UNICEF is not different from other UN organizations
In an attempt of self-preservation, many of us treat such scandals as individual and isolated cases. Guilty are always the others. We want to believe that corruption and mismanagement do not happen in UNICEF, which we take to be an organization of selfless altruists and humanitarians who have nothing than the welfare of all children at their heart.It is safe to assume that UNICEF has a similar proportion of scoundrels than any other UN agency. We do have our fair share of documented fraud and corruption, abuse of authority, mismanagement and sexual harassment.
The BBC article and film about the treatment of whistle-blowers in the UN was rushed to me few hours after their publication, by three colleagues, each telling their own stories of having observed or being the victim of corruption, abuse of authority, mismanagement and treatment of whistle-blowers in UNICEF. I could add many of my own experiences, not counting those that I learned about from my days in OIAI (Office of Internal Audit and Investigation).
In fairness, UNICEF has been adopting measures, zero-tolerance and whistle-blower policies, procedures and standards that are meant to control the phenomenon. UNICEF got its office of investigation as part of internal audit as late as 2006, and an ethics office in 2008, and there are ombudspersons, and an office for organizational culture. A listing of the more than 300 investigated cases closed by OIAI in 2021 is publicly available.
While we now should have confidence in UNICEF’s procedures regarding reported cases and the outcome of subsequent investigations, problems remain:
- Do UNICEF staff recognize a case of wrongdoing?
- Do UNICEF staff bring wrongdoing to the attention of management or oversight?
- Does management react, without bias?
UN privilege invites corruption
Staff members of the UN – including UNICEF – live in an environment of relative luxury, fantastic salaries, much privilege, growing budgets and little accountability. The immunity and status of being an international civil servant gives some staff members the unwarranted confidence that whatever they do will be ok. Unlike in the real world, we spend money that we didn’t have to earn. Driven by the need to increase expenditure, we can sink money into foolish and ill-planned projects. We can waste resources by hiring consultants to do what we originally were tasked to do ourselves.You don’t have to squander 3 million USD like the UNOPS Executive Director is said to have done. Adding extra days to a business trip 'for consultations' with full per diem is stretching the limits. Taking a UN car to go on vacation is more than enough to constitute corruption, no matter how you explain it. Does everyone know where the use of privilege ends and where corruption starts?
UNICEF, probably more than any other UN agency, depends on its reputation for voluntary donations. It may boost our reputation to sack a driver who sold some fuel coupons, but it may not be good for the organizations's reputation if a representative is found culpable of misreporting. The driver was sacked; the representative got a farewell party showcasing his achievements and was moved to a distant country.
As OIAI reports, only one third of all justified cases warrants disciplinary action by either DHR or executive management. Two-thirds of all justified and relevant complaints are referred back to the concerned UNICEF office for action, essentially saying that the office has a management issue. If managers actively support informal dispute resolution without bias towards their fellow managers or fear of conflict, it would not only save the organization a lot of money spent on investigations and bureaucracy, but also help to create a culture of trust, fairness and integrity.
What happens when one is accused and after a thorough investigation is cleared.
ReplyDeleteNo matter what the person is tainted in terms of career growth.
Unicef never issues apologies or will not provide any support to clear his/her name.
It’s just business as usual.
This is a good start Detlef. It is perhaps a little bit on the diplomatic side. The situation as I remember it was a lot worse, something UNICEF never lived up to. Corruption and other worse abuses were covered up and the culprits were paid to leave the organization with their loot and reputation intact. The organization's reputation had to be protected at all costs. Or is this something we should all solemnly agree to never ever mention? It may have improved since my days. I, of course, would not know, it is twenty years since I left UNICEF.
ReplyDeleteYour last paragraph puzzles me a bit. It seems as though you are asking the fox to guard the hen house.
Thomas Ekvall
UNICEF would be more likely to succeed to rid the organization of corruption if it was more transparent about past malpractices. All corruption must be dealt with decisively and nothing should be covered up to "protect UNICEF's reputation". Such coverups are likely to have the opposite effect. During and before my 30 years with UNICEF recruitment was often problematic, even corrupt. That is a problem for an organization that pays "exorbitant" salaries and depends on voluntary contributions. Such corruption, by definition, has the potential to stay with the organization for decades. Detlef, you know all about this, perhaps you could put your excellent and incisive writing skills to use on this topic next week.
