OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION

 

FFAACCTT SSHHEEEETT OONN SSOOUURRCCEESS AANNDD

UUSSEESS OOFF UU..SS.. FFUUNNDDIINNGG PPRROOVVIIDDEEDD

IINN FFIISSCCAALL YYEEAARR 22000066 FFOORR IIRRAAQQ

RREELLIIEEFF AANNDD RREECCOONNSSTTRRUUCCTTIIOONN

FFIINNAALL RREEPPOORRTT

SSIIGGIIRR--0077--000055

JJUUULLLYYY 2277,,22000077
SPECIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION

 

July 27, 2007 

MEMORANDUM FOR U.S. AMBASSADOR TO IRAQ 

DIRECTOR, IRAQ TRANSITION ASSISTANCE OFFICE 

MISSION DIRECTOR-IRAQ, U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL 

DEVELOPMENT 

DIRECTOR, ARMY BUDGET OFFICE 

COMMANDING GENERAL, MULTI-NATIONAL FORCE-IRAQ 

COMMANDING GENERAL, MULTI-NATIONAL SECURITY 

TRANSITION COMMAND-IRAQ 

COMMANDING GENERAL, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, 

GULF REGION DIVISION 

DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET 

 

SUBJECT: Fact Sheet on Sources and Uses of U.S. Funding Provided in Fiscal Year 

2006 for Iraq Relief and Reconstruction (SIGIR-07-005) 

We are providing this fact sheet for your information and use. In November 2003, the 

Congress appropriated $18.439 billion for the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund 

(IRRF). The Office of Management and Budget, in consultation with the Coalition 

Provisional Authority (CPA) Administrator, was required to submit reports quarterly to 

the Congress on the proposed uses of IRRF funds on a project-by-project basis. This 

reporting requirement is currently the responsibility of the Department of State (DoS). 

The Congress appropriated about $5.4 billion, in additional non-IRRF funding made 

available in FY 2006, to four separate funds, for various relief and reconstruction projects 

in Iraq, including training of Iraqi security forces, reconstruction programs, rule of law 

programs, and the Department of Defense (DoD) “commander’s emergency response 

program”. However, the Congress did not legislate the same robust quarterly reporting 

requirements on the uses of these funds as it had for IRRF, though there are less detailed 

reporting requirements in many cases. 

This fact sheet provides information on the FY 2006 funding made available by the 

Congress for Iraq relief and reconstruction activities, the reporting requirements for that 

funding, and the plans and procedures for the funds that have been put in place by the 

400 Army Navy Drive • Arlington, Virginia 22202
U.S. government organizations carrying out the relief and reconstruction activities. To 

obtain this information, we conducted a survey with applicable U.S. government 

organizations. 

This review was performed as “nonaudit services” in accordance with generally accepted 

government auditing standards. The information in this fact sheet was vetted with senior 

officials responsible for the accountability of these funds; therefore, no formal response 

to this fact sheet is required or expected. An extended review period was provided from 

July 23 to July 25, 2007, on the consolidated Preliminary Final report to accept technical 

comments from impacted agencies. All comments received have been considered and 

addressed as appropriate in this final report. 

The fact sheet was prepared and the survey conducted under the direction of Joseph T. 

McDermott, Assistant Inspector General for Audit. We appreciate the courtesies extended 

to the staff. For a list of the review team members, see Appendix E. 

For additional information on this report, please contact Mr. Glenn Furbish 

(glenn.furbish@sigir.mil / 703-428-1058); or Mr. Walt Keays 

(walt.keays@iraq.centcom.mil / 703-343-7921 or cell: 914-822-2796). For the fact sheet 

distribution, see Appendix D. 

 

Stuart W. Bowen, Jr. 

 Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction 

cc: See Distribution 

ii 
Table of Contents 

Introduction 1

Iraq Security Forces Fund 5

Legislative Authority 

Reports Required by Law 

Other Reports 

Fund Availability and Use 

Control and Oversight 

Performance Measures 

Economic Support Fund 13

Legislative Authority 

Reports Required by Law 

Other Reports 

Fund Availability and Use 

Control and Oversight 

Performance Measures 

Commander’s Emergency Response Program Funding 26

Legislative Authority 

Reports Required by Law 

Other Reports 

Fund Availability and Use 

Control and Oversight 

Performance Measures

International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement Fund 34

Legislative Authority 

Reports Required by Law 

Other Reports 

Fund Availability and Use 

Control and Oversight 

Performance Measures 

Appendices 

A. Scope and Methodology 40 

B. Number of Days Initial Funds Were Made Available to Implementing 

Field-level Activity Program 42 

C. Acronyms 43 

D. Report Distribution 45 

E. Audit Team Members 47 
Introduction 

Background 

In November 2003, Public Law (P.L.) 108-106 created the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund 

(IRRF 2) and appropriated $18.439 billion for security, relief, rehabilitation, and reconstruction 

in Iraq. The funds were allocated to specific sectors of Iraqi governance and society. Section 

2207 of the law also required that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in consultation 

with the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) Administrator, submit quarterly reports to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on the uses of IRRF funds on a project-byproject basis, including cost-to-complete estimates. In July 2005, this reporting requirement was 

delegated to the Department of State (DoS) who had been tasked under NSPD 36 in May 2004 to 

coordinate and manage all reconstruction activities in Iraq. These reports were required to be 

submitted to the Congress until October 2007; however, P.L. 109-234, enacted in June 2006, 

extended the date for submitting the reports until October 2008. 

In addition to creating IRRF 2, P.L. 108-106 also created the CPA’s Office of Inspector General 

(CPA-IG) to conduct, supervise, and coordinate audits and investigations of the CPA’s 

treatment, handling, and expenditure of IRRF funds and of the programs, operations, and 

contracts carried out utilizing IRRF funds. The CPA-IG was also required to submit quarterly 

reports summarizing the activities of the CPA-IG and CPA, including a detailed statement of all 

obligations, expenditures, and revenues associated with reconstruction and rehabilitation 

activities in Iraq. In June 2004, the CPA was terminated and its responsibilities were transferred 

to the U.S. Mission-Iraq. At the same time, the CPA Inspector General was re-designated as the 

Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR). In FY 2007, P.L. 109-440 expanded 

the duties of SIGIR to include the oversight of all FY 2006 funds appropriated or otherwise made 

available in FY 2006 for the relief and reconstruction of Iraq, regardless of how they are 

designated. 

Summary

The Congress appropriated about $5.4 billion in additional, non-IRRF funding made available 

for FY 2006 to four separate funds, for various relief and reconstruction projects in Iraq. 

Between 29 and 230 calendar days elapsed from the time the funds were appropriated until they 

reached the field-level implementing organizations through a series of agency apportionment, 

allotment, allowance, and other funding transactions. For a summary of days elapsed for each 

fund type and program, see Appendix B. 

Two programs, however, were outside the range of calendar days it took for the funds to be made 

available to the implementing activities in Iraq. These programs were not considered in 

estimating the range of days because of special circumstances concerning these programs or their 

appropriations: 

1 
• $2 million for the Democracy and Rule of Law program for Iraq and Afghanistan, funded 

by the Economic Support Fund, in P.L. 109-234. As of June 14, 2007, had not yet been 

allotted because the Congress had not resolved a decision on whether the funds should go 

to Iraq or Afghanistan. 

• $375 million CERP funds provided for Iraq programs in P.L. 109-148, of which a portion 

of the budget authority was made available pursuant to the Continuing Resolution 

approved on September 30, 2005. However, the Congress did not enact the appropriation 

legislation to make the total amount of funds available for use until December 30, 2005. 

 

The laws that enacted the additional, non-IRRF funds do not impose the same quarterly reporting 

requirements as contained in P.L. 108-106 although there are other reporting requirements. 

Funds were appropriated in FY 2006 under these laws: 

• P.L. 109-102, Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs 

Appropriations Act, 2006, enacted November 14, 2005 

• P.L. 109-148, Department of Defense, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to 

Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act, 2006, enacted 

December 30, 2005 

• P.L. 109-234, The Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global 

War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery, enacted June 15, 2006 

The FY 2006 appropriations funded: 

• Iraq Security Forces Fund—$3.007 billion made available to assist the Iraqi Security 

Forces 

• Economic Support Fund—$1.545 billion made available by appropriations to assist Iraq 

relief and reconstruction efforts in the security, economic, and political areas 

• Commander’s Emergency Response Program funding—$708 million for Iraq made 

available through two appropriations to enable local U.S. military commanders in Iraq to 

respond to urgent humanitarian relief and reconstruction requirements in their areas of 

responsibility 

• International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement funding—$91.4 million 

($82 million for prison construction) made available to the DoS 

Objective 

The overall objective of this review was to identify the sources and uses of the funds made 

available in FY 2006 for Iraq reconstruction. We answered these questions: 

1. When did this money become available for use in Iraq? 

2. When did the activities in Iraq begin to use these funds and for what purposes? 

2 
3. What policies and procedures have been put in place to control the use and oversight of 

these funds? 

4. How does the controlling authority ensure that the policies and procedures are carried 

out? 

5. What performance measures are in place to evaluate the effectiveness of the individual 

projects supported by these funds in relationship to the overall goals of the Iraq relief and 

reconstruction program? 

6. What are the reporting requirements to senior U.S. officials, including the Office of 

Management and Budget, on the use and status of these funds? 

7. What are the reporting requirements to the Congress on the obligations, expenditures, and 

use of these funds? 

The information reported in this fact sheet is as of March 31, 2007. For the scope and 

methodology for this review, see Appendix A. 

This fact sheet was organized by fund type under these categories: 

• Legislative Authority: discusses the legislation that appropriated the funds 

• Reports Required by Law: defines the reporting requirements established by the Congress 

• Other Reports: defines the reporting requirements established by other activities 

• Fund Availability and Use: describes when and for what purpose the activities in Iraq 

began using the funds 

• Control and Oversight: describes how control over funds and performance is monitored 

and maintained 

• Performance Measures: identifies the metrics that have been established to assess the 

success or failure of the funded programs 

Each of the following organizations provided information for this report and reviewed our 

compilation of that information relative to the responding organization. 

