Skip Navigation
United States

Open Government to Support Global Sustainable Development (US0101)



Action Plan: United States Action Plan 2015-2017

Action Plan Cycle: 2015

Status: Inactive


Lead Institution: NA

Support Institution(s): NA

Policy Areas

Anti Corruption and Integrity, Anti-Corruption Institutions, Capacity Building, Fiscal Openness, Publication of Budget/Fiscal Information

IRM Review

IRM Report: United States End-of-Term IRM Report 2015-2017, United States Mid-Term Report 2015-2017

Starred: No

Early Results: Marginal

Design i

Verifiable: Yes

Relevant to OGP Values: Access to Information , Technology

Potential Impact:

Implementation i



Greater transparency in the planning and delivery of foreign assistance enhances the ability of the U.S. Government to achieve national security objectives by promoting accountability and effectiveness, empowering foreign governments to make informed strategic decisions, and helping to identify what works and what does not. Yet, while security sector assistance plays a uniquely important role because of its impact on the ability of the United States to prevent, deter, and respond to conflict, security sector assistance has also faced challenges in promoting transparency. To build momentum behind efforts to improve the transparency of U.S. security sector assistance, the United States will: • Improve Transparency in the Defense Sector: Transparent and accountable defense institutions under democratic control are fundamental to global security and stability, and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has been a world leader in this regard. As a demonstration of its commitment to transparency, the Department of Defense will undertake participation in NATO’s Building Integrity Programme Self-Assessment and Peer Review process. In addition, to increase transparency and accessibility in relation to its security sector assistance activities, DoD will develop a unified annual budget for its security sector assistance activities, including available details on allocation and program plans. Further, DoD will continue to expand its contributions to, including by increasing the number of programs for which it provides data and improving the quality and comprehensiveness of data. • Transparently Assess, Monitor, and Evaluate Security Sector Assistance: In accordance with Presidential Policy Directive 23, the United States will enact an interagency assessment, monitoring, and evaluation framework that will set forth best practices and expectations to guide individual department and agency efforts. The United States will ensure, moreover, that leading implementers of security sector assistance have robust agency-specific policies on assessment, monitoring, and evaluation of security sector assistance, beginning with the establishment of the first-ever department-wide policy governing DoD security sector assistance activities. • Enhance Delivery of Security Sector Assistance to Prevent Corruption: Careful attention is required to ensure that U.S. security sector assistance does not facilitate corruption or empower corrupt actors and, where possible, that it helps to prevent or combat corruption. To that end, the United States will examine opportunities to build additional anti-corruption safeguards into security assistance. DoD will review relevant training curricula to identify and implement additional opportunities for specific anti-corruption training elements. The United States will also support greater assessment and mitigation of corruption risk, alongside other risks, within security sector assistance. The Department of State will build on the recent identification of anti-corruption points of contact in every U.S. embassy to deepen U.S. support for local open governance efforts. The United States will seek to ensure that security sector assistance supports, wherever relevant, improvements in security governance, to complement the provision of equipment and tactical training. The United States is particularly committed to addressing corruption in places where it is fueling or facilitating violent extremism as part of broader U.S. counterterrorism and countering violent extremism programming.

IRM Midterm Status Summary

This commitment was not assessed in the midterm IRM report.

IRM End of Term Status Summary

Commitment 49. Improve Transparency of U.S. Security Sector Assistance

For details of this commitment, please see


Open Government Partnership