Email 
Print 
World Vision scandal puts spotlight on efforts to stamp out aid corruption
Written by: George Fominyen
A schoolboy eats a plate of food in Nairobi's Kibera slum.
REUTERS/Finbarr O'Reilly
REUTERS/Finbarr O'Reilly
With a $1 million alleged fraud case in Liberia, World Vision has become the latest aid agency to be embroiled in a corruption scandal. The Christian organisation has rushed to implement new systems to prevent such abuse in the future, but analysts say fear of negative publicity, lack of external monitoring and a degree of complacency are hampering efforts to stamp out corruption in the aid world. The Liberian case involves three former World Vision officials who are accused of stealing food and construction materials meant to help people recover from the country's 14-year-long civil war. They allegedly masterminded a scam in which food aid was sold for profit in local markets. Corruption in humanitarian emergencies is widespread, particularly in countries that already have high levels of graft. Yet aid agencies say little about this problem because they fear it will harm their reputation and donations, analysts say. George Ward, senior vice-president for international programmes at World Vision United States, told AlertNet the Liberian case had been a "heavy blow" for the organisation. To avoid a repeat, World Vision has taken a number of steps, including increased field oversight of programs and improved background check procedures. It also funded training programs to increase the ability of local staff to detect fraud. In addition, the aid agency enhanced its international, 24/7 "integrity hotline" which World Vision employees can call confidentially if they become aware of anything suspicious. WHY IS AID PRONE TO CORRUPTION? Dishonest staff are not the only problem. Some anti-graft watchers also blame corruption on a lack or resources for external monitoring. "Often, in an effort to cut overhead costs, on-site external monitoring is de-prioritised. Regular audits only pick up areas where procedures have not been followed, not where procedures have been manipulated to cover up fraud," says Jessica Shultz, programme coordinator at the Norway-based U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre. In addition, there is a sense of complacency towards corruption. "Paying bribes to get goods past a road block, for example, may seem acceptable at the height of an emergency when lives may really be at stake. However, that thinking is being challenged now even in emergency situations," Shultz said. A notorious corruption case surfaced in 2002 when a study brought to light allegations of widespread sexual exploitation of refugee children in Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone by aid workers and peacekeepers from 40 agencies in exchange for relief supplies. Food distribution, a cornerstone of humanitarian assistance, is particularly vulnerable because the complex logistics of aid delivery make corruption hard to detect. Moreover, food is a valuable commodity and there are many opportunities for corruption in the process of shipping, storing and distributing food aid. The World Food Programme says it has set up a system that aims to provide food directly to women and heads of families. People are registered before the food is delivered and there's post-distribution monitoring to ensure it has been used by those it was intended for. Following the Liberian case, World Vision has opted for inspection at all levels of the process. "When inspectors (receive) the documents (that) have been signed by recipients (of food aid), they take them back to the villages and they re-interview the recipients to ensure that the people did receive the food. We do not take our internal documents at face value," Ward said. SPEAKING OUT Analysts believe an important first step that agencies can take in tackling corruption is to promote open discussion. "Corruption remains a taboo topic," said Sarah Bailey, author of a policy brief on corruption for the British Overseas Development Institute (ODI) think-tank. "Agencies should make sure that staff and aid recipients have channels to safely report suspected abuses. If people feel intimidated or that they are risking their job in reporting abuses, this presents a serious disincentive. "We need to encourage aid agencies and aid workers to confront corruption honestly and openly - if it remains a taboo topic or agencies withhold assistance then no one will win - least of all the people who need assistance." Providing recipients of aid with better information about the process also improves openness. Experts say more needs to be done to make sure that assistance is transparent and that people have ways to communicate suspected fraud. Anti-corruption organisation Transparency International is producing a handbook on preventing corruption in humanitarian assistance based on research with the ODI and Tufts University in the United States, due for publication later this year. Both high-level official support and grass-roots activism are also crucial in the fight against aid corruption. Liberia's President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf spoke out against corruption last week when the World Vision case came to light. The scandal also galvanised about 15 civil society organisations to hold a march in the capital Monrovia on Tuesday. The participants presented a memorandum to the U.S Ambassador to Liberia, asking that no visa be given to people under investigation for corruption. Read more on how corruption is affecting aid work and what can be done to tackle it in our Q+A with Transparency International.
Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.
We welcome argument but AlertNet will not publish comments that are racist, abusive or libellous.
7 responses to “World Vision scandal puts spotlight on efforts to stamp out aid corruption ”
Please note that comments should not be regarded as the views of Reuters.
Leave a Reply
When you submit a comment to us we request your name, e-mail address and optionally a link to a website. Please note where you submit a website address, we may link to it via your name. By sending us a comment, you accept that we have the right to show the comment and your name to users. Although we require your email address, this will not be published on the site, and is only required to enable us to check facts with you, e.g. if you are making a claim we can not confirm easily. Additionally, if you would like your comment removed at anytime, you'll have to use this e-mail address when you contact us. To remove a comment at any time please e-mail us at blogs-(at)-reuters-(dot)-com (address obscured to avoid spam) specifying who you are and what you would like removed. We moderate all comments and will publish everything that advances the post directly or with relevant tangential information. We reserve the right to edit comments in order to maintain the quality of the comments, and may not include links to irrelevant material. We try not to publish comments that we think are offensive or appear to pass you off as another person, and we will be conservative if comments may be considered libelous. Reuters will use your data in accordance with Reuters privacy policy. Reuters Group is primarily responsible for managing your data. As Reuters is a global company your data will be transferred and available internationally, including in countries which do not have privacy laws but Reuters seeks to comply with its privacy policy.