Iraq Security Forces Fund (ISFF): 

• OMB 

• Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) (USD(C)) 

• Army Budget Office 

• Multi-National Security Transition Command-Iraq (MNSTC-I), (Comptroller) 

3 
Economic Support Fund (ESF): 

• OMB 

• U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Washington, DC and MissionIraq 

• DoS Bureau of Resource Management 

• DoS Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs 

• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Gulf Region Division, Resource 

Management 

• Department of Justice 

Commander’s Emergency Response Program Fund (CERP): 

• OMB 

• USD (C) 

• Army Budget Office 

• U.S. Army Central Command 

International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE): 

• OMB 

• DoS Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) 

OMB also provided an overall comment about the timing of obligations: “The Office of 

Management and Budget apportions or distributes budgeted amounts to the executive branch 

agencies, thereby making funds in appropriation accounts (administered by the Treasury 

Department) available for obligation. The apportionment system through which budget authority 

is distributed is intended to achieve an effective and orderly use of available budget authority, 

and to reduce deficiency appropriations. Each agency then makes allotments pursuant to the 

OMB apportionments, other statutory authority, or internal agency allotment guidelines. An 

allotment is a delegation of authority to agency officials which allows them to incur obligations 

within the scope and terms of the delegation. Hence, the timing of when OMB signs an 

apportionment document is not a good indicator of how quickly funds can be obligated. There 

are many internal processes that need to be completed within (and sometimes between) agencies 

before funds can be legally obligated. Sometimes OMB signs apportionments many months 

before agencies complete their internal processes that would allow for the allotment of funds to 

specific agency officials. Sometimes OMB signs apportionments concurrently with agencies 

completing their internal processes that would allow for the allotment of funds. While OMB 

apportionments are a necessary condition for an agency to allot funds, it is not a sufficient 

condition to allot funds and/or enable agencies to obligate resources. Congressional actions can 

also influence the timing of obligations after funds have been appropriated.” 

4 
Iraq Security Forces Fund 

Legislative Authority

During FY 2006, the Congress appropriated $3.007 billion for the Iraq Security Forces Fund 

(ISFF) in The Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on 

Terror, and Hurricane Recovery (P.L. 109-234, enacted June 15, 2006). 

The law does not provide extensive direction as to how the appropriated funds are to be used.1

The legislation broadly states that the purpose of the ISFF funding is to provide assistance to the 

security forces of Iraq, including the provision of equipment, supplies, services, training, facility 

and infrastructure repair, renovation, and construction. Additionally, to accomplish this, the law 

allows the Secretary of Defense to transfer ISFF funds to other appropriations for military 

personnel; operations and maintenance; overseas humanitarian, disaster, and civic aid; 

procurement; research, development, test, and evaluation; and defense working capital funds. 

Reports Required by Law

Section 9010 of P.L. 109-148 requires the Secretary of Defense to report every 90 days to the 

Congress on a comprehensive set of performance indicators and measures for progress toward 

military and political stability. This Section 9010 Report is to include performance standards and 

goals for security, economic, and security force training objectives in Iraq, together with a 

notional timetable for achieving these goals. 

Chapter 2 of P.L. 109-234 requires the Office of the Secretary of Defense to submit a report no 

later than thirty days after the end of each fiscal quarter to the Congressional Defense 

Committees if ISFF funds are transferred to other appropriations. According to an Army Budget 

Office official, no such transfers have occurred and thus no reports have been submitted. 

Other Reports 

We identified reports prepared by implementing organizations that provide information on the 

use of the ISFF to senior officials. MNSTC-I conducts activities supporting the Iraqi Ministries 

of Defense and Interior security forces. The MNSTC-I Comptroller provides bi-weekly, monthly, 

and quarterly status of ISFF funds reports to the Multi-National Force-Iraq, U.S. Central 

Command, the Army Budget Office, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Office of the USD (C). 

The USACE Gulf Region Division provides engineering services and construction capabilities 

for many ISFF-funded MNSTC-I projects. As the implementing agency, it tracks and reports on 

its status of projects in a number of ways, including input to the Iraq Reconstruction 

 

1

 According to OMB, the Administration submitted a detailed “budget justification” document that explained how 

the funds would be used prior to Congress appropriating the funding. 

5 
Management System (IRMS) and the Corps of Engineers Financial Management System 

(CEFMS). Reports generated from these systems are made available to the Office of the USD 

(C), DoS, and other agencies. 

Fund Availability and Use 

During FY 2006, the Congress appropriated $3.007 billion to ISFF to fund Iraq relief and 

reconstruction projects. Within 29 calendar days, ISFF funds were allotted to the MNSTC-I field 

activity. For the allotment timeline and flow of these funds, see Figure 1. Key events include: 

P.L 109-234: 

• June 15, 2006: $3.007 billion is appropriated to DoD. 

• June 19, 2006: OMB apportioned this amount to USD(C). 

• July 13, 2006: USD(C) began allocating the funds to the Assistant Secretary of the 

Army (Financial Management and Comptroller). 

• July 14, 2006 through July 17, 2006: Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial 

Management and Comptroller), through the Army Budget Office, allocated 

$3.007 billion to MNSTC-I. 

The Army Budget Office maintains the funding authorization documents that detail when the 

ISFF funds were released to MNSTC-I. The documents show that an initial allocation of 

$2.977 billion was made on July 14, 2006, and a second allocation of $30 million for the Quick 

Response Fund was made on July 17, 2006. The Quick Response Fund gave commanders the 

flexibility to respond rapidly to fund projects focused on training and equipping the Iraqi 

Security Forces. 

MNSTC-I, initially committed ISSF funds on July 19, 2006, and the initial disbursement, from 

available documentation, occurred between August 29 and September 1, 2006. Thus, these funds 

were put to use in just over a month from the appropriation date of June 15, 2006. For the 

chronology of fund activity, see Table 1. 

 

6 
Figure 1. Flow of Iraq Security Forces Fund, P.L. 109-234 

ABO Army Budget Office 

B Billion 

FAD Funding Authorization Document 

M Million 

OA Obligation Authority 

RAD Resource Allocation Document 

SF 132 Apportionment and Reapportionment Schedule 

QRF Quick Response Fund, part of Iraq Security Forces Fund 

NOTE: Dates presented are the initial transmittal dates of funds apportioned or allotted for each action, and do not necessarily 

 represent an action for the total amount of funds. 

Sources: Office of Management and Budget; Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller), Army 

 Budget Office; Multi-National Security Transition Command-Iraq. 

7 
Table 1—Iraq Security Forces Fund (P.L. 109-234) 

 Initial Funding Transmittal Datesa

FUNDING ACTION 

$3.007 Billion 

Appropriation 

Congress appropriates funds June 15, 2006 

Office of Management and Budget signs apportionment and sends 

to the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) June 19, 2006 

Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to the Assistant 

Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller)–

Army Budget Office 

July 13, 2006 

Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and 

Comptroller)–Army Budget Office to the Multi-National Security 

Transition Command-Iraq 

July 14, 2006 

Available at Implementing Agency in Iraq July 14, 2006 

First Commitment July 19, 2006 

Between August 29 and 

September 1, 2006 First Disbursement 

a NOTE: Dates presented are the initial transmittal dates of funds apportioned or allotted for each action, and do not necessarily 

 represent an action for the total amount appropriated.

Sources: Office of Management and Budget; Assistant Secretary of the Army (FM&C), Army Budget Office; Multi-National 

 Security Transition Command-Iraq. Discussions held on various dates between February 2007 through April 2007. 

Funding authorization documents show that the Army Budget Office allocated most funds to 

MNSTC-I for specific budget activity groups within the Iraqi Ministry of Defense (MOD) and 

Ministry of Interior (MOI), in support of the Iraqi Security Forces. Other budget activity groups 

include the above-referenced Quick Response Fund, detainee operations, and prosthetics. 

MOD and MOI sub-activities within each MOD/MOI budget activity group include 

infrastructure, training and operations, sustainment, and equipment and transportation. 

Additional data from the Army Budget Office show that MNSTC-I reallocated ISFF funds from 

the original Army Budget Office-designated activities to other activities to adjust for in-theater 

needs. For example, while the Army Budget Office did not allocate funds to MOI for 

sustainment, MNSTC-I reallocated funds from the MOD equipment and transportation budget 

activity group to increase the sustainment activity to $185 million. Table 2 shows the Army 

Budget Office distributions and MNSTC-I allocations. 

8 
Table 2—ISFF Initial and Adjusted Allocations 

Activity and Uses of Funds 

Initial Allocation from 

Army Budget Office 

(as of July 17, 2006) 

Balances after MNSTC-I’s 

Activity Re-allocations 

(as of September 15, 2006) 

Iraqi Ministry of Defense Activities 

$185,000,000a Sustainment $0

 Infrastructure 751,000,000 751,000,000

602,000,000 a Equipment and Transportation 787,000,000

 Training and Operations 20,000,000 20,000,000

Iraqi Ministry of Interior Activities 

 Sustainment 210,000,000 210,000,000

 Infrastructure 485,000,000 485,000,000

 Equipment and Transportation 431,000,000 431,000,000

 Training and Operations 217,000,000 217,000,000

Other Activities 

Detainee Operations 73,000,000 73,000,000

Prosthetics 3,000,000 3,000,000

Quick Response Fund 30,000,000 30,000,000

Total $3,007,000,000 $3,007,000,000

 a Re-allocation by MNSTC-I 

 Source: SIGIR Analysis of Funding Authorization Documents (FADs) provided by Army Budget Office, as of September 15, 2006. 

Control and Oversight

The DoD financial management regulations and USD(C) directives provide routine funds control 

guidance. OSD(C) and OMB have also issued other directives to help and manage ISFF. 

Further, the military commands in Iraq have issued additional orders and procedures relative to 

controls over ISFF. These include: 

• Multi-National Corps-Iraq Fragmentary Order 237, Funding Responsibility for the Iraqi 

Security Forces (August 22, 2005)—also defines the funding responsibility for the Quick 

Response Fund portion of ISFF. 

• Multi-National Corps-Iraq Fragmentary Order 247 (August 27, 2005)—Procedure for 

Requesting Non-MTOE Equipment, Services, and Life Support Funding for Iraq Security 

Forces. MTOE is a modified version of a Table of Organization and Equipment that 

prescribes the units organization, personnel and equipment necessary to perform a 

mission in a specific wartime geographical environment. 

9 
• Multi-National Corps-Iraq Fragmentary Order 351, Modification 1 Funding 

Responsibility for the Iraqi Security Forces (August 2005)—also provides guidance on 

funding responsibilities for the Quick Response Fund portion of ISFF. 

