Foreign Assistance: Actions Needed to Better Assess the Impact of Agencies' Marking and Publicizing Efforts
Published: 2007-03-12T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: The negative perceptions of the United States associated with U.S. foreign policy initiatives have underscored the importance of the United States presenting a complete portrayal of the benefits that many in the world derive from U.S. foreign assistance efforts. Congress has expressed concerns that the United States has frequently understated or not publicized information about its foreign assistance programs. As requested, this report (1) describes the policies, regulations, and guidelines that agencies have established to mark and publicize foreign assistance; (2) describes how State, USAID, and other agencies mark and publicize foreign assistance; and (3) identifies key challenges that agencies face in marking and publicizing foreign assistance.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: Most of the agencies we reviewed involved in foreign assistance activities have established some marking and publicity requirements in policies, regulations, or guidelines. USAID has the most detailed policies and regulations relating to marking and publicity. USAID has also established a network of communications specialists at its missions to publicize its assistance efforts and has issued communications guidelines to promote that assistance. According to State officials, its policy is to allow its program managers and ambassadors to use their discretion when determining which programs and activities to mark or publicize. USDA, DOD, HHS, Treasury, and MCC have also established some policies for marking and publicizing assistance, though these policies vary in their level of formality and detail. To increase awareness of U.S. assistance abroad, key agencies that we reviewed used various methods to mark and publicize some of their activities and exercised flexibility in deciding when it was appropriate to do so. These agencies used different methods of marking, or visibly acknowledging, their assistance. In addition, agencies generally used embassy public affairs offices for publicizing, information about the source of their assistance and, in some cases, augmented these efforts with their own publicity methods. We identified some challenges to marking and publicizing U.S. foreign assistance, including the lack of (1) a strategy for assessing the impact of marking and publicity efforts on increasing the awareness of U.S. foreign assistance and (2) governmentwide guidance for marking and publicizing U.S. foreign assistance. First, although some agencies conduct surveys in recipient countries that primarily capture information on public opinion of the United States, little reliable work has been done to assess the impact of U.S. assistance on foreign citizens' awareness of the source of U.S. provided assistance. Second, while the newly appointed Director of Foreign Assistance has begun to address the issue of developing a governmentwide policy for marking and publicizing all U.S. foreign assistance, it is unclear to what extent this policy will be implemented by agencies whose foreign assistance programs are not under DFA's direct authority.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: The negative perceptions of the United States, associated with U.S. foreign  policy initiatives, have underscored the importance of the United States  presenting a complete portrayal of the benefits that many countries in the  world derive from U.S. foreign assistance efforts. A recent worldwide  survey by the Pew Research Center and our reports have noted that  negative perceptions of the United States increased in recent years in  response to U.S. foreign policy initiatives, particularly in the Middle East.
The United States is one of the largest donors of foreign assistance to  countries around the world; however, many of the recipients of this aid are  unaware that it is provided by the United States. In fiscal year 2005, the  United States provided about $20 billion in humanitarian and development  assistance throughout the world to, among other things, relieve suffering,  educate children, feed the hungry, promote economic opportunity, and  support democracy and human rights. Congress has expressed concerns  that the United States has frequently understated or not publicized  information about its foreign assistance programs and, as a result, the  generosity of the people of the United States has not been fully understood  abroad.
According to the United States Agency for International Development  (USAID), marking of foreign assistance refers to using methods such as  applying graphic identities or logos to program materials or project  signage to visibly acknowledge contributors and identify organizations  supporting the work. Publicity of assistance is the dissemination of  information about assistance to generate interest and create positive  perceptions in citizens of foreign countries. Marking and publicity are  complementary communication tools, but with different goals. Marking  can raise the awareness about the source of assistance with individuals  who come in contact with the assistance sites or materials, whereas  publicity can potentially communicate more detailed information about  assistance to broader audiences.
As requested, this report focuses on the efforts of key U.S. agencies to  mark or publicize U.S. foreign assistance. It (1) describes the policies,  regulations, and guidelines that agencies have established to mark and  publicize foreign assistance; (2) describes how the Department of State  (State), USAID, and other agencies mark and publicize foreign assistance;  and (3) identifies key challenges that agencies face in marking and  publicizing foreign assistance. In addition, as requested, we describe  selected public sector and foreign government organizations’ marking and  publicity practices.
