Agencies Providing Democracy Assistance in Burma

U.S. democracy assistance in Burma is primarily provided by USAID’s  Mission in Burma Office of Democracy and Governance (USAID/DG),  USAID’s Bureau of Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance’s  Office of Transition Initiatives (USAID/OTI), and State’s Bureau of  Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (State/DRL). USAID and State Democracy Projects Are Primarily Coordinated through an Interagency Working Group Represented by Embassy Officials That Has Not Directly Included State/DRL

The U.S. embassy in Burma’s Assistance Working Group (AWG), the  primary mechanism for coordinating agencies’ democracy projects in  Burma, according to USAID officials, consists of representatives from  each agency located at the embassy, including USAID, State, and the  Department of Defense. In  addition, in May 2017, officials from the embassy, the Burma desk, and  State/DRL stated that they had recently initiated a process to identify  more efficient and inclusive methods for coordinating with and obtaining  State/DRL’s input on future democracy program decisions, partly as a  result of our review. Further, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014, required that the  Burma Democracy Strategy include support for civil society, former  prisoners, monks, students, and democratic parliamentarians. USAID and State Make Some Efforts to Prevent U.S. Democracy Assistance from Being Provided to Prohibited Entities and Individuals, but Partners Indicate They Could Benefit from Further Guidance, and USAID/DG and State Do Not Review Partners’ Procedures

Annual appropriations acts have included provisions that state U.S.  democracy assistance may not be provided to certain categories of  prohibited entities and individuals. Standards for Internal Control in the Federal  Government call for management to periodically review policies,  procedures, and related control activities for continued relevance and  effectiveness in addressing related risks. USAID and State Provide Some Guidance on Due Diligence, but USAID/DG and State/DRL Do Not Review Partners’ Processes

USAID and State have provided some guidance to their implementing  partners on how to conduct due diligence to address appropriations acts  restrictions. Similarly,  State/DRL has provided some guidance to only a few implementing  partners on conducting due diligence. Another representative said that their organization lacked the capacity  to conduct Internet searches in Burmese because it does not employ  local staff. Recommendations for Executive Action

To better ensure that sufficient due diligence is undertaken by  implementing partners of U.S. democracy assistance in Burma, where  appropriate, to help ensure that assistance is not made available to  prohibited entities or individuals, we are making the following two  recommendations:
We recommend that the Administrator of USAID direct the Mission in  Burma to review its procedures and practices regarding due diligence  for democracy projects to determine whether additional guidance or  reviews of implementing partners’ due diligence procedures would be  appropriate. Appendix II: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Our objectives were to examine (1) U.S. Agency for International  Development (USAID) and Department of State (State) democracy  projects, including coordination of those projects; (2) steps USAID and  State have taken to ensure that U.S. democracy projects and the U.S.  Strategy for the Promotion of Democracy and Human Rights in Burma  (Burma Democracy Strategy) address and support the specified purposes  and groups, respectively, for Burma assistance funding; and (3) USAID  and State efforts to ensure that U.S. democracy assistance is not  provided to prohibited entities and individuals. We also  interviewed officials from USAID and State in Washington, D.C., and  Burma about their active projects. To examine steps USAID and State have taken to help ensure that U.S.  democracy projects and the Burma Democracy Strategy address and  support the specified purposes and groups, respectively, for Burma  assistance funding, we reviewed the specified purposes for Burma  assistance funding in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, as well  as the specified groups for the Burma Democracy Strategy in the  Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014.
Why GAO Did This Study

U.S. policy toward Burma has been to promote the establishment of a democratically elected civilian government that respects the human rights of the Burmese people, according to State. Since 2011, Burma has been in transition from military, authoritarian rule toward parliamentary democracy. Congress included a provision in statute for GAO to review U.S. democracy programs in Burma. This report examines (1) USAID and State democracy projects, including coordination of these projects; (2) steps USAID and State have taken to help ensure that U.S. democracy projects and the U.S. Strategy for the Promotion of Democracy and Human Rights in Burma (Burma Democracy Strategy) address and support the specified purposes and groups, respectively, for Burma assistance funding; and (3) USAID and State efforts to ensure that U.S. democracy assistance is not provided to prohibited entities and individuals. GAO reviewed relevant agency documents; conducted fieldwork in Burma; and interviewed officials in Washington, D.C., and Burma.

What GAO Found

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Department of State (State) have funded 34 democracy projects in Burma since 2012, including efforts to strengthen the country's civil society and democratic institutions. These projects are primarily coordinated by the interagency Assistance Working Group (AWG) at the U.S. embassy in Burma, which approves all U.S. agencies' activities in Burma. However, State's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (State/DRL) is not directly included in AWG proceedings because it does not have an embassy presence, and embassy policy limits participation in the AWG to those located at the embassy. As a result, the AWG has made decisions about State/DRL's projects without direct input from State/DRL and without State/DRL always receiving feedback. State officials said that they had recently begun an effort to identify more inclusive methods for coordinating with State/DRL and obtaining its input, which, if implemented properly, could improve coordination.
Dollars in millions
USAID and State take several steps to help ensure that their projects and the Burma Democracy Strategy address the specified purposes for Burma assistance funding. When designing projects, USAID and State both consider purposes for which assistance shall be made available. For example, GAO found that several current projects include objectives addressing purposes in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016. Also, the Burma Democracy Strategy—an interagency strategy for promoting democracy in Burma—includes language supporting civil society, former prisoners, monks, students, and democratic parliamentarians, as required by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014.
USAID and State make some efforts to ensure that U.S. democracy assistance is not provided to prohibited entities and individuals specified in law. USAID and State/DRL provide information to implementing partners on prohibited entities and individuals and the need for partners to conduct due diligence. However, USAID's Mission in Burma Office of Democracy and Governance (USAID/DG) and State/DRL only provide some guidance to partners on how to conduct due diligence and do not review partners' procedures. Partners GAO interviewed either did not conduct due diligence or expressed concerns about their due diligence procedures. Standards for internal control in the federal government call for management to review procedures and controls for relevance in addressing risks. Without providing more guidance and reviewing partner due diligence procedures, USAID/DG and State may miss opportunities to better ensure that U.S. assistance is not provided to prohibited entities and individuals.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that USAID and State review their procedures and practices to determine whether additional guidance or reviews of implementing partners' due diligence procedures are needed. USAID and State both concurred with our recommendations.