The State Department has not updated the maximum space standards for overseas Foreign Service housing since 1991, leaving a 35-year-old policy to govern homes for more than 9,000 employees abroad, the Government Accountability Office reported Monday.
State’s goal is to provide housing comparable to what an employee would occupy in the Washington metropolitan area. GAO found that Washington-area housing has become more expensive and smaller over the period, while the overseas limits remained unchanged.
The measurement method also differs from domestic appraisal practice. GAO said that mismatch can prevent a reliable comparison between overseas residences and the Washington benchmark the policy is supposed to follow.
Most units still complied with the existing rules. In fiscal 2025, 87% met cost standards and 81% met space standards. Posts must request waivers when a residence exceeds either limit.
Approved cost waivers added less than 2% to annual lease spending: $8.8 million of $497 million. Executive officers and smaller families used cost and space waivers most often, while posts with more difficult living conditions exceeded space standards more frequently and by larger margins.
GAO studied headquarters records and housing data, then used posts in Côte d’Ivoire, France and Thailand to illustrate operational constraints. Officials cited limited suitable housing, resource shortages and separate systems for tracking housing information.
State’s Staff Housing Opportunity Purchase program lets eligible posts acquire homes with proceeds from sales of excess property. Officials said ownership can reduce long-term leasing costs, but the report did not quantify future savings across the housing portfolio.
GAO recommended that State review and update both its maximum space standards and the method used to measure overseas residences. The department agreed with both recommendations; they remain open until GAO verifies completed action.
The finding is not that every overseas residence is too large or every waiver is improper. It is that State cannot show that a decades-old ceiling and a noncomparable measurement method still deliver the housing benchmark Congress and employees are told to expect.