To meet these objectives, we reviewed legislation forming the statutory  basis for marking and publicizing assistance, and obtained and analyzed  related agency documents. We also met with representatives from USAID,  the Departments of State, Agriculture (USDA), Defense (DOD), Health and  Human Services (HHS), Justice, the Treasury, and Millennium Challenge  Corporation (MCC). In addition, we met with representatives of  nongovernmental organizations, host governments, international  assistance organizations, and with executives working in the advertising  industry. We conducted fieldwork in Washington, D.C.; New York City;  Indonesia; Liberia; Montenegro; Peru; Serbia; and South Africa. In this  review, we excluded the following foreign assistance: contributions to  multilateral organizations, military assistance that is related to acquisition  of U.S. military equipment and training, programs related to peacekeeping  operations, antiterrorism programs, and programs related to weapons  proliferation. We also excluded foreign assistance programs that provide  economic support payments to Middle East countries.
We conducted our work from December 2005 through January 2007 in  accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.  Appendix I contains a more detailed description on our scope and  methodology. Appendixes II and III contain information on public sector  and other donor key marking and publicizing practices.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: For the purposes of this report, foreign assistance is any tangible or  intangible item provided by the U.S. government to a foreign country or  international organization, including but not limited to any training,  service, or technical advice; any item of real, personal, or mixed property;  any agricultural commodity, U.S. dollars, and any currencies of any foreign  country that are owned by the U.S. government. Foreign assistance has  grown in complexity in recent years as the United States, through the  efforts of a wide spectrum of U.S. agencies, has used foreign aid to address  transforming events such as the end of the Cold War; the terrorist attacks  of September 11, 2001; and the HIV/AIDS pandemic. This report focuses on  bilateral foreign assistance that includes development foreign assistance  programs to promote sustainable economic progress and stability;  economic foreign assistance in support of U.S. political and security goals;  and humanitarian foreign assistance, which primarily addresses immediate  humanitarian emergencies.
Provisions in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended (FAA), and  Public Law 480 (P. L. 480), are the statutory basis for existing regulations  and policies for marking and publicizing most U.S. foreign assistance.  Specifically, Section 641 of the FAA provides that “programs under this  Act shall be identified appropriately overseas as ‘American Aid.’ “ Section  202 of P.L. 480 requires that, to the extent practicable, commodities  provided under that act be clearly identified with appropriate markings in  the local language as being furnished by “the people of the United States.”  In addition, section 403(f) of P.L. 480 requires that foreign countries and  private entities receiving P.L. 480 commodities will widely publicize “to  the extent practicable” in the media that the commodities are provided  “through the friendship of the American people as food for peace.”  However, a major foreign assistance agency, the Millennium Challenge  Corporation, which is authorized and funded under legislation other than  the FAA or P.L. 480, is not subject to explicit statutory marking or  publicity requirements. The 2004 Intelligence Reform Act, in establishing  broad public diplomacy responsibilities for the Department of State,  assigned State a coordination role regarding marking and publicizing U.S.  foreign assistance and called for closer cooperation between State and  USAID in these efforts. Appendix IV provides more detailed information  on the statutory provisions and agencies’ policies, regulations, and  guidelines for marking and publicizing U.S. foreign assistance.
To better coordinate U.S. foreign assistance activities, the Secretary of  State appointed a DFA in January 2006, who is charged with directing the  transformation of the U.S. government approach to foreign assistance. The  DFA serves concurrently as USAID Administrator, ensuring that foreign  assistance is used as effectively as possible to meet broad foreign policy  objectives. The DFA:    Has authority over all USAID and most State foreign assistance funding  and programs, with continued participation in program planning,  implementation, and oversight conducted by the various bureaus and  offices within State and USAID, as part of the integrated interagency  planning, coordination, and implementation mechanisms;   Develops a coordinated U.S. government foreign assistance strategy,  including multiyear country specific assistance strategies and annual  country-specific assistance operational plans;   Creates and directs consolidated policy, planning, budget, and  implementation mechanisms and staff functions required to provide  overarching leadership to foreign assistance; and   Provides guidance to foreign assistance delivered through other agencies  and entities of the U.S. government, including the MCC and the Office of  the U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator.
section_title: Most Agencies Have Marking and Publicizing Policies, Regulations, and Guidelines
paragraphs: Most of the agencies we reviewed involved in foreign assistance activities  have established some marking policies, regulations, and guidelines.  USAID has established the most detailed policies, regulations, and  guidelines for marking and publicizing its assistance. State has also  established marking and publicity policies for two presidential initiatives,  MEPI and PEPFAR. However, USDA, DOD, HHS, Treasury, and MCC  efforts in this area have been more limited. Since Justice does not have  independent authority to conduct foreign assistance but implements  politically sensitive programs for State and USAID, it has not established  departmentwide marking or publicity policies, but allows its component  agencies to determine when it is appropriate to mark and publicize their  activities. Appendix IV provides the statutory provisions and agencies’  policies, regulations, and guidelines for marking or publicizing U.S. foreign  assistance.
