The United States is both  the largest overall and in-kind provider of food aid, supplying over one-half  of all global food aid. Multiple Challenges Hinder the Efficiency of Delivery of U.S. Food Aid

Multiple challenges reduce the efficiency of U.S. food aid, including  logistical constraints that impede food aid delivery and reduce the amount,  timeliness, and quality of food provided. For the largest U.S. food aid program (Title II),  approximately 65 percent of expenditures are on inland transportation (to  the U.S. port for export), ocean transportation, in-country delivery,  associated cargo handling costs, and administration. First, uncertain funding processes for emergencies can result in bunching  of food aid purchases, which increases food and transportation costs and  lengthens delivery time frames. Over 70 percent of the  carriers strongly recommended actions to address contracting practices. However, the long-term cost  effectiveness of both initiatives has not yet been measured. Various Challenges Prevent Effective Monitoring of Food Aid

Despite the importance of ensuring the effective use of food aid to  alleviate hunger, U.S. agencies’ efforts to monitor food aid programs are  insufficient. Limited food aid resources make it important for donors and  implementers to ensure that food aid reaches the most vulnerable  populations, thereby enhancing its effectiveness. However, USAID and  USDA do not sufficiently monitor food aid programs, particularly in  recipient countries, due to limited staff, competing priorities, and legal  restrictions in use of food aid resources. In  fiscal year 2006, although USAID has some non-Title II staff assigned to  monitoring, it had only 23 Title II-funded staff assigned to missions and  regional offices in just 10 countries to monitor programs costing about $1.7  billion in 55 countries. As a result, agencies may not be sufficiently  accomplishing their goals of getting the right food to the right people at  the right time. In a draft report that is under review by U.S. agencies, we recommend that  to improve the efficiency of U.S. food aid—in terms of amount, timeliness,  and quality—USDA, USAID, and DOT work together and with  stakeholders to  improve food aid logistical planning through cost-benefit analysis of  supply-management options, such as long-term transportation agreements  and prepositioning—including consideration of alternative methods, such  as those used by WFP;   modernize transportation contracting procedures to include, to the extent  possible, commercial principles of shared risks, streamlined  administration, and expedited payment and claims resolution;   seek to minimize the cost impact of cargo preference regulations on food  aid transportation expenditures by updating implementation and  reimbursement methodologies to account for new supply practices, such  as prepositioning, and potential costs associated with older vessels or  limited foreign-flag participation; and   establish a coordinated system for tracking and resolving food quality  complaints.
Why GAO Did This Study

The United States is the largest provider of food aid in the world, accounting for over half of all global food aid supplies intended to alleviate hunger. Since the 2002 reauthorization of the Farm Bill, Congress has appropriated an average of $2 billion per year for U.S. food aid programs, which delivered an average of 4 million metric tons of agricultural commodities per year. Despite growing demand for food aid, rising business and transportation costs have contributed to a 43-percent decline in average tonnages delivered over the last 5 years. For the largest U.S. food aid program, these costs represent approximately 65 percent of total food aid expenditures, highlighting the need to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of food aid. To inform Congress as it reauthorizes the 2007 Farm Bill, GAO examined some key challenges to the (1) efficiency of delivery and (2) effective monitoring of U.S. food aid.

What GAO Found

Multiple challenges combine to hinder the efficiency of delivery of U.S. food aid by reducing the amount, quality, and timeliness of food provided. These challenges include (1) funding and planning processes that increase delivery costs and lengthen time frames; (2) transportation contracting practices that create high levels of risk for ocean carriers, resulting in increased rates; (3) legal requirements that can result in the awarding of food aid contracts to more expensive service providers; and (4) inadequate coordination between U.S. agencies and food aid stakeholders in systematically addressing food delivery problems, such as spoilage. U.S. agencies have taken some steps to address timeliness concerns. USAID has been stocking or prepositioning food commodities domestically and abroad and USDA has implemented a new transportation bid process, but the long-term cost effectiveness of these initiatives has not yet been measured. Given limited food aid resources and increasing emergencies, ensuring that food reaches the most vulnerable populations--such as poor women who are pregnant or children who are malnourished--is critical to enhancing its effectiveness. However, USAID and USDA do not sufficiently monitor the effectiveness of food aid programs, particularly in recipient countries, due to limited staff, competing priorities, and restrictions in the use of food aid resources. For example, although USAID has some non-Title II-funded staff assigned to monitoring, it had only 23 Title II-funded staff assigned to missions and regional offices in just 10 countries to monitor programs costing about $1.7 billion in 55 countries in fiscal year 2006. As a result of such limitations, U.S. agencies may not be sufficiently accomplishing their goals of getting the right food to the right people at the right time.