REPORT ON THE INTERNAL REVIEW

OF THE

BUREAU FOR FOOD, DISASTER ASSISTANCE

AND

CRISIS MANAGEMENT

UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

December 13, 1993

TEAM MEMBERS: Howard Helman John Hummon Jerry Jordan Jeanne Markunas Patricia Rader Susan Walls Michael Zeitlin Ronnie Ward

( y

..

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I • EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

II. INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY

I I I • BUREAU OVERVIEW

IV. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

V. PROPOSED REORGANIZATION

A. ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL ORGANIZATION UNITS - Assistant Administrator - Management - Program, Planning and Evaluation - Humanitarian Assistance (Foreign Disaster

Assistance, Food For Peace, Transition Initiatives)

- Private and Voluntary Cooperation - American Schools and Hospitals Abroad

B. STRUCTURE C. STAFFING-

VI. IMPACT OF USAID REORGANIZATION

VIII. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

IX. APPENDICIES

A. LIST OF INTERVIEWS/WRITTEN INPUTS B. LIST OF PREVIOUS STUDIES AND BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS C. PROPOSED STAFFING PATTERN D. PROPOSED ORGANIZATION CHART

..

,

2

I. EXECUIWE SUMMARY

The IDC Rightsizing Team has developed the following key conclusions:

• FDC performs functions pivotal to bow USAID carries out its mission; its responsibilities have been enhanced by the increase in complex emergencies world-wide and the emphasis given by the Administration to humanitarian assistance including 8 pilot me initiative for transition from crises to development, and by the priority in the Agency's vision to working with Private Voluntary Organizations.

• FDC should move toward two distinct missions: (1) being a focal point for definition of the relief into development continuum; and (2) being the executive secretariat for the PVO-USAID partnership.

• FOC has performed very well in many areas; many interviewees and the Team also felt that improvements in FOC performance are required.

• FOe needs more FTEs and enhanced quality of staff to do its job. We have proposed a net increase of 5 direct hire staff for the Bureau (exclusive of Transition Initiatives Staff), for 8 full-time allocation of 111 positions. Two deputy titles have been eliminated as well as 4 full-time positions. With the addition of 8 new small staff, the additional positions, none of which are supervisory, the supervisor to staff ratio remains at 1:7-higher than the Agency average.

• Greater coordination is necessary internally within the Bureau. It is critical in particular that there be more effective coordination between FDCIFDA and Food for Peace. There were some differences in the Team on how best to achieve this.

• The Bureau needs to give more attention to policy development and long­range and contingency planning. The Team is calling for 8 strengthened FDCIPPE to assist in these efforts.

• There is a need for increased strategic planning in protracted emergency situations. This will improve the coordination and consistency on decision­"making in country situations. This must involve Regional Bureaus and other IDC offices (including FDCIPPE).

3

• There was a general consensus by the Team that the Bureau could do more to help the Agency playa role in the continuum from relief into development under a policy framework developed with PPC's lead. There was agreement that Title II food aid was an important part of the Bureau's arsenal of assistance to address this continuum. However, in Title III, there was disagreement on the location of budget authority. Many interviewees who commented on this suggested a divestment of Title II] from FOC as did most Team members, but not all.

• The relationship with PVOs is of critical importance and FDC/PVC needs strengthening in staff and performance to fulfill this critical role. There was some disagreement among Team members on what programs should or would be transferred to other Bureaus but agreement that FDC/PVC should cover the entire spectrum of the continuum.

• The Team notes two possible organizational structures, but postulates one with two Deputy Assistant Administrators. (see Appendix D)

• Both the Regional Bureaus and FOC must work to achieve cooperation and coordination. Many interviewees cited a lack of openness in FOC budget formulation in both FDC/FDA and food areas. The Team recognizes that improvements are essential, but notes that an Agency-wide effort is needed to improve communication.

In conclusion, the Team believes that FOC has an exciting and extremely important role to play in the dramatically changed international climate. FDC must be a leader in providing humanitarian assistance; in the context of the relief into development continuum it must ensure that food is integrated into this continuum. The Bureau must strengthen even further its ties with and the participation of PVOs in USAID emergency and development efforts. The Team hopes that the factors considered and recommendations made in this right-sizing exercise will help to achieve those goals.

(

" ll. INTRODUcnON AND MElHODOLOGY

As part of the reorganization and at the request of the Assistant Administrator for Management, the Bureau for Food, Disaster Assistance and Crisis Management (FDC) conducted a "rightsizing " exercise drawing on FDC staff as weD as representatives from M, AFR, and HRDM. The exercise looks at the emerging role of the Bureau as defined by the reorganization. It assesses and makes recommendations on the appropriate functional focus, organization structure, staffing levels and sldlls mix, accountability and span of control.

The Team members comprised varied technical skills, different levels of responsibility in the USAID hierarchy and different levels of understanding and experience with the functions and operations of FOC. Our approach drew upon available experience and studies, collecting as much information as possible during the time allowed. The Team spent the majority of its interview time with focus groups representIng a wide range of experience with FOC: USAID staff, representatives from State and USDA as well as representatives from the PVO community. (See Appendix A for a list of those interviewed as well as written comments.)

In conducting the review, the Team assessed individual office strengths and weakness, redundancies and gaps in functions, and made recommendations for appropriate change where deemed necessary to enhance the functions of the Bureau and limit redundancy and gaps for the Agency as a whole.

The Team appreciates the time devoted to the effort by the individuals interviewed and comments provided by several field missions all of which were considered in our analysis and recommendations. However, the Team takes sole responsibility for the conclusions reached.

III. BUREAU OVERVIEW

A. Present Mandate

The reorganization confirmed the Bureau's mandate in the following areas:

• disaster/emergency relief;

• impending or continuing crisis - humanitarian response;

5

• food aid expertise: the sole role of providing technical and logistic support to the Agency, PVOs and the World Food Program (WFP) on food; a lead policy role under Title II (emergency and developmental applications through PVOS and through the WFP); a supporting role under Title III (grants to governments of food for sale);

• interchange with PVOs and administering grants to strengthen PVOs and help to develop their programs overseas in concert with ppc, LP A, Global and Geographic Bureaus;

• American Schools and Hospitals Abroad Program.

• to take the lead in helping the Agency and the USG become more pro­active in defining the relief into development continuum and addressing the conceptual and operational gap between relief and development. As part of this, through a new initiative, the Bureau will undertake pilot initiatives in aiding countries to make the transition from crisis into development.

B. Conceptual Framework for Rh:htsizinK

The Team recommends the Bureau seek to fulfill two essential missions: (1) focal point for definition of the relief into development continuum and (2) focal point and executive secretariat for the PVO-USAID partnership and a lead role in institutional strengthening across the relief into development continuum.

c. Bureau Focus and Responsibility

The Team believes the Bureau should shift focus and responsibility over the medium-term. Under this scenario, the Bureau would pursue its activities as part of an integrated whole instead of tending to manage its portfolio as separate operational

Of . activities: dollar-funded relief efforts, food aid emergency response, Title II regular programs, Title III development programs, and FDC/PVC grant-making. It would oversee an~ implement the activities as an integrated continuum from straight emergency response through rehabilitation into development. There would be increased conceptual as weD as operational emphasis on longer-term emergencies, i.e., activities which faD between quick relief response and sustainable development (the continuum) and . transitions from crisis to development. In order to implement this approach successfully, food aid and dollar humanitarian efforts must be better integrated within this continuum approach.. If this focus shift is accepted, the structure of the Bureau must be reorganized from the· current focus on resources (inputs) to a focus on function and program impacts.

6

A special concern is decision-making-Iargel-J exogenous to USAID-on when, how, and the extent to which the USG responds to protracted disasters. Not only is this driven by crisis events, such as large movements of displaced persons and refugees, and by exposure in the media, but by political forces which are not consistent nor readily anticipated.

Senior Agency management perceives emergency situations as open-ended and this perception undercuts rational and balanced decision-making. FDC is then seen as having a bias towards emergencies and to be making decisions on an ad hoc basis. Absence of an understood position on resource trade-offs at the Agency leve~ applied with strong leadership support and widely accepted, will compromise the credibility essential to FDC's playing the role descnoed herein.

Recognizing the inexorable nature of the demal)d, it is essential to be clear, yet flexible, about how resource a))ocation decisions are to be made. Guidance can be meaningful, accepting uncertainties and contingencies. The cha))enge for FOC and for the Agency is to make this happen so that changes sought wi)) be sustainable.

D. Co))aboratjon wjth Geo~aphic Bureaus

With a new continuum approach, greater need and opportunity to coordinate with Geographic Bureaus, e.g., in detennining appropriate responses, on strategic planning, and for resource a]]ocations -would exist. This would require an equal change and commitment on the part of the Geographic Bureaus to this approach.

E. food Aid

Modifications in the perception and management of food aid would be required; the emergency food aid resource would be integrated into transitional strategies. For Title II regular, perception and definition would shift to recognize that the majority of these programs have objectives which faD within the relief through transition portion of the continuum with notable exceptions, e.g., Title II 100% monetization used for sustainable food security objectives which would define the development end of the continuum. .

. The Bureau's involvement in Title III should be modified predicated upon there being a locus for broad food security policy outside the Bureau (in PPC or Global and M/B) which would exercise policy oversight on resource a]]ocations and program approvals. FDC would provide analysis on the specific role of food aid in promoting

..

7

food security. NOTE: There was not unanimity on where the Title III budget function should be located in the Agency. See below.

F. Partnership wjth pyas

If the Team's recommendation is accepted, the Office of Private and Voluntary Coordination (FDC/PVC) would make a critical shift in basic function/mission. Executive secretariat and outreach functions would be one central role, taking on the leadership of institutional strengthening programs for an PVOs working across the continuum and, as an eventual goal, indigenous NGOs working with the Agency~ would be the other.