ReplyDeleteThomas Ekvall
You may wonder why I am wading in. I have, after all, not had anything, whatsoever, to do with UNICEF for the past 20 years. Long before I left UNICEF I had concerns about how recruitment, corruption, and abuse were dealt with. When I noticed that the organization could also, blatantly, be used for political ends it was time to leave. So why am I writing this? Lars, the Swedish plumber who cleans blocked toilets and pays a monthly take-home pay every year to UNICEF and other aid organizations deserves a good deal. If Lars knew that his money had been lost to corruption he may not be so keen to part with a month's salary next year. But Lars was kept in the dark. UNICEF's reputation had to be protected. Perhaps my concerns are unwarranted and UNICEF does things well today. Is the alleged UNOPS case unique? Should I stop worrying?
ReplyDeleteThomas Ekvall
Dear Colleagues:
ReplyDeleteWhile it is good to read about concerns of colleagues with issues of corruption, I am surprised at the generic nature of many inputs. Over my more than 23 years in 7 country offices with at least 4 more post retirement. a few observations.
Under the umbrella term of corruption, sits a spectrum that goes from systematic fraud, to sloppiness that costs the organization money and reputation, to fiddling expenses, to actions that compromise the hiring process ( though to be fair, not always one that seems to provide the best candidates to blatant abuse of office for personal gain.
Much more attention is given to the areas of procurement, finance and travel but my contention is that programmatic decisions can have deleterious impacts on UNICEF bottom line both reputational and resource wise. In on major office, a progamme focal point was able, over two years, to spend more than US $ 400 000 to conduct process based exercises which had no perceptible impact on the project. As the s/m had internal political clout -- was quietly retired!! And yes, the usual paens of praise were sung. Impunity is corrosive, because it undercuts the compliant and energizes the bad apples.
While over time things improved, early audits were largely focused on the mechanics etc of procurement, finance and transfers, however, for example in one programme where under pressure from very senior officer, millions were spent to procure the wrong equipment -- later, thanks to country office vigilance, a link was proved with a global company and the person quietly dropped.
There is a lot of talk on accountability and hopefully now action too, as someone remarked, just catching drivers for selling tires of gasoline in scarce economies cannot be the only focus. Also, in response, very strict controls are placed, which then forestall timely response, surely there are other ways to monitor.
Also, the growing tendency for management teams to function at more ethereal levels, which means, the granular details are missed. In one instance, for example, the Rep asked a driver why he was getting such a large salary advance to see if there was an illness in the family and after some coaxing, it was revealed that he owed the senior driver, a large payment on his appointment, because the latter persuaded him that he( the Senior Driver) had put a good word in.
Where decisions are made that raise questions, the old practice of a Note for the Record, can actually work..3 years after my team filed such an NFR against someone in the office, he was finally caught red handed, with as they say in India, disproportionate assets, and viola our little NFR while not key, did its bit...
Lastly: I cannot overstate this: Visible adherence to the norms by senior staff is critical, its sets the tone and influences the team. Was fortunate to have some very good role models in this area -- they know who they are and the impact they had on a host of staff.
The salaries and entitlement issues matter if that is the only reason people are attracted to the U.N, these days, the best and the brightest are certainly not heading our way, because, we seem to have lost the mojo for providing stimulating and challenging work with opportunities for growth.
In fact, in many countries, the UN team would sometimes typify Govt systems as corrupt, and no doubt they were, but in my time in many LDCs, was always struck by how many professionals were not and worked diligently under adverse personal and professional circumstances. To this day, I remember and salute them...
Anyway, more later if this thread carries on...Samphe
Samphe - You seem to have similar experiences as I have. You are also equally generic. Perhaps we should keep it like that - at least for now. I know we can put meat on the bones and a bit of fat, here and there, should the need arise. Of course, the "thread should continue". Perhaps we could start to unravel some of the many and all too entangled ones. Something good could come out of it. If it would help, even a little, to put the large 10 billion dollar ship, that UNICEF is, back on a more even keel it would be worth it. I hope we can get more former staff to chip in. They know everything about the problems. I am eagerly awaiting more inputs. In the meantime, let us give a thought to Lars the Swedish toilet cleaner who pays for our generous pensions.
ReplyDeleteThomas Ekvall
There appears to be little interest in corruption on these pages. Are these issues that should stay under the carpet? What good could, after all, come out of digging up old corruption and abuse cases? It disturbs the peace and tranquility of our well-deserved retirement. This club of mutual admiration should really be reserved for reminiscing about little projects and meetings with our leaders. They did try to deal with corruption. There was a well-established scheme for paying back, in installments, what the corrupt tried to steal. It must have recovered a lot of money that would otherwise have been lost.
