforts, (2) U.S. government monitoring of antitrafficking projects and difficulties in evaluating these projects, and (3) suggestions for strengthening monitoring and evaluation. GAO analyzed agency documents; convened an expert panel; interviewed officials; and conducted fieldwork in Indonesia, Thailand, and Mexico.While governments, international organizations, and nongovernmental organizations have recognized the importance of collaborating and have established some coordination mechanisms and practices, they will need to overcome challenges that have impeded collaboration in the past for their efforts to be successful. In two of the three countries GAO visited, it found that host governments–which bear ultimate responsibility for combating trafficking within their borders–have passed national antitrafficking laws and enacted national action plans. However, organizations continue to face numerous challenges when collaborating to combat human trafficking, including varying levels of government commitment and capacity. For example, some governments treat foreign trafficking victims as illegal immigrants and deport rather than protect them. In addition, according to officials in two of the three countries GAO visited, the ministries responsible for coordinating antitrafficking efforts have limited authority and capacity. U.S. government-funded antitrafficking projects often lack some important elements that allow projects to be monitored, and little is known about project impact due to difficulties in conducting evaluations. Project documents GAO reviewed generally include monitoring elements, such as an overarching goal and related activities, but often lack other monitoring elements, such as targets for measuring performance. To oversee projects, State officials supplement their efforts with assistance from U.S. embassy staff, but have not established written guidance for oversight. Officials said that they are working to improve performance measures and develop monitoring guidance. Conducting impact evaluations of antitrafficking projects is difficult due to several factors, including questionable project-level estimates of the number of trafficking victims. These estimates are needed for baselines by which to evaluate how effectively specific interventions are reducing trafficking. Elements in the design of certain projects, such as objectives that are too broad, further impede evaluation. Because of these difficulties, few impact evaluations have been completed, and little is known about the impact of antitrafficking interventions. A GAO-convened panel of experts identified and discussed ways to address the factors that make it difficult to monitor and evaluate antitrafficking projects. Panelists’ suggested approaches included improving information on the nature and severity of trafficking and addressing monitoring and evaluation in project design. To improve information on trafficking, panelists suggested methods that have been used to sample other hard-to-reach populations, including domestic violence victims. One suggested method is sampling of “hot spots”–an intensive search for victims in areas known to have high concentrations of victims. To address weaknesses in project design that impede monitoring and evaluation, panelists suggested that officials design projects that clearly link activities to intended outcomes, identify measurable indicators, and establish procedures for setting and modifying targets.

    [Read More…]

  • Turkey Travel Advisory
    Reconsider travel to [Read More…]
  • Justice Department Reaches Proposed Consent Decree with the State of New Jersey to Resolve Claims that the Edna Mahan Correctional Facility for Women Violated the Constitution by Failing to Protect Prisoners from Sexual Abuse by Staff
    In Crime News
    The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for New Jersey today filed a complaint and a proposed consent decree with the State of New Jersey and New Jersey Department of Corrections concerning the Edna Mahan Correctional Facility for Women.

    [Read More…]

  • Suburban Chicago Businessman Charged with Illegally Exporting Arms to Ukraine
    In Crime News
    A suburban Chicago businessman has been indicted on federal criminal charges for allegedly illegally exporting gun parts and other defense articles from the United States to a company in Ukraine.

    [Read More…]

  • The U.S. Reaches $1.5 Billion Settlement with Daimler AG Over Emissions Cheating in Mercedes-Benz Diesel Vehicles
    In Crime News
    The U.S. Department of Justice, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and California Air Resources Board (CARB) announced today a proposed settlement with German automaker Daimler AG and its American subsidiary Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (collectively, “Daimler”) resolving alleged violations of the Clean Air Act and California law associated with emissions cheating. 

    [Read More…]

  • Justice Department Reaches Settlement with Withlacoochee River Electric Cooperative Inc. to Enforce the Rights of United States Army National Guard Member
    In Crime News
    The Department of Justice announced today that it has reached a settlement agreement resolving allegations that the Withlacoochee River Electric Cooperative Inc. (WREC) terminated U.S. Army National Guard Staff Sergeant Garrett Woodard when he returned from military service in violation of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA). 

    [Read More…]

Source: Network News
Area Control Network

Copyright © 2022 ACN
All Rights Reserved © ACN 2020

ACN Privacy Policies
Area Control Network (ACN)
Area Control Network
Area Control Network Center