G. Assessjn& the External Environment

The Ointon Administration is placing increased priority on interventions in countries caught up in complex crises as an explicit component of its foreign policy. The Administrator, as the President's Coordinator for Disaster Assistance, has determined to bring a new dimension to that role and is pulling the USG Agencies engaged in humanitarian assistance together for a more coherent approach.

For this new commitment to be successful, the fonowing lists of constraints must be recognized and overcome:

• the absence of a USG policy framework for prolonged emergencies and crisis intervention;

• the lack of definition and boundaries for emergency interventions and of the roles of various USG parties;

• the lack of senior level policy direction on the trade-offs between sustainable development vs. humanitarian assistance reflected in budget decisions.

H. Assessin& the Internal Environment

The Bureau is widely perceived as having the fonowing major strengths:

.. • rapid emergency response capacity;

8

• food aid operational expertise;

• PVO liaison work;

• and managing the FDC/ASHA program.

Weaknesses most frequently cited by interviewees and which the majority of the Team believe are valid include:

• A need' to improve transparency in resource allocation decisions and to adjust the current perceived bias towards favoring emergency objectives over developmental objectives in allocations;

• A need ~o improve communication both internally among the various fIX; offices, as we)) as externa))y with other USAID bureaus and USG offices;

• A need to balance the current Washington·based decision·making model which does not take adequate account of Geographic Bureau and field perspectives and experiences;

• A need to integrate current fragmented interventions and activities by individual offices and divisions into country and regionaJ programming along a continuum of relief, rehabilitation, reconstruction to transition and development;

• A need to significantly strengthen analytical capacity in the Bureau;

• A need to assess the value lldded of Bureau activities.

• A need for stronger middle management and more technically and analytically proficient officers.

IV. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

A. Strengthenine the Bureau

There is an overriding issue of how the Bureau will build the capacity, demonstrate impact and gain recognition for itself as having real expertise in the two principal functions of its new mandate. The recommendations in this report seek to address this issue.

9

The Bureau should conduct a significant review to determine the long-term

feasibility of organizing its offices more by functional Jines, and less by resources. The

ultimate goal should be to delineate FDC's offices by relief, transition and sustainable

development functions.

B. Strenilhenine the ProiIam. Plannine and Evaluation Office

One partial answer is to strengthen the program/policy office. It will be a

chaUenge to build this program office to become a credible and influential force within

the Bureau and across the Agency. In order to accomplish this, individual operational

offices which have been carrying the ad hoc responsibility for policy and bu~get must

begin to share or devolve some of their current functions to this strengthened

program/policy office. This wi]] help the Bureau to become more focused and to bring

the mutual goals the Bureau's component offices together.

C. Focus for Humanitarian Programs

FOC should become the focal point for humanitarian assistance and the

effective staff arm of the Administrator as the President's Disaster/Humanitarian

Assistance Coordinator. To accomplish this, the Bureau must:

• re-align Bureau offices engaged in food and non-food humanitarian

operations for more effective coordination within the Bureau and with the

Geographic Bureaus;

• determine the appropriate level of resources and commitment for activities

within ~he continuum (including transitions);

• develop a model for participation and co-financing with Geographic

Bureaus, PPC and Global;

D. Focal Point for PVOS and Institutiona) Strenilhenine

In order for the Bureau to provide institutional strengthening and become

the policy and coordination focal point across the relief into development continuum for

all PVOs, the following need to be addressed:

• development of systematic coordination and communication among LP A,

ppe, Global, the Geographic Bureaus and the missions, and FOe on PVO

policy and issues;

10

• re-focus/re-structuring of FDC/PVC to take on the leadership role in AgencylPVO relations.

• determinations of which functions to shed, if any, to allow resources to be focussed on policy formulation, outreach, and institution~l strengthening for PVOs involved in the continuum from relief to development

V. PROPOSED ORGANIZA110N

A Analysis Of Individual Offices

17 omce or the Assistant Administrator (ANFDC)

There is currently an Assistant Administrator, two Deputy Assistant Administrators, two support staff, one executive secretary, and one special assistant in the

. AA's office. The only change the Team recommends in staffing is that the special assistant position be deleted. Team consensus was that, due to resource constraints and the need for stronger mid-level management, the position ceiling would be better utilized elsewhere in FOC.

FOC, as a composite of humanitarian, PVO and other institutional strengthening programs has been in place for a little more than two years. In many ways it remains a collection of separate offices with independent functions. However, FDC has made considerable progress in identifying and beginning to tackle substantive and organizational issues which the Team strongly believes will continue and be enhanced by the current FDC senior management team.

The Office of the Assistant Administrator should actively address and pursue four critical areas on which the Team generally agreed that FOC needs strengthening: .

• bringing togetl)er the segments of the Bureau with strong mutual interest, especially food aid and disaster assistance;

• solving recruitment problems;

• making the FOCIPPE Office into a real force for integration, quality improvement and policy formulation within the Bureau and for representation of the Bureau throughout the Agency;

11

• working effectively with other parts of the Agency and being recognized by them as significant contn'butors in the areas of the Bureau's comparative advantage.

Recommendations:

• That the AA's office needs to take an even more aggressive role in ensuring that there is solid communication internally among Bureau units in addressing disaster, food aid policy and PVO issues.

• That priority should be given to supporting a strengthened FDC/PPE.

• That communication between FDC/FFP and FDC/FDA be enhanced.

• That a systematic outreach to the Geographic Bureaus to improve cooperation be established.

• That the special assistant position be eliminated in the M's office.

• That the AA request a significant review to determine the long-term feasibility of organizing FDC offices more by functional lines and less by resources toward the ultimate goal of delineating FOC offices by relief, transition and sustainable development functions. -

0' Office or Manaeement (FDelM)

The Office of Management is currently staffed with six full-time employees: the Director, 3 Administrative Officers (one serves as alter ego to the Director), Administrative Assistant and a Secretary. The staff provides administrativelpersonnel support to 102 direct hire positions and limited administrative

Of . support to over 80 PSCS. As with other Management Offices in the Agency, FDC/M serves as the focal point for all administrative support needs of Bureau staff. Additionally, the staff ensures adequate management, personnel and logistical support to the Bureau and facilitates resolution of management, logistical and personnel problems.

Although the Agency-wide reorganization plan proposes no or relatively few management/personnel functions -remaining in the Bureau, the Team reviewed the functions, size and skills mix of this Office and the Office's responsibilities based on the proposed FDC structure. The Team concluded that given the current leadership of the office, four full-time positions would be sufficient to cover the above stated functions. One Administrative Officer position and one Administrative Assistant

12

position could be eliminated and functions redistnbuted to remaining staff. Neither the workload (current or proposed) nor number of management units requires a staff of six full time employees. The team did not identify the two specific positions to be eliminated. This should be left to the Director, FDCIM.

One of the key issues addressed in this report is that of adequacy in numbers and quality of FDC staff. If the recommendations in this report are accepted, the Management Office will have to play a much stronger role in staffing, training, and recruitment than it has played in the past. Based on the fact that the office is being managed by a highly experienced and knowledgeable Director, the smaller staff would be able to manage an expanded role.

Recommendation:

• The Team recommends deletion of two positions provided the office continues to be managed by a strong Director. The Team notes that with a staff of four, a justification will be required to support a separate unit for this staff. The Team did ~onsjder merging the Management Office with the Program Office but based on past experience with this type of structure, opted for a separate unit.

0" omce or Proeram Planning and Evaluation (FDClPP£)

Current staff consists of: the Director, a Deputy, three Program Analysts, a Program Operations Specialist, an Economist, a ControJJer, a Disaster Assistance Specialist, two support staff and one contractor (MIS Administrator). Additional contract technicat services are recommended, especially for policy analysis. The staff:

• advises and assists AA/FDC in formulating the Bureau's program policies, objectives and guidelines, including budget presentation, monitoring and evaluation practices and program guidance, and for translating these into strategies and methodologies for implementation by the Bureau's operating offices;

• coordinates the preparation of program documentation; participates in program analyses, design and evaluation;

• performs the overaJJ quality control function for the Bureau, including coordination of inter-office document preparation and review of documents prepared by other offices; reviews all documents which obligate funds;

..

13

• coordinates development and maintenance of the Bureau's management information system;

• oversees preparation, maintenance and distnbution of handbooks, manuals and other guidance;

• maintains liaison With the Agency's Policy, Planning and Coordination Office and the Bureau for Management;

• serves as liaison with GAO and IG on audits;

• develops, in consultation with operating offices, plans and strategies for donor coordination.

Overview:

There is agreement that strengthening FDCIPPE and elevating its role will help enhance the FOC Bureau overall. The Team believes that the Bureau should undertake a phased approach to accomplishing the broader role proposed for FDCIPPE.

In the short- to medium-term, FDCIPPE should have fairly modest objectives directed to building internal coherence within the Bureau. While FDCIPPE has been perceived as relatively weak for the past several years, concerted efforts by senior management have resulted in a strong new Director and Deputy recently being brought on board. Positive results are already being seen.

Redundancies:

External:

• Evaluation of Title III programs and impacts. FDCIPPE has attempted to playa de facto lead role in Title III evaluations creating redundancy with Mission and COlE functions; .

• Application of different definitions of food security resulting in tension between FDCIPPE and PPC and the Geographic Bureaus.

Internal: 4

14

• There are separate, free-standing Management Information Systems (MIS) for each office which are not accessible from other Bureau or Agency offices.

• There are parallel budget and contract systems.

• There are separate evaluation and audit systems.

Vulnerabilities:

At present, FDCIPPE should become an effective staff office to the front office as well as perform four critical functions: 1) strategic planning - for the Bureau and in helping offices to develop their own plans; 2) quality control and management of the process by which Bureau offices upgrade quality of work; 3) budget; and 4) evaluation and audit coordination for the Bureau.