 

• Multi-National Security Transition Command-Iraq Standard Operating Procedures, 

Appendix P (December 30, 2006)—an internal control procedure established to ensure 

compliance with Public Law as applied by external audit agencies, such as the U.S. Army 

Audit Agency, DoD Office of the Inspector General, Special Inspector General for Iraq 

Reconstruction (SIGIR), and the Government Accountability Office (GAO). This 

Standard Operating Procedure identifies appropriate references such as the public laws, 

the purpose for the fund, the mission to be accomplished, and permitted and proscribed 

uses of the fund. 

Performance Measures

According to the MNSTC-I Chief of Internal Audit/Control, progress in developing the Iraqi 

Security Forces is tracked and measured in numerous ways. For example, in a memorandum of 

record prepared on August 15, 2006, the MNSTC-I Commanding General provided direction to 

MNSTC-I personnel that included the following: 

Training/Equipped figures listed on the “Current Status: ISF” slide will adhere to the following 

guidelines: 

Numbers and percentages will reflect: 

• Cumulative data up to 100% of authorized strength in each subordinate authorization (e.g., 

up to 100% of Army, Iraqi Special Operations Forces) 

• Data confirmed by MNSTC-I or Multi-National Corps-Iraq personnel 

• All personnel recruited, trained, and equipped regardless of attrition [emphasis in original] 

• Personnel recruited, trained, and equipped by MNSTC-I or by the divisions within their area 

of operations, vetted by the military personnel office in coordination with the division 

commanders, and then trained and equipped by MNSTC-I. . . .2

According to information received from the Chief, MNSTC-I Internal Audit/Control, the 

referenced “Current Status: ISF” slide is part of a briefing that is provided biweekly to MultiNational Corps-Iraq (MNC-I) and Multi-National Forces-Iraq (MNF-I). 

Further, the SIGIR report on “Iraqi Security Forces: Review of Plans to Implement Logistics 

Capabilities,” issued in October 2006, noted that MNF-I uses transition readiness assessments to 

determine when logistics units are ready to begin their transition to Iraqi control. While the 

actual assessments are classified, the performance measures used in the preparation of the 

transition readiness assessments are described as follows: 

 

2

 Memorandum for Record, MNSTC-I, August 15, 2006, Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) Update Reporting Procedures. 

10 
These assessments rate the readiness of an Iraqi Army unit by four levels of capability. These 

ratings start from: 

• when the unit is formed (level 4) 

• when it can fight side by side with MNF-I forces (level 3) 

• when it is deemed capable of controlling its own area of responsibility with coalition 

support (level 2) 

• when it is able to independently conduct operations (level 1) 

When a unit is rated level 2, MNF-I will begin the process to transition the unit to Iraqi Army and 

Ministry of Defense control. An Iraqi Army unit will be rated level 2 when it has at least 85% of 

its equipment on hand and authorized personnel assigned. At this point, MNF-I begins the 

process of transitioning a level 2 unit to Iraqi Army and Ministry of Defense control. MNF-I’s 

priority has been on training Iraqi Army divisions to conduct counter-insurgency operations.3

DoD also submits a quarterly report to the Congress, as required under Section 9010 of P.L. 109-

148 that discusses performance measurements and goals for achieving security, economic, and 

security force training objectives in Iraq, together with a notional timetable for achieving the 

defined goals. This report is also cross-referenced in the President’s “benchmarks” report to the 

Congress that is required under P.L. 110-28. The reporting requirements as defined in Section 

9010 include these metrics: 

Stability and security: 

• key measures of political stability 

• primary indicators of a stable security environment 

• estimated insurgency strength 

• description of all militias operating in Iraq 

• criteria used to determine when it is safe to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq 

Training and performance of security forces: 

• training provided to Iraqi military and other MOD forces and the equipment used by 

such forces 

• key criteria for assessing capabilities and readiness of the Iraqi military and other 

MOD forces 

• operational readiness status of Iraqi military forces 

• rates of absenteeism in Iraqi military forces and extent of insurgent infiltration 

• training provided by Iraqi police and other MOI forces and the equipment used by 

such forces 

 

3

 Source: Iraqi Security Forces: Review of Plans to Implement Logistics Capabilities (SIGIR-06-032, 

October 28, 2006). 

11 
• key criteria for assessing capabilities and readiness of the Iraqi police and other MOI 

forces 

• total number of Iraqi battalions needed to perform duties now undertaken by coalition 

forces 

• effectiveness of Iraqi military and police officer cadres and chain of command 

• the number of U.S. and coalition advisors needed to support Iraqi Security Forces 

• an assessment of U.S. military requirements 

12 
Economic Support Fund

Legislative Authority 

Two appropriations were made by the Congress in FY 2006 that included funding for the 

Economic Support Fund (ESF). The first appropriation, Foreign Operations, Export Financing, 

and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2006 (P.L. 109-102, November 14, 2005) provided 

$61 million (later reduced by a 1% “across-the-board” rescission mandated in the same bill to 

$60.39 million). The second appropriation, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for 

Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery (P.L. 109-234, June 15, 2006) 

provided $1.686 billion (of which $201 million was allocated for non-Iraq purposes, leaving 

$1.485 billion available for Iraq). 

P.L. 109-102 provided specific direction for the purpose of the appropriation for Iraq activities: 

• Not less than $56 million (reduced by rescission to $55.44 million) for Democracy, 

Governance, and Rule of Law programs in Iraq. 

• Not less than $5 million (reduced by rescission to $4.95 million) for the Marla Ruzicka 

War Victims Fund, provided to the USAID and subsequently transferred to and merged 

with funds appropriated as IRRF under P.L. 108-106. 

P.L. 109-234 directed that the $1.485 billion appropriation was to be used for these purposes: 

• Not less than $50 million for Democracy, Governance, and Rule of Law programs in 

Iraq. 

• Not less than $5 million to the Marla Ruzicka War Victims Fund; provided to the USAID 

and subsequently transferred to and merged with funds appropriated as IRRF under P.L. 

108-106. 

• Not less than $45 million was made available to the USAID-Iraq for its Community 

Action Program. 

No congressional direction was provided for the remaining $1.385 billion. 

Reports Required by Law

Under P.L. 109-102, DoS was required to submit a “Congressional Notification” report (CN) to 

the Congress explaining how the ESF funds would be used prior to obligating the money, but no 

such Congressional reporting notification was required in P.L. 109-234. Also, P.L. 109-102 

requires a CN if DoS intends to use the funds differently than described in the initial CN. There 

are no “post-obligation” reporting requirements in either law. Though there were no legallyobligating reporting requirements in P.L. 109-234, the House Committee on Appropriations 

directed in “report language” that no ESF funds could be expended for Provincial Reconstruction 

Teams (PRTs) or Provincial Reconstruction Development Committees (PRDCs) until a detailed 

13 
report on the operations of such a program was submitted to the Congress. DoS met this 

reporting request. 

However, the $9.95 million, that was transferred to and merged with IRRF for the Marla Ruzicka 

War Victims Fund, is mandated to be included in the quarterly report to the Congress on IRRFfunded projects as required by Section 2207 of P.L. 108-106. 

Although not legislatively required, the DoS Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs began reporting on 

the use of the ESF in an appendix to the January 2007 Section 2207 quarterly report to the 

Congress. The implementing agencies provide status information about programs, expenditures, 

and accomplishments related to ESF activities. The major reporting implementing agencies are 

USAID and the USACE Gulf Region Division. Further, Iraq Transition Assistance Office—the 

successor to the Iraq Reconstruction Management Office (IRMO)4—widely circulates a weekly 

report with consolidated financial data from the relevant agencies on the status of obligating and 

disbursing ESF funds. 

Other Reports

The DoS Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor requires quarterly reports from their 

grantees. 

Likewise, USAID-Iraq creates quarterly reports entitled, USAID/Iraq’s Quarterly Reports for 

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) Level of Effort Contracts that are prepared for internal review and 

control reporting requirements. Courtesy copies of these reports were provided to IRMO. As of 

June 17, 2007, USAID had not decided if copies of these reports would be provided to the Iraq 

Transition Assistance Office.

Fund Availability and Use

During FY 2006, the Congress appropriated about $1.545 billion to the ESF for activities in Iraq. 

Of this, $9.95 million was transferred to IRRF for the Marla Ruzicka War Victims Fund. 

Funding actions took 218 calendar days between the time the funds were appropriated and all of 

the precursors to obligating all of the funds had been completed in order to be used by the 

implementing field activities in Iraq—the DoS Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and LaborIraq, and USAID-Iraq. The initial allotment of P.L. 109-234 funds took 85 calendar days to be 

provided to USAID-Iraq and up to167 calendar days to be provided for DoS’s field activities that 

were implemented in Iraq by the Department of Justice and USACE Gulf Region Division (145 

days) and IRMO (167 days). For the allotment timeline and flow of these funds, see Figures 2 

and 3. 

 

4

 By Executive Order 13431 of May 8, 2007, the President created the Iraq Transition Assistance Office as the 

successor to the Iraq Reconstruction Management Office. The Iraq Transition Assistance Office shall continue 

coordination, oversight, and reporting concerning remaining Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund monies.

14 
According to OMB, there are many steps required before ESF are obligated. The Congress 

appropriates ESF funds to USAID, but provides DoS the authority for overseeing and 

determining the uses of those funds. DoS develops so-called “Action Memos” signed by senior 

officials that determines how ESF funds will be both “split” between USAID and DoS, and how 

those funds would be used. In cases where DoD is the implementing agency, DoS (or USAID) 

need to negotiate an interagency agreement on how the funds would be used. The agency then 

needs to “obligate” the funds with a contractor after completing a procurement process governed 

by various government regulations. OMB appropriates all ESF funds initially to USAID, per 

Congressional direction. However, any funds going to DoS need to get “re-apportioned” from 

USAID to DoS under a “direct apportionment” procedure. Finally, the Congress has included 

reporting requirements and, at times, the Congress has placed a “hold” on the use of ESF funding 

in Iraq. 

Key ESF events include: 

P.L. 109-102: 

• November 14, 2005: $60.39 million appropriated to USAID’s ESF account, of which 

$4.95 million was made available for IRRF for the Marla Ruzicka War Victims Fund. 

• December 6, 2005: OMB sent a signed apportionment of $55.44 million to the 

USAID Bureau for Management. 

• According to OMB sometime between December 6, 2005 and June 5, 2006, DoS 

signed an “Action Memo” that identified how the $60.39 million will be used and 

which agency will implement the programs. 

