Overview
Title
To authorize and encourage the United States Agency for International Development to pursue a model of locally led development and humanitarian response and expand engagement with local partners and increase its local partner base.
ELI5 AI
H.R. 7710 is a plan to help America's aid agency, USAID, work more closely with local communities around the world. It wants to give them more money and make it easier for them to participate, hoping they can better solve their own problems and make their communities stronger.
Summary AI
H.R. 7710, also known as the "Locally Led Development and Humanitarian Response Act," aims to encourage the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to work more closely with local partners in development and humanitarian efforts. The bill proposes simplifying access to resources, allowing local languages in applications, and increasing direct funding for local entities to enhance community leadership and sustainability. It calls for policy changes within USAID to support these goals, including streamlined performance requirements and flexible funding. Additionally, it mandates annual reporting on USAID's progress toward locally led development and assesses recruitment and retention of contracting officers.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
This legislative bill, known as the "Locally Led Development and Humanitarian Response Act," aims to direct the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) towards a model emphasizing locally led initiatives. The goal is to foster more sustainable and effective development and humanitarian outcomes by increasing direct engagement and funding to local partners. The bill outlines various measures to simplify processes, enhance local engagement, and adjust existing policies and regulations to facilitate these objectives.
Summary of Significant Issues
Several issues arise within the bill that may affect its implementation and outcomes:
De Minimis Indirect Cost Rate: The bill proposes an increase in the de minimis indirect cost rate to 15 percent for local entities. While intended to provide greater flexibility, this could result in higher overhead costs without demonstrable benefits, leading to potential wasteful spending.
Transparency and Accountability: One provision exempts local entities from certain reporting requirements, which could undermine the transparency and accountability of federal fund usage.
Competition and Favoritism: The authority to limit competition for USAID contracts to local entities could inadvertently favor some organizations over others, leading to inefficiencies or exclusion of viable competitors.
Vague Definitions: Terms such as 'local partner' lack clear definitions, which can cause inconsistencies in how the bill is enacted and applied, leading to possible disparities in resource allocation.
Resource Allocation: The bill suggests that working with local partners may demand more time and resources than traditional partners. Without careful management, this could strain budgets and lead to inefficient use of resources.
Language and Administrative Costs: Allowing proposals in local languages sounds inclusive, yet it could escalate administrative costs due to the broadness of the provision and lack of specified language criteria.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
The bill has the potential to significantly impact both the general public and specific stakeholders in various ways:
Broad Public Impact:
For the general public, particularly in communities where USAID operates, the bill's emphasis on empowering local entities could lead to more relevant and sustainable development projects. This approach aligns development initiatives closely with local needs and priorities.
Impact on Local Partners and Organizations:
Local organizations set to benefit from this bill would gain easier access to USAID resources, enabling them to scale their projects and have a more significant impact. However, if increased costs from higher indirect rates aren't managed, organizations may face financial burdens.
Impact on USAID and Government Entities:
For USAID itself, the transition to a more locally focused approach demands adjustments in policies, staffing, and resources. This might strain current capacities, but if implemented effectively, it could foster stronger local partnerships and more impactful outcomes.
Impact on International Implementers and other Contractors:
International organizations might find themselves sidelined as the focus shifts to local entities. However, clear guidelines and regulations to manage this shift can help maintain fairness and partnership opportunities for all implementing entities.
In conclusion, while the bill sets a visionary path towards locally led development and humanitarian response, careful consideration and resolution of the identified issues are essential for its success. The potential benefits of more sustainable development are significant, but only if the implementation challenges are addressed with due diligence.
Financial Assessment
The bill H.R. 7710, titled the "Locally Led Development and Humanitarian Response Act," includes several financial considerations and provisions that relate to facilitating and supporting locally led initiatives through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The following comments analyze the financial aspects of the bill and address related issues.
Financial Allocations and Provisions
Increased De Minimis Indirect Cost Rate
The bill proposes an authority for USAID to increase the de minimis indirect cost rate to 15 percent for local entities receiving assistance awards. This change is intended to make it easier for local organizations with limited resources to manage funds from USAID. However, there is concern that increasing overhead costs without clear justification could lead to wasteful spending, particularly if there is no rigorous accounting for these additional costs.
Competition Authority for Local Contracts
H.R. 7710 authorizes the USAID Administrator, or designees, to award contracts with competition limited to local entities if such actions result in cost savings or strengthen local capacity. This provision is capped at $25,000,000 per acquisition award, and such awards cannot exceed more than 10 percent of the amounts appropriated to USAID each fiscal year. While this could help bolster local capacities and quicken local project implementations, it introduces potential risks of favoritism and inefficiencies if local competition inadvertently excludes other qualified entities.
Relation to Identified Issues
Transparency and Oversight Concerns
The aforementioned increase in the indirect cost rate and the exemption from standard federal reporting requirements for local entities could potentially reduce transparency and accountability. Without comprehensive oversight and justification of these financial leniencies, the provisions might allow for funds to be allocated inappropriately or misspent. The bill’s mechanisms should include strict safeguards to ensure effective use of the allocated funds and maintain accountability, particularly for exempted entities.
Potential Resource Strain
Sections of the bill hint at extending availability of funds and the need for a more substantial staff presence, reflecting a significant commitment of time and resources to managing these local partnerships. These increased resource demands could strain USAID's budget and infrastructure if not properly managed, especially without clear delineations of where additional resources will originate. This could lead to inefficient allocation of financial resources.
Local Partner Definitions and Criteria
The lack of clear and consistent definitions for terms such as "local partner" could result in unequal distribution of resources and inconsistency in awarding funds. Clearly defined eligibility criteria and inclusion of compliance measures could mitigate risks of favoritism while ensuring financial resources are allocated effectively and equitably.