Unlike some other content on this website, the written content in this article may be republished or redistributed by any means free of charge. Any use of photographs and graphics on this website is expressly prohibited. You must check whether written content contained in other articles on this website may be republished or redistributed without the express permission of Reuters or the relevant third party provider.
11 Jun 2009 08:41:32 GMT
This should not be surprising really as many international NGOs are not properly monitoring not only how their funds are being spent but also how their programmes are being managed and activities are being carried out. I have worked for international NGOs for 4.5 years and I am still connected to the humanitarian world. My own first hand experiences include money (about US$10,000 including money paid by patients to access the international NGO operated health clinics) going missing from a project office because not a single senior manager had bothered to do a cash count in 2 years (possibly because it required a field trip to a not so pleasant area). Many other friends of mine have reported serious financial discrepancies by both expatriates and national staff from well known international NGOs. I have experienced first hand donor reports being written about all the activities that are being conducted but yet the actual quality of the activities are very poor. On paper it all sounds wonderful but when you visit the projects and see for yourself the quality is not there. One friend worked for an international NGO that claimed they were experts in malaria yet they didn't even have a malaria protocol or manual. As humanitarian workers for international NGOs we have a responsibility to be professional and to provide quality services. While many individuals and organisations do do this, there are still many others who do not, or at least not consistently. Every day as I scan humanitarian websites I see new NGOs which I have never heard of before. Who is monitoring these NGOs to make sure they really are delivering what they say they are delivering? When people write that despite all the aid provided, change has not come to many developing countries, then as humanitarian workers, donors and NGOs we seriously need to look at our own part in this failure to improve the lives of people who seriously need help! .
12 Jun 2009 02:40:25 GMT
It is since long that this problem has been hampering aid work. One coula go as far as saying that corruption kills as is written in an interesting article, see http://taps4all.wordpress.com/2008/09/27/humanitarian-corruption-kills/
At that time there were many allegations against large organisations and government officials involved in re-construction following the Tsunami of 2004 inb south Asia. Surprisingly very little happened. A brief survey showed that 68 % of respondents said that their organisation did not respons immediately to allegations of fraud, and out of these 2/3 only did do something when their was proof of corruption. I believe that there is still a big job for agencies, (with Transparency International in the lead) AND governments to improve their anti-corruption records!14 Jun 2009 17:45:52 GMT
. . .
Hmmmm ... I respect Transparency International's efforts over the years, but am always doubtful when they are presented as unquestioned paragons of integrity. In my own country, the Cook Islands, a national report was released in 2004, authored by two people both suffering serious, undeclared conflicts of interest. A disastrous hotel project and the controversial offshore industry did not rate a mention, despite author links to both, corruption instead being blamed on "traditional attitudes." Questions sent by this agency to Transparency International about how it vets its country consultants for conflicts of interest remain unanswered despite several requests over the years. Out of 90 national chapters contacted for comment only one - Papua New Guinea - bothered to respond to concerns about conflicts of interest within Transparency International. http://avaiki.blogspot.com/16 Jun 2009 12:45:21 GMT
The World Vision story is just the tip of the corruption in that organization. George might have outlined plans to avoid this scandal that took place several years ago but the corruption continues. The National Directors of Chad, Congo, Malawi, Tanzania have all been removed from office due to corruption. The wissle blower policy of Worl Vision in there to protect the image of the oganization but not for the benefit of the children they claim to support.
20 Jun 2009 16:10:06 GMT
The problem is the do gooders are co-opted as windo dressing for imperial projects. The do gooders are set up and financed to give a feel good image to the western regime looking to steal African resources.
If in addition the do gooders can bribe enough people well that is just icing on the cake. The Islamic relief organizations live on 1% of the money being stuffed on the western do-gooders yet provide more relief than world vision and rest of US based "do-gooders". Muslim organizations operating successfully on 1% have been repeatedly banned by the Bush regime because they were actually doing something usefull rather than blowing millions just to look as if they are doing something usefull. One of the biggest frauds of these so called Christian aid was the fraud of slavery Sudan. People would come claim they need money to free slaves then it would turn out it was the same slaves being freed over and over again. http://www.globalpolitician.24 Nov 2009 12:58:06 GMT
The moderator I am a producer with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's international affairs program, Foreign Correspondent, and have been investigating World Vision for some time. I am wondering if there's any possibility of getting in contact with Martin who left a comment on 16 June 2009. He may be helpful for me to talk to. Our conversation would be confidential. Foreign Correspondent's website is at www.abc.net.au/foreign. Cheers Mary Ann Jolley
24 Nov 2009 13:00:12 GMT
Forcing people to change faith to be able to receive aid/help should also be condemned and punishable just like child abuse