Research for Haiti

White House Draft Proposal Discusses Taking Development Assistance Away from State (sort of)

Well, it’s about time. Both the broad strokes and the details of US development assistance, down to the specifics of what (or who) gets funded, is often a political football. Aid work, as with domestic policy work, will always be influenced by changes in the executive and legislative branches, but it should also be subject to scientific review and professional standards. But as long as development work is housed at State, I worry that that will not happen to the degree that it should. Of course, I am not certain that any single pending reform will make foreign assistance policy more evidence-based and less tainted by the ideological spin of administrations as they come and go, but it seems that some very serious reforms are under consideration, including taking aid work away away from the Department of State. That article (at Foreign Policy) discusses a draft paper (which is available at the website) that recommends moving aid out from under State:

One important section of the seven-page document would establish an interagency "development policy committee"  -- moving the responsibility for coordinating U.S. policy on development out of the State Department.

At issue is whether Foggy Bottom should have the ultimate authority over development policy or whether oversight should be done by the new interagency body, which reports up to the president.

The draft document also calls for an overall review of U.S. development strategy every four years (separate from the QDDR), and the design of country and/or regional strategies to "organize U.S. engagement and inform resource allocation."

The idea of a government-wide, independent committee to oversee development is one that Senate Foreign Relations Committee heads John Kerry, D-MA, and Richard Lugar, R-IN, also support.

However, the draft would not allow for complete independence of US AID from State. Dr. Shah, for instance, would still report to Sec. Clinton, not President Obama; and the budget would still be (partially?) controlled by the State Department. One “development observer” interviewed by the Foreign Policy blog “The Cable” stated: "We're not hugely supportive of the USAID administrator reporting to the secretary of state, but a lot of this is largely positive in terms of strategy and overall direction." (Note that this is all very much a draft, but it is interesting to get a glimpse.)

Corruption – Daniel Kaufman and Mushtaq Khan Interviewed by Owen Barder on “Development Drums”

You can read the transcript or listen to the pod cast of Development Drums’ Episode 20: Corruption which features an interesting conversation with Daniel Kaufman and Mushtaq Khan (see also) about corruption in development. This has been a frequent topic in discussions about Haiti recently.

Sadly, discussions of corruption in Haiti often focus—to the neglect of the seriousness and nuance of the topic—just on Haitian officials. This is a real deficiency in the conversation. Any serious conversation about corruption in Haiti needs to include a recognition of the role that forces outside the country have played (e.g., drug smuggling, gun running, past support for paramilitary groups, past support of opposition leaders of questionable democratic credentials, etc.) in corruption and governance problems in the country. The U.S. has come clean recently about the role the U.S. market for narcotics plays in the violence and corruption that is causing havoc in Mexico; discussions of corruption in Haiti need to include similar recognition before there is too much finger pointing.

Discussions of corruption also need to go beyond discussions of bribes and diversions of public funds. Kaufman has an interesting discussion about this here.

For me, though, the most important take home message from the podcast is that corruption should be viewed as a symptom as often as a cause of development problems. This is something I have mentioned to several people about Haiti but the point seems to fall on deaf ears, so it is nice to see it mentioned in the podcast. In the case of Haiti, it is the lack of governance capacity as much as and likely more so than corruption per se that is the barrier to development in Haiti. 

Notable Letter from Progressive Civil Sector to Sec. Clinton on Private Security Firms; Corruption in Reconstruction in US Efforts Overseas

More than a dozen progressive organizations in the US and Haiti have sent a letter to Sec. Clinton expressing concern that the US government may hired private security firms to work in Haiti. The letter details (citing news and analytical reports) a list of human rights scandals that these firms have been engaged in, including child trafficking and murder. It also notes that private security firms

…have routinely been implicated in accusations of financial mismanagement. The problem of poor oversight has directly led to what Congress’s own Commission on Wartime Contracting has called “fiscal hemorrhaging.” (p.2)

Reading some of the articles cited in the letter, it becomes clear that fighting corruption in the reconstruction efforts in Haiti will mean making sure that foreign contractors, donor nation employees, and NGOs act in a transparent fashion. To date, most press and pundit coverage of corruption in Haiti has focused on Haitians, not NGOs and private contractors. One of the earliest posts on the web site mentions a report on the impact of UN peacekeeping in many nations that mentions the frequent connection between peacekeeping forces and increases in prostitution and trafficking in women.