• June 5, 2006: OMB reapportioned $55.44 million to the DoS Bureau of Resource 

Management based on the signed Action Memo. 

• June 5, 2006: $4.95 million transferred to IRRF from the Marla Ruzicka War Victims 

Fund. 

• June 9, 2006: DoS Bureau of Resource Management allotted $55.44 million to the 

DoS Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor to be used for Democracy, 

Governance, and Rule of Law programs. 

• June 18, 2006: The funds were allotted to the DoS Bureau of Democracy, Human 

Rights and Labor-Iraq field activity. 

P.L. 109-234: 

• June 15, 2006: $1.485 billion appropriated, of which $5 million was made available 

for IRRF for the Marla Ruzicka War Victims Fund. 

• July 12, 2006: OMB sent signed apportionment of $1.485 billion to USAID Bureau 

for Management. 

• According to OMB, sometime between July 12, 2006 and October 26, 2006, DoS 

signed multiple Action Memos and reported to the Congress on the use of the PRT 

and PRDC funding. 

15 
• According to OMB, the Congress “cleared” on this report about 15 days after 

submission. 

 USAID Activities

• Between July 20, 2006 and January 25, 2007, $438 million allotted to 

USAID Office of Foreign Assistance and Bureau for Asia and the Near 

East. Another $2 million remained unallotted as of June 14, 2007. 

o August 2, 2006: $5 million transferred to IRRF from the Marla 

Ruzicka War Victims Fund. 

o Between September 8, 2006 and January 25, 2007, $433 million 

allowed to USAID-Iraq field activity. 

• September 8, 2006: OMB reapportioned $30 million to DoS. 

• November 3, 2006: OMB reapportioned $1.015 billion to DoS. 

 DoS Activities

• September 14, 2006: $25 million of $30 million allotted to the DoS 

Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor Office for Democracy and Civil 

Society programs. 

• Between November 7, 2006, and November 29, 2006: DoS completed and 

signed interagency agreements to transfer $1.015 billion to DoD and the 

Department of Justice. After signature, funds were allotted to Iraq field 

activities: 

o $33 million to the Department of Justice, Regime Crimes Liaison’s 

Office. 

o $45 million to IRMO for the Ministerial Capacity Development 

Program. 

o $937 million, approved by IRMO to USACE Gulf Region Division 

using interagency agreements. 

On June 15, 2006, the first disbursement of the P.L 109-102 funds was made by the DoS Bureau 

of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor-Iraq. Initial disbursements, for P.L.109-234 funds, for 

those programs that made disbursements during SIGIR’s field work, were between June 15, 2006 

and March 13, 2007, for the implementing field activities. For the chronology of fund activity for 

each appropriation, see Tables 3 through 6. 

16 
17 

Figure 2. Flow of Economic Support Fund, P.L. 109-102 

AA Advice of Allotment 

ANE/SPO Bureau for Asia and the Near East / Strategic Planning & Operations 

M Million 

PPS Posted in Phoenix Accounting System 

SF 132 Apportionment and Reapportionment Schedule 

a Marla Ruzicka War Victim Funds were merged with IRRF funds June 5, 2006. 

NOTE: Dates presented are the initial transmittal dates of funds apportioned or allotted for each action, and do not necessarily 

 represent an action for the total amount of funds. 

Sources: DoS: Iraq Reconstruction Management Office; Bureau of Resource Management; and Bureau of Democracy, Human 

Rights and Labor. Also the Office of Management and Budget, and the U.S. Agency for International Development.
Figure 3. Flow of Economic Support Fund, P.L. 109-234 

AA Advice of Allotment 

ANE/SPO Bureau for Asia and the Near East / Strategic Planning & Operations 

AU Allotment Authority 

B Billion 

DRL Democracy, Human Rights and Labor 

IAA Interagency Agreement 

IRMO Iraq Reconstruction Management Office 

DoJ Department of Justice 

M Million 

PPS Posted in Phoenix Accounting System 

PRDC Provincial Reconstruction Development Committee 

PRT Provincial Reconstruction Team 

SF 132 Apportionment and Reapportionment Schedule 

 a Marla Ruzicka War Victims Fund was merged with IRRF funds on September 14, 2006.

NOTE: Dates presented are the initial transmittal dates of funds apportioned or allotted for each action, and do not necessarily 

 represent an action for the total amount of funds. 

Sources: DoS: Iraq Reconstruction Management Office, Bureau of Resource Management, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs; and the 

Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor. Also the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Gulf Region Division; U.S. 

Agency for International Development; and the Office of Management and Budget.

18 
Table 3—Economic Support Fund (P.L. 109-102) Initial Funding Transmittal Datesa

FUNDING ACTION 

Democracy, 

Governance and 

Rule of Law Program 

(DoS DRL) 

Marla Ruzicka War 

Victims Fund 

(USAID Mission-Iraq) b

$55.44 Million 

Appropriation 

$4.95 Million 

Appropriation 

Congress appropriates funds November 14, 2005 November 14, 2005 

Office of Management and Budget signs 

apportionment and sends to the 

USAID Bureau for Management 

December 6, 2005 December 6, 2005 

Office of Management and Budget signs 

apportionment and sends to the 

DoS Bureau of Resource Management 

June 5, 2006 N/A 

DoS Bureau of Resource Management to the 

DoS Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and 

Labor 

June 9, 2006 N/A 

USAID Bureau for Management to the 

DoS Office of the Director of Foreign 

Assistance 

N/A June 6, 2006

DoS Office of the Director of Foreign 

Assistance to the USAID Bureau for Asia and 

the Near East 

N/A June 15, 2006

USAID Bureau for Asia and the Near East to 

the USAID Mission-Iraq N/A June 20, 2006

Available at Implementing Agency in Iraq June 18, 2006 June 20, 2006 

First Commitment June 8, 2006 July 16, 2006 

First Disbursement June 15, 2006 March 13, 2007 

a NOTE: Dates presented are the initial transmittal dates of funds apportioned or allotted for each action, and do not necessarily 

 represent an action for the total amount appropriated. 

b The provisions of P.L. 109-102 required the $4.95 million to be transferred to and merged with IRRF. This occurred on June 5, 

2006. 

Sources: Office of Management and Budget; DoS Bureau of Resource Management and Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and 

Labor; and the U.S. Agency for International Development Mission-Iraq. 

19 
20 

The $1.485 billion P.L. 109-234 Economic Support Fund appropriation was allotted to various 

agencies for various projects, with no uniformity in the transmittal dates. Tables 4 to 6 outline 

the results of SIGIR research into activities receiving these funds and the dates of those actions. 

The allocations were: 

• $937 million to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Gulf Region Division 

• $440 million to the U.S. Agency for International Development 

• $ 75 million to DoS 

• $ 33 million to DoJ 

Table 4--Economic Support Fund (P.L. 109-234) Initial Funding Transmittal Datesa

for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Gulf Region Division Programs 

FUNDING ACTION Infrastructure 

Security 

Protection 

Operation and 

Maintenance 

Sustainment 

Technical 

Capacity 

Development 

Provincial 

Reconstruction 

Teams and 

Provincial 

Reconstruction 

Development 

Committee 

Total = $937 Million $277 Million $285 Million $60 Million $315 Million 

Congress appropriates funds June 15, 2006 June 15, 2006 June 15, 2006 June 15, 2006 

Office of Management and 

Budget signs apportionment and 

sends to the USAID Bureau for 

Management 

July 12, 2006 July 12, 2006 July 12, 2006 July 12, 2006 

Office of Management and 

Budget signs apportionment and 

sends to the DoS Bureau of 

Resource Management b

November 3, 2006 November 3, 

2006 

November 3, 

2006 November 3, 2006 

DoS Bureau of Resource 

Management to the DoS Bureau 

of Near Eastern Affairs 

November 3, 2006 November 3, 

2006

November 3, 

2006 November 3, 2006

DoS Bureau of Near Eastern 

Affairs to the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers 

November 21, 

2006 

November 21, 

2006 

November 21, 

2006 November 7, 2006 

Available at Implementing 

Agency in Iraq 

November 21, 

2006 

November 21, 

2006 

November 21, 

2006 November 7, 2006 

First Commitment November 28, 

2006 

November 27, 

2006 

February 10, 

2007 November 18, 2006 

First Disbursement Not Disbursed c February 9, 2007 Not Disbursed d February 21, 2007 

a NOTE: Dates presented are the initial transmittal dates of funds apportioned or allotted for each action, and do not necessarily 

 represent an action for the total amount appropriated. 

b Funds are initially apportioned by OMB to USAID and then, with USAID’s authorization, are reapportioned to DoS or other 

agencies. c As of March 31, 2007, no disbursement had been made to this program, except for internal labor for the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers, Gulf Region Division, disbursed on December 20, 2006. d As of March 31, 2007. 

Sources: DoS Iraq Reconstruction Management Office; DoS Bureau of Resource Management; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Gulf 

Region Division; Office of Management and Budget; and U.S. Agency for International Development. 
21 

Table 5--Economic Support Fund (P.L. 109-234) Initial Funding Transmittal Datesa for USAID Pro

FUNDING ACTION 

National 

Capacity 

Development 

Minister of 

Finance-Iraqi 

Central Bank b

Community 

Stabilization 

Program 

Community 

Action Program 

PRT and Local 

Government 

Support c

Democracy 

and Civil 

Society d

Total = $440 Million $60 Million $20 Million $135 Million $45 Million $155 Million $18 Million 

Congress appropriates funds June 15, 2006 June 15, 2006 June 15, 2006 June 15, 2006 June 15, 2006 June 15, 200Office of Management and Budget signs apportionment and sends to the USAID Bureau for Management 

July 12, 2006 July 12, 2006 July 12, 2006 July 12, 2006 July 12, 2006 July 12, 2006 

USAID Bureau for Management to the DoS Office of the Director of Foreign Assistance 

July 20, 2006 July 20, 2006 July 20, 2006 July 20, 2006 July 20, 2006 July 20, 2006 

DoS Office of the Director of Foreign Assistance to the USAID Bureau for Asia and the Near East 