ReplyDeleteEven so, a thought should perhaps go to Lars, the Swedish toilet cleaner, who pays our pensions. Lars started to work at the age of 15 and is due to retire this year after 50 years of hard and dirty work. But things are not really so good for Lars. His pension only amounts to $900 a month. He has no assets and his small savings are being eaten into by inflation. But Lars is not complaining, he takes solace in having contributed one month's salary every year to UNICEF and other aid agencies.
Thomas Ekvall
On reflection, it must be wrong to cover up what actually amounts to crimes. Statutes of limitation though may make it impossible to have all old cases prosecuted. For example, I don't know what the statute of limitation is for sexual abuse in say the UK. However, sexual abuse cases should be prosecuted wherever possible. UNICEF owes that to the ones abused.
ReplyDeleteLars the Swedish plumber to whom we are all grateful has had to take early retirement. His knees did not take it any longer, those toilet floors were really hard on them. Lars has been a staunch social democrat and women's rights activist all his life and would like to see sexual abuse cases prosecuted.
Lars came from a poor family that could not afford much education. He had only eight years of primary school. Swedish scholarships that were given freely to many students from poor, faraway countries were not available to him. But, Lars never complains. He has now plenty of time on his hands and is taking classes to improve his English. It gives him better access to information about development aid that he is very interested in and proud to have contributed so much to. His findings are puzzling him though. He will let us know more of what he thinks once he has really dug into the information available.
Thomas Ekvall
Some good news from Lars, his knees are getting better. He loves the free time he has. He has added a class on how to use the internet. Lars never had time for the net when he worked, he was too exhausted when he came home in the evenings. Lars is using his new skills to look into UNICEF the organization he always buys Christmas cards from. Lars thinks they are expensive, but it is for a good cause. This morning Lars looked at the corruption/abuse/discipline issues and was surprised. His boss in the plumbing company dealt easily with such issues and he didn't even have a degree and wasn't paid well, but he was honest and had common sense. Serious cases such as theft and sexual abuse went straight to the police. Lars is starting to ask who these UNICEF managers are. He has also looked up how much they are paid. He is starting to wonder if the money, that he worked so hard for, went to pay these people.
ReplyDeleteYes, it did Lars (I haven't dared to tell him yet).
Thomas Ekvall
Amazing - only Detlef, Samphe, and Thomas are concerned about corruption and abuse among many thousands of employees and retirees with less than stellar history. When I worked for UNICEF we were only 7,000 staff with 1,200 in New York. In those days the US, the most powerful and richest country in the world, was the biggest beneficiary of UNICEF and in extension Lars' hard work. Had Lars known he may have thought it corrupt.
ReplyDeleteTalking about Lars, I had to tell him that some (I did not dare to say that 50 percent was) of his hard-earned money was used to pay these exorbitant salaries to people who can't even manage a subcontractor or "implementing partner". Lars says - why can't they call a spade a spade? Lars' plumbing company had many subcontractors. They had good, detailed, and well-managed contracts, and the work was done to the customer's satisfaction otherways they would have gone bust. Lars has come to understand that going bust is not something that UNICEF worries much about. That worries him.
Lars is still smarting about the high UNICEF salaries. He has never in his life met a person with such a high salary. His research on salaries in his poor home city of Malmo shows that less than one percent of all employees are paid so much and they pay half in tax. Lars, a social democrat, is in favor of high taxes, it is good for equality. Lars has yet not figured out that UNICEF staff don't pay taxes. But Lars does not jump to conclusions. He learned that during his many years of being active in his powerful labor union with direct links to the social democratic party. He reasons that the UNICEF staff, who obviously can't manage, must have other very valuable skills that help poor countries develop fast and reduce inequality.
Lars is putting, his now, excellent research skills to use in establishing what UNICEF and other aid organizations have actually achieved during the 50 years he has contributed so much. He will keep us posted.
Thomas Ekvall
Lars is making rapid progress in his research. He has read about the recent story surrounding UNOPS, and he has dug up several other corruption scandals. He read the USAID audit of Afghanistan. Some altruistic humanitarians. Lars asked his local newspaper, known for its investigative journalism, why they have not picked up on any of these stories. The editor is apologetic and the only thing he can find in his archives is a review of "Lords of poverty". Lars finds it interesting but out of date, so much more money is spent on aid today. The poor editor says these things happen in distant lands and he has not got the money to investigate them. Lars also asked SIDA about corruption just to be referred to their many evaluations that are in the public domain. He found many problems there also. Lars can not understand how so much money can be spent with so little scrutiny. In Malmo Lars has ready access to how much the local politicians spend on wine when they give a party - down to the last penny. It keeps them honest. The massive aid business appears to be a case of "out of sight and out of mind". Where is the accountability?