The letter closes with:

Finally, we request that you reiterate your support for the Stop Outsourcing Security Act that was reintroduced in February 2010 by Rep. Jan Schakowsky (IL) in the House and Sen. Bernie Sanders (VT) in the Senate. The U.S. has only begun to rebuild its image in the world; we should not turn our backs on this progress now.

Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti: Groups Caution Secretary Clinton on Private Military Contractors in Haiti Relief Efforts

A well argued, preemptive call against hiring shady mercenary firms to work in Haiti:

Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti: Groups Caution Secretary Clinton on Private Military Contractors in Haiti Relief Efforts

White House Requests $2.8 Billion for Haiti

Here’s the request (PDF, 412kb). A large chunk ($749,311,000) is for “International Assistance Programs” and appears to be cash that will be available to the State Department and USAID until Sept 2012 for:

infrastructure rehabilitation and technical assistance to the Government of Haiti to improve its public outreach capacity and facilitate its short-to-medium term operations with basic infrastructure and supplies…needs to essential services including shelter and supporting water, sanitation, healthcare, and electricity infrastructure. Funding will also be provided for necessary investments in agriculture, financing, farm to market roads, and major roads, bridges, and ports. (p.23).

Up to $120 million of this may go to a donor trust fund (presumably this is what President Clinton would help manage) and $212 million for debt relief.

There is a huge risk that years from now people will ask what happened to the billions “spent to rebuild Haiti” without realizing that much of that money was NOT on rebuilding. It was for rescue and relief efforts. As important as rescue and relief is, it does not “rebuild” the country. In addition, many other policy areas are addressed with this funding request that are or may be important (nearly quarter billion for narcotic control and for embassy reconstruction), but that are not, directly, rebuilding. This needs to be kept clear in journalists’ and commentators’ mind.

The total request is for $2.8 billion, but not all of this will translate into money for Haiti as some is to cover what has already been spent. It is also important to note that large chunks are for “logistics and security,” not for reconstruction. The breakdown:

• Dept of Agriculture:  $155,000,000. This is entirely for Food for Peace programs and includes reimbursement of funds already spent. Not clear how much is for reimbursement.
• Dept of Defense: $133,300,000 for the Army; $114,600,000 for the Navy; $18,700,000 for the Marines; $113,400,000 for the Air Force; $255,000,000 for Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid. This appears to be entirely reimbursement, but it is possible some of the funds being reimbursed are funds transferred to a disaster account but not spent. That DOD was one of the largest chunks of money listed in the OCHA spreadsheets means that this may not be substantially new money (but this is just a guess). The funds to OHDCA seems more likely to be for continuing programs. However, the funds appear to largely be for transport, salaries, support, and security. Little mention of the funds being used for more concrete programs.
• Dept of Health and Human Services: $220,000,000 for Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund. Note: This is the first part of the request to mention reconstruction (outside of requests for DOD to cover security for reconstruction).
• Dept of Homeland Security: $15,000,000 for Citizenship and Immigration Services. This is to help cover the Temporary Protected Status effort for Haitians in the United States, as well as other refugee programs (resettlement).
• Dept of Homeland Security: $45,000,000 for Coast Guard. People often assume that the US Coast Guard is in the DOD, but it is part of DHS. This is for “maintenance” as well as reimbursements, so some funds appear to be for ongoing efforts in Haiti.
• Dept of State: $65,000,000 for Diplomatic and Consular Programs; $84,500,000 for Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance (“replace U.S. Embassy housing damaged in the earthquake and meet requirements for safe and secure housing for 150 permanent United States Government direct hire staff in Haiti,” p.18); $96,500,000 for Contributions to International Peacekeeping Activities (United Nations Peacekeeping Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH)); $143,489,000 for International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement.
• Dept of Treasury: $690,000 for additional staff.
• (US Agency for International Development) International Assistance Program, Economic Support Fund: $749,311,000 of which $120 million can go to a multi-donor fund. See also opening paragraphs of this post.
• (US Agency for International Development) International Assistance Program, International Affairs Technical Assistance Program: $7,100,000 for costs incurred before this request was made and for advisors to Haiti’s Finance Ministry and Central Bank.
• (US Agency for International Development) International Assistance Program, International Disaster Assistance: $350,700,000 “for, among other activities, search and rescue efforts to locate victims, medical supplies and care, food, water, and sanitation needs, shelter, livelihoods support, and communications and logistical support” (p.25).
• (US Agency for International Development) International Assistance Program, Office of Inspector General: $1,500,000 for oversight.
• (US Agency for International Development) International Assistance Program: $212,000,000 for  “the Inter-American Development Bank, International Development Association, and the International Fund for Agricultural Development as a grant, as part of a multi-donor deal in which the United States has agreed to participate, for the purpose of cancelling debts owed by Haiti to those institutions” (p.28). Note: This section of the request is rather confusing as it also refers to funds already discussed elsewhere in the request and a potential additional $40 million for Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Trust Fund, which seems to be about something other than this $212,000,000.
• Voice of America: $5,220,000