Over the longer term, FDCIPPE should plan an expanded role in the Bureau and exert more influence within the Agency. In order to take on this leadership role, the Bureau must:

• concentrate on making the operating offices more impact oriented; having FDC/PPE playa critical role in helping them to do so;

• unify management services (grant, controller, administrative), program support and poJicy analysis functi(\ns into FDC/PPE, leading to empowerment of the operational offices to better organize workload and build a durable link with FDCIPPE;

• continua)]y improve FDC/PPE's capacities for analysis and program support, which will bring the office to make a difference; and

• gather for itself, with support of the operatin& offices. the attnbutes to back up the directions it encourages (program or issues research and substantive analysis capability resource allocation, information management, strategic direction and ability to elevate before Agency leadership the change issues which are external constraint upon FDC and external liaison).

RestructuriDg FDC/PPE:

FDC/PPE must improve its capacity to oversee the Bureau's portfolio. This would aDow FDClPPE to help offices to upgrade individual products and thus

15

enhance the Bureau performance as a whole. In FDC/PPE, there wi)] be officers responsible for working with the Bureau's operating offices.

A critical element would be introduction of controller and grant officer capabilities. The ControJJer would help build the transition toward centralization of budget functions would bring increased accountability and financial management skills and would handle audit issues. The grant officers would handle grant negotiations under the Bureau's numerous competitive grant programs and administration of grants and contracts. This would also make available to FDCIFDA and FDC/ASHA financial management and grant officer support in the exercise of their grant-making authority.

Bringing into FOCIPPE, the controJJer and grant officer skiJJs and linking them with the office's administrative staff would be a benefit both to FOC and M. There would also be a major by-product benefit: this is probably the most significant single step to encourage operating offices to accept the advantages of modifying their operating scope and becoming supportive of the role described for FDC/PPE.

Both the program support and program management staff would be located in the Director's office. A team would be created for Policy and Analysis to include an Economist, two additional analysts (one of whom would be a foreign service officer with experience in humanitarian assistance and donor coordination), and an Evaluation Specialist.

There would also be a need for training to help develop staff capacity; the sldJls required would be drawn from all parts of the Office. (see section V. C.)

Recommendations:

• That the GS-11 audit position be used to offset one of the position increases in FDC/PPE and that the function reside with the controller.

• That a net total of three additional positions be approved for FDCIPPE: two grant officers and two technical analysts for Policy and Analysis.

Humanitarian Assistance· ReJieftTransition/Development

If there is one key issue which has confronted the team in t~is exercise, it is the need to integrate food with humanitarian dollar resources. This report proposes that Bureau resources - dollars and food aid - be used to support a continuum approach to humanitarian assistance. We argue that the functions and resources need to be

16

integrated for increased impact. This means that the offices which program these resources must be better integrated. Though at the current time we recommend increased integration within the current structural arrangement, we believe it is advantageous that the three offices most directly involved in delivery of humanitarian assistance - FDCIFDA; FDCIFFP and FDCffI- report to a single DAA. We recommend that both FDCIFFP and FDC/FDA be restructured into divisions of rapid response, protracted emergency and transition programs.

At some future date the Bureau may want to consider complete integration of the resources by functiori, i.e., including food aid and doUars within the same offices which are then divided by function, not resources.

a Office of Forei&n Disaster Assistance (FDCfFDA)

Director!Deputy Director: Provides support to NAJD as the President's Special Coordinator for International Disaster Assistance and serves as Deputy Special Coordinator. Assists in U.S. disaster assistance policy formulation in coordination with other USG agencies and the private sector; develops strategies and coordinates activities for USG disaster response; directs funding, budgeting, program support, procurement and administrative functions; coordinates media response.

USDH Staff - 2 officers, 1 support

Prevention, Mitigation & Preparedness: Assists in formulation of disaster policy; formulates and implements FDC/FDNPMP strategy; implements, monitors and evaluates PMP program widely disseminating progress and impact data; provides scientific and technical advice to FDC/FDNDRD; manages FDC/FDA staff, in­country and U.S. training initiatives; assists with ABS and CP budget preparation for rnC~A '

USDH Staff . , 3 officers, 1 support Institutional Contractors .

Basic Health Management· 3 Labat Anderson Inc. • 11

PSC • 1 MAS Fellow • 2

Disaster Response Division: Provides assessment, relief and rehabilitation responses to disasters; recommends disaster assistance response policy;

17

coordinates with the UN, lOs, PVOs and host governments; monitors threatening and incipient disasters and conducts field assessments and plans/recommends appropriate responses; manages planning and implementation of usa humanitarian assistance responses worldwide; prepares briefing materials for senior usa officials; formulates budget projections.

USDH Staff PSCS

- 8 officers, 1 support -11

Operations Support Division: Manages disaster response actions for rapid onset disasters; manages private and public sources for technical services, commodity resources, functional and operational support; coordinates program fund allocations, personnel and technical resources; coordinates PVO activities;. maintains roster of management and technical experts; develops and refines FDCIFDA operational procedures; manages support to Disaster Assistance Response Teams; assures availability of health and technical services to expedite disaster response; maintains and manages FDCIFDA stockpiles and provides contracting and procurement services; manages obligation and disbursement of program all FDC/FDA funds.

USDH Staff PSCS RSSAs

- 5 officers, 1 support • 7 . 6

Institutional Support Contractors Macfadden & Assoc, Inc. - 4 Labat Anderson Inc. • 4

Respondents were unanimous and the Team agrees that FDC/FDA performs exceedingly well for rapid response to quick onset emergencies. To this end, it has successfully established a rapid contracting mechanism. In addition, for these quick

ow. onset emergencies it uses the" not-withstanding" authority appropriately and to positive benefit. There was also general agreement that its cadre of committed, energetic, talented contractors effectively supplement limited USDH staff and perform exceedingly well in diffiCUlt emergency situations. As an action unit, its work has been outstanding, and deserving of much praise.

It is clear to most people interviewed, including many in FDCIFDA, that in recent years the demands on FDC/FDA have changed radically iil nature. In the past, FDC/FDA responded almost exclusively to quick onset natural disasters which allowed tbem to deliver assistance within 90 days, and its office structure and mandate were established for this type of emergency response. Now, some 80 percet.lt of what

18

FDCIFDA does is in response to long-term, complex emergencies generated by civil strife.

As there has been no systematic policy formulation on the appropriate USG and USAID role in these new protracted emergencies, FDC/FDA has not been able to revise Office structure and capacity to respond to these changes. There are now gaps in both numbers and skill mix of FDCIFDA staff.

NOTE: The disaster budget has grown significantly in the past four years in response to these protracted emergencies. It has grown from $25 million with a $50 million borrowing authority in FY 1991 to $145 million, plus the borrowing authority in FY 1994.

R~undBDcies:

While not taking away from the many positive aspects of FDC/FDA activities, interviewees have noted that there is overlap of some FDC/FDA field activities with developmental activities funded by other offices and Bureaus. There is an apparent Tack of clear definition of relief vs transition vs development activities. Rapid response approaches are applied across the board and result in activities which are designed and funded quickly which may compete with, be redundant with or counter-productive to developmental activities funded by other Agency resources.

Interviewees also suggested that there is a lack of country and regional level coordination between FDCIFDA and FDCIFFP staff. This leads to both redundancies in program review and approval as well as gaps in information and analysis on both sides.

When FDC/FDA's quick response approach is applied to more complex, protracted emergencies the following requirements become apparent:

Budget:

• There is a need to increase the transparency of FDC/FDA budgeting planning and allocation. FDC/PPE should assist FDCIFDA in strengthening its budget development and management process to assure increased involvement of FDC/FFP, Ge.ographic Bureaus, and MJB to ensure that Agency priorities ~re set and met.

Coordination:

..

19

• FDC/FFP: There is a need for improved coordination with FDCIFFP. Food is a critical important component of USAlDts emergency assistance package. Means of achieving this could include set weekly meetings, country specific coordinators in each office, as well as in each emergency individual situations. In the longer-term the Bureau m~y also want to consider having Food for Peace staff actually assigned to FDC/FDA, to ensure integration of food aid used for humanitarian assistance.

Further, we strongly recommend that the Agency locate Food for Peace and FDC/FDA adjacent to each other before the Agency is moved to its new location.

• Geographic Bureaus: Much closer coordination and cooperation is also needed with the Geographic Bureaus. This has developed with the NIS as they provide additional do]]ar resources to FDC/FDA and FDC/FDA is able provide technical expertise in humanitarian assistance.

The relationship between FDC/FDA and Africa Bureau has been more confrontational. This is due largely to competition over scarce dollar resources in the region and differences in priorities by the two entities between emergency and development.

Stamng:

There is unanimity that FDC/FDA must now take steps to strengthen its management function. H the current need to respond to protracted emergencies continues, there is a need for more middle level Direct Hire personnel to manage the contract staff. (The Team notes, nowever, that the Bureau should wait for the results of the Booz-A1len report due in late January before making final recommendations.) In addition, there is a need to train DH and contractors alike in strategic planning .

FDC/FDA handles its own procurement through a contractor with USAID's Procurement Office making the final approvals. This needs to be assessed, because of the possibility of conflict of interest by the contractors handling procurement decisions.

As the Agency plays an activist role in humanitarian assistance beyond the 90 day rapid response capability, FDClFDA should explore various means, including prime grant arrangements with PVO's, to carry out these longer-terin responsibilities .

•

20

To the extent possible, DART team leaders should be DH, and DART teams should include personnel from other Bureaus. We also recommend each DART team have a Food for Peace officer as part of its staffing.

