GAO Awaits Congressional Invite to Probe Vetting of USAID Funding Recipients in Gaza and West Bank
Credit: Kiyoshi Tanno
Tel Aviv, Israel
Key Points:
· Explanation of GAO report on USAID
· Mission Order 21 anti-terrorism policies
· GAO constrained to fully evaluate required vetting
· GAO tells Un-American Activities it is prepared to conduct comprehensive study of vetting
· Will Congress empower GAO to ensure quality vetting?
The Government Accountability Office, in the wake of its release of a report on U.S. Agency for International Development funding in Gaza and the West Bank, has indicated to Un-American Activities that it would welcome a congressional mandate for an in-depth examination of all aspects of the required vetting of recipients of USAID largess.
At first blush it appeared to this reporter that the GAO report, titled “USAID Generally Ensured Compliance with Anti-terrorism Policies and Addressed Instances of Noncompliance,” seemingly gave kid-glove treatment to the State Department’s appendage.
This turned out to be an incorrect impression of a product produced by official Washington’s premier watchdog agency which prides itself on “ensuring the accountability of the federal government.”
Rather, a key GAO official made it abundantly clear in exclusive comments to Un-American Activities that her agency was ready, willing and able to do a comprehensive report on the vetting associated with USAID once it receives a congressional green-light to do so.
Since 1993, the State Department and the USAID West Bank and Gaza program has doled out bilateral assistance to Palestinians to the tune of $7.6 billion. “USAID is primarily responsible for administering the assistance to the West Bank and Gaza and ensuring compliance with its anti-terrorism policies and procedures,” the GAO report explained.
While barely making reference to “the most recent escalation in violence” which occurred in October 2023, GAO quickly got to the heart of the matter – terrorism and terrorist organizations.
Consider Footnote 8 in the report which informs readers: “Hamas has been designated a Foreign Terrorist Organization and a Specially Designated Global Terrorist by the U.S. government. Provisions in annual appropriations acts have prohibited funding for assistance to Hamas, any entity effectively controlled by Hamas, or any power-sharing government of which Hamas is a member or that results from an agreement with Hamas and over which Hamas exercises undue influence.”
Mission Order 21
According to the GAO report, USAID assistance to the West Bank and Gaza is conducted under anti-terrorism policies and procedures outlined in Mission Order 21, with the goal of ensuring program assistance “does not inadvertently provide support to entities or individuals associated with terrorism.”
The three applicable procedures involve vetting, obtaining anti-terrorism certifications, and including specific mandatory provisions in award documents. In 2017, Addendum 1 was issued “to expand the application of the existing Mission Order to certain U.S.-based organizations, which had not previously required vetting.”
“According to USAID documents, in September 2017, USAID issued the addendum after the government of Israel charged a Gaza field office employee of a past U.S.-based prime awardee with diverting donor funding to Hamas’s military wing. USAID concluded that vetting of the prime awardee’s field-based key individuals might have revealed sufficient risk to warrant action by the mission,” the report said in Footnote 12.
In the realm of vetting, there are specific procedures USAID must carry out. It applies to certain individuals and non-U.S. organizations and involves checking their names and other identifying information against databases and other sources to determine whether they have any identified links to terrorism. Per Addendum 1, vetting includes certain key individuals at U.S. organizations’ field offices in Gaza.
GAO Explains Bureaucratic Limitations
The magnitude of the October 7, 2023, invasion of Israel and the atrocities perpetrated by Hamas and its adherents among the “civilian” population of Gaza, cries out for a close look at the Mission Order 21 mandatory provisions on vetting. Who does the actual vetting, how comprehensive is it, and how effective is it?
Turns out that for its report, GAO was only empowered to study the tip of the vetting iceberg.
This reporter reached out to Latesha Love-Grayer, GAO’s director, International Affairs and Trade, to clarify some points about the report. Due to conflicting schedules and time zones, she responded to questions by email.
According to Love-Grayer, USAID initiates the vetting process and is involved, along with the Intelligence Community. “They are required to conduct vetting under the Partner Vetting Program requirements and Mission Order 21, which outlines its application in the West Bank and Gaza,” she explained.
Love-Grayer was asked about the scope of GAO’s review and whether it examined the actual vetting process. Her agency “was mandated to review” the extent to which USAID is complying with applicable policies and procedures, including vetting, she noted, adding that GAO “assessed whether USAID could demonstrate (through documentation about the vetting and anti-terrorism contract clauses) that it took the steps that it is required to take, and we’ve been reporting on that for a few years now.” As part of its work, GAO interviewed “knowledgeable officials” at USAID headquarters and the West Bank and Gaza mission.
GAO Awaits Call from Congress
Did GAO conduct a review of the vetting process from start to finish? “We have not been asked to assess the information sources used to conduct vetting. This would likely result in a classified product. However, we can and would do so, if requested by Congress,” Love-Grayer responded.
Given the ongoing revelations regarding Hamas and Gaza, this reporter asked whether GAO has any concerns about the situation? “We are always concerned about the possibility of the U.S. providing funds to terrorist groups of any kind and we think that it is highly important that effective processes are in place to prevent this from happening. Oversight of these issues continues to be critically important,” was Love-Grayer’s candid reply.
Calling Capitol Hill
The full GAO was delivered to the following members of Congress:
· Sen. Christopher Coons (D-DE), chair of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs.
· Sen. Lindsey Graham (D-SC), ranking member of the same Senate Appropriations subcommittee.
· Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL), chair of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs.
· Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), ranking member of the same House Appropriations subcommittee.
Is Congress ready to accept the invitation of a top GAO official to request her agency conduct the oversight that is sorely needed in this matter?
-30-