subsections: section_title: USAID Has Established Detailed Policies, Regulations, and Guidelines
paragraphs: To ensure that U.S. taxpayers receive full credit for the foreign assistance  they provide, USAID in 2004 undertook a campaign to clearly  communicate that USAID foreign assistance is from the American people.  This campaign included publication of a Graphic Standards Manual  containing new marking guidelines and the development of a new Graphic  Identity. In January 2006, USAID revised its foreign assistance awards  regulations to include new marking requirements for USAID staff and all  nongovernmental organizations (NGO) receiving funding under grants and  cooperative agreements. The regulations require that all programs,  projects, activities, public communications, and commodities partially or  fully funded by a USAID grant or cooperative agreement be marked  appropriately overseas with the Graphic Standards Manual’s Graphic  Identity of a size and prominence equal to or greater than the recipient’s or  other donors’ logos or identities. The regulations provide for presumptive  exceptions and waivers to the marking requirements. USAID’s final  guidance for contractors, ADS 320, issued January 8, 2007, includes more  comprehensive information on the process for preparing and approving  marking plans and branding strategies in contracts and also eliminates the  use of the USAID brand on NGO’s and contractors’ business cards.
Also, USAID’s Food for Peace program regulations prescribe the terms  and conditions governing activities under Title II of P.L. 480, including  provisions for implementing the marking requirements of section 202 of  that law. The regulations require that, to the maximum extent practical,  public recognition be given in the media that Title II-funded commodities  or foreign assistance have been “provided through the friendship of the  American people as food for peace”; cooperating sponsors, to the extent  feasible, display banners, posters, and similar items at project sites  containing similar identifying information; and, unless otherwise specified,  bags or other containers of commodities packaged for shipment be  similarly marked. The regulations also require that containers of donated  commodities packaged or repackaged by cooperating sponsors prior to  distribution be plainly labeled with the USAID emblem, and, where  practicable, with the legend, “Provided through the friendship of the  American people as food for peace.”
In addition, USAID has established regulations prescribing rules and  procedures for the marking of shipping containers and commodities under  commodity transactions financed by USAID. These regulations require  that suppliers of such commodities be responsible for ensuring that all  export packaging and the commodities carry the official USAID emblem,  except where USAID prescribes otherwise in the case of commodities. The  regulations also prescribe the manner in which the export shipping  containers, cartons, or boxes are to be marked; how the USAID emblem is  to be affixed to the containers; the size, design, and color of the emblem;  exceptions to the requirement to affix the emblem; and waivers to the  marking requirement where it is found to be impracticable.
To publicize its foreign assistance, in 2004, USAID established  communications guidelines and a network of over 100 communications  specialists located at USAID missions around the world to promote the  agency’s foreign assistance abroad. The guidelines for communications  specialists delineate their role, which is to be a comprehensive resource  for information regarding USAID’s work and its impact on the citizens of  the host country, and provide guidance on the activities the  communication specialists may undertake to fulfill this role. These  outreach functions include responding to inquiries about USAID programs,  collaborating with the embassy public affairs office on strategies, speech  writing for the USAID mission director and others, preparing press  releases, and coordinating Web site updates.
section_title: State Policy Allows Program Managers and Ambassadors Discretion for Marking and Publicizing Assistance
paragraphs: According to State officials, State’s policy provides that department  program managers and country ambassadors use their discretion to  determine when it is appropriate to mark and publicize U.S. foreign  assistance. As a result, some programs mark and publicize activities while  others do not. For example, State has established guidelines for project  implementers to acknowledge State’s support for two presidential  initiatives that State manages: MEPI and PEPFAR. The MEPI guidelines  require NGOs that implement MEPI programs to include, in all public  programs and publications, standard language acknowledging the support  of MEPI and State. For PEPFAR, the Office of the U.S. Global AIDS  Coordinator has instructed its implementing agencies to place the  PEPFAR logo on all materials procured as part of the PEPFAR initiative.  However, more sensitive Department of State activities are generally not  marked or publicized. For example, according to State officials, in Peru, it  is embassy policy to decide on a case-by-case basis, in close consultation  with the host government, the appropriate type and extent of publicity to  give counter-narcotics foreign assistance activities done in partnership  with the host government. In addition, State officials noted that other  assistance programs, such as those focusing on counter-terrorism and  weapons proliferation, are not generally marked, but these efforts may be  publicized.
section_title: Most Agencies Have Established Some Requirements or Guidance for Marking and Publicizing Foreign Assistance
paragraphs: Agencies’ efforts in establishing requirements or guidance for marking and  publicizing their foreign assistance include the following:    USDA has issued regulations for its Foreign Agricultural Service that  establish labeling requirements for commodities donated under its  program for international food for education and child nutrition. The  regulations require containers of commodities packaged or repackaged by  a cooperating sponsor to indicate that the commodities are furnished by  the people of the United States of America; if the commodities are not  packaged, the cooperating sponsor must display such items as banners or  posters with similar information. The Foreign Agricultural Service also has  included standard language in all its food aid agreements with its  implementing partners requiring them to highlight their programs in local  media in the recipient country, identify USDA as the funding source in the  media and to program participants, and to recognize USDA in all USDA- funded printed material.