FDCIFDA's information system is important not on1y to the office and USAID, but to USG and UN agencies. We recommend that the continued emphasis be given to information collection and dissemination be continued and strengthened as necessary in the proposed Bureau consolidated Management Information System.

Recommendations:

• The Team recommends that an additional minimum DH staff of four is needed in FDClFDA. However, we suggest the Agency review the recommendations of the Booz-AJlen report due in late January to determine the adequacy of the staff level.

• That there be an increase in strategic planning in protracted emergency sit1.lations. This will improve the coordination and consistency on decision-making in country situations. This must involve Regional Bureaus and other FOC offices (including FDC/PPE).

• That there be increased contingency planning for both short and longer term emergencies. Once again this will take commitment and coordination with Geographic Bureaus as well.

• That FDC/FDA contract staff be trained on USAID policies and procedures to facilitate coordination and effective country programming.

• That FDCIFFP and FDC/FDA restructure into divisions focusing on rapid response, protracted emergency and transition programs.

a Transition Initiatives StaD' (FDOO)

A decision has been made to establish a staff in the Agency to help meet the "ga p" in the aid continuum between relief and development assistance. The team accepts this decision. Its placement in FOC is a preferable organizational option.

The TI staff should have ihe capacity to undertake on short notice the following functions:

21

• Evaluate prospects for potential crises and transitions. with special focus on political change;

• Send teams to assess transition needs;

• Aid in the rapid start up of programs with NGOs and others capable of meeting the needs in the following focus areas, where funding permits:

Advise and possibly assist with demobilization and reintegration of dislocated populations;

Aid in political institution building, including helping to establish law and order, developing fundamental legal institutions, supporting the processes of political reconciliation, and providing short term support to strengthen non-governmental organizations;

• Coordinate with other organizations active in these areas, both within the USG and internationally and provide advice to AID staff on services available from AID and other institutions; and

• Develop plans and mobilize support for social reconstruction activities.

FOerrI will improve focus of the Agency's efforts to help countries reestablish political institutions where they have collapsed or to help countries make the transitions to democracy proceed more smoothly and effectively.

Could the FDCrrI staff be located within FDC/FDA? If so, FOCIFDA would require additional staff. Moreover, the team believes a separate, clearly identifiable organization to illuminate the "gap" issue is essential.

Recommendations:

• Establish a small staff in FDC to give principal focus to Agency efforts on providing assistance to meet the "gap" in the aid continuum.

• Ensure that the USAID policy on humanitarian assistance covers the role of the FDCm staff.

• That HRDM move immediately to staff this office.

\

22

a orner or Food For Peace fFDCLFFP)

Currently, there is a Director, Deputy Director, a program analyst position and two support positions in the Director's Omce. The Director's office is responsible for food aid policy, overall budget decisions, overview of program for individual countries, specific geographic regions, and across regions. It maintains liaison between the Agency and other USG agencies including USDA and State/RP; develops recommendations fo~ senior Agency participation in interagency Food Assistance Policy Council. It 'serves as key contact for food aid PVOs including support to senior Agency participation in Food Aid Consultative Group. FOe currently performs a unique leadership role with respect to World Food Program (WFP) governance, policy and budgeting. While both FDC/FFP and FDC/FDA have major involvement with WFP across the relief into development continuum, the FDC/FFP Director's Office phlyS a key analytical and policy role within the USG and with other donors.

In the Emergency Relief Division there are currently six USDH officers (three vacancies), one support staff and one contractor. The Division has delegated responsibility for management of P.L 480 Title II emergency food resources. Those functions include: (a) budget planning and management; (b) monitoring existing or potential food related emergency conditions worldwide, (c) facilitating food needs assessments, (d) overseeing design, review, approval and implementation of emergency projects through PVOs, WFP and governments, (e) providing policy and technical guidance to USAID offices, implementing partners, international donors and institutions.

The Development Programs Division is currently staffed with six officers (one vacancy), one support staff and five contractors. The Division has delegated responsibility for management of P.L 480 Title II development resources; support function for P L 480 Title III with respect to policy, budget, program review and commodity procurement/shipping. It is also responsible for Title II functions include managing Agency's review and approval process for: (a) budget planning (b) PVO regular program multi-year project proposals, (c) Section 202(e) and Institutional Support grants, and (d) World Food Program development projects.

The Commodity Procurement Division currently has a staff of five officers (one vacancy), one support staff and six contractors. It is responsible for coordinating development of P.L 480 Title II and III budget planning levels including compliance with legislative mandates; maintaining/updating official approved Title II budget; coordinating Title II and III commodity procurement with implementing partners

23

and USDA; establishing and maintaining Title II and III transportation accounts; communicating with other USG agencies, Missions/cooperating sponsors and private industry on technical commodity and transportation issues; managing operation of computerized FDC/FFP information system; preparing official and informal reports on program.

Overview:

Many people interviewed suggested that there were significant strengths in the FDCIFFP including active and profound commitment to the vulnerable and poor in the world, rapid response to emergency requests, and technical knowledge of food aid programs. These same interviewees descnoed several weaknesses in execution of the Office's functions. Additionally, there are areas of redundancy with other Agency offices while, at the same time, important functions are not being met. .Most of these people agreed that many of FDC/FFP's problems stem from inadequate Senior Agency Management and Bureau policy and budget direction. These problems are exacerbated by numerous vacancies in key positions.

FDC/FFP should limit its functions to those areas in which it has comparative advantage: "food" expertise, WFP (governance, policy and budgeting) and the emergency into transition continuum (not all team members concurred with the specific recommendations drawn from this framework). This reshaped focus would affect both Title II and Title III functions. FDC/FFP would shed its policy and implementation responsibility for Title III programs; nonetheless FDC/PPE would retain policy-related responsibility for food aid in support of food security goals. FDCIFFP would maintain essential Title II functions while emphaSizing Title II regular and protracted emergency .applications along the continuum into development. Title II sustainable development programming would continue with its scale dependent on resource availabilities. Program officers would focus the majority of their time on analysis and monitoring in design and assessing impact of the programs. Emphasis would be placed Office-wide on

... upgrading analytical skills and knowledge of food aid legislation, regulations and policy. Technical food handling skills i.e. procurement and transportation would be strengthened in the Commodity Support Division.

The above changes would be dependent upon improved leadership and support from other parts of the Agency in the areas of food security (PPC and G), budget (MIB and PPC), and evaluation (COlE and Geographic Bureaus).

Redundancies: ..

24

The individuals interviewed believe significant functional areas of overlap, particularly in policy and budget, exist between FDC and other Bureaus; FDCIFFP is seen by many as being the heart of the issue.

1. Policy

TITLE III: Agency Delegations of Authority for Title III draw clear lines of authority which are difficult to put into practice because of the roles assigned to ppc, Geographic Bureaus, and IDC. There have been frequent disputes. This redundancy has led to delays in provision of guidance, program design, review, approvaJ, and implementation, sometimes with deteriorating relationships with host governments as a consequence.

In the specific area of food security, there is overlap on policy which cuts actoss all food aid programs. To date, the Agency has been unable to develop a strong locus of expertise and consensus building on food security policy. There is disagreement between PPC and FDC over the definition of food security and its application to both Title II and TitJe III.

2. Budget

Many interviewed believe there is redundancy in the food aid budget function, for TitJe III the authority for which has been deJegated to M Bureau's Office of Budget (M/B) and, for Tide II, to ANFDC; budget authority has not been delegated to FDC/FFP. Given the transfer authority between the two accounts, this has Jed to conflict and deJay in budget decision-making. In part, the problem stems from lack of clear budgetary guidance; without an explicit, early determination on the appropriate split between Tide II and TitJe III, and within Title II between emergency and regular, intra­Agency conflicts over priority uses continue throughout the budgeting cycJe.

An additional cause of budget redundancy is the inability of M/B to master . the food aId budget issues and provide strong, proactive Jeadership for the Agency.

Vulnerabilities:

1. Communication

Information sharing and consensus building within FDC/FFP on TitJe II is uneven. PVOs find coordination on country and regionaJ programs Jacking and receive

..

25

different information on the same programs from different Agency offices. FDC/FFP is seen by some to have difficulty in setting priorities, establishing parameters and achieving closure related to operational programming and budget decisions. To compensate, Geographic Bureaus have developed redundant expertise in Title II programming to inform and represent Mission/Bureau interests.

FDC/FDA and FDCIFFP staff have also expressed frustration at the lack of communication and integration within Geographic Bureaus of emergency and humanitarian assistance programs and the unwillingness and inability of Geographic Bureaus to address the relief into development continuum.

2. Umited Developmental, Analytical & Technical Expertise

Geographic Bureaus, Central Bureaus, and PVOs note a significant lack of developmental and analytical expertise in FDCIFFP. PVOs have expressed concern that FDC/FFP will not be able to provide adequate substantive support as Title II regular programs are redesigned for more food security impact as is currently being proposed. The perceived lack of analytical ability delaying substantive food security issues frustrates the Geographic Bureaus and Missions. However, FDC is expressing a legitimate concern that the Geographic Bureaus have not been diligent enough about food security.

There is a parallel concern about lack of analysis by FDC/FFP on emergency issues. FDC/FFP reacts more effectively than it strategizes for emergency food aid programming due, in part, to an inability of senior USAID management to set its own emergency priorities as well as limited country strategy development by FDC/FDA

Lack of adequate staff skills is exacerbated by constant turnover in staff, absence of systematic training in food issues, and deletion of a dedicated personnel backstop for food aid expertise. PVOs, Geographic Bureaus and Missions cited food aid technical assistance as the most critical function that FDCIFFP can provide and they are concerned that this expertise has been disappearing as senior FDCIFFP Officers retire and adequate technical support cannot be provided.

3. Lack of Agency Consensus OB Food Aid Issues

There is a lack of productive coordination by . FDCIFFP with FDCIFDA, other Central Bureaus and the Geographic Bureaus on food aid programs particularly importan$ in protracted emergency situations. .