September 30, 

2006

September 30, 

2006

September 30, 

2006

September 30, 

2006

October 26, 

2006 and 

January 25, 

2007

September 7

2006

USAID Bureau for Asia and the Near East to USAID-Mission Iraq 

September 30, 

2006

September 30, 

2006

September 30, 

2006

September 30, 

2006

October 27, 

2006 and 

January 25, 

2007

September 8

2006 

Available at Implementing Agency in Iraq 

September 30, 

2006 

September 30, 

2006 

September 30, 

2006 

September 30, 

2006 

October 27, 

2006 and 

January 25, 

2007 

September 8

2006 

First Commitment September 30, 2006 September 30, 2006 September 30, 2006 September 30, 2006 December 20, 2006 September 11, 2006 First Disbursement 

Not Disbursed f Not Disbursed f October 17, 2006 March 7, 2007 Not Disbursed f March 13, 2007 

a NOTE: Dates presented are the initial transmittal dates of funds apportioned or allotted for each action, and do not necessarily represent an action for t

Sources: DoS Iraq Reconstruction Management Office; Office of Management and Budget; and U.S. Agency for International Development. 

b Also known as Economic Governance Program II.c Also known as Local Governance Program II. d Part of the $50 million earmarked by the Congress for Democracy, Governance and Rule of Law programs, see Table 6 for remainder.e Transferred from ESF to IRRF on September 14, 2006. f Not disbursed as of March 31, 2007. 
Table 6--Economic Support Fund (P.L. 109-234) 

 Initial Funding Transmittal Datesa for DoS and DoJ Programs

Department of State Department of Justice 

FUNDING ACTION 

Ministerial 

Capacity 

Development 

Program b

Democracy and 

Civil Society 

Program d FUNDING ACTION 

Régime Crimes 

Liaison’s Office 

Programs 

Total = $75 Million $45 Million $30 Million Total $33 Million 

Congress appropriates 

funds June 15, 2006 June 15, 2006 Congress appropriates funds June 15, 2006 

OMB signs apportionment 

and sends to USAID July 12, 2006 July 12, 2006 OMB signs apportionment 

and sends to USAID July 12, 2006 

OMB signs apportionment 

and sends to the DoS 

Bureau of Resource 

Management c

 November 3, 

2006 

September 8, 

2006 

OMB signs apportionment 

and sends to the DoS 

Bureau of Resource 

Management 

November 3, 2006 

N/A N/A 

DoS Bureau of Resource 

Management to the DoS 

Bureau of Near Eastern 

Affairs 

November 3, 2006 

DoS Bureau of Resource 

Management to the DoS 

Bureau of Democracy, 

Human Rights and Labor 

N/A September 14, 

2006 

DoS Bureau of Near 

Eastern Affairs to DoJ, 

Régime Crimes Liaison’s 

Office 

November 7, 2006 

DoS Bureau of Resource 

Management to the DoS 

Bureau of Near Eastern 

Affairs 

November 3, 

2006 N/A N/A N/A 

DoS Bureau of Near Eastern 

Affairs to the DoS Iraq 

Reconstruction Management 

Office 

November 29, 

2006 N/A N/A N/A 

Available at 

Implementing Agency in Iraq 

November 29, 

2006 October 10, 2006 

Available at 

Implementing Agency in 

Iraq 

November 7, 2006 

First Commitment December 1, 

2006 

September 18, 

2006 First Commitment November 7, 2006 

First Disbursement December 13, 

2006 October 7, 2006 First Disbursement December 8, 2006 

a

 NOTE: Dates presented are the initial transmittal dates of funds apportioned or allotted for each action, and do not necessarily 

 represent an action for the total amount appropriated. b

 Managed by the Iraq Reconstruction Management Office (succeeded by the Iraq Transition Assistance Office). c

 Funds are apportioned by OMB to USAID and then, with USAID’s authorization, are reapportioned to DoS or other agencies. d Part of the $50 million for Democracy, Governance and Rule of Law programs, see Table 5 for remainder. Managed by the DoS 

Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor.

Sources: DoS Iraq Reconstruction Management Office; DoS Bureau of Resource Management; Office of Management and Budget; 

and U.S. Agency for International Development. 

22
Of the $1.485 billion appropriated for Iraq by P.L. 109-234, $45 million was earmarked 

for the USAID Community Action Program in Iraq and $5 million for the Marla Ruzicka 

War Victims Fund. 

Further, P.L. 109-234 made $50 million available for Democracy, Governance, and Rule 

of Law programs in Iraq and Afghanistan and where designated to the following 

programs as follows: 

• $18 million to USAID for Democracy and Civil programs 

• $30 million to DoS for Democracy and Civil Society programs 

• $ 2 million to DoS for Democracy and Rule of Law programs in Iraq and 

Afghanistan 

No other direction was provided by the Congress for the remaining $1,385 million.5

However, Table 7 outlines funding allotments by sector contained in the September 29, 

2006, Action Memorandum6

 prepared by the DoS’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs for 

the DoS’s Director of Foreign Assistance, on how funds were to be programmed. 

As of June 14, 2007, the $2 million for the Democracy and Rule of Law program for Iraq 

and Afghanistan remained unallotted because the Congress had yet to resolve a decision 

on whether the funds should go to Iraq or Afghanistan. 

DoS and USACE signed interagency agreements, regarding the projects executed by 

USACE, as the implementing agency. The interagency agreements defined the scope of 

work for project deliverables, the cost for the projects, and the roles and responsibilities 

of DoS and USACE during the term of the agreement. 

 

5

 According to OMB, the Administration submitted a Congressional Budget Justification (CBJ) document 

and consulted with Congress on how funds would be used prior to the Congress appropriating the money. 

6

 According to OMB, for internal reasons, DoS/USAID cannot obligate funds until this Action Memo is 

signed. 

23 
Table 7—Economic Support Fund (P.L. 109-234) Allotments 

Area Implementing Agency Project 

Amount

(Dollars in 

Millions)

USACE Provincial Reconstruction Teams 

(PRTs) and Provincial 

Reconstruction Development 

Committee (PRDC) Projects 

$315.0

USACE Infrastructure Security Protection 277.0

USAID PRT Support to Local Governments 155.0

USAID Community Stabilization Program 135.0

Security 

USAID Community Action Programa

 45.0

Economic USACE O&M Sustainment 285.0 

USACE Technical Capacity Development 60.0

DoS/IRMO Ministerial Capacity Development 45.0

USAID National Capacity Development 60.0

USAID Ministry of Finance/Central Bank Support 20.0

Political 

DoJ Regime Crimes Liaison’s Office 33.0

Subtotal $1,430.0

USAID Marla Ruzicka War Victims Fundb 5.0

USAID Democracy and Civil Programs 18.0

DoS Democracy and Civil Programs 30.0

Other 

DoS Democracy/Rule of Law-Iraq/Afghanistan 2.0

Total $1,485.0

a Earmark. 

b Earmark. Transferred to IRRF on September 14, 2006. 

Sources: Action Memorandum, DoS Director, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, to DoS Director of Foreign Assistance, 

September 29, 2006: Subject: FY 2006 Supplemental ESF Funds Obligation Request for Iraq. DoS and USACE 

interagency agreements, dated November 7and 21, 2006. Also, Appendix III of the Section 2207 Report, dated January 

2007.

Control and Oversight

IRMO, in consultation with the Iraq Assistance Coordinator in the DoS Bureau of Near 

Eastern Affairs, is tasked with coordinating the programs, policies, and procedures for the 

use of the ESF funds. IRMO exercises oversight mainly through the use of the quarterly 

Section 2207 Report, as directed in the action memorandum prepared by the Bureau of 

Near Eastern Affairs, through the creation of Appendix III to the Section 2207 Report. 

USACE is to maintain accountability and control of ESF funds identified in the 

interagency agreements in accordance with the same rules and regulations which guided 

USACE’s use of IRRF funds. In addition there is specific guidance in the ESF 

agreements regarding fund restrictions and responsibilities. 

24 
That guidance included in the interagency agreements also includes: 

• Restrictions in both the applicable Appropriations Act, including the 

Supplemental, and in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, are 

applicable to the funds provided under the ESF interagency agreement. 

• The Servicing Agency (i.e., USACE) agrees to carry out its responsibilities in 

accordance with applicable U.S. laws and regulations, and U.S. foreign policy 

directives. 

• The Servicing Agency shall use the funds made available by this IAA for no 

purpose other than to carry out the Agreement under the terms and conditions. 

Funds will be used only for specific projects and purposes delineated in the 

agreement or as agreed by IRMO. No funds provided under this agreement will be 

used for activities that would normally be performed in the absence of this 

agreement. 

• Approval must be obtained from IRMO prior to any project modifications, 

cancellations or descoping of said projects. IRMO shall approve, modify, or deny 

the Servicing Agency’s requests in a timely manner. 

• The Servicing Agency shall maintain accountability and controls in accordance 

with its agency rules and regulations, and shall be accountable to the Department 

of State for all funds made available to it in this Agreement. Funds shall not be 

expended on activities, services or materials that cannot be justified in terms of 

their contributions to meeting program objectives. 

USACE uses the cost-to-complete projects discipline to manage ESF allocations within 

its purview. 

Performance Measures 

SIGIR did not find specific performance measures established or required for all 

programs funded by the ESF. Some of the programs managed by the USACE incorporate 

metrics into some of their interagency program agreements. USAID addressed 

performance measurement in its publication, USAID/IRAQ Performance Management 

Plan, which it uses to measure progress in meeting its mission’s objectives. 

25 
Commander’s Emergency Response Program 

Funding 

Legislative Authority 

The Congress appropriated $923 million in FY 2006 funds for the Commander’s 

Emergency Response Program (CERP), of which $708 million was designated for Iraq, 

and $215 million for Afghanistan. The intended purpose of these funds was to enable 

local U.S. commanders in Iraq to respond to urgent humanitarian relief and 

reconstruction requirements within their areas of responsibility by carrying out programs 

that will immediately assist the indigenous population. The first appropriation, 

Department of Defense, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations To Address Hurricanes 

in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act, 2006 (P.L. 109-148, enacted 

December 30, 2005) provided $500 million. The second appropriation, Emergency 

Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane 

Recovery (P.L. 109-234, enacted June 15, 2006) provided $423 million. 

Of the $708 million for Iraq, $510 million was designated for use in FY 2006 and 

$198 million was held to be used in FY 2007 until December 31, 2007, (end of first 

quarter FY 2008). 

Reports Required by Law

P.L. 109-148 specifically states that the Army, with the support of the Office of the 

Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller), will provide to the Congress, not later than 15 

days following the end of each fiscal quarter, a report regarding the source of funds and 

the allocation and use of CERP funds. 