White House Video of Presidents Preval and Obama

Here’s today’s footage: Standing Together with Haiti | The White House.

People of Haitian Ancestry in the US by State: 2006-2008 American Community Survey Data

While talking with some people the other night at a showing of the movie Poto Mitana Haitian-American woman mentioned how surprised she was at the number of Haitians she ran into while traveling through Georgia. So, using the American Community Survey, I created an Excel file of the Haitian population by state (2006-2008) (28kb). Note that this is based on self-reported data, so it certainly undercounts the numbers. Also, the data is a few years old. However, since the "undercounting" is likely fairly even across states, the relative sizes by state are interesting to see.

I was surprised to see the population in FL double that of NY and NY, in turn, double that of MA. Also, due to the margins of error, you could say that MA and NJ nearly tie for third. GA, PA, and CT all tie for fourth. Given the number of Haitians in Maryland, I was surprised that VA has so much fewer, and that it lost out to both IL and CA!  Again, it is unknown what number of Haitians do not report ancestry. I will see if I can ring up somebody at Census to get their thoughts on estimating that number.

Here's a summary table of the top states (the file linked above has all states) :

Geography	Universe: TOTAL ANCESTRY CATEGORIES TALLIED FOR PEOPLE WITH ONE OR MORE ANCESTRY CATEGORIES REPORTED: Haitian (Estimate)	Margin of Error (+/-)
Florida	359,197	9,766
New York	181,808	7,121
Massachusetts	60,210	4,121
New Jersey	56,816	4,650
Georgia	19,642	2,651
Pennsylvania	18,455	2,608
Connecticut	16,864	2,483
Maryland	10,626	2,253
Illinois	8,938	1,932
California	8,355	1,422
Virginia	5,010	1,191

US Contracts and Purchases: $32 Million since Jan 12, 2010

Using the the Federal Procurement Data System's on-line database (free sign up required to use), I simply searched for the term Haiti and found that $32 million in contracts or purchases have been made since the earthquake. A few contracts in the six and even seven figures have been let out already. Here's the table I produced. Let me know if people find better ways to use the FPDS system. (Note: Department of Defense contracts may not be listed for 90 days, or at all.)

Update: Tracking the $3 Billion and Now Private Funds

A prior post provided some early thoughts on where the money is going and where it is coming from. I know see an interesting "make a table" function at Relief Web that presents data from the Financial Tracking System (FTS) of the UN. The page and the instructions are a little confusing, but here's the table I produced (I move to the second tab some text the table generates, sorted by recipient (called "appealing agency" awkwardly fy FTS, and I hid some columns to make the table tidier, but not date was removed). The figures are updated from the prior post and it has more details (as well as fewer acronyms). Please try out the make a table function and let me know if you get something different.

I think it is urgent that larger recipient groups begin re-granting to small NGOs in Haiti, especially in the countryside, to jump start relief efforts that are focused on the planting season, on decentralizing population, and on putting people to work. This should be tracked, too, so the grants are transparent and that we know where the money is finally going and for what.

The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) has a Haiti Relief and Reconstruction Watch blog set up. They note that the Federal Procurement Data System has set up a special page for accessing data on US government contracts in Haiti (note: you have to set up a free account to access the data). I have not had a chance to play with it yet, but CEPR discusses what they have learned on their page. Press and advoactes will be making lots of heat around for-profit contractors (especially those that have parent companies with financial interests in Haiti, or that have had scandals in their past) receiving money for work in Haiti.

Where is the $3 Billion to Haiti Going?

Relief Web has posted some tables on the amounts INGOS and donor nations are giving to Haiti. I had an analysis posted here, but the formatting was going haywire for some reason. The observations I made are now in this file.