USAID Proceeds With Caution in Allocating Billions to Pakistani NGOs

The aid organization has asked for help to improve the management style of Pakistani organizations receiving US taxpayer funds.

Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


This story first appeared on the ProPublica website.

As the United States prepares to drastically increase civilian aid in Pakistan, the agency in charge has asked for help training the local organizations that will spend that aid money, saying those organizations “do not meet the minimum standards for managing” U.S. government funds.

Last fall, President Obama signed a bill committing $7.5 billion in nonmilitary aid to Pakistan over five years. In December, we reported on the administration’s plan (PDF) to channel much of that money away from American contractors and nongovernmental organizations, directing it instead toward Pakistani organizations. Administration officials defended their approach, saying it would help build stronger Pakistani institutions. But the plan drew warnings from development experts, who questioned whether Pakistan’s history of corruption and lax accounting standards would increase the risk to U.S. taxpayers’ money.

This week, the U.S. Agency for International Development, which oversees the funding, took a stab at answering that question. On Monday, the agency posted a notice (.doc) on Grants.gov, the main Web site for government grants, asking for comments and suggestions on how to train Pakistani organizations, including government ministries, contractors and nongovernmental organizations.

“USAID’s past experience with local institutions indicates that many of these local organizations are faced with institutional capacity issues and overall weaknesses in their internal controls, financial management and absorptive capacity,” reads the notice, leading to “a higher degree of risk and ultimately more audit recommendations.”

According to the notice, USAID will use the comments it receives to help draft a request for applications for its “Assessment and Strengthening Program,” a five-year, $25 million project intended to screen Pakistani organizations and improve the way they operate. The organization that wins the award will be responsible for ensuring that those new policies and procedures are being followed, through what the notice calls “annual compliance validations.”

“The ASP will specifically target those local implementing partners which are considered essential to meeting USAID/Pakistan’s goals and objectives, but do not meet minimum standards for managing USG funds,” says the notice. “The ASP will allow for the provision of the technical assistance required to build their institutional capacity up to USAID standards.”

Charles Tiefer, a professor of government contracting at the University of Baltimore Law School, and a member of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan that reports to Congress, said that USAID’s approach in Pakistan is “understandable, but risky.”

“AID is on the horns of a dilemma,” he said. “They don’t have enough local NGOs to help with the large amount of aid that Congress wants Pakistan to have. But by using local NGOs that don’t keep the kind of reliable bookkeeping that AID and its inspector general require, they risk from time to time seeing some of their grant money evaporate without much sign it’s doing what it’s intended to do.”

Jacques Gansler, a professor at the University of Maryland who was undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics under President Clinton, praised USAID’s approach, which he called “on-the-job training” for Pakistani organizations. But he said the success of the program would depend on the willingness of Pakistanis to make their institutions more transparent.

“The challenge is whether the people who are in leadership positions in Pakistan are the kind that are looking for money in their pocket, or money for their country,” Gansler said. “If it’s clearly for the building up of the nation, it’ll work. If it’s trying to say, ‘I’ll take my 10 percent off the top first,’ that’s something that AID has to be very careful of.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate