Several shortcomings and in one instance inaccurate information were discovered in the early stages of the implementation of the US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) in Guyana, according to an audit done in 2005. These issues, described as “teething problems” by PEPFAR officials here, who described the audit as useful, have since been corrected.
Among the more critical shortcomings highlighted in the audit report, which was published in May last year, were weak financial management practices by some of the sub-grantees (local NGOs); delays in the procurement of antiretroviral drugs; late advancement of cash to sub-grantees and inaccurate reporting of achievements in performance targets.
However, Julia Rehwinkel-Roberts Population Health & Nutrition (PHN) Officer at USAID, under which PEPFAR falls, told Stabroek News in a recent interview that the audit was done when the programme was new and was experiencing what could be described as “teething problems”.
She also disclosed that some of the issues raised in the audit had actually been rectified before the audit was done but they were still recorded in the report because the audit looked at a period prior to when the issues were addressed.
She said USAID/Guyana agreed with some of the issues raised in the audit and spent some eight months trying to adjust its programme and has communicated all of its changes to the investigation office in Washington, supplying evidence of the work done. As a result, just recently, a letter arrived from the investigation office informing that the investigation had been closed.
Erroneous information
The audit report had said that the USAID Annual Report and the PEPFAR Report to Congress contained “erroneous information. For example, the Second Annual Report to Congress states that 5,200 orphans and vulnerable children received support while in reality less than 300 received support.”
The report said this was because the results reported by Family Health International (FHI), which along with its subcontractors provided technical direction to a network of 19 non-governmental organisations that provide services to the programme’s beneficiaries, Ministry of Health and the sub-grantees were inaccurate or unsupported. As a result, it said, USAID/Guyana could “