P.L. 109-234 did not identify any reporting requirements. 

Other Reports

According to an Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) (USD(C)) 

memorandum dated July 27, 2005, that provided CERP guidance, the Army is to submit a 

monthly CERP project status report as of the last day of the preceding month. The Army 

is to provide a copy of the report to the U.S. Central Command Comptroller and the Joint 

Chiefs of Staff Comptroller. The CERP project status report is to contain this 

information: 

• unit 

• project number 

• payment date 

• project description/location 

• amount committed, obligated, and disbursed

26 
Funds Availability and Use

The $923 million CERP appropriations were allocated as follows: 

• Commanders in Iraq were allocated $708 million in FY 2006, of which 

$198 million was held for use in FY 2007. As a result, FY 2006 obligations 

totaled $510 million: 

o $375 million from P.L. 109-148 

o $135 million from P.L. 109-234 

• Commanders in Afghanistan were allocated $215 million in FY 2006, of which 

obligations totaled $215 million: 

o $125 million from P.L. 109-148 

o $ 90 million from P.L. 109-234 

The information on funding for Afghanistan is included only to identify total CERP funds 

made available in these appropriations. SIGIR did not examine the funding or activities 

for Afghanistan, and the following discussions relate only to the $510 million in funds 

provided in FY 2006 for Iraq. 

The CERP funds for Iraq from P.L. 109-148 were made available pursuant to Continuing 

Resolution budget authority approved on September 30, 2005. Within 4 calendar days, 

these funds were allocated to the Army implementing field activities. The Congress did 

not enact the appropriation legislation to make the complete funds available for use until 

December 30, 2005. 

However, CERP funds from P.L. 109-234 were made available immediately when 

appropriated by the Congress on June 15, 2006. Within 35 calendar days, the initial P.L. 

109-234 funds were allocated. For the allocation timeline and flow of these funds, see 

Figure 4. Key events include: 

• P.L. 109-148: 

o December 30, 2005: $375 million appropriated. 

o January 31, 2006: OMB signed an apportionment and sent to USD(C). 

o February 3, 2006: USD(C) provided obligation authority to Army Budget 

Office 

o October 1, 2005 through October 4, 2005: with Continuing Resolution 

authority, Army Budget Office allocated $375 million to Army field activities. 

Funds were initially allocated to the U.S. Army Forces Command (FORSCOM) on 

October 1, 2005. FORSCOM immediately forwarded the funds to U.S. Army Central 

27 
Command (ARCENT). ARCENT in turn made the funds available to Multi-National 

Force-Iraq (MNF-I) and Multi-National Corps-Iraq (MNC-I) on October 4, 2005. 

• P.L. 109-234: 

o June 15, 2006: $333 million made available. 

o June 16, 2006: OMB signed apportionment and sent funds to USD(C). 

o June 16, 2006: USD(C) provided obligation authority to Army Budget Office 

o July 20, 2006: Army Budget Office began allocating the $333 million to 

Army field activities; of which $198 million was held for use in FY 2006, and 

not obligated during FY 2006. 

The $135 million allocated for use in FY 2006 began arriving at MNF-I and MNC-I on 

July 20, 2006. The initial fund commitment occurred on August 1, 2006—approximately 

two weeks following receipt by MNC-I. For the chronology of fund activity for each 

appropriation, see Table 8. 

28 
Figure 4. Flow of Commander’s Emergency Response 

Program Funding for Iraq 

(A) Appropriation 

(S) Supplemental 

FAD Funding Authorization Document 

OA Obligation Authority 

RAD Resource Allocation Document 

SF 132 Apportionment and Reapportionment Schedule 

NOTE: Dates presented are the initial transmittal dates of funds apportioned or allotted for each action, and do not 

 necessarily represent an action for the total amount of the funds.

Sources: P.L. 109-148; P.L.109-234; Office of Management and Budget; Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial 

Management and Comptroller), U.S. Army Central Command; and the Multi-National Corps-Iraq. 

29 
Table 8--CERP Iraq Initial Funding Transmittal Datesa

FUNDING ACTION 

P.L. 109-148 

$375 Million 

P.L. 109-234 

$333 Million 

Congress appropriates funds December 30, 2005 June 15, 2006 

Office of Management and Budget signs 

apportionment and sends to the Under 

Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) 

January 31, 2006 June 16, 2006 

Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) 

to the Assistant Secretary of Defense 

(Financial Management and Comptroller), 

Army Budget Office 

February 3, 2006 June 16, 2006 

Army Budget Office to the 

Army Forces Command October 1, 2005 b

 July 20, 2006 

Army Forces Command to the 

Army Central Command October 1, 2005 July 20, 2006 

Army Central Command to the 

Multi-National Corps-Iraq October 4, 2005 July 20, 2006 

Available at 

Implementing Agency in Iraq October 4, 2005 July 20, 2006 

First Commitment October 19, 2005 August 1, 2006 

First Disbursement November 17, 2005 August 23, 2006 

a

 NOTE: Dates presented are the initial transmittal dates of funds apportioned or allotted for each action, and do not 

 necessarily represent an action for the total amount appropriated. 

b The Continuing Resolution, September 30, 2005, allowed agencies to received funds before the passage of the 

 appropriation law.

Sources: PL 109-148; PL109-234; Office of Management and Budget; Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial 

Management and Comptroller); U.S. Army Central Command; and the Multi-National Corps-Iraq. 

CERP funds are provided for specific purposes in support of Iraq relief and 

reconstruction, and a list of nineteen allowable uses are defined in USD(C) and in-theater 

guidance. Examples of the nineteen allowable CERP categories include water and 

sanitation, food production and distribution, electricity, healthcare, and education 

projects. Likewise, the USD(C) guidance also identifies ten areas where CERP funds 

shall not be used, including, for example, direct or indirect benefit to U.S., coalition, or 

other supporting personnel; entertainment; reward programs; removal of unexploded 

ordnance; or, training, equipping or operating costs of Iraqi Security Forces. Most 

weapon procurement programs are prohibited. For a listing of authorized uses of CERP 

funds, see Table 9. 

30 
Table 9—CERP Iraq Projects for Fiscal Year 2006 

Authorized Uses - Fiscal Year 2006 Project Category Number Obligations 

1. Water and sanitation - projects to repair or reconstruct water or sewer 

infrastructure, including water wells 659 $ 138,250,913 

2. Food production and distribution - projects to increase food production or 

distribution processes 17 $1,302,366 

3. Agriculture - projects to increase agricultural production or cooperative 

agricultural programs 58 $28,614,675 

4. Electricity - projects to repair or reconstruct electrical power or distribution 

infrastructure, including generators 421 $81,755,958 

5. Healthcare - projects to repair or reconstruct hospitals or clinics or to 

provide urgent healthcare services, immunizations, medicine, medical 

supplies, or equipment 232 $25,838,505 

6. Education - projects to repair or reconstruct schools, purchase school 

supplies or equipment 557 $41,986,775 

7. Telecommunications - projects to repair or reconstruct 

telecommunications systems or infrastructure 81 $8,690,536 

8. Economic, financial, and management improvements - projects to 

improve economic or financial security 95 $29,281,329 

9. Transportation - projects to repair or reconstruct transportation systems, 

roads, bridges, or transportation infrastructure 480 $66,970,347 

10. Rule of law and governance - projects to repair or reconstruct such 

government buildings as administration offices, courthouses, or prisons 150 $12,131,377 

11. Irrigation - projects to repair or reconstruct irrigation systems 

 49 $13,823,564 

12. Civic cleanup activities - projects to remove trash, cleanup the 

community, or beautify the surroundings 234 $17,143,268 

13. Civic support vehicle - projects to purchase or lease vehicles to support 

civic and community activities 9 $2,194,300 

14. Repair of civic and cultural facilities - projects to repair or restore civic or 

cultural buildings or facilities 73 $4,923,332 

15. Repair of damage that results from U.S., Coalition, or supporting military 

operations and is not compensable under the Foreign Claims Act 59 $1,490,369 

16. Condolence payments to individual civilians for death, injury, or property 

damage resulting from U.S. Coalition, or supporting military operations 438 $7,356,542 

17. Payment to individuals upon release from detention 

 0 0 

18. Protective measures – projects to enhance the durability and survivability 

of critical infrastructure sites (e.g., oil pipelines and electrical lines) 53 $4,347,217 

19. Other urgent humanitarian or reconstruction - projects to repair 

collateral battle damage not otherwise payable because of combat 

exclusions or condolence payments 146 $23,595,065 

 Subtotal by Type of Project 3,811a $509,696,437 

 Funds Issued to Units / Project Details Pendingb $ 352,888 

 Total $510,049,325 a

 On February 9, 2007, there were 3,854 CERP projects as compared to the 3,811. This occurs because 

 commanders are sometimes provided bulk funds for CERP projects and the actual number of completed projects is not 

 known until the major subordinate command reports to Multi-National Corps-Iraq (MNC-I). 

b

 Funds are obligated by MNC-I headquarters when issued to military unit. 

Source: Army Budget Office, as reported to the Congress in its September 30, 2006, quarterly report. The number 

 of projects by category and total number were computed by SIGIR from information provided by the Army 

 Budget Office. 

31 
Guidance regarding use of CERP funds has been provided through various sources, from 

the Office of the USD(C) to in-theater commands. The Office of the USD(C) has, for 

example, issued a memorandum defining purposes and applicability, responsibilities, 

procedures, and other controls for CERP. 

The Multi-National Force-Iraq Commander also has issued Fragmentary Order 05-374 

(November 29, 2005) that identifies the specific strategic effects to be achieved with 

CERP funding. These include: 

• Build Iraqi provincial government capacity by partnering with Provincial 

Reconstruction Development Committee in the identification, development, and 

execution of local projects. 

• Complete “last mile” projects that connect essential services or major 

infrastructure projects to the local end user, especially in strategic cities. 

• Create the conditions for economic development momentum. 

Other military guidance that controls the use of CERP funds include: 

• Multi-National Corps-Iraq Comptroller Standard Operating Procedure, “Money as 

a Weapons Systems” (November 11, 2006), which provides complete guidance on 

CERP, including its permitted and prohibited uses, sample forms, usage 

instructions, and reporting requirements. 

Control and Oversight 

The Office of the USD (C) is responsible for the establishment and supervision of the 

execution of principles, policies, and procedures for CERP and to ensure that 

congressional oversight committees are informed of CERP activities on a quarterly basis. 