DOD has established policy and program guidance for publicizing overseas  humanitarian activities to ensure their maximum visibility and publicity.  The policy and guidance provides that project planners and implementers  will coordinate appropriate public affairs activities with embassy and  combatant command public affairs officers, and, where appropriate,  provide some tangible or visible marker of DOD involvement at the site of  the activity.
HHS has established its own policies related to marking and publicizing  HHS activities. HHS officials told us that the agency’s departmentwide  grants policy, as required by its annual appropriations acts, provides that  all HHS grants recipients must acknowledge U.S. assistance when publicly  describing a project. Also, HHS health projects are generally marked with  the logos of HHS and the other HHS units such as the Centers for Disease  Control or the National Institutes of Health that are involved in  implementing the foreign assistance. HHS carries out foreign assistance  programs under PEPFAR and the President’s Malaria Initiative; HHS  officials stated that the Office of the U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator has  instructed HHS and its operating divisions to place the PEPFAR logo on all  materials procured as part of the PEPFAR Initiative.
Treasury officials said they were not aware of agencywide policy on  marking and publicizing foreign assistance activities. However, OTA  issued its own marking policy, effective December 7, 2006, for certain  types of foreign assistance provided by that office. This policy requires  that the foreign assistance must be identified with the seal of the Treasury  and the tagline: “From the American People.” The policy covers any  material, goods, or equipment provided by OTA to foreign government  agencies or central banks; any public communications intended for  distribution to foreign government officials; and any training courses or  conferences sponsored and financed by OTA for the benefit of foreign  government officials. In addition, the policy contains presumptive  exceptions for waiving the marking requirements.
While MCC’s organic legislation, the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003,  does not contain an explicit marking or publicity requirement for the  foreign assistance it authorizes, MCC provides for such a requirement in  its country compacts. MCC has distributed a marking and publicity policy  that, according to agency officials, requires recipient countries and  accountable entities to provide marking and publicity requirements to  acknowledge the foreign assistance from MCC as being from the American  people.
However, Justice officials said they rely on individual Justice agencies to  determine when it would be appropriate to mark and publicize their  activities. Justice officials said they have not issued guidance on  assistance marking and publicity, and added that most of the agency’s  foreign assistance is not marked because of its sensitive nature. Some  Justice officials said that they follow embassy guidance on when to mark  and publicize the agency’s foreign assistance activities. For example,  Justice program managers in Indonesia and Serbia told us they had  received no guidance from Justice headquarters on marking and  publicizing agency activities, and the program manager in Indonesia said  he follows embassy guidance in determining what to mark and how to do  so.
section_title: Foreign Assistance Marking Efforts and Publicity Have Varied
paragraphs: To increase awareness of U.S. assistance abroad, key agencies that we  reviewed used various methods to mark and to publicize some of their  activities and exercised flexibility in deciding when it was appropriate to  do so. These agencies used different methods of marking, or visibly  acknowledging, their assistance, including applying graphic identities or  logos on such things as publications and project signage. In addition,  agencies generally used embassy public affairs offices for publicizing, or  disseminating information about, the source of their assistance and, in  some cases, augmented these efforts with their own publicity methods.
subsections: section_title: Agencies Marking Efforts Vary
paragraphs: USAID has established the most detailed processes of uniformly marking  its assistance activities, while other key agencies either mark their  assistance activities in some way, or they provide reasons for not marking  some assistance. USAID has established a universal brand that conveys  that the assistance is from USAID and the American people. Other  agencies either use multiple logos, and in some cases, they use logos that  do not convey that the agency is a U.S. entity or that the United States is  the source of the assistance.
subsections: section_title: USAID Using New Brand to Mark Its Foreign Assistance Activities
paragraphs: After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, recognizing the connection between  national security and the good will toward the United States that could be  created if more accurate information about U.S. foreign assistance was  widely known, agency officials determined that they should portray more  complete and accurate information about USAID foreign assistance. To  help focus its image abroad, USAID developed its new brand by updating a  former USAID logo, and combining it with the agency brand name and a  tagline, “From the American People.”