Administrative Cost Risks
The proposal to allow applications and proposals in local languages (without set criteria on language selection) raises concerns about the potential for higher administrative costs. Without proper budgetary constraints and guidelines, this could become a significant financial burden, affecting overall efficiency and administration costs related to monitoring and evaluating these proposals.
These financial aspects and their implications highlight the need for carefully considered operational and oversight frameworks when implementing the proposed legislation to ensure both efficacy and accountability in USAID’s efforts to advance locally led development.
Issues
The increase in the de minimis indirect cost rate to 15 percent for local entities in Section 7 may lead to higher overhead costs without clear benefit, potentially resulting in wasteful spending if not properly justified.
Exempting local entities from reporting requirements under the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act in Section 7 could reduce transparency and accountability in the use of federal funds, raising concerns about oversight.
The authority to limit competition to local entities for contracts in Section 7 may favor certain local organizations over others, which could lead to favoritism or exclusion of other deserving entities and potentially increase risk of inefficiency or higher costs.
Section 4's lack of clear definitions for terms like 'local partner' and criteria for eligibility could lead to inconsistencies in implementation and disparities in how resources are allocated.
The requirement for USAID to work with local partners as per Section 3 could require more time and resources than traditional partners, which might strain budgetary resources and lead to inefficient resource allocation if not managed well.
The broad language in Section 6 authorizing the acceptance of proposals in local languages could lead to excessive administrative costs or logistical challenges, as it lacks specific criteria on language selection or budget constraints.
The absence of clear oversight measures for the increased direct funding to local entities as stated in Section 3 may result in wasteful spending and misallocation of resources if funds are used ineffectively.
Section 3 implies greater staffing needs and extended availability of funds without clearly delineating the source of these resources, which may result in budget strains or misallocated resources.
Section 5 lacks specific metrics or benchmarks for assessing the integration of actions into USAID’s policies, leading to potential ambiguity in implementation and challenges in monitoring progress.
The provision in Section 4 for solving the shortage of contracting officers might lead to rushed or inadequately vetted staffing decisions, potentially compromising the quality and effectiveness of USAID initiatives.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of this act gives it the official name: "Locally Led Development and Humanitarian Response Act."
2. Purpose Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The purpose of this section is to motivate the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to focus on development and humanitarian efforts led by local communities and to increase collaboration with local organizations.
3. Sense of Congress Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Congress believes that development and humanitarian efforts are more effective and long-lasting when led by local communities. They encourage USAID to increase direct funding to local groups, involve them in decision-making, and allow more resources and flexibility to work with these local partners.
4. Working with local partners Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines measures for USAID to enhance its collaboration with local partners by simplifying access to resources, offering different types of awards, reducing bureaucratic hurdles, and improving communication in local languages. It also emphasizes the need for better risk management, fair cost recovery, updated definitions of local partnership, and increased engagement and oversight, along with addressing staffing and procedural issues to support locally led development effectively.
5. Institutionalization of actions described in section 4 Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section requires the Administrator of USAID to start making plans and potentially creating new rules within 180 days to include the actions from section 4 into various USAID policies and regulations, like their Automated Directive System and Local Capacity Strengthening Policy.
6. Authority to accept applications, proposals, and contracting agreements in local languages and local language support Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
USAID is given the authority to accept applications or proposals in languages other than English if doing so helps local partners and USAID can still evaluate them effectively. Additionally, USAID must assess ways to support local partners using their local languages for various processes and report the findings to Congress within a year.
7. Modifications relating to the Code of Federal Regulations and other requirements Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The text outlines changes to regulations affecting USAID, including allowing a higher indirect cost rate for local groups receiving aid, offering reporting exemptions, and permitting contracts limited to local entities if it saves money or enhances impact. Additionally, it allows foreign entities to use their own accounting standards instead of U.S. standards for certain contracts.
Money References
- Such authority may not be used to make acquisition awards in excess of $25,000,000 and shall not exceed more than 10 percent of the amounts appropriated to USAID each fiscal year.
8. Annual report Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section requires the Administrator of USAID to submit an annual report to Congress and publish it online detailing USAID’s progress on locally led development, including the amount of funding managed by local entities, efforts to increase local program leadership, and assessments of various strategies and policies. It also includes evaluations of the use of new authorities and issues related to provisional indirect cost rates.
Money References
- Not later than 180 days after the end of each fiscal year following the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Administrator of USAID shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees and publish on USAID’s website a report on USAID’s progress to advance locally led development and humanitarian response, to include the following elements: (1) The amount of funding implemented directly and indirectly by local entities in the previous fiscal year, including all development and humanitarian assistance programs. (2) An assessment of how USAID is enabling more local leadership of USAID-funded programs, including recipients of direct funding, subrecipients and subcontractors to an international implementing partner, participants in a USAID program, or members of a community affected by USAID programming. (3) An assessment of progress implementing the Acquisitions and Assistance Strategy, including updated information on the ratio of the USAID Acquisitions and Assistance workforce to award dollars managed with comparison to other relevant agencies; the Local Capacity Strengthening Policy; the Policy on Locally Led Humanitarian Assistance; and any other relevant strategies and policies. (4) An assessment of how USAID is using new authorities granted in sections 6 and 7 and an assessment of the impact of these authorities on USAID’s ability to work with local partners.
9. Report on contracting officers Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section requires the Administrator of USAID to provide a report to the appropriate congressional committees within 180 days of the Act's enactment. This report should cover the recruitment and retention of contracting and agreement officers at USAID and include suggestions for improving these processes.
10. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section provides definitions for terms used in the Act. It specifies that "appropriate congressional committees" include specific committees in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, and that "USAID" stands for the United States Agency for International Development.