Inter-American Development Bank

Questions Concerning Payment to Nicaragua Gao ID: NSIAD-89-167 July 5, 1989

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the Inter-American Development Bank's (IDB) loan disbursements to Nicaragua in November 1987, focusing on: (1) whether the payments complied with IDB regulations or violated U.S. law; (2) whether IDB should recover the funds; and (3) an audit memorandum the IDB Auditor General prepared concerning the transaction.

GAO found that IDB: (1) followed procedures in notifying Nicaragua in May 1987 that it was in arrears on loan payments, and in suspending disbursements on all Nicaraguan loans; (2) did not follow established procedures in clearing Nicaragua's arrearages, since it acted on notification that the Nicaraguan government had instructed the Central Bank of Nicaragua to clear the arrearages and did not actually receive the payments until November 20, 1987; (3) after investigating disbursements, released a memorandum providing information about the Nicaraguan loan disbursements, but not fully detailing the IDB Auditor General's conclusions and recommendations; (4) did not release the Auditor General's audit memorandum to the Department of the Treasury or participating countries; and (5) issued revised procedures to strengthen loan payment collection procedures. GAO also found that: (1) its lack of authority to audit internal IDB records precluded it from independently determining how Nicaragua actually used the November 1987 disbursements or confirming whether IDB implemented the revised procedures; and (2) Nicaragua again fell into arrears before the end of November 1987.

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.