Although USAID first began marking assistance over four decades ago,  agency officials acknowledged that it has not always systematically or  effectively marked its foreign assistance. USAID had existing standards  that specified that its foreign assistance activities were to be marked, but  these standards were not consistently enforced; and at times, U.S. foreign  assistance was marked with the implementer’s logos and program names  instead of the agency logo. Agency officials told us that it was often  difficult for people to know that the foreign assistance they received was  coming from the United States. USAID officials said they viewed the  multiple brands used by USAID implementers as potentially confusing to  recipients. However, in the past, some USAID staff believed that spending  money on marking foreign assistance could take away funds from other  foreign assistance activities, and therefore were reluctant to incur these  costs. Also, USAID staff and implementers were concerned that  communication about foreign assistance could potentially draw unwanted  attention to the projects and make staff vulnerable. Figure 1 illustrates  changes of USAID’s brand over time, and figure 2 illustrates the use of  USAID’s current brand.
section_title: Other Agencies’ Marking Efforts Vary
paragraphs: While other departments and agencies also mark the foreign assistance  that they provide, these efforts vary. In some cases, the markings used do  not convey that the donor is a U.S. entity or that the United States is the  source of the foreign assistance.
subsections: section_title: State Department Marking Efforts
paragraphs: State gives discretion to its department program managers and  ambassadors to determine when and how it is appropriate to mark and  publicize U.S. foreign assistance. Marking decisions are made at each U.S.  embassy to account for the sensitive nature of the foreign assistance and  the local conditions in country. State officials told us that, because State’s  foreign assistance addresses a wide range of issues—such as narcotics  control, international law enforcement, terrorism, weapons proliferation,  non-U.N. peacekeeping operations, refugee relief, the Global AIDS  Initiative, and economic support—they did not see any benefits from using  a single visual image or mark. Therefore, embassies have used a number of  symbols to mark their foreign assistance, including program logos, a  bureau seal or unit name, the Department of State seal, or an embassy  logo.
State manages MEPI, and has agreements with its project implementers on  how MEPI assistance, which can include publications, products, and  services, is to be acknowledged. State generally leaves most decisions on  when to use the program logo to its implementing organizations but  specifies that, if used with logos of other cofunding organizations, the  MEPI logo should not be smaller than the others. Additionally, State has  developed more than one version of the MEPI logo, one of which does not  include the name of either the United States or the Department of State  (see fig. 3).
The lack of clear marking requirements has at times created confusion  with project implementers regarding the appropriate use of the MEPI logo.  For example, in one instance a project implementer copied the logo  without the U.S. tagline—“U.S.-Middle East Partnership Initiative”—from  the MEPI Web site and used it on promotional materials, when the logo  with the tagline would have been more appropriate, according to MEPI  officials. In addition, a small portion of MEPI projects are implemented by  USAID, and these projects follow USAID branding policy, according to an  agreement between State and USAID.
In other State marking efforts that clearly identified the U.S. government  as the source of foreign assistance, there were differences in appearance  from one mark to another. For example:  In a Peruvian police training academy that prepared recruits to support  narcotics eradication teams, a computer room provided by State’s  Narcotics Affairs Section was marked with the unit’s initials and the U.S.  and Peruvian flags (see fig. 4).
In Montenegro, a U.S. foreign assistance site was marked with a sign that  included the Department of State emblem and the emblem of Serbia- Montenegro with a description of the project in English and the local  language.
In Serbia, State foreign assistance was marked with an embassy-developed  logo in which the U.S. and Serbian flags were joined to form a bridge (see  fig. 5).
section_title: USDA, DOD, and HHS Marking Efforts
paragraphs: Other agencies generally determine how to mark their foreign assistance  on a program-by-program basis. For example:    USDA specifies marking requirements in the programs’ grants and  cooperative agreements. USDA’s food aid agreements require that the U.S.  government is identified as the sources of the foreign assistance, while  USDA grants and cooperative agreements that provide technical foreign  assistance specify that printed materials include an acknowledgement that  the United States is the source of the foreign assistance (see fig. 6). For  Title II food programs managed by USAID, the USAID mark is used.
DOD marks its humanitarian foreign assistance products and sites. For  example, DOD’s humanitarian daily ration packages were marked with a  U.S. flag and a statement that the food gift was from the people of the  United States. In South Africa, a sign for a DOD humanitarian foreign  assistance project was marked with the U.S. and South African flags (see  figs. 7 and 8).
