Richard G. Lugar, United States Senator for Indiana

U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Ranking Member Dick Lugar had the following statement today on the introduction of the Foreign Assistance Revitalization and Accountability Act. Text of the bill may be found at: http://lugar.senate.gov/sfrc/pdf/ForeignAssistance.pdf.

I am pleased to join my colleague, Senator John Kerry, in introducing the Foreign Assistance Revitalization and Accountability Act of 2009. Our colleagues, Senators Corker, Menendez, Risch, and Cardin, join us in this effort as original cosponsors.

The role of foreign assistance in achieving U.S. foreign policy objectives has come into sharper focus since 2001. President Bush elevated development as a third pillar of the U.S. National Security Strategy. President Obama pledged to double foreign assistance, and announced new initiatives on global food security and health. Secretary Clinton announced a quadrennial review of diplomacy and development. These initiatives are likely to have far reaching implications for foreign assistance policy and organization.

For development to play its full role in our national security structure, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) must be a strong agency with the resources to accomplish the missions we give it. Earlier this month, Secretary Clinton stated: “I want USAID to be seen as the premier development agency in the world, both governmental and NGO. I want people coming here to consult with us about the best way to do anything having to do with development.” I share the sentiments expressed by Secretary Clinton, and I have confidence in the extraordinary development expertise housed at USAID.

But during the last two decades, decision-makers have not made it easy for USAID to perform its vital function. Even as we have rediscovered the importance of foreign assistance, we find ourselves with a frail foundation to support a robust development strategy. We have increased funds for development and elevated its priority, while allowing USAID to atrophy. Many new programs have been located outside USAID with roughly two dozen departments and agencies having taken over some aspects of foreign assistance, including the Department of Defense. Each of these agencies naturally considers itself the lead agency in its sector, provoking competition among agencies rather than coordination and coherence. We don’t really know whether these programs are complementary or working at cross-purposes.

USAID’s staffing and expertise have declined markedly since the 1980s. There are only five engineers left; twenty-three education officers are tasked with overseeing different programs in 84 countries. Decisions to reorganize in pursuit of better coordination between the Department of State and USAID resulted in the latter’s loss of evaluation, budget, and policy capacity. Much of the work of running America’s development programs is now farmed out to private contractors.

I believe the starting point for any future design of our assistance programs and organization should not be the status quo, but rather the period in which we had a well-functioning and well- resourced aid agency. To be a full partner in support of foreign policy objectives, USAID must have the capacity to participate in policy, planning, and budgeting. The migration of these functions to the State Department has fed the impression that an independent aid agency no longer exists.

It the Administration pursues the goal of doubling foreign assistance over time, it is crucial that Congress has confidence that these funds will be used efficiently. USAID must have the capacity to evaluate programs and disseminate information about best practices and methods and it must have a central role in development policy decisions.

The legislation that we introduce today promotes capacity, accountability, and transparency in U.S. foreign assistance programs. It has received strong initial support from outside groups led by the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network. There are three deficiencies we are trying to address.

First, the evaluation of assistance programs and the dissemination of knowledge have deteriorated in the last couple of decades. While USAID was a respected voice in this regard during the 1980s, its evaluation capacity has been allowed to wither. The bill strengthens USAID’s monitoring and evaluation capacity with the creation of an internal evaluation and knowledge center. The bill also re-establishes a policy and planning bureau. It is crucial that USAID be able to fully partner with the State Department in decisions relating to development.

Second, U.S. foreign assistance programs are littered among some two dozen agencies with little or no coordination. We do not have adequate knowledge of whether programs are complementary or working at cross-purposes. The bill requires all government agencies with a foreign assistance role to make information about its activities publicly available in a timely fashion. It designates the USAID Mission Director as responsible for coordinating all development and humanitarian assistance in-country. And, it creates an independent evaluation and research organization that can analyze and evaluate foreign assistance programs across government.

Third, staffing and expertise at USAID have declined since the early 1990s, even as funding for foreign assistance programs has increased. This decline in capacity has resulted in other agencies stepping in to fill the gap. While Congress has begun to provide the necessary resources to rebuild this capacity, the agency does not have a human resources strategy to guide hiring and deployment decisions. The bill would require such a strategy and a high-level task force to advise on critical personnel issues. The bill also encourages increased training and inter-agency rotations to build expertise and effectiveness.

It is especially important that Congress weigh in on this issue because the Administration has yet to appoint a USAID Administrator or fill any confirmable positions in the agency. Without an Administrator in place, USAID is likely to have less of a role in the current State Department review than it should have. The State Department review process should include strong voices advocating for an independent aid agency.

Both Congress and the State Department should be offering proposals on how to improve development assistance. Our legislation does not rule out any options that the State Department may propose as a result of its review. But ultimately, Congress will have to make decisions on resources for development programs. Given budget constraints, it is essential that Congress has confidence in how development resources are spent. Building capacity at USAID will be an important part of this calculation.

The issues that we face today – from chronic poverty and hunger to violent acts of terrorism – require that we work seamlessly toward identifiable goals. I look forward to working with colleagues to improve and support the development mission that benefits our long-term security.

# # #