Since 2007 Transparency International (TI) has been working with a consortium of international NGOs to develop anti-corruption strategies and good practices for humanitarian agencies. TI believes that this can help to prevent the kind of corrupt diversion of humanitarian resources that allegedly has taken place with World Vision-administered aid in Liberia.
This Q+A by email with TI's Roslyn G. Hees, Senior Adviser, Global Programmes, addresses some key questions on corruption in the aid sector and how the organisation works with NGOs to tackle it.
Can TI estimate the scale of corruption in the humanitarian aid sector?
As an essentially hidden phenomenon, it is not possible to quantify the scope of corruption in humanitarian assistance, but it has an impact far beyond funds that are lost through fraud. Resources diverted as a result of corruption mean that humanitarian programs do not achieve their mission of saving lives and rebuilding communities. Corruption also damages humanitarian agenciesÂ? reputations internationally and with affected communities, and undermines organizational culture and staff morale.
Is corruption of the nature exposed by the alleged World Vision case in Liberia a widespread phenomenon within West and Central Africa?
Humanitarian assistance operations mostly take place in countries where corruption is endemic, as in many Sub-Saharan African countries. All of the African countries for which a UN appeal for contributions for humanitarian aid has been launched in 2008 score very poorly in TIÂ?s
Is this also present within the United Nations emergency/humanitarian aid systems?
There were several cases of corruption in the various humanitarian responses to the Asian tsunami, for example with Oxfam and Save the Children. Due to their scale and the countries where they operate, corruption is undoubtedly present in the humanitarian responses under the UN system, though we do not have specific examples of such.
To help them detect and prevent corruption, TI has approached the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)to work with it and its U.N. partner agencies to collaborate with TIÂ?s ongoing programme. Several reports have been published, the most recent in 2008, on the practice of sexual favours being requested by UN and other humanitarian staff as well as by peace-keeping forces in return for access to food aid or protection in West and Central Africa. TI considers sexual exploitation in return for humanitarian aid the most egregious form of corruption in humanitarian operations.
Which are the sectors in humanitarian aid that are most at risk of corruption?
- Procurement, human resources, accounting, vehicle and fuel management, and the supply chain (transport and storage) are the functional areas with the highest corruption risks.
- Food aid, shelter/construction, health programs involving high-value drugs, and IDP/refugee camps are the most risky sectors.
- The processes of needs assessment, targeting and registration of recipients, and distribution of assistance can be distorted so that non-target groups receive aid instead of the targeted beneficiaries. These forms of corruption may not be reflected in financial losses.
What is your advice to aid agencies on tackling corrupt practices in these areas?
TI is essentially asking humanitarian aid agencies to break the taboo, to put the issue on the table and together we can and should find and implement mechanisms to detect and prevent corruption for the benefit of the millions of people worldwide who depend on aid and to be accountable to those who are giving aid in the first place. The most important elements for ensuring that humanitarian assistance reaches its intended beneficiaries with appropriate relief are:
- Increased transparency and accountability. Humanitarian aid providers should ensure that information on their assistance programmes, including beneficiary eligibility criteria, entitlements and the processes for registration and distribution, are widely publicised and accessible to beneficiaries, community leaders and government authorities. This Â?downward accountabilityÂ? to recipient communities can empower them to help monitor the effectiveness and integrity of the humanitarian response.
- Effective complaints mechanisms. Humanitarian staff and beneficiaries should have access to safe, confidential and culturally appropriate complaints mechanisms. In this way they can alert humanitarian agency management to suspected abuses.
- Careful vetting of humanitarian staff and partner agencies. It is an essential part of due diligence to do thorough background checks on international and locally recruited staff and implementing partners. Reputation for integrity should be an integral part of such background checks. However, staff and partner performance must be continuously monitored through regular evaluations to ensure that they are behaving in accordance with agency values and codes of conduct.
- Go behind the Â?paper trailÂ?. Audits and other forms of compliance monitoring should not be limited to certifying the requisite documentation. Physical on-site monitoring, including random surprise visits, is essential to ensure that the documents presented as proof of compliance reflect the reality on the ground.
Would you say it is down to human resources or it is a systemic issue?
TI believes that corruption is a systemic issue in humanitarian aid, rather than merely the problem of a few Â?bad applesÂ? who take advantage of the opportunities for corruption in humanitarian contexts. Nonetheless, diligent vetting of staff before recruitment and thorough monitoring of aid distribution are important elements of any program to mitigate corruption in humanitarian aid. Systems are only as good as the people who implement them and all programs must be monitored on site to check for any discrepancies that could indicate abuse.
How do you explain that for years people could abuse the humanitarian aid process without being detected? Is there complacency or lack of stringent control?
We have no details of the World Vision case other than what is reported in the media and do not know the exact factors that contributed to that situation. However, it appears that normal financial and administrative controls were circumvented and that monitoring was not sufficiently thorough to detect the massive diversion of aid that took place. All of the agencies with whom TI is partnering to develop good practices in this regard, including World Vision, do have policies and stringent control systems aimed at preventing this kind of abuse, but these policies and systems must be continuously monitored to ensure that they are effectively implemented.
We do believe, based on field research, that corruption has been a kind of Â?tabooÂ? subject both within and among humanitarian aid providers until very recently. This could be interpreted as a kind of complacency that existing control systems were adequate and were working effectively.
For more on the subject read our analysis on efforts to stamp out corruption in humanitarian aid.
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