HHS’ health projects are generally marked with the HHS logo and those of  other HHS units involved in implementing the foreign assistance. For  example, an HHS-developed book—which was written for use in  Afghanistan and provided information on HIV/AIDS—used U.S. and  Afghani flags to mark the material. It also included a recorded message in  two local languages stating that the book was being provided by U.S.  taxpayers (see fig. 9).
The agencies we reviewed stated that when making decisions on whether  or how to mark foreign assistance, they exercise flexibility to allow for  variations in the nature of foreign assistance, risks to implementers, or  other special circumstances that foreign assistance activities may entail.  Some of these activities are more readily marked than others. Moreover,  circumstances may occur when U.S. foreign assistance marking may need  to be modified or withheld due to safety, political, or other concerns, such  as concerns associated with advising high-level government officials or  providing foreign assistance in volatile issue areas such as narcotics  control. Also, at certain times, such as before elections, marking of foreign  assistance activities may be suspended to remove any association of U.S.  foreign assistance with certain issues—such as the connection between  funding a health clinic and the issue of reproductive health. In other cases,  marking may be withheld to ensure the local government’s ownership of  the programs is not called into question.
USAID and OTA have established a process for determining when to  modify its marking requirements to allow for the differences in the nature  of foreign assistance projects and special circumstances that may be  related to foreign assistance implementation. USAID’s marking regulations  identify a number of conditions under which the agreement officer can  consider approving exceptions to marking requirements. For example, in  Serbia, in order to not compromise the perceived neutrality of program  activities and diminish the credibility of materials produced during the  course of the project, USAID approved exceptions to marking  requirements for certain activities associated with a civil society project in  public policy advocacy and reform. USAID regulations also allow for the  possibility that, political, safety, or security conditions could warrant a  request to the mission director or the most senior USAID officer at the  mission for a full or partial waiver of the marking requirements. For  example, in Indonesia, the mission director approved a waiver of the  marking requirements for a project designed to demonstrate democracy’s  compatibility with Islam because of threats from religious fundamentalists  to the safety of the individuals involved in the project. In December 2006,  OTA had formalized its guidance on determining when marking  requirements for a particular project should be modified or suspended.  While this guidance states that much of OTA’s work that includes oral  advice or technical assistance provided to foreign governments and  central banks is not marked, its rules for marking any commodities, public  communications, or training courses provided by OTA may be waived in  writing by the OTA Director or designee for conditions that include safety  or security concerns, adverse political impact, and potential compromise  of the intrinsic independence of a program or materials such as public  service announcements.
section_title: Embassies’ Public Affairs Offices Generally Publicize Most U.S. Assistance
paragraphs: The U.S. ambassador, as chief of mission, has authority over all U.S.  government activities in a foreign country, and the embassy public affairs  office publicizes U.S. foreign assistance activities through press releases,  Web sites, and speeches by U.S. officials. To enhance publicity of its  foreign assistance programs, USAID has also, as mentioned earlier,  established a network of communications specialists to increase  awareness of these programs in the host country. At the time of our field  visits, the public affairs officers and USAID communication specialists  were still defining their roles in publicizing U.S. foreign assistance. For  example, the ambassador in Liberia and the public affairs officer in  Indonesia expressed the opinion that all U.S. foreign assistance should be  publicized by the embassy public affairs sections and did not see the need  for separate USAID communications specialists.
section_title: U.S. Embassy Public Affairs Foreign Assistance Publicity Efforts
paragraphs: Following are some examples of foreign assistance publicity efforts  conducted by the embassy in the countries we visited.
In Indonesia, in fiscal year 2003, the public affairs office developed a  program to enhance media coverage of U.S. assistance and publicized 11  assistance projects. In February 2006, the embassy issued a press release  on the distribution of books and school supplies funded by the United  States to Indonesian school children. The distribution, done in cooperation  with two leading Islamic organizations, supported the mutual goal of  improving education and highlighted shared values between the two  countries.
In Liberia, in June 2006, the embassy issued a press release on the  launching of a USAID funded radio teacher training program.
In Peru, in June 2006, the public affairs office issued a press release on  joint U.S.-Peruvian military exercises, which included DOD humanitarian  foreign assistance to construct health clinics, done in conjunction with the  exercises. These efforts were publicized to dispel citizens’ anxiety over  U.S. military exercises in that country. However, because of the sensitivity  of some other activities in Peru, according to State officials, it is embassy  policy to decide on a case-by-case basis, in close consultation with the  host government, the appropriate type and extent of publicity to give  counter-narcotics foreign assistance activities done in partnership with the  host government.
In Serbia, the embassy public affairs office has issued press releases on  U.S. foreign assistance provided by USAID, State, USDA, DOD, Justice and  other agencies. For example, in April 2006, the embassy issued a press  release on a Justice-implemented program to support the organized crime  and war crimes specialized institutions.
