Foreign Assistance: Inadequate Accountability for U.S. Donations to the World Food Program

The Director of WFP, with U.S. assistance, has launched a series of management initiatives designed to strengthen the Program's financial and commodity management, oversight, and auditing functions. AID officials believe that these management improvements will contribute directly to improved control for the distribution, monitoring, and safeguarding of donor commodities. They cited as examples of WFP's strengthened procedures WFP's recent decision to withdraw the WFP program in the Congo and Guinea Bissau due to high commodity loss rates.

The Director of WFP, with U.S. assistance, has launched a series of management initiatives designed to strengthen the Program's financial and commodity management, oversight, and auditing functions. AID officials believe that these management improvements will contribute directly to improved control for the distribution, monitoring, and safeguarding of donor commodities. They cited as examples of WFP's strengthened procedures WFP's recent decision to withdraw the WFP program in the Congo and Guinea Bissau due to high commodity loss rates.

WFP, with U.S. assistance, has made substantial progress on this recommendation. WFP now reports in-country food losses by country, including actions taken to reduce food losses. The U.S. delegation also suggested WFP hold country directors accountable for all losses and reflect this on their annual appraisals. Based on suggestions from the U.S. delegation, WFP now holds country directors accountable for all losses and reflect this on their annual appraisals. As a result of this new policy, a country director in Africa was fired in 1996.

WFP, with U.S. assistance, has made substantial progress on this recommendation. WFP now reports in-country food losses by country, including actions taken to reduce food losses. Based on suggestions from the U.S. delegation, WFP now holds country directors accountable for all losses and reflect this on their annual appraisals. As a result of this new policy, a country director in Africa was fired in 1996.

The U.S. delegation, working with other donors, assisted WFP in strengthening its monitoring and evaluation unit. Since then, WFP evaluation reports have noted persistent weaknesses in WFP's impact reporting and monitoring. AID officials said that these evaluations now include commodity management problems, and point to the evaluation of Guinea Bissau as a case in point. In addition, WFP has replaced the Director of the Office of Evaluation to increase the quality of WFP evaluations.

The U.S. delegation, working with other donors, assisted WFP in strengthening its monitoring and evaluation unit. Since then, WFP evaluation reports have noted persistent weaknesses in WFP's impact reporting and monitoring. AID officials said that these evaluations now include commodity management problems, and point to the evaluation of Guinea Bissau as a case in point. In addition, WFP has replaced the Director of the Office of Evaluation to increase the quality of WFP evaluations.

WFP now provides donors a status report on the External Auditor's recommendations. The U.S. delegation has suggested similar reporting for the Office of the Internal Auditor. However, donors did not support this proposal. They indicated that this would violate both UN protocol and practice for UN Offices of Internal Audit. Without donor support, this portion of the recommendation cannot be implemented.

WFP now provides donors a status report on the External Auditor's recommendations. The U.S. delegation has suggested similar reporting for the Office of the Internal Auditor. However, donors did not support this proposal. They indicated this would violate both UN protocol and practice for UN Offices of Internal Audit. Without donor support, this portion of the recommendation cannot be implemented.

AID has updated its requirements for missions. Missions must now evaluate both WFP operations and WFP and host country capabilities. AID guidance now specifically states that the United States is responsible for ensuring that WFP and the host countries have adequate capabilities to manage U.S. donations effectively.

AID officials and documents indicate that the U.S. Delegation now develops comprehensive position papers on all WFP proposals and programs. However, no new directive or policy has been issued to require this practice.

AID has taken a variety of measures to improve its responsiveness to WFP emergency requests. AID has re-engineered its food aid procedures, including its procedures for the review, approval, and implementation of its emergency food programs. Under this new system, which is being implemented, AID plans to systematically log and monitor the status of WFP emergency requests. The new system also streamlines the approval documentation for emergency requests. For the first time, AID, in cooperation with the Department of Agriculture, used expedited procurement procedures for emergency food requirements for Burundi. AID is also reviewing the efficiencies of pre-positioning commodities at select ports in the United States and sub-Saharan Africa.

AID did not pledge title II commodities to the WFP International Emergency Food Reserve. According to AID officials, however, AID has used other mechanisms to expedite the U.S. response to WFP emergency food requests. They stated that the increasing availability of cash has been a key factor in ensuring a rapid response to emergencies through local and regional purchases. Toward this goal, AID pledged $3 million in fiscal years 1994 and 1995 to WFP's Immediate Response Account. WFP has also drawn cash from the U.N.'s Central Emergency Revolving Fund. According to AID, these options are relatively new and are key factors in expediting WFP's ability to respond to food emergencies. Lastly, AID can also rely on the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance's cash resources if additional money is needed. AID officials said that these alternatives meet the intent of GAO's recommendation.