The Strategic Goals of the Four Inter- American Organizations Are Predominantly Aligned with U.S. Agencies’ Strategic Goals

We found that the strategic goals of the four inter-American organizations  are predominantly aligned with the high-level strategic goals for the  Western Hemisphere documented by State, USAID, HHS, and USDA. For example, four of the five goals in  State and USAID’s Joint Strategy correspond with goals at the OAS, IICA,  and PAIGH. OAS, PAHO, IICA, and PAIGH Have Established Oversight Mechanisms

OAS, PAHO, IICA, and PAIGH have established mechanisms for  overseeing their use of assessed and voluntary contributions, such as  external auditors and internal audit boards as required by IIA standards. State and USDA have directly supported these oversight mechanisms. For example, a USDA official serves as  a member of IICA’s Audit Review Committee. Agencies Did Not Include All Key Monitoring Provisions in the Agreements We Reviewed

We reviewed 12 selected assistance agreements that the four U.S.  agencies awarded to OAS, PAHO, and IICA that were active during  calendar years 2014 through 2016, and found that two agencies did not  consistently include all key monitoring provisions in their agreements. USDA and State agency officials did not explain why USDA and  State did not include these monitoring provisions in their agreements. However, State has since taken corrective action to ensure that they are  included in future agreements, according to State officials. Agencies Did Not Have Full Documentation of Monitoring Activities for Most of the Agreements We Reviewed

None of the four U.S. agencies had full documentation of all of the  monitoring activities required by their agreements we reviewed (see table  10). USDA did not have full documentation of any of the 10 monitoring  activities we identified (see table 11). Without  full documentation of the required monitoring activities, USDA may not  have the information it needs to make appropriate budgetary and  programmatic decisions. According to USAID officials, the agencies’ lack of complete monitoring  documentation was in part due to agency officials not following some of  their agency’s requirements for managing agreement documents, such as  placing all documents in a shared document management system. Of these four agencies, USAID and USDA  have not taken corrective actions. USDA concurred with our recommendations in an e-mail. In this report, we (1) assess the extent to which the  organizations’ strategic goals align with those of U.S. agencies; (2)  examine how the organizations oversee the use of their funds and the  extent to which U.S. agencies have supported those efforts; (3) assess  the extent to which U.S. agencies included key monitoring provisions as  part of their assistance agreements; and (4) assess the extent to which  U.S. agencies had documentation of monitoring activities, including those  called for by these provisions. We also interviewed  officials from State, USAID, HHS, and USDA to discuss their support of  these mechanisms. To address the third objective, we identified 60 active assistance  agreements that these agencies oversaw with OAS, PAHO, and IICA  during calendar years 2014 through 2016 and selected a  nongeneralizable sample of 12 agreements, three each from State,  USAID, HHS, and USDA. To determine which agreements we would  review for each agency, we selected the three agreements with the  lowest, median, and highest dollar value. Appendix II: Financial Oversight Mechanisms of Four Inter-American Organizations

The Organization of American States (OAS), Pan American Health  Organization (PAHO), the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on  Agriculture (IICA), and the Pan-American Institute on Geography and  History (PAIGH) have established mechanisms for overseeing their use of  funds. Appendix III: Key Monitoring Provisions Implementing Federal Regulations or Agency Guidance

To oversee the execution of their agreements, the Department of State  (State), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the  Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and U.S. Department  of Agriculture (USDA) are to conduct monitoring activities called for by  applicable federal regulations or agency guidance and document these  provisions in assistance agreements as called for by federal standards for  internal control.
Why GAO Did This Study

The United States is a member of the OAS, PAHO, IICA, and PAIGH, which promote democracy, health care, agricultural development, and scientific exchange.
GAO was asked to review U.S. assistance to these four organizations. In this report, GAO (1) assesses the extent to which the organizations' strategic goals align with those of U.S. agencies; (2) examines how the organizations oversee the use of their funds and the extent to which U.S. agencies have supported those efforts; (3) assesses the extent to which U.S. agencies included key monitoring provisions as part of assistance agreements; and (4) assesses the extent to which U.S. agencies had documentation of monitoring activities, including those called for by these provisions. GAO analyzed documents and interviewed officials from State, USAID, HHS, USDA, and the organizations. GAO also analyzed a nongeneralizable sample of 12 of the 60 assistance agreements that were awarded by State, USAID, HHS, and USDA to OAS, PAHO, and IICA and were active during calendar years 2014 through 2016. For each agency, GAO selected three agreements with the lowest, median, and highest dollar value.

What GAO Found

GAO found that strategic goals of the Organization of American States (OAS), the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA), and the Pan-American Institute of Geography and History (PAIGH) are predominantly aligned with the strategic goals of the Department of State (State), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). For example, IICA's strategic goals of a productive agricultural sector, enhancing agricultural development, and food security are aligned with USDA's foreign assistance goals. State, USAID, HHS, and USDA fund activities in the form of assistance agreements (e.g., grants and cooperative agreements) with OAS, PAHO, and IICA, which in 2016 totaled $32 million. According to agency officials, the agencies employ mechanisms to ensure that these agreements align with U.S. strategic goals.
OAS, PAHO, IICA, and PAIGH have established mechanisms for overseeing their use of funds, such as external auditors, internal audit boards, and anti-fraud and ethics policies. State and USDA have directly supported these mechanisms. For example, State engaged in the selection process for OAS's Inspector General.
GAO's review of 12 selected assistance agreements found that USDA included no financial or performance monitoring provisions in one of its agreements and that State did not include two key monitoring provisions in one of its agreements, called for by applicable guidance. GAO found that the remaining 10 agreements it reviewed contained all key monitoring provisions and that State has since taken corrective action.
GAO found that U.S. agencies did not have full documentation of 18 of the 42 monitoring activities required by the 12 assistance agreements GAO reviewed (see table). For example, USDA did not have full documentation, such as for financial reports, of any of its 10 required monitoring activities and USDA officials did not explain their lack of documentation. USAID officials explained that their lack of full documentation was due, in part, to grant officers not always following their document management policies. State and HHS have since taken corrective action. If an agency does not have full documentation of monitoring activities, it may lack information needed to make appropriate budgetary and programmatic decisions.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that (1) USDA ensure inclusion of all monitoring provisions as part of agreements and (2) USAID and USDA ensure full documentation of monitoring activities. USDA and USAID concurred with GAO's recommendations.