In South Africa, the public affairs office has issued press releases on U.S.  foreign assistance provided by USAID, State, HHS, MCC, and other  agencies. For example, in January 2006, the embassy issued a press release  on a HHS -implemented HIV vaccine research initiative.
subsections: section_title: USAID Foreign Assistance Publicity Efforts
paragraphs: In 2004, USAID established and trained a network of development  outreach and communications specialists to enhance the skills of officers  who handle public outreach and media and improve coordination among  USAID staff, foreign assistance implementing partners, and the embassy  public affairs sections. An assessment of public diplomacy in the Muslim  world, issued in 2003 by the Advisory Group on Public Diplomacy for the  Arab and Muslim World, concluded that too few people knew the extent of  USAID’s activities and recommended closer integration of the public  diplomacy activities of agencies that administer foreign assistance. The  communications specialists are responsible for publicizing USAID foreign  assistance (1) by developing public outreach and media materials and  strategies and (2) by providing general communications support through  writing, media relations, Web site development, and review of foreign  assistance proposals. These specialists also work with public relations  staff hired by foreign assistance implementing organizations to support  them in addressing community relations issues and publicizing their  projects. USAID has now placed these specialists at most missions; a few  large missions have been assigned more than one communication  specialist, while at a few small missions, program officers have been asked  to perform these tasks. The communication specialists’ resources vary  based on individual USAID missions’ decisions on how to fund their work  and whether USAID headquarters has provided additional funds for  communication pilot activities.
Following are examples of initiatives communications specialists have  carried out.
A pilot communication campaign project in Indonesia, which was funded  by USAID headquarters, involved communications officers overseeing the  development and production of a radio, TV, and print advertisement  campaign that focused on health care, education, and economic growth  partnerships between American and Indonesian people. The purpose of  this and other communication campaign pilots was to identify effective  practices in foreign assistance publicity.
In Peru, communications specialists worked with implementing  organizations to develop and distribute—for eventual broadcast on  regional television stations—a video of a major U.S. alternative  developmentforeign assistance project, which involved building a road in  northern Peru to provide farmers with greater access to markets. On  another project, a communication officer was contacted by television  producers who were preparing a video about an ecological project that  had received USAID foreign assistance funding. At the communications  officer’s suggestion, the producers interviewed the USAID mission  director to highlight how USAID supported the project. The final film was  shown on television.
In Serbia, two newly hired communication specialists redesigned a Web  site and, subsequently, developed questions on public awareness of  USAID’s foreign assistance activities that were incorporated into the  embassy’s public opinion poll.
According to mission officials in South Africa, the outreach efforts of the  communications specialist there have resulted in an improved perception  among the local population of USAID/South Africa programs, which were  previously hampered by negative comments made by high-level South  African government officials in the late 1990s. In addition, the  communications specialist conducted five training workshops, primarily  for PEPFAR partners, on how to write stories of successful projects. The  workshops resulted in more than 40 stories submitted by implementing  partners, which were posted on various U.S. government Web sites and in  publications. This effort was also sanctioned by the embassy public affairs  section.
section_title: Challenges to Marking and Publicizing May Result in Missed Opportunities to Increase Public Awareness of U.S. Foreign Assistance
paragraphs: We identified some challenges to marking and publicizing U.S. foreign  assistance that may result in missed opportunities to increase public  awareness of U.S. foreign assistance. First, little reliable work has been  done to assess the impact of U.S. assistance on foreign citizens’ awareness  of that assistance. Second, although the newly appointed DFA has begun  to develop governmentwide guidance for marking and publicizing all U.S.  foreign assistance, it is unclear to what extent this policy will be  implemented by agencies whose foreign assistance programs are not  under State’s direct authority.
subsections: section_title: Agencies Conduct Some Research on Impact of U.S. Foreign Assistance Activities, but Lack Clear Guidance for Such Research
paragraphs: State conducts some research on public perceptions of the United States  and its foreign assistance activities. State’s Bureau of Intelligence and  Research conducts approximately 120 surveys per year in about 80  countries, according to a State official. However, these surveys focus on  tracking trends in the foreign public’s perception of the United States to  serve U.S. public diplomacy efforts and do not assess public awareness of  U.S. foreign assistance activities or the effectiveness of publicity activities.  Some individual embassies perform surveys of public attitudes and  awareness relating to U.S. foreign assistance activities. For example, the  surveys commissioned by the embassy in Serbia and Montenegro attempt  to measure public awareness of foreign assistance programs in addition to  measuring public perception of the United States. However, the surveys do  not attempt to link any foreign assistance programs to the level of  awareness, but instead track changes in the level of awareness for a given  period of time.
