International Charities Decry U.S. Plan to Examine Foreign Workers

An announcement by the U.S. government that it will probably move ahead on a plan to screen foreign-aid workers for terrorist ties has elicited protests from international charities, which say the program would hinder their work by stirring distrust among the people they serve.

“Being seen as institutions that are gathering data for the U.S. intelligence services would fundamentally harm our relationship with the communities we depend on to do our work,” said Samuel A. Worthington, president of InterAction, a Washington group that represents more than 160 international-aid groups.

The screening program, known as the Partner Vetting System, was first announced in the Federal Register in July. It has until now been limited to a pilot version in the West Bank and Gaza. But officials at the U.S. Agency for International Development announced in an April meeting with nonprofit leaders that they would probably expand the antiterrorism vetting system to other countries.

James R. Kunder, acting deputy administrator for USAID, said the agency would expand the program gradually, first to countries where “we believe the risk of diversion is high.”

Privacy Concerns

Under the vetting system, groups that are applying for USAID grants must provide the names of “key individuals” overseeing their projects. Employees of USAID would then check the names against a classified U.S. database that contains information on terrorists.

Charities say the program violates the privacy rights of their employees and could place their workers in additional danger overseas. They also say it does nothing to protect Americans from terrorism.

“No one wants to see U.S. taxpayers’ dollars supporting terrorism, but the [Partner Vetting System] won’t actually help the U.S. identify terrorists and stop them,” said Raymond C. Offenheiser, president of Oxfam America, in Boston, in a statement. “Aid workers would be collecting information to check against a list of suspects the U.S. already has. If individuals have already been identified as having committed or are planning to commit a terrorist crime, they should be arrested by law-enforcement officials.”

Long Delays

Charities that work in the West Bank and Gaza say the program has reduced their efficiency. Groups face delays of up to six months to buy even simple goods, such as fax machines, as organizations they work with are vetted, according to InterAction.

Some charities in Gaza and the West Bank have stopped accepting money from USAID. Mr. Worthington said he believes that many of its members, including some large charities, would consider ending their relationship with USAID in certain countries if the program were expanded.

He also said that aid groups already vetted staff members for terrorist ties through a system they’d previously devised with the government. “It’s overkill,” he said.

What’s more, said Mr. Worthington, private contractors that receive USAID money weren’t being asked to take similar steps. Nonprofit organizations were being unfairly singled out, he said, because it was easier for the government to obtain information on them.

“The light is already on nonprofits,” he said. “But the likelihood of finding problems is less likely than of finding problems in areas that aren’t already under the light and under intense scrutiny.”

Mr. Kunder, of USAID, said that while he was sympathetic to the objections raised by charities, his agency needed to balance their concerns against the risk of grant money getting into the hands of terrorists.

“We understand that some NGO’s may have concerns about the program, and it may cause them not to seek federal funds,” he said. “This is part of the balancing process.”

He said the delays facing charities in the West Bank and Gaza weren’t due to the vetting system and that he didn’t foresee aid groups’ work being hindered in other countries where the vetting system would be used.

The vetting system wasn’t onerous, he said, in that it required grant applicants to supply the names of a only limited number of staff members. Charities weren’t being asked to do their own investigatory work, he said.

“We’ve listened very carefully and I understand the concerns,” he said, “but I believe most of the concerns once we put this program into effect will be proven to be of relatively marginal impact.”