Recommendations:

26

• That FDCIFFP vigorously pursue filling vacancies placing recruitment emphasis on analytical and technical skills. Recruitment for FDCIFFP/CPD vacancy should emphasize technical services in the areas of commodity availability, packaging, shipping and quality control.

• That the Director's office give higher priority to managing external relationships and establish and maintain procedures for discussions related to policy, strategy development and resource allocation.

• That mOdest adjustments should be made in the staffing pattern, transferring one position from FDCIFFPIDP to FDCIFFP/CPD. The additional FDC/FFP/CPD position should support expanded functions i.e. budget analysis and accounting, standards and procedures and commodity handling.

• That FDC/FFP would develop strategies for integrated Title II programming across the relief through development continuum; this decision reinforces

. the need for FDC/FFP to focus its efforts on its special strengths and to devolve a close relationship of shared responsibilities with FDCIPPE.

• That FDC/FFP expand its external support and outreach through: (a) increased technical support for emergency food needs assessments and DART participation, (b) increased coordination through routine meetings at Director and staff level regarding strategy developme'nt and resource allocations, (c) cross training programs with FDC/FDA and Geographic Bureaus.

• That FDCIFFP limit its responsibility on Title III to technical support to Missions by the Operations Support Division. Title III ordering. commodity and transportation procurement would be delegated to OP{fRANS.

USDH

17 The omce of Private and VoJuntaD' Cooperation (FDCIPvg

Director, Deputy Director, 17 officers, 3 secretaries (3 vacancies, including the Director), total: 22

contractors (3 institutional contracts, 2 person~ service PASNRSSA, 1 PVO fellow) total: 22

contracts, 2

Most of the staff reports directly to the DirectorlDeputy (11 USDH, 10 contract); the rest consists of a Matching Grant Division (4 USDH, 1 contract) and an

27

Information and Program Support Division (S USDH, 11 contractors). The functions of FDC/PVC follow:

• advises ANFDC, in coordination with FDC/PPE, on policy formulation concerning the Agency's partnership with PVOs and CDOs, the geographic bureaus with regard to policy implementation and Agency organizational units in the area of voluntary assistance;

• promotes and leads the Agency's relationship with PVOs/COOs; encourages programs to facilitate use of PVO/Coo resources; this includes the various grant programs and mandates administered by the Office;

• develops and monitors the application of simplified Agency procedures for PVO/CDO programs;

• chairs the Intra-Agency PVO liaison Committee; provides management; implementation, coordination and operating support to the Advisory Committee for Voluntary Foreign Assistance; maintains liaison with the Advisory Committee on Overseas Cooperative Development, Interaction and the Overseas Development Council;

• plans, directs and supervises FDC/PVC operations; maintains an automated information system;

• in coordination with FHAlFDA, plans, approves, directs and supervises project operations designed to link relief and reconstruction with rehabilitation and development;

• provides leadership, direction and coordination for the agencies efforts in development education;

• develops, compiles and synthesizes data on PVO/COO activities and programs.

As the Agency's information center on PVO activates, the Information and Program Support Division (FDClPVClIPS) provides analytical infol1Dation; .

• develops operational policies, procedures and practices for using automated and manual PVO data systems;

28

• reviews performance of PVOs to identify management deficiencies; directs and overseas the registration process;

• develops policies and procedures for the allocation and monitoring of the Agency's ocean freight reimbursement program.

The Matching Grant Division (FDC/PVClMG) advises the Director on policy and program matters pertaining to the PVO centrally funded field grant program, farmer-to-farmer program and outreach grants and develops program criteria for FDC/PVC grant assistance;

• analyzes pva program proposals to ensure planning, discussion and clearance within the Agency and conformance with Agency criteria;

• performs the full range of project management responsibilities for the centrally-funded pva program;

• maintains liaison with geographic bureaus, overseas posts and developing countries for collaboration of PVOs in Agency programs;

• develops, compiles and synthesizes data on FDCIPVC-funded PVO grant activities.

Oveniew:

The new USAID leadership's vision includes building a closer partnership with and providing stronger support to PVOs. Numerous segments of USAID are proposing to take on key roles in the relationship: ppc, LPA, Global, FDC and the Geographic Bureaus (and Missions). Resource decisions are still under discussion and the precise role of FDClPVC in the proposed "interdependent" management style is not clear.

USAID resources administered by PVOs/COOs represent close to $1.0 billion. About $50 million are direct strengthening grants under FDClPVC. The remainder are divided primarily between FDC humanitarian assistance (disaster assistance under the FAA and food aid under the Agricultural Act) and development assistance programs administered by Missions (being the larger). There are also programs run by the Global Bureau in population, AIDS prevention, environment, micro­enterprise (to be initiated) and other sectoral themes.

't .

29

There are significant external constraints to FDC/PVC's taking on a leadership role in the USAID-PVO Partnership. Qear direction is needed by USAID leadership about how USAID intends to work with PVOs, which should include: budget levels which reOect increased collaboration; guidelines on what PVOs will be encouraged to undertake in non-presence countries; a strong signal to Geographic Bureaus and field Missions on increased direct PVO responsibility for program performance and financial accountability; and, guidance on new PVO-Mission relationships.

This situation poses two central issues for consideration for Bureau management:

• bow FDC/PVC is to become more credible, inside USAID as well as externaJJy, in carrying out the role of executive secretariat for the PVO­USAID partnership and in being a catalyst for "inter-dependent" management among USAID offices contnbuting to this relationship;

• the disposition that should be made of grant programs for PVOs currentJy administered throughout USAID.

FDC/PVC Strengths:

The developmentaJJy-oriented PVOs view FDC/PVC as their focal point for dialogue with USAID on policy issues, on the partnership relationship and on access to resources.

Within USAID, FDC/PVC is seen as an office committed to providing the non­profit organizational view on Agency policies and issues. It is also seen as successfully managing a diverse portfolio of important and popular grant assistance to the non-profit community.

Redundancies

1. Grants tor which FDClPVC is responsible

The registration process is onerous and could be simplified. There are suggestions tbat it is duplicative of work done by the contracts office (M/OP) in pre-award surv~ys. . ..

30

Requests for Applications for Grants (RFAs) are issued by FDC/PVC. M/OP believes they should be issued by the contracts office so that there would be consistent and complete information at the outset, avoiding intense and duplicative efforts at the negotiation stage.

GRANT ADMINISTRATION: U FDC/PVC is to focus on significant improvements of its coordination, outreach, and institutional strengthening functh;>ns, it may have to divest itself of some of the sectoral grant-making functions. There is a strong view among some team members, however, that this step would weaken the office's ability to function as the executive secretariat for the partnership.

The Team is divided on the appropriate mix of grants which should remain with FDC/PVC. There is unanimity among Team members that FDC/PVC should continue to administer those grant programs which predominantly re~ate to its leadership' role in the USAID-PVO partnership (development education, cooperatives) and to institutional strengthening of PVOs (matching grants).

The remaining grant programs should be reviewed carefully, both as to what level the Agency can afford to continue them and whether they should remain in FDC/PVC or be transferred to Global. (Grants that are considered the most logical for movement elsewhere include: Child Survival, Vitamin A, Ocean Freight, Enterprise Development and Farmer-to-Farmer.)

Moving them from the Bureau at this time would allow the Bureau to be more focused in the short- to medium-term. For the longer term, however, the Bureau is likely to have a comparative advantage in administering grant programs because of close ties to the institutions.

Members of the Team who favor retaining the majority of grant programs which combine institutional strengthening and sectoral support believe that these grants provide the combination of stimuli PVOs need to mature at an earlier stage of development. In addition, these Team members believe that maintenance of a larger

. rather tha~ smaller grant portfolio in FDC/PVC lends credibility to the office in the eyes of PVOs and other USAID offices.

The substantive option (Global) offers prospect of providing appropriate technical supervision and of linking the institutions with other USAID programs. Team members who favor this option believe that dollar resources Will not make the office credible unless the Agency leadership function can be filled successfully and that grant administration distracts from strengthening this central role.

..

31

2. Coordination or other Institutional strengthening grants:

There are FDC grant programs for institutional strengthening managed outside of FDCJPVC. The issue is whether these grant should be consolidated within a strengthened FDC/PVC.

• FDC/FFP manages the institutional strengthening grants (ISO) under the FAA and the grants for administrative support of food aid programs under section 202( e) of the Farm Bill.

• The short tum-around nature of FDCIFDA work has not lent itself to institutional strengthening grants in the past. However, with onset of complex, continuing disasters and work along the continuum and transitions, FDCIFDA has felt the need for a few, limited actions. The Bureau should consider whether this dimension should be expanded and how FDC/PVC and FDC/FDA may work together to accomplish this.

• War victims and orphans grants (Congressional Earmark) is currently administered by the Global Bureau. As it has a sectoral support element which targets humanitarian assistance, it could belong in the FOC Bureau (although there is more than one Office which could be the receptor).

Vulnerabilities:

PVOs have raised concerns about the Office's limitations in fulfilling the broad coordination responsibility and have suggested that, currently, FOC/PVC is not the most "influential" locus within USAID for this purpose.

• Geographic Bureau representatives expressed a lack of knowledge about the functions and grant activities of FDCIPVC. Some found that centrally­funded grants lacked relevancy to Mission strategies.

• . FDC/PVC representatives expressed frustration over lack of Geographic Bureau and Mission interest in FDC/PVC programs.

Stamng:

The central conclusion is that it is essential to enhance the analytical and decision-making ability of staff -- including through recruitment - and to get stronger middle management into the Office.

32

It is not advisable to reduce staff in the face of strong criticism of inadequate resources to administer grant programs, but the problem is not unique to FDC/PYC.