USAID also conducts some research. The agency requires that its  communications specialists develop a communications strategy that  includes methods to measure impact, and USAID’s communications  manual encourages communications specialists to monitor local media  coverage and obtain and analyze locally conducted polls as a means to  measures results. The agency has contracted with polling firms to conduct  eight public opinion surveys in various locations overseas—including one  survey in Egypt, two in Indonesia, one in Jordan (along with a focus  group), one in Colombia, and three in the West Bank and Gaza. According  to a USAID official, these surveys were designed to test different methods  for conducting broad-based public affairs campaigns. The surveys  included questions to assess (1) the extent of awareness of USAID and  U.S. foreign assistance; (2) attitudes toward USAID and U.S. foreign  assistance among recipients of that foreign assistance; and (3) which  communication sources, ranging from billboards and magazines to  television and the Internet, may be most effective in reaching target  audiences. Although each of the USAID surveys we reviewed provide  information about the extent of awareness of USAID and U.S. assistance,  the surveys in Colombia, Egypt, Jordan, and the West Bank and Gaza were  not designed to compare pre- and post-campaign levels of awareness. A  USAID official agreed that pre- and post-branding measurement of public  opinion was important to measure the impact of USAID’s branding  activities, know which branding activities were most effective, and use the  lessons learned to improve USAID’s branding activities.
Recently, USAID has begun to provide some guidance to communications  specialists responsible for managing research programs. USAID hired a  contractor to train communications specialists on public opinion polling.  The training instructs communications specialists on issues such as the  importance and benefits of polling, types of polling, the most effective  ways to deliver messages, principles of sampling in polling, and how to  hire a qualified agency to conduct the polls. Also, USAID officials said they  are developing a manual to provide guidance on communications research  instruments, primarily focused on polling. The manual will include key  criteria for evaluating the quality of the research instruments and a  standard set of questions to include in research instruments.
Ad Council executives whom we met with emphasized that successful  quantitative research, such as surveys, to measure results of efforts are  key practices they use in their public service campaigns. Also they  conduct pre- and post-tracking studies to benchmark attitudes and  behaviors. In addition, they examine best practices, including areas where  the practice has worked well and learned how to emulate them. In  addition, these executives examine cases where their efforts have yielded  poor results and implement some policies that could alleviate the  situation. See appendix II for additional key practices identified by the Ad  Council executives.
section_title: The United States Lacks Governmentwide Guidance for Marking and Publicizing Its Assistance
paragraphs: While some agencies have established policies, regulations, and guidelines  on marking and publicizing U.S. foreign assistance, we found that USAID  missions and all federal agencies and presidential initiatives providing  assistance overseas have not received clear and consistent direction on  marking and publicizing U.S. foreign assistance. During our field visits to  five countries between May and August 2006, we found that three of the  five embassies lacked specific guidance that addresses assistance  publicity. Embassy Mission Performance Plans are the means by which an  embassy aligns its plans, programs, and resources with the U.S.  government’s international affairs strategy, including publicizing foreign  assistance. Only one Mission Performance Plan—for Serbia and  Montenegro—listed foreign assistance publicity as an embassy priority  and established that the embassy would increase its outreach activities  and aggressive advertising of U.S. foreign assistance by (1) improving  media coverage, (2) coordinating public diplomacy activities at the  mission to improve synergy and publicity of foreign assistance programs,  and (3) using polling and focus group information to help direct these  efforts. The embassy was also planning to expand exchange programs that  would bring individuals from Serbia and Montenegro to the United States.  The ambassador said that he became aware that U.S. foreign assistance  was not widely known in Serbia and Montenegro after he arrived at the  mission and saw that implementing partners often used project logos that  did not clearly communicate that the foreign assistance was from the  United States. He identified a need to more clearly portray U.S. foreign  assistance and made it a priority for the embassy. In addition, the Mission  Performance Plan for Liberia called for publicizing U.S. efforts to rebuild  security services and promote respect for human rights.
In the five countries that we visited, we also found that assistance is  publicized by public affairs officers on an ad hoc basis and, as a result,  embassies may miss opportunities to publicize their foreign assistance  activities. For example, in Indonesia, the USDA attaché told us that an  exchange program that brings agricultural specialists to the United States  for training has not been publicized by the embassy because the public  affairs officer was not aware of it. Also in Indonesia, the public affairs  officer almost missed a publicity opportunity when the officer was initially  opposed to issuing a press release on an event to promote a teacher- training program that was attended by representatives of an NGO and 15  Indonesian institutions, because communicating about the program was  