Further, the USD (C) memorandum cited in the “Other Reports” section above mandated 

that the administration of CERP will be subject to periodic audits by DoD’s internal 

review and audit organizations (i.e., the Office of the Inspector General and/or the Army 

Audit Agency), as well as by external organizations (the U.S. Government Accountability 

Office and congressional oversight committees). SIGIR has also performed reviews of 

the CERP family of funds. 

The U.S. Army is the executive agent for CERP, and the Army Budget Office, under the 

Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Financial Management and 

Comptroller, is responsible for producing the quarterly report to the Congress on the 

source, allocation, and use of CERP funds pursuant to P.L. 109-148. 

The U.S. Central Command oversees military operations, programs, and funds in both 

Iraq and Afghanistan. It is responsible for allocating CERP funds between Iraq and 

Afghanistan, and through its component command, the Army Forces Central Command, 

32 
is required to reconcile CERP funds every three months and report these results to the 

Army Budget Office. 

The Multi-National Force-Iraq (MNF-I) provides guidance, establishes priorities, and 

identifies focus areas for subordinate units to leverage CERP in support of the strategic 

objectives of its Campaign Plan. 

Performance Measures 

Measuring the effect of a CERP project is often complex and difficult. For example, 

many CERP effects are second- and third-order impacts that go beyond completion of a 

project. MNC-I coordinates the efforts of several staff agencies to determine the intended 

effects of CERP projects in a city or region. An Effects Assessment Working Group 

meets every week and during that working group the impacts of CERP projects across the 

lines of operations are reviewed directly or indirectly as required. The Effects 

Assessment Working Group culminates in a classified Effects Assessment Board to the 

MNC-I Commanding General once a month. Actual effects of completed projects are 

measured through measures of effectiveness that access the MNC-I Campaign Plan. The 

majority of the effects a CERP project has on an area are second and third order impacts, 

that go beyond the simple completion of the project. 

The assessment process considers polling results, operational reports, and subjective 

matter expert reports in a holistic methodology so that all the effects and impacts of a 

project are captured and measured. Examples of indirect impacts are economic, essential 

service, and security activities in an area where the CERP project is completed. For 

example a CERP funded security project did not directly cause economic growth in an 

area, however, because of the increased security it provided, the second order impact was 

the enablement of free trade, increasing economic activity in the area, which in turn 

added to job growth, wage increases, etc. (third order impacts). Polling of Iraqis, for 

example, would show that CERP projects provided jobs to Iraqis, and/or Iraqis indicated 

that they noticed the coalition’s reconstruction efforts (i.e. the reconstruction was visible 

to them).

33 
International Narcotics Control and Law 

Enforcement Fund 

Legislative Authority 

The International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE) Fund for Iraq 

activities consists of $91.4 million made available by the Congress through the 

Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and 

Hurricane Recovery (P.L. 109-234, enacted June 15, 2006). The DoS Bureau of 

International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) is responsible for the 

development of programs and policies to combat international narcotics and crime.7

Presidential Decision Directive 71, February 24, 2000, directs DoS to strengthen criminal 

justice systems in support of U.S. peace operations and other complex contingencies. The 

INL office at the U.S. Mission-Iraq primarily conducts projects in three areas—police, 

rule of law, and corrections.

Reports Required by Law 

There are no reporting requirements to the Congress in the enacted appropriation. 

Other Reports 

The majority of these funds are for construction projects, specifically for the renovation/ 

construction of prison facilities within Iraq, to be undertaken by the USACE Gulf Region 

Division. These projects are conducted in accordance with an interagency agreement 

between the Gulf Region Division and INL, which also identifies requirements for 

reports that the Gulf Region Division was to submit to INL. According to the agreement, 

the reports are to include this information: 

• overall project status 

• percent of project completed, with a description of work completed and costs 

itemized according to specified categories 

• a project monthly expenditure plan 

• funds committed, obligated, accrued, invoiced, and expended 

• remaining balance of unobligated funds 

• projected funding needed for completion 

• list of materials and supplies ordered, delivered, and installed 

 

7

 INL, Program and Policy Guide, March 9, 2006. 

34 
• list of all change orders and design changes/modifications 

• copies of all laboratory materials test results 

• documentation of all onsite material substitutes 

• summary of critical issues and challenges 

• a plan of action to resolve outstanding challenges or issues 

• an assessment of current, short-term and long-term security conditions 

• photographs of completed sections of the project 

Project status reports should be submitted monthly to the following INL representatives: 

 

• Chief, Resource Management/Budget Office 

• Chief, Resource Management Office, Afghanistan-Iraq-Jordan Support Division 

• Director, Civilian Police Program 

• Program Manager, Civilian Police Program 

• Senior Corrections Adviser 

• In-country (Iraq) Contracting Officer’s Representative 

• In-country (Iraq) Government Technical Monitor 

• Director, INL Iraq 

• Deputy Director, INL Iraq 

Funds Availability and Use

The Congress appropriated $107.7 million to the INCLE Fund in P.L. 109-234 on June 

15, 2006, to support INL activities, of which up to $16.3 million was earmarked for 

Columbian activities, leaving $91.4 million for Iraq. After 230 calendar days elapsed, 

funds were available to the Iraq field activity, USACE; which was in an interagency 

agreement with INL. For the allocation timeline and flow of these funds, see Figure 5. 

Key events include: 

• June 15, 2006: Congress appropriated the funds to INCLE. 

• September 28, 2006: OMB signed an apportionment and sent it to DoS Bureau of 

Resource Management (105 calendar days after appropriation). 

• October 30, 2006: DoS Bureau of Resource Management initially allotted funds 

to INL. 

• January 31, 2007: INL entered into an Interagency Agreement with USACE for 

prison renovation and construction in the amount of $82 million. 

35 
• As of March 31, 2007: INL was negotiating with the U.S. Marshals Service to 

develop an Iraqi judicial protection service and to procure secure judicial housing 

for $7.7 million. 

• The remaining $1.7 million was with INL for program support costs, as of March 

31, 2007. 

For the chronology of fund activity, see Table 10. 

36 
Figure 5. Flow of International Narcotics Control 

and Law Enforcement Fund P.L. 109-234 

Notes: 

a

 NOTE: Dates presented are the initial transmittal dates of funds 

apportioned or allotted for each action, and do not necessarily

represent an action for the total amount of funds. b

 $1.7M for Bureau program support costs. c. Funds have been obligated, May 23, 2007. d These funds were rescinded. 

AU Allotment Authority

IAA Interagency Agreement

M Million 

SF 132 Apportionment and Reapportionment 

Schedule

Sources: DoS Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, and Bureau of Resource Management;

the Office of Management and Budget; and P.L. 109-234.

37 
Table 10--International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement Fund 

 (P.L. 109-234) Initial Funding Transmittal Datesa

FUNDING ACTION $91.4 Million 

Congress appropriated funding June 15, 2006 

Office of Management and Budget signed an apportionment and sent it to 

the DoS Bureau of Resource Management September 28, 2006 

DoS Bureau of Resource Management to the DoS Bureau of International 

Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs October 30, 2006 

DoS Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs to the 

Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers January 31, 2007 

Available at Implementing Agency in Iraq January 31, 2007 

First Commitment May 23, 2007 

First Disbursement Not Disbursed as of 

June 15, 2007 a

 NOTE: Dates presented are the initial transmittal dates of funds apportioned or allotted for each action, and do not 

 necessarily represent an action for the total amount appropriated.

Sources: Office of Management and Budget and DoS Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs. 

Control and Oversight 

Under the terms of the interagency agreement, INL requires the USACE to prepare 

independent government estimates for the proposed work, to provide appropriate 

program and project management to oversee the specified tasks, to permit unrestricted 

INL access to the project sites, and to submit reports as outlined in the “Other Reports” 

section of this fact sheet. Further, USACE is to maintain accountability and controls in 

accordance with the same rules and regulations which guided USACE’s use of IRRF; that 

guidance mandates that the designated funds cannot be used for any purpose which does 

not contribute to the project objectives. Specific restrictions and responsibilities in 

construction of prisons include identifying proposed project cost per bed; cost estimates 

for project oversight, quality control, and other logistics; and proposed costs for each 

component. Each subproject (i.e., each prison) requires a separate support agreement, 

which contains a detailed scope of work, schedule information, cost estimates, and 

procedures for coordinating with Iraqi and U.S. government representatives. The support 

agreement is the authorizing document for the work to commence. 

38 
Performance Measures

Performance metrics were not established for INL’s INCLE Fund for Iraq activities. 

There are no provisions in the USACE interagency agreement, for instance, that 

mandates minimally acceptable standards for the buildings. Section V.10 of the 

interagency agreement does state: “Subject to the terms and conditions of this interagency 

agreement, the Gulf Region Division agrees to make its best effort to perform the work 

within the amounts provided for under the section entitled Fiscal Terms.” In some other 

documents, however, the scope of work indicated the facilities would be built and 

renovated to Iraqi code. 

39 
Appendix A—Scope and Methodology 

The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) initiated this study on 

January 30, 2007 (Project 7005); to identify the FY 2006 funds made available by the 

Congress for Iraq relief and reconstruction, and for each appropriation covered the 

specific objectives: 

1. When did this money become available for use in Iraq? 

2. When did the activities in Iraq begin to use these funds and for what purposes? 

3. What policies and procedures have been put in place to control the use and 

oversight of these funds? 

4. How does the controlling authority ensure that the policies and procedures are 

carried out? 

5. What performance measures are in place to evaluate the effectiveness of the 

individual projects supported by these funds in relationship to the overall goals of 

the Iraq relief and reconstruction program? 

6. What are the reporting requirements to senior U.S. officials, including the Office 

of Management and Budget, on the use and status of these funds? 

7. What are the reporting requirements to the Congress on the obligations, 

expenditures, and use of these funds? 

Funds were appropriated in FY 2006 under these laws: 

• P.L. 109-102, Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs 

Appropriations Act, 2006, enacted November 14, 2005 

• P.L. 109-148, Department of Defense, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations 

To Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act, 2006,

enacted December 30, 2005 

• P.L. 109-234, The Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the 

Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery, enacted June 15, 2006 

This fact sheet was organized by fund into the following headings in order to highlight 

the legislation that appropriated the funds, define the reporting requirements established 

by the Congress and other activities, describe when and for what purpose the activities in 

Iraq began using the funds, how control is maintained, and what metrics have been 

established to assess the success or failure of the funded programs. 