Contract resources. The Office has three institutional contracts: (i) information management (PYO data base); (ii) program support; and (iii) specialized technical skills for the sector specialized programs administered (child survival, vitamin A, micro-nutrients and AIDS prevention); there are two personal services contractors in the Farmer-to-Farmer Program, two RSSNPASAs and a PYO fellow. About the same level of contract resources 'would be appropriate in the future.

Recruiting for the Office is a critical problem, especially of foreign service officers. It is not seen as a favorable place from which to seek a forward assignment.

Recommendations:

• That FDC/PYC be restructured to have its two essential functions supported by operating units: (i) executive secretariat/outreach and (ii) grant administration. The information and regulatory function would be under supervision of the office Director.

• That the information and regulatory function should be modified to eliminate duplication of functions with M/OP and MlFM; this task wiD be simplified if the decision recommended for FDCIFFP and FDC/PPE to include grant officer and controller capabilities in that office is accepted.

• That Agency leadership make a concerted effort to make "inter-dependent" management a reality, using its PYO-USAID partnership team as a model; this is critical to the success of FDC/PYC's central mission -- and even more so, to its being able to attract the talent needed to be successful.

cr omce or American Schools And Hospitals Abroad (FDc/ASHA)

Currently, the professional staff include: a Director, a Deputy, who handles the program and systems considerations, a program officer (grants and administration), and an engineer/architect who also provides information management skills. This number of professional positions is appropriate. However, in view of the Administrator's policy to flatten the Agency hierarchy, the Team recommends that the Deputy designation be deleted from the function of program and systems analyst.

33

FDC/ASHA also has two secretaries, the need is for a secretary and one information specialist but this step has not been taken because of concern that the information specialist would refuse to do support work, undermining critical needs of the office. Additionally, the office would face a crisis if the engineer/architect were to leave­FDC/ASHA would be unable to sustain its high quality management information system.

Contract technical services are being provided this year to improve office systems and procedures and should be continued on a reduced basis in the future.

The office has made a strong response to the FY 92 IG audit which concluded that staff were inadequate to manage the number of grants in the portfolio. Following-the decision to fund the program from the DA account, the General Counsel's Office is coming to the conclusion that the Office's ability to continue its grant program worldwide and to exercise grant negotiating authority remains in tact.

FDC/ASHA administers a program of grants to schools and hospitals founded or sponsored by U.S. individuals or organizations and which serve "as a demonstration center for ideas and practices of the United States". The functions include:

• to encourage applications;

• to administer a process for review of applications and to recommend awards;

• to negotiate grants;

• to oversee grant implementation;

• to assure proper close out, administer evaluation and audits and exercise internal controls;

• to provide program support, inter-office coordination and technical service functions to support other needs of the Bureau or Agency.

Overview:

For the first time in recent years, the Administration is attempting to establish some control over the FDC/ASHA program both in terms of budget and

34

quality. The Administrator has agreed to continue the program, given the strong Congressional interest, but at a reduced level: 523.4 mittion for FY 94 and an estimated 523 miJJion for FY 95. He also has stated that Development Assistance criteria would apply to the program.

Issues:

1. To the extent that the Aeency has discretion oyer this prQ~am. shQuld it be continued for the lone term?

Accepting that the Program can have a strong impact on local institutions which are important within the country or region, continuation still should be predicated upon two premises: (i) the program wilt advance critical' aspects of the Agency's vision in a way which wilt afford a recognizable impact; and (ii) the program witl contnbute to stronger institutions. (Note: FDC/ASHA has prepared an options paper which offers a few aJtern~tives as to how to achieve this direction).

2. Should the Procram's structure within the Bureau be modified to brine it more into line with the mandate for institutional development of non-profit oreanizations?

FDC/ASHA's management has a vision of this program which tracks closely with the ideas which underlying the shift in the Bureau's emphasis to institutional strengthening. The program involves few PYOs (primarily other non-profits), has different administrative skiJJs requirements (since it involves primarily capital financing) and would be a drain on en~rgies of FDC/FDC/PVC. The gain is not sufficient to consider this step at this time.

3. Should the Program be moved to the Global Bureau?

The advantage of keeping the Program in FDC is the aligned concern about institutional strengthening and the mutual reinforcement of different kinds of innovative work on this theme. The arguments for shift to the Global Bureau include: (i) the possible Jjnking of this assistance to other subst~ntive programs; (ii) accessing non-USAID sources of financing; (iii) having stronger representation of FDC/ASHA beneficiaries to Geographic Bureaus and Missions;

On balance, the Team believes FDC/ASHA should remain in the Bureau, if the critical role of the Bureau in PYO institutional strengthening is affirmed and if the Bureau retains administration of the PYO strengthening grant programs. Should this not

Of,

35

be the case, then the team supports moving the FDC/ASHA program to the Global Bureau along with the sector specific grant programs.

v.

RecommeDdatioDS:

• That the level of staff resources should remain the same;

• That one secretary position should be eliminated and replaced by an information management specialist;

• That the title of Deputy be removed, given the small staff size.

B. Structure

Though there was consensus on the part of team members on change in focus and function which the FDC Bureau should pursue, there was not unanimity among team members on recommendations for structural change. There are several options for encouraging enhanced new mandates proposed by the Team. No one option seemed to the group to address all of the issues which confront this new approach.

OPTION ONE: One possibility is a Bureau with one Deputy Assistant Administrator, and a strengthened FDC/PPE reporting directly to the ANOAA In this scenario, present organizational units would remain as they are, but with a much stronger focus on internal coordination within the Bureau, e.g, FDC/FDA, FDCIFFP, and FDC/FDC/PVC, and much stronger external cooperation with Geographic Bureaus to

. ensure that FDC is more mainstream than it is today, and that its value-added in emergen-cy response, food aid competency, assistance in meeting the "gap" in the development continuum, and playing a leadership role in PVO use and strengthening is more fully developed.

OPTION TWO: An alternative structure which was proposed by several interviewees. was to divide the Bureau into functions areas rather than divisions by resource (inputs) as is currently the case. This could result in division into two major sections, emergency response/humanitarian assistance/transition on the one hand and developmental programs and institutional strengthening on the other. This approach recommends two DAAs per the attached chart. 'This approach would allow more explicit linkage of food aid and dollar resources in meeting like objectives. It would also strengthen. the Bureau's ability to address the relief to development continuum. There are is also a down-side to dividing developmental programs from a continuum approach.

36

What is clear to the majority of the Team is that the new integrated approach to relief, humanitarian and transition functions must be accepted and mandated by the top of the Bureau and the Agency. By the same token, increased focus on PVO coordination and institutional strengthening must also be accepted and required if these functions are to be enhanced. With this commitment, then the correct structure should follow. Re-structuring the Bureau without this commitment would not lead to the desired changes in focus and function.

v. c. Staffina

The Team has spent a considerable amount of time discussing the staffmg issues in the Bureau and have concluded that there is an inadequacy in numbers as well as quality of staff in most Offices in the Bureau. These factors are certainly a major issue in FDCIFFP, FDC/FDA, FDC/PPE and FDC/FDC/PVC. Further discussion of staffing issues is incJuded in Section V., Analysis of Individual Offices.

The Team is recommending increases in direct hire staff given our strong belief that current levels are untenable and place the Bureau in a position of having to manage increasing levels of resources and heightened vulnerability with far too few USDH.

This is especiaJ1y true in FDC/FDA, FDC/FFP and FDC/PPE. Contracting staff has performed welJ for the Bureau and have been used to supplement direct hire personnel. These non-direct hires provide expertise in areas that are critical shortages in the Agency. Any move to reduce this resource would make an already untenable situation impossible. FOC should consider; along with the suggested shift in its mission, shifting some technical services to analytical tasks. A modest increase in level of technical services would also be acceptable.

Of equal importance is the question of the quality of staff. Traditionally, Food for Peace and Disaster Assistance have not been considered mainstream functions. The majority of Bureau vacancies have historically been in these two offices. The Agency has done little, for example, to recruit food aid expertise or to proVide sufficient training in food issues. The Team believes that if the Bureau focuses its functions on those of the relief to development contin~um and institutional strengthening and defines new approaches to these areas, the jobs win. be seen as more' attractive.

Agency leadership could help increase the level of attractiveness to this Bureau by agreeing that work in humanitarian and food aid, voluntary agency

..

37

relationships is of critical importance and service in this organization could lead to rewards in assignments and stronger consideration for promotion. As part of this commitment, the Agency should reinstitute recruitment of Backstop 15 Food for Peace Officers. In the past, this Backstop has been used as a means of entering the Agency and then switching to more desirable Backstops. Therefore, recreation of the backstop will not completely address the staffing issue. The Bureau shouJd, however, pursue this option and formulate recruitment pJans in consultation with HRDM.

Training options should also be considered. HRDM, in consultation with the Bureau, should design specialized training where Jacking. For example, in food aid management, addressing both the needs of externaJ and internaJ target groups; link this with the realities of recruiting for the disciplines which are under-developed and under­supported (food aid, disaster assistance). Additionally, the Team strongly recommends that HRDM offer more training for middle managers. The Management Skills course should be given more regularly to USAID/W staff.

FOC ",in need priority consideration in filling new positions in FDCffI, FDC/FDA, FDC/PPE as weU as critical Food For Peace positions that have been vacant for many months. The Bureau wiU need the assistance of HRDM to ensure that the Bureau receives this priority.

The Team is concerned that, in the course of right-sizing which includes abolishing two Deputy designations (each currently incumbered by women, one minority), the Administration's and Agency's concern for advancing diversity in the workplace will be undermined. While we realize Agency management is aware of the potential problem USAID-wide, the Team feels it important enough to FOe to express our concern in this report.

