Grave concern about where UNICEF money is going
UN agencies UNICEF and UNFPA are sitting on billions of dollars of unspent cash, and are guilty of “gross” failures of transparency, says a confidential audit carried out at the request of Norway’s government.
Both agencies refused to disclose information on staff salaries and expenses such as travel allowances.
According to a news report by Wendy Wright of C-Fam, the auditor also found that donors have “little knowledge regarding the ultimate destiny” of funds.
Wright wrote that UNICEF, for example, is free to spend money donated to it wherever it chooses, despite the particular project that earned it.
The study covered five UN agencies, seeking to discover “where the money goes.” It found that UNFPA and UNICEF had $3.2 billion in cash in 2009, and that in 2008 UNICEF earned $109 million in interest alone.
Approached by Fox News, UNICEF and UNFPA refused to answer questions, other than claiming the cash reserves were earmarked for future work on programmes.
Details on UNICEF’s overheads were lacking, said the auditor, and scraps of information on expenditures make “it difficult to track use of funds from headquarters down to the ultimate beneficiaries on the ground.”
Nor could UNICEF account for expenditures within countries, which is the majority of its spending, earning a “gross failure” rating from the auditor.
The study warned that the hoard of money “implies that substantial donor funding is not being used for development purposes.” Donors may be reluctant to fund the UN until the “reserves are utilised.”
The report found that the population control agency, UNFPA, was unable, or unwilling, to account for $200 million a year channelled to governments and non-governmental groups.
It refused to disclose details of salaries, travel, consultant costs, and other items. The auditor declared, “UNFPA fails grossly” in its official commitment to transparency.
The World Food Program (WFP) was the only one of the five agencies to be judged transparent and its performance “impressive”.
The UN Development Program had $5 billion in cash reserves, invested large amounts on bonds, and almost doubled personnel costs in the last decade.
The UN High Commission on Refugees did not have a cash stockpile but refused to disclose spending, particularly on staff costs.
Wright commented that “for years UN agencies have resisted divulging their finances. Government officials have suspected the lack of transparency hides lavish salaries and expensive travel.”
She added that “diverting funds to non-governmental groups provides a coterie of accomplices who defend the UN agencies. Shadowy accounting often signals systemic waste, fraud and abuse.”
The 2-volume draft report, written by the consulting firm IDC, has yet to be published.
Both agencies refused to disclose information on staff salaries and expenses such as travel allowances.
According to a news report by Wendy Wright of C-Fam, the auditor also found that donors have “little knowledge regarding the ultimate destiny” of funds.
Wright wrote that UNICEF, for example, is free to spend money donated to it wherever it chooses, despite the particular project that earned it.
The study covered five UN agencies, seeking to discover “where the money goes.” It found that UNFPA and UNICEF had $3.2 billion in cash in 2009, and that in 2008 UNICEF earned $109 million in interest alone.
Approached by Fox News, UNICEF and UNFPA refused to answer questions, other than claiming the cash reserves were earmarked for future work on programmes.
Details on UNICEF’s overheads were lacking, said the auditor, and scraps of information on expenditures make “it difficult to track use of funds from headquarters down to the ultimate beneficiaries on the ground.”
Nor could UNICEF account for expenditures within countries, which is the majority of its spending, earning a “gross failure” rating from the auditor.
The study warned that the hoard of money “implies that substantial donor funding is not being used for development purposes.” Donors may be reluctant to fund the UN until the “reserves are utilised.”
The report found that the population control agency, UNFPA, was unable, or unwilling, to account for $200 million a year channelled to governments and non-governmental groups.
It refused to disclose details of salaries, travel, consultant costs, and other items. The auditor declared, “UNFPA fails grossly” in its official commitment to transparency.
The World Food Program (WFP) was the only one of the five agencies to be judged transparent and its performance “impressive”.
The UN Development Program had $5 billion in cash reserves, invested large amounts on bonds, and almost doubled personnel costs in the last decade.
The UN High Commission on Refugees did not have a cash stockpile but refused to disclose spending, particularly on staff costs.
Wright commented that “for years UN agencies have resisted divulging their finances. Government officials have suspected the lack of transparency hides lavish salaries and expensive travel.”
She added that “diverting funds to non-governmental groups provides a coterie of accomplices who defend the UN agencies. Shadowy accounting often signals systemic waste, fraud and abuse.”
The 2-volume draft report, written by the consulting firm IDC, has yet to be published.
