To fulfill this pledge, the U.S. government created the FATA Development  Program, which aims to “support the Government of Pakistan’s  development efforts to integrate FATA into the mainstream of Pakistan.”
In support of this pledge, State reports that the U.S. government has  allocated $728 million in nonmilitary assistance in Pakistan’s western  frontier region, including the FATA. U.S. Development Efforts in the FATA Are Generally Aligned with U.S. National Security and Pakistan’s Development Goals, but Joint U.S.- Pakistan Implementation Plans Are Lacking

The U.S. development objectives in the FATA are generally in alignment  with U.S. national security goals and the government of Pakistan’s  development objectives. USAID and the Government of Pakistan Have Not Developed Joint Strategic Implementation Plans for Each FATA Agency As Called for in Their Agreement

In September 2007, USAID and the government of Pakistan signed an  agreement regarding development activities in the FATA that included a  requirement to develop joint strategic implementation plans for each of  the seven FATA agencies. The United States Has Two Efforts Under Way to Track the Pledge

In accordance with good management practices, the U.S. government has  implemented two efforts to track the $750 million pledge. U.S. Efforts to Measure and Report the Performance of Development Programs in the FATA Are Lacking

USAID and State collect reports on the performance of their FATA-specific  programs, as required by federal regulations and agreements with  implementing partners. INL did not collect all of the required documentation of how it  tracks project performance. Development programs for which  performance could be measured against annual targets generally did not  achieve those targets. Additionally,  USAID’s performance management plan does not identify possible  evaluation efforts and does not include a timeline for duties such as  assessing the quality of data obtained and reviewing implementing  partners’ reports. State’s INL is using a combination of monitoring  procedures, but also is not documenting its use of all of these procedures. USAID has generally documented its use of each of these monitoring  procedures for its OTI development activities. As shown in figure 12, INL did not always document its  use of its monitoring procedures. Recommendations for Executive Action

To help ensure that U.S. development projects associated with the U.S.  pledge and future spending plans for Pakistan continue to be aligned with  our national security goal of assisting Pakistan in addressing terrorist  threats, and have clearly articulated monitoring responsibilities,  indicators, and performance tracking, we recommend that USAID work  with the government of Pakistan to complete the development of joint  strategic implementation plans as originally called for in the agreement  between USAID and the government of Pakistan. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

The objectives of this review were to examine (1) the extent to which U.S.  development objectives align with U.S. goals and Pakistan’s objectives, (2)  U.S. efforts to track the fulfillment of the U.S. pledge, (3) efforts to  measure and report the performance of development programs, and (4)  efforts to monitor development assistance in the Federally Administered  Tribal Areas (FATA). We interviewed U.S. officials in Washington, D.C., and in Islamabad,  Pakistan.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) has been a recognized safe haven for al Qaeda leadership and a base for the Taliban to launch cross-border attacks into Afghanistan. The United States, in an effort to assist Pakistan in addressing this threat, pledged $750 million between 2007 and 2011 to support development activities in the FATA region. This report focuses on (1) the extent U.S. development objectives align with U.S. national security goals and Pakistan's objectives, (2) U.S. efforts to track the pledge, (3) U.S. efforts to measure program performance in the FATA, and (4) efforts to monitor assistance in the FATA. GAO reviewed U.S. and Pakistani documents and interviewed U.S. and Pakistani officials in Washington, D.C., and Pakistan. GAO has prepared this report under the Comptroller General's authority to conduct evaluations on his own initiative.

What GAO Found

U.S. national security goals call for development assistance to aid the Pakistani government in addressing terrorist threats emanating from the FATA. GAO found that U.S. development objectives in the FATA are generally aligned with U.S. national security goals and Pakistan's FATA development plans. In September 2007, USAID and Pakistan signed an agreement regarding development activities in the FATA including the creation of joint strategic implementation plans for the seven FATA geographic areas. We found, however, that the U.S. and Pakistan have not yet completed such plans. The U.S. government has implemented two efforts to track its $750 million pledge in accordance with good management practices. State is tallying allocations of U.S. programs in Pakistan's western frontier region (which includes the FATA), and the USAID controller in Islamabad has undertaken an effort to track most, but not all, U.S. development-related obligations and expenditures in the FATA. As of the end of fiscal year 2009, the U.S. government has reportedly allocated over $728 million toward the pledge. USAID and State collect reports on the performance of their FATA-specific programs. However, key elements, such as identification of evaluation efforts and a timeline for reviewing implementing partner reports required by USAID's regulations are missing in its performance management plan for the FATA. Also, State did not collect all the required project performance documentation. Long-term development programs for which performance could be measured against annual targets generally did not achieve targets. Although hampered by security challenges that prevent direct monitoring called for in its guidance, USAID has taken steps to apply a set of indirect monitoring procedures. This includes collecting information from implementing partners and locally employed staff, and the use of a geographic information system. While USAID officials told GAO they use these methods, GAO found that USAID did not always document the use of these monitoring procedures. GAO also found that State has several monitoring procedures, but had not fully documented their use of these procedures.