The Bureau currently has 102 direct hire positions (fun-time and part-time) and 84 contract positions aUocated by Office as fonows:

DIRECfHIRE Office of the Assistant Administrator 7 Office of Management 6 Office of Program, Planning & Evaluation 12 Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance 24 Office of Food for Peace 2S Office of Private and Voluntary Cooperation 22 Office of American Schools & Hospitals Abroad 6

.. TOTAL 102

~ o o 1

49 12 22 o

84

38

VI. IMPACT OF USAlD REORGANIZA170N

The primary impact of the USAID reorganization, in theory at least, is to give greater importance to the FOC Bureau that has been the case in the past. There is a stronger focus on humanitarian assistance in new USAID strategy language and the Congressional Presentation. A new initiative to stimulate a more active role by the Agency in transition into development is the establishment of the Transition Initiatives Staff. USAID's leadership role in this field is comparable to the role USAID has played in the past in 'such areas as family planning, child survival, AIDS and those in which its early involvement has served as a standard to entice other donor institutions to become involved. The question of how we move from relief to ensure that we have a stable sustainable economy in a country is a matter which requires urgent attention by the total donor community.

The reduction of 20 some missions and further changes which may take place . could lead to increased work load for such organizations as FDC/FDA and FDC/FFP. In

the past, the Bureau has relied upon a local missions to monitor and implement preparedness and mitigation activities or continuation of relief work and assistance programs. With the Mission gone, it devolves upon either regional institutions or USAID Washington to ensure that the efforts are successful. Time will be required to see the impact of these changes.

VIII. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDA170NS

1. That the AA's office needs to take an even more aggressive role in ~nsuring that there is solid communication internally among Bureau units in addressing disaster, food aid policy and PVO issues.

2. That priority should be given to supporting a strengthened FDCIPPE.

3. That communication between FDCIFFP and FDC/FDA be enhanced.

4. That a systematic outreach to the Regional Bu~eaus to improve cooperation be established by the AA.

S. That the special assistant position be eliminated in the AA's office.

39

6. That the AA request a significant review to determine the long-term feasibility of organizing FDC offices more by functional lines and less by resources toward the ultimate goal of delineating FDC offices by relief, transition and sustainable development functions.

7. The Team recommends deletion of two positions provided FDC/M continues to be managed by a strong Director. The Team notes that with a staff of four, a justification will be required to support a separate unit for this staff. The Team did consider merging the Management Office with the Program Office but based on past experience with this type of structure, opted for a separate unit.

8. That the GS-11 audit position be used to offset one of the position increases in FDC/PPE and that the function reside with the controller.

9. That a net total of three additional positions be approved for FDC/PPE: two grant officers and two technical analysts for Policy and Analysis.

10. The Team recommends that an additional minimum DH staff of four is needed in FDCIFDA However, we suggest the Agency review the recommendations of the Booz-AJlen report due in late January to determine the adequacy of the staff level.

11. That there be an increase in FDC/FDA strategic planning in protracted emergency situations. This will improve the coordination and consistency on decision­making in country situations. This must involve Regional Bureaus and other FDC offices (including FDC/PPE).

12. That there be increased FDCIFDA contingency planning for both short and longer term emergencies. Once again this will take commitment and coordination with Geographic Bureaus as well.

13. There is a need to train FDCIFDA contract staff on USAID policies and procedures to facilitate coordination and effective country programming.

14. That FDCIFFP and FDCIFDA restructure into di~ions focusing on rapid response, protracted emergency and transition programs.

IS. Establish a small Transition Initiatives staff in FDC to give principal focus to Agency efforts on providing assistance to meet the "gap" in the .aid continuum.

16. Ensure that the USAID policy on humanitarian assistance covers the role of the FDc/TI staff.

40

17. That HRDM move immediately to staff this FDClfl.

18. That FDC/FFP vigorously pursue filling vacancies placing recruitment emphasis on analytical and technical skills. Recruitment for FDC/FFP/CPD vacancy should emphasize technical services in the areas of commodity availability, packaging, shipping and quality control.

19. That the Director, FDCIFFP, give higher priority to managing external relationships and est~blish and maintain procedures for discussions related to policy, strategy development and resource a])ocation.

20. That modest adjustments should be made in the staffing pattern, transferring one position from FDC/FFP/DP to FDC/FFP/CPD. The additional FDCIFFP/CPD position should support expanded functions i.e. budget analysis and accounting, standards and procedures and commodity handling.

21. . That FDC/FFP would develop strategies for integrated Title II programming across the relief through development continuum; this decision reinforces the need for FDC/FFP to focus its efforts on its special strengths and to devolve a close relationship of shared responsibilities with FDC/PPE.

22. That FDC/FFP expand its external support and outreach through: (a) increased technical support for emergency food needs assessments and DART participation, (b) increased coordination through routine meetings at Director and staff level regarding strategy development and resource allocations, (c) cross training programs with FDCIFDA and Geographic Bureaus.

23. That FDC/FFP limit its responsibility on Title III to technical support to Missions by the Operations Support Division. Title III ordering, commodity and transportation procurement woul" be delegated to OP{fRANS.

24. That FDC/PVC be restructured to have its two essential functions supported by operating units: (i) executive secretariat/outreach and (ii) grant administration. The information and regulatory functiol) would be under supervision of the office Director.

25. That the information and regulatory function in FDC/PVC be modified to eliminate duplication of functions with MJOP and MJFM; this task will be simplified if the decision recommended for FDCIFFP and FDC/PPE to include grant officer and controller capabilities in that office is accepted.

...

41

26. That Agency leadership make a concerted effort to make "inter-dependent" management a reality, using its PVO-USAID partnership team as a model; this is critical to the success of FDC/PVC's central mission - and even more so, to its being able to attract the talent needed to be successful.

27. That the level of FDC/ASHA staff resources should remain the same;

28. That one secretary positionin FDC/ASHA should be eliminated and replaced by an information management specialist;

29. That the title of FDC/ASHA Deputy be removed, given the small staff size .

..

42

IX. APPENDICES

Appendix A. People/Groups Interviewed

LIST OF INDIVIDUAlS INTERVIEWED

Douglas Stafford, Assistant Administrator Lois Richards, Deputy Assistant Administrator Nan Borton, Director, FDCIFDA Lou Stamberg, Director, FDC/PVC Len Rogers, Director, FDC/PPE David Joslyn, Director, FDC/FFP Mabel Meares, Acting Director, FDC/ASHA Steve Morrison, Special Assistant Barbara Blackwell, Deputy Director, FHNM

Focus Group. DivisioD Chiefs Barry Heyman, FDC/FDA Pete Bradford, FDC/FDA Lenora Watlington, FDC/PVC Sally Jones, FDC/PVC Tim Lavelle, FDC/FFP

Focus Group. Support StalT

Michele Cannon, FDC/FDA Barbara Trueheart, FDC/PPE Virginia Ostrich, FDC/PVC Pat Johnson,AA Pam Arrington, FDC/ASHA

Focus Group. Aeena Representatives

Harold Gray,F~lJI) Steve Tisa, GC Peggy Thome, HRDM Joe Frederick, LEG Carol Weiskirch, POL

Focus Group. <lfoerapbic Bureaus

Eric ZaUman, lAC Wayne Tate, LAC Art Silver, Asia Tom O'Keefe, NE Paul Tuebner. AFR Dina Esposito, AFR Ric Harber, AFR Jeanne Pryor, AFR

Focus Group. USDA

Skip Brown Donna Testerman

Focus Group. PVOs

Mike Frank, CRS Sean CalJahan, CRS Robert Bell, CARE Curt Schaeffer, CARE Ellen Levinson, Food Aid Coalition Kim Flemmer, ADRA Julia Taft, INTERACTION Lou Mitchell, PACT John Forsyth, LRS Todd King, ACDI

.. Focus Group. omce or Procurement

Garry Kinney Carolyn Eldridge Jim, JeckeU Bob Goldmaa Sharon Zavestoski

43

Focus Gamp. International Oaanizations

Paula Lynch, State RP

Ann KeUerer, State/lO Tom Beck, POUPPC Focus Group. Other

AJan Silva, ENI Paul Novick, AFR

Overseas Missions

Leticia Diu, Deputy"Director Uganda Marge Bonner, Director Ethiopia Carl Leonard, Director Bolivia

44

John Heard, Director, Office of Cooperation, Philippines Ronald Ullrich, Food for Peace Officer REDSO/Nairobi

45

Appendix B. Studies

LIST OF PREYlOUS STUDIES AND BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS

]) Functiona] Statement of Bureau for Food and Humanitarian Assistance (FHA), AID Handbook 17, January 30, ]993

2) Options in Contracting for Technical Support Services, Food and Humanitarian Assistance Bureau, prepared by Consultant, Irving Rosentha~ dated August 25, 1993

3) Report on "Food Aid, Management Improvements are Needed to Achieve Program Objectives", prepared by the General Accounting Office, dated July, 1993

4) Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance, Stress Assessment Project, prepared by Deborah J. DeWolfe, Ph.D., MSPH, October 1993

Other Documents:

Focus Group notes from discussion with FHA Senior Management on June ]7, 1993

Focus Group notes from discussion with FHA Division Chiefs, Deputies - no date available

Focus Group notes from discussion with FHA Support Staff on July I?, 1993

46

Appendix C. Proposed Staffing Pattern

..

BUREAU I'OR 1'000, DISUTD USISTUCB AKJ) CRISIS DDGBKDI'l'

OFFICE OF tBE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR, AA/FDC Assistant Administrator EX-04 Deputy Assistant Administrator FE Special Assistant AD-l8 Secretary GS-lO Secretary FS-06 Administrative Operations Asst GS-08

TRANSITION INITIATIVBS STAPF

Director

• position.