ReplyDeleteLars has now discovered that half of his money, that went to UNICEF, went to pay salaries to what he considers to be grossly overpaid workers whose competence and honesty he feels he has reasons to doubt. He has also learned that UNICEF and other UN staff don't pay taxes. Lars is trying to process all this - it is hard. His parents used to proudly tell him about Hammakjold and Lars admired Annan. But Lars is determined, he will get to the bottom of this.
Lars has picked out his own indicator to determine what all these aid agencies have achieved with all his money over the past 50 years. He doesn't care what flimsy unmeasurable objectives they had in their millions of programs over all these years. Lars reckons GDP per person is by far the most important indicator. Poverty gets you nowhere. Lars' grandparents, who were sharecroppers, knew about poverty. Lars likes real measurable stuff that is hard to fudge. He says if GDP improves steadily and at a good clip, things will be OK and other developments will follow.
Lars has started to look at GDP per person. He is trying to establish if the poorest African countries are catching up with the rest of the world. He was shocked to find that some countries are falling further behind. They have a relatively lower share of global GDP per person today than they had 50 years ago. Lars asks what all this aid was for. Perhaps the UNICEF staff, whose salary he has paid for so many years, could give him an answer.
Lars did not sleep last night he was very upset and angry. He spent the night reading Dambisa Moyo's Dead Aid. It seems to confirm many of his fears. He took note of UNDP's and the Worldbank's criticism of Dambisa's work, but he dismissed it - turkeys don't vote for Christmas.
ReplyDeleteLars takes comfort from two recent articles in The Economist and The Financial Times, two newspapers with a better reputation than aid agencies. One concluded that "GDP is almost everything", the headline in the other was: "So much money and so few results".
Lars is taking a nap. He feels a little bit better after having learned that the plumbing company where he worked for 30 years, cleaning blocked toilets, has decided to give him a farewell bonus of $5,000. They want to show their appreciation for his hard work and honesty. Lars never padded his overtime claims nor did he take sick leave if he wasn't really very sick.
Lars who has never been outside Sweden, except for trips to Copenhagen, has decided to go to Nairobi. He wants to see what these overpaid and obviously often corrupt aid workers actually do and how they live.
Thomas Ekvall
Lars is disappointed that no one has gotten back to him on why some African counties appear to be getting poorer after 50 years of aid. Lars doesn't understand that these people are very powerful executives in a 170 billion dollar global aid industry. They are obviously too important and too busy to deal with a disgruntled plumber who has read a couple of books and a few reports. If he has problems with how much he pays in aid he should contact his government and stop making voluntary contributions. They have been scrutinized many times before by a lot more qualified people without any problems. Lars obviously doesn't understand the fine subtleties of development - it is about so much more than crude, raw GDP. As regards corruption, it is regrettable, but you find it all around the world - including in Sweden.
ReplyDeleteLars feels humiliated and abused but he won't give up. He is determined to get to the bottom of this aid business that he is losing more respect for by the day. While preparing for his trip to Kenya, he is doing research on people who have worked and are working for UNICEF. He seems to find confidence tricksters who are not whom they pretend to be. They appear to even have been promoted to senior positions. He wonders what kind of organization UNICEF is that is not able to identify a fraudster. In Lars' business, an imposter would be caught immediately, but then, on the other hand, his business requires real, hard skills.
Lars feels that these arrogant people are looking down their noses at him. He continues his research and preparations for going to Nairobi. He will keep us posted.
Thomas Ekvall
Dear Thomas,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your updates on Lars. His sentiments and confusions are shared by others on the outside as well as on the inside of the organisations.
Please do keep us updated on his progress, and reassure him that he is not alone.
At some point he may wish to expand his search to address the misogynistic and racist social norms that are brought into the country offices by international staff (or discovered on ground by international staff when they arrive); or the arrogance and bullying that often silences enthusiastic staff into obedient/compliant (complicit?) automatons.
There are many ills in organisations this large. Really - where to start to make a meaningful change?
Hopefully this is a safe-zone for candid problem-solving.
Sorry folks, Lars has died of a heart attack. Dear Lars R.I.P.
ReplyDeleteThomas Ekvall
Hopefully the widow of Lars will make that journey to Nairobi now.Somebody has to do it!
ReplyDelete