A Closer look at USAID

The question isn’t whether these cuts will affect the agency’s work, it’s how. Reduced staffing will inevitably weaken capacity. Yet some hold out hope that downsizing might also curb corruption. The past few months have revealed a troubling pattern: in September, the USAID OIG indicted and convicted an individual for diverting and selling more than $100,000 worth of medical supplies from a USAID program. Just a week earlier, another kickback scheme made headlines, and in August another USAID director pled guilty to fraud.

Recent reports highlight the agency’s achievements even as they expose its shortcomings. And while it’s reassuring that the OIG is pursuing wrongdoing in good faith, the office itself has not been immune to misconduct. One former OIG employee was debarred after pleading guilty to wire fraud in September.

Before refilling a bucket that is clearly leaking, the agency would do well to tighten its administration, strengthen oversight, and refine its priorities so programs serve global needs not just favored U.S. interests such as Ukraine, which has dominated attention lately. On a systemic level, calls to standardize reporting reviews and better assess questioned costs offer real promise.

When it comes to African affairs, the U.S. African Development Foundation (USADF) established by Congress in 1980 remains one of the best-positioned institutions for grassroots development. Its mission has always been to invest in African community organizations and entrepreneurship. But even here, the record is imperfect. Report E-ADF-25-004-M found that gaps in policy and guidance undermined the Foundation’s ability to carry out that mission.

Issues of management, accounting, and accountability slipped. Other activities were delayed due to unclear procedures and inconsistent administrative guidance. With these weaknesses exposed, the idea of defunding the program becomes easier to understand. No one wants to finance negligence or corruption. Yet in an environment full of confusing and opaque processes, individual responsibility becomes even more important.

People can hide behind a broken institution as cover for their own greed or inaction. But individuals can also lead the way forward by modeling the proper record-keeping, transparency, and reporting needed to get the program back on track. Following the recent report, nine recommendations were issued to strengthen USADF’s partnerships, grants management, and administrative processes. The Foundation agreed with all nine and outlined corrective actions and target dates though it noted that full implementation depends on the agency remaining operational.