FE Transition Spec. Transition Spec. Administrative Asst. (Typing)

FS GS GS-06

OFFICE OF XANAGEMENT, FDC/M 4 Administrative Officer (Director) Administrative Officer Administrative Officer Administrative Officer Administrative Assistant

positions U FS-Ol

Secretary (Office Automation)

OFFICE OF PROGRAM, PLANNING AND Dir Ofc Prqm/Pl/Evl (Director) Supv Prog Ofc (Dep Dir) Controller Program Analyst

- Grant Off ic'er Grant Officer Secretary (O/A) Secretary (O/A)

GM-lJ GS-l2 GS-ll GS-08 GS-07

EVALUATION, ES-OJ FS-02 FS-Ol GS-lJ

GS-08 GS-07

contractor - System Administrator policy .. 4 Analyses section

Program Analyst Economist Disaster-Operations Officer Program Analyst Program Officer Program Officer Evaluation Officer

GS-l4 FS-02 GM-l4 GS-l3

FDC/PPE 15 positions

OFFICE OF U.S. PORBIGH DISASTER ASSISTANCB (PDC/OFDA) 28 positions Director, OFDA AD-l8 Foreign Affairs Officer FE Secretary (OA) GS-08 !L FDC to i4entify two positions for 4.l.tio~.

Com/Rec Management Asst. Office/Automation Assistant

PREVENTION, MITIGATION AND Supv Spec Projects Officer Disaster Operations Spcl Disaster Operations Spcl Secretary (OA) PSC - Economist MAS Fellow MAS Fellow

-2-GS-08 GS-OS

PRBPARBDKBSS DIVISION FS-Ol GS-13 GS-l4 GS-06

(PDC/OPDA/PMP)

Institutional contractors -- Bas ic •• alth Kanaq ... nt (BRM) Project Manager Evaluation Specialist Project Assistant Institutional contractors -- Labat Anderson Inc. (LAX) Training Specialist/Contract Manager Communications & Records Clerk Information Specialist Information Specialist Ihformation Specialist Information Specialist Information Specialist Information Specialist Information Specialist Information Specialist Training Specialist

DISASTER RESPONSE DIVISION Supv Spec Projects Officer Senior Disaster Operations Senior Disaster Operations Senior Disaster operations Disaster Operations Spcl Disaster Operations Spcl

(FDC/OFDA/DRD)

Disaster Operations Spcl Disaster Operations Spcl Disaster operations Spcl Disaster Operations Spcl Secretary (OA)

Spcl Spcl. Spcl.

PSC External Resources Officer PSC - Action Officer/DART Support PSC - Action Officer PSC - Action Officer PSC - Assistant Action Officer PSC - Assistant Action Officer PSC Assistant Action Officer PSC - Assistant Action Officer PSC - contingency Program Planner PSC - Action Officer PSC - Asst Action Officer

FS-Ol GM-14 GS-l4 GS-l4 AD-12 GS-13 GS-13 AD-l3 AD-13 GS-l3 GS-OS

ez

• • I ..

-J-

OPERATIONS SUPPORT DIVISION (PDC/OPDA/OS) Disaster Operations Spcl GM-14 Disaster Operations spcl. GS-l4 Disaster Operations Spcl. GS-l4 Disaster Operations Spcl GS-13 Disaster Operations Spcl GS-IJ Financial Operations Spcl GS-12 Contracts Specialist GS-09 Secretary (OA) GS-06 PSC - Disaster Logistics Specialist PSC - Disaster Operations Support Spcl PSC - Disaster Communications Specialist PSC - Program Operations Assistant PSC - Program Operations Assistant PSC - Program Operations Assistant PSC - Program Operations Assistant RSSA - USFS RSSA Manager RSSA - USFS Operations Assistant RSSA - USFS Operations Specialist RSSA - USFS Operations Specialist RSSA - USPHS Health Officer RSSA - USPHS Health Officer Institutional Contractors -- Macfadden' Associates, Inc. Program Manager Senior Contract Specialist Contract Specialist Contract Specialist Institutional contractors -- Labat Anderson Inc. (LAX) Management Information Systems Manager Programmer/Analyst System Administrator Data Entry Clerk

OFFICE OP FOOD FOR PEACB, FDC/FFP Supv Food for Peace Officer (Dir) Program Manager (Dep Dir)

25 positioJls FE GM-15

Program Analyst Secretary (OA) Secretary (OA)

EMERGENCY RELIEP DIVISION, Supv Program Analyst Program Analyst Food for Peace Officer Program Analyst

GS-IJ GS-08 GS-07

PDC/PFP/D GM-15 GM-14 FS-02 GS-13

• I I I

Food for Peace Officer Food For Peace Officer Secretary (OA) Contractor - Program Analyst

-4-

FS-02 FS-02 GS-06

•• Employee is currently serving as Actg. Division Chief & was given Temporary Prom. to GM-1S.

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS DIVISION, Supv Food for Peace Officer Food for Peace Officer Food for Peace Officer Program Analyst Program Analyst secretary (OA) Contractor - Project Manager

FDC/FFP/DP FS-Ol FS-02 FS-02 GS-13 AD-13 GS-06

Contractor - Prog Analyst/Dep Project Mgt Contractor - Program Analyst Contractor - Administrative Assistant

. Contractor - Administrative Assistant

COMMODITY AND PROCUREMENT Supv Program Analyst Program Analyst

DIVISION, FDC/FFP/CPD GM-14

Program Analyst Program Specialist Program Specialist Program Operations Asst (OA) Secretary (OA)

GS-13 GS-l3 GS-12 GS-09 GS-08 GS-06

Analyst Contractor - Project Mgr/Senior Contractor - Budget Analyst Contractor - Shipping Logistics Spcl Contractor - Title III/3unior Analyst Contractor - Data Technician Contractor - FFPIS System Administrator

OFFICE OF PRIVATE AND VOLUNTARY COOPERATION, FDC/PVC 23 positions II Director ES Program Manager (Deputy Director) GM-1S Secretary (OA) GS-08 Secretary (OA) GS-07

PVO Liaison , Institutional strengtbening Division, FDC/PVC/LIS

Supv. Program Analyst Program Analyst Program Analyst Program Analyst Program Analyst

FS/GM GS-l3 GS-l3 " GS-l2 AD-ll

-5-

Program operations Specialist

Special Assistant (IPA) Contractor - Administrative Support Contractor - Project Manager Contractor - Consultant for ACVFA

GS-09

Information and Proqraa Support Divilion, roc/PVC/IPS

Supv. Program Analyst Program Analyst Registration Analust secretary (OA)

Contractor - Accountant

GS-14 GS-l3 GS-l2 GS-06

Contractor - Registration Coordinator Contractor - Document Specialist Contractor - Systems Analyst Contractor - Senior Programmer Contractor - Administrative Support Contractor - Technical Support Coordinator Contractor - Adminstrative Support Contractor - Financial Manager

GRANTS DIVISION, PDC/PVC/GD Supv Program Analyst Program Analyst Program Analyst Program Analyst Special Projects Officer Prvt. Engerprise Officer Program Analyst _ Program operations Assistant

GM-14 GS-13 GS-13 GS-12 FS-02 FS-02 GS-14 GS-07

Contractor - Administrative Support TAACS Advisor - Child Survival Advisor Contractor - Project Manager Contractor - Child Survival Advisor Contractor - Child Survival Advisor Contractor - Child Survival Advisor PSC - Program Mgr (Farmer-To-Farmer) PSC - Program Asst. (Farmer-To-Farmer) Contractor - Administrative Support

U Includes IPA

OFFICE OF AMERICAN SCHOOLS AND HOSPITALS ABROAD, PDC/A8BA , positions

Supv Program Officer supv Program Analyst

FS-Ol GM-14

• I I ...

Program Analyst Engineering Officer Secretary Typing Program Operations Asst (OA)

GM-14 FS-Ol GS-08 GS-06

***Alice Wheeler presently on 120 day detail to PPC Bureau, Colomba Chow, GS-08, Adm Opns Asst, on detail to her position.

OFFICE OF POOD FOR PEACB, PAO AFPAIRS ROME ITALY Food for Peace Officer FE Personal Services Contrator

Personal Services Contractor

-6-

UNASSIGNED EMPLOYEES

. Special Assistant, AD-lS International Disaster Advisor, GM-lS

Administrative Officer, GS-ll Administrative Assistant, GS-8

Program Operations Specialist, GS-ll Program Opns. Asst., GS-07

I ',i .lj "

f ;j

1 --1 ,. ] ~ " '. ~ "

d c:: .g .j CIO

~ 0

I I l ,t ~ Q

1 .!:S "0

:~ c &

:-. .~

0.

~ <

tJ

1

IIJREAIJ FOR FOOD, DISASTER ASSISTANCE AND CRISIS IIANAOBliEIfI'

Deputy Aula tant AciIIiniltralor

Off ice of tbe Alliltant Ad.iniltrator

I

Deputy Aula'e .. t Adai .. i. tra tor

Office of Pro •• a. ~ Pla •• I., a.d Evaluallo.

Office of P.lvate and Volunta.y Coope.ation

Office of Forei8. Dilaster Aisistance

~ Office of, Pood for Peace

. ~e.ica. Schooll a.d ~ Holpitall Abroad

"anage.ent Staff

Transition Initiativel Staff

~

•

aJRI!.MJ FOR FOOD. DISASTER ASSISTANCE AND CIUSIS' "ANAGSlEN'l'

Assistant Ad.inistrator ---_.--------------_. Deldty Assistant

.1nistrator

Transition Initiative t-~ .. anafe.ent Staff Salf

J I I I Office of

Office of Foreila PI'0lra. Planninl Office of Office of Pl'ivate aad ~ericaa fcbooll and Dl ••• tel' AI.l.taace aa E"aluatioD Food for Peace Voluntary Coopel'atioa HOlpita • Abl'oad

•

,