Foreign Aid

Issues Concerning U.S. University Participation Gao ID: NSIAD-89-38 April 11, 1989

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed efforts by the Agency for International Development (AID) and the Board for International Food and Agricultural Development (BIFAD) to implement title XII of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, which encourages the involvement of U.S. land-grant, sea-grant, and eligible universities in AID development activities, focusing on: (1) the impact of changes in the AID budgetary and administration environments on title XII implementation; (2) procurement issues that hinder title XII implementation; and (3) whether there has been improvement in AID-university efforts to increase commitment to supporting international agricultural development activities.

GAO found that title XII project activity declined between 1982 and 1988, and officials believe that the downward trend will continue because of: (1) a decrease in the primary funding source for title XII activities; (2) changing congressional and AID priorities; and (3) the reluctance of some AID staff to use title XII universities. GAO also found that: (1) neither AID nor BIFAD accurately tracked title XII activities; (2) AID has not submitted required annual reports to Congress since 1984; (3) although AID has issued several impact studies on university-implemented projects, the studies do not fully discuss all issues pertinent to title XII; (4) AID did not require its contracting officers to evaluate university compliance with the National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges' (NASULGC) principles regarding international development activities; (5) BIFAD has not developed a comprehensive register of title XII universities which it could use to match university capabilities with AID needs; (6) AID was reluctant to use set-asides limiting contractor competition for title XII projects to title XII universities because it did not have confidence in universities' capabilities and did not want to limit competition; and (7) the AID set-aside procurement mechanism was not consistent with statutory competition requirements.

Recommendations

Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.

Director: Team: Phone:


The Justia Government Accountability Office site republishes public reports retrieved from the U.S. GAO These reports should not be considered official, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Justia.