• Legislative Authority: discusses the legislation that appropriated the funds 

• Reports Required by Law: defines the reporting requirements established by the 

Congress 

40 
41 

• Other Reports: defines the reporting requirements established by other activities 

• Fund Availability and Use: describes when and for what purpose the activities in 

Iraq began using the funds 

• Control and Oversight: describes how control over funds and performance is 

monitored and maintained 

• Performance Measures: identifies the metrics that have been established to assess 

the success or failure of the funded programs 

To answer these questions and to determine the overall status of non-IRRF FY 2006 

funds, we interviewed senior officials with the Iraq Reconstruction Management Office; 

the Office of Management and Budget; Office, the U.S. Agency for International 

Development; the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller); the Army Budget Office; 

the Department of State’s Bureaus of Resource Management, Near Eastern Affairs, and 

International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs; the U.S. Army Central Command; 

the Multi-National Security Transition Command-Iraq; Multi-National Force-Iraq; and 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Gulf Region Division. We obtained information on 

various funds within their respective organizations. We also reviewed and discussed with 

senior organizational officials the agencies’ applicable policies and procedures, oversight, 

reporting requirements, and performance metrics. Information in this fact sheet was 

vetted with senior officials responsible for the accountability of these funds. 

We conducted this review from January 2007 through July 2007, as “nonaudit services”, 

in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Use of Computer-Processed Data

In preparing this fact sheet we used computer-processed data from the Iraq 

Reconstruction Management System and the Corps of Engineers Financial Management 

System to ascertain commitment and disbursement dates. We did no work to validate the 

accuracy of the data in these systems. 

Prior Coverage 

The following reports were reviewed during the course of this audit: 

Iraqi Security Forces: Review of Plans to Implement Logistics Capabilities (SIGIR-06-

032), October 2006. 

Management of the Commander’s Emergency Response Program for Fiscal Year 2006 

(SIGIR-07-007) issued as an audit report in April 2007. 

Management of the Iraq Security Forces Fund in Southwest Asia – Phase II (DOD-IG 

Report Number D-2007-060), issued February 12, 2007. 
42

Appendix B—Number of Days Initial Funds Were Made AvailaImplementing Field-level Activity Program 

Days to Implementing Activity

117

107107107107

85

62

35

29

INCLE PL 109-234, DoS

Marla Ruzicka War Victims Fund , ESF 109-102, USAID

Democracy, Governance and Rule of Law Program, ESF 109-102, DoS

Ministerial Capacity Development Program , ESF 109-234, DoS

Infrastructure Security Protection, ESF 109-234, GRD

Operation and Maintenance Sustainment, ESF 109-234, GRD

Technical Capacity Development, ESF 109-234, GRD

PRTs and Provincial Reconstruction Development Committee Projects, ESF 109-234, GRD

Régime Crimes Liaison’s Office Programs, ESF 109-234, DoJ

PRT and Local Government Support, ESF 109-234, USAID

Democracy and Civil Society Program , ESF 109-234, DoS

National Capacity Development, ESF 109-234, USAID

Minister of Finance-Iraqi Central Bank, ESF 109-234, USAID

Community Stabilization Program, ESF 109-234. USAID

Community Action Program, ESF 109-234, USAID

Democracy and Civil Society, ESF 109-234, USAID

Marla Ruzicka War Victims Fund, ESF 109-234, USAID

CERP 109-234, DOD

ISFF 109-234, DOD

NOTE: Not included were: (1) $2 million in ESF from P.L. 109-234 for the Democracy and Rule of Law program for Iraq and Afghani14, 2007, this amount remained unallocated; and (2) $375 million in CERP funds from PL 109-148, because only a portion of these fun

a Continuing Resolution.

CERP (Commander’s Emergency Response Program); ESF (Economic Support Fund); INCLE (International Narcotics Control and LaISFF (Iraq Security Forces Fund). 
Appendix C—Acronyms

AA Advice of Allotment 

ABO Army Budget Office 

ARCENT Army Central Command 

AU Allotment Authority 

BM Bureau for Management 

CPA Coalition Provisional Authority 

CEFMS Corps of Engineers Financial Management System 

CERP Commander’s Emergency Response Program 

CPA Coalition Provisional Authority 

CPA-IG CPA’s Office of Inspector General 

DoJ Department of Justice 

DoS Department of State 

DRL Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, Bureau of 

ESF Economic Support Fund 

FAD Funding Authorization Document 

FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation 

FY Fiscal Year 

IAA Interagency Agreement 

ICITAP International Criminal Investigative Training Assistance Program 

INCLE International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement 

INL Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs 

IRMO Iraq Reconstruction Management Office 

IRMS Iraq Reconstruction Management System 

IRRF Iraq Reconstruction and Relief Fund 

ISFF Iraq Security Forces Fund 

MNC-I Multi-National Corps-Iraq 

MNF-I Multi-National Force-Iraq 

MNSTC-I Multi-National Security Transition Command-Iraq 

MOD Iraqi Ministry of Defense 

MOI Iraqi Ministry of the Interior 

43 
O&M Operations and Maintenance 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

OPDAT Office of Overseas Prosecutorial Development, Assistance, and 

 Training 

OSD Office of the Secretary of Defense 

P.L. Public Law 

PRDC Provincial Reconstruction Development Committee 

PRT Provincial Reconstruction Team 

RAD Resource Allocation Document 

SF Standard Form 

SIGIR Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction 

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

USAID U.S. Agency for International Development 

USD (C) Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) 

44 
Appendix D—Report Distribution 

Department of State 

Secretary of State 

Senior Advisor to the Secretary and Coordinator for Iraq 

Director of U.S. Foreign Assistance/Administrator, U.S. Agency for 

International Development 

 Director, Office of Iraq Reconstruction 

 Assistant Secretary for Resource Management/Chief Financial Officer, 

 Bureau of Resource Management 

U.S. Ambassador to Iraq 

Director, Iraq Transition Assistance Office 

Coordinator, Office of Provincial Affairs 

Mission Director-Iraq, U.S. Agency for International Development 

Inspector General, Department of State 

Inspector General, U.S. Agency for International Development 

Regional Inspector General-Iraq, U.S. Agency for International Development 

Department of Defense 

Secretary of Defense 

Deputy Secretary of Defense 

Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer 

 Deputy Chief Financial Officer 

 Deputy Comptroller (Program/Budget) 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense-Middle East, Office of Policy/International 

Security Affairs 

Inspector General, Department of Defense 

Director, Defense Contract Audit Agency 

Director, Defense Finance and Accounting Service 

Director, Defense Contract Management Agency 

Department of the Army 

Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology 

Principal Deputy to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, 

Logistics, and Technology 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Policy and Procurement) 

Commanding General, Joint Contracting Command-Iraq/Afghanistan 

Assistant Secretary of the Army for Financial Management and Comptroller 

Chief of Engineers and Commander, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

 Commanding General, Gulf Region Division 

Chief Financial Officer, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

Auditor General of the Army 

U.S. Central Command

Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq 

Commanding General, Multi-National Corps-Iraq 

Commanding General, Multi-National Security Transition Command-Iraq 

Commander, Joint Area Support Group-Central 

45 
Other Federal Government Organizations 

Director, Office of Management and Budget 

Comptroller General of the United States 

Inspector General, Department of the Treasury 

Inspector General, Department of Commerce 

Inspector General, Department of Health and Human Services 

President, Overseas Private Investment Corporation 

President, U.S. Institute for Peace 

Congressional Committees and Subcommittees, Chairman and 

Ranking Minority Member 

Senate Committee on Appropriations 

Subcommittee on Defense 

Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs 

Senate Committee on Armed Services 

Senate Committee on Foreign Relations 

Subcommittee on International Development and Foreign Assistance, Economic 

Affairs, and International Environmental Protection 

Subcommittee on International Operations and Organizations, Democracy and 

Human Rights 

Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South and Central Asian Affairs 

Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, 

Federal Services, and International Security 

Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal 

Workforce, and the District of Columbia 

Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations 

U.S. House of Representatives 

House Committee on Appropriations 

Subcommittee on Defense 

Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs 

House Committee on Armed Services 

House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

Subcommittee on Government Management, Organization, and Procurement 

Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs 

House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights, and Oversight 

Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia 

46
Appendix E—Audit Team Members 

This fact sheet was prepared and the survey was conducted under the direction of Joseph 

T. McDermott, Assistant Inspector General for Audit, Office of the Special Inspector 

General for Iraq Reconstruction. 

The staff members who conducted the survey and contributed to the fact sheet include: 

Karen Bell 

Ronald J. Bonfilio 

Mark L. Comfort 

Glenn Furbish 

Clifton Spruill 

47
SIGIR’s Mission Regarding the U.S. reconstruction plans, programs, 

and operations in Iraq, the Special Inspector General 

for Iraq Reconstruction provides independent and 

objective: 

• oversight and review through comprehensive 

audits, inspections, and investigations 

• advice and recommendations on policies to 

promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness 

• deterrence of malfeasance through the prevention 

and detection of fraud, waste, and abuse 

• information and analysis to the Secretary of 

State, the Secretary of Defense, the Congress, 

and the American people through Quarterly 

Reports 

Obtaining Copies of SIGIR 

Reports and Testimonies 

To obtain copies of SIGIR documents at no cost, go 

to SIGIR’s Web site (www.sigir.mil). 

To Report Fraud, Waste, 

and Abuse in Iraq Relief 

and Reconstruction 

Programs 

Help prevent fraud, waste, and abuse by reporting 

suspicious or illegal activities to the SIGIR Hotline: 

• Web: www.sigir.mil/submit_fraud.html 

• Phone: 703-602-4063 

• Toll Free: 866-301-2003 

Congressional Affairs Hillel Weinberg 

Assistant Inspector General for Congressional 

 Affairs 

Mail: Office of the Special Inspector General 

 for Iraq Reconstruction 

 400 Army Navy Drive 

 Arlington, VA 22202-4704 

Phone: 703-428-1059 

Email: hillel.weinberg@sigir.mil 

Public Affairs Director for Public Affairs 

Mail: Office of the Special Inspector General 

 for Iraq Reconstruction 

 400 Army Navy Drive 

 Arlington, VA 22202-4704 

Phone: 703-428-1100 

Fax: 703-428-0818 

Email: PublicAffairs@sigir.mil 

48