The Foreign Service Journal, May 2007

H as anyone seen USAID? All of a sudden, I looked and it wasn’t there anymore. At least not the way I remember it. Let me describe what I am looking for. I recall USAIDas the agencywhose purposewas to assist less- developedcountries around theworld improve substandardcon- ditions in agriculture, health, environment, education and eco- nomicperformance. DecentralizedUSAIDmissionsworkedvery closelywith their counterparts todevelop sensible on-the-ground projects. Concurrently, host-government representatives,many ofwhomwereprevious recipients ofUSAIDscholarships, under- stood what we were striving to accomplish. The best interventions were designed in a collaborative style using simplifiedbut effective planningdocuments suchas aplan- ning tool called the Logframewhich, if properly prepared, clear- ly identified the goal, purpose, outputs, activities and inputs. This documentwas easilyunderstandable to all parties. Once the pro- ject was approved, USAIDFSOs rolledup their sleeves and actu- ally started implementation. At the project’smiddle and end, the results were evaluated and used to improve the next project. Therewere overarching themes such as BasicHumanNeeds, the Four Pillars of Development and Core Values, but we were trusted and expected tooperate our programswith limited inter- ference fromheadquarters. The systemworkedandwe got results. Mortality rates for children and mothers plunged in many of the countries where USAID worked. Family planning services were accepted, and successfully reduced fertility rates. Emergency assistance and food were delivered to the most remote regions of theworld. Elementary educational services improvedand thou- sands received a chance to study in the United States. Agricultural production increased significantly and economic activities improved. USAIDhad a secure reputation as the “pre- mier” development agency in the eyes of other donors anddevel- oping nations. Sadly, nothing looks like that now. Newbuzzwords abound for initiatives such as Transformational Diplomacy, Country Operational Plans, the Results Framework, Manage-to-Budget and the Joint Management Platform. Thousands of hours are spent inmeeting after meeting discussing how to produce doc- uments for these initiatives which, theoretically, should take us tohigher levels of performance. But employees are sobusy strate- gizing and reporting that by the time they finish, it is time to start over again. There is hardly enough time to tend to projects any- more. Noone is allowed toproceedwithout a centrally-approved operational plan, which is a formulaic, top-down instrument pre- viously developed for the one-theme-focused HIV/AIDS PEP- FAR program. The appropriateness of adopting this model to the highly diverse world of development is of questionable value. Apart fromnew initiatives, a full-blown reorganization is also in the works, but there is no clarity on how the agency will ulti- mately look or who will report to whom, because lines of com- munication are not apparent. What is clear is that authority is highly concentrated at the top. The assistant administrator for management positionhas beenvacant for twoyears, and remains vacant. Somebureaus, suchasPolicyProgramandCoordination, have been eliminated completely and their people farmedout to the new“F”Bureauover at the StateDepartment or to theOffice of theChiefOperatingOfficer atUSAIDheadquarters. Executive officers are being “encouraged” tobidonState jobs offeredunder the JointManagement Platform, which raises uncertainty about their careers as USAID proceeds with its “stealth” merger with State. To add to this mix, we also note that direct-hire staff num- bers arewoefully inadequate and recruitment is currently at only half of attrition(in2006, 29newFSOswerehiredwhile65 retired). There are 1,000 fewerUSAIDemployees today than in 1992, yet we hear boasts that development aid has tripled from $10 bil- liona year to$30billionunder the current administration. What’s more, the operating expenses budget request for Fiscal Year 2008 is 15percent less than the actual FY2006budget. It appears there will be little funding tobring employeebenefits into linewithwhat State employees are receiving. It seems we are being asked to do more with less and less and less. It is unrealistic to think that the momentous changes taking place can be successfully implemented within the 600 or so days left in the current administration. Already,manyof the toppolit- ical appointees at the agency are leaving to take other opportu- nities before the end comes. There seems to be very little buy-in to the changes being proposed because there is a lack of serious consultationabout theprocess andultimate goal. I amafraid that this will only leave amess for the next administration to sort out. I know I sound like an old-timer yearning for the good old days. However, many of the tried-and-tested ways worked, and what we have now clearly does not. Given that only 12 percent of FSOs in our recent survey thought that morale at USAIDwas good and that 67 percent believe that working con- ditions are worsening, I know I am not alone in this opinion. The agency I remember not only had a clear mission but was also well-staffed, respected, decentralized and effective. Has anyone seen it lately? V.P. VOICE: USAID BY FRANCISCO ZAMORA Where’s My Agency? 56 F OR E I GN S E R V I C E J OU R N A L / MA Y 2 0 0 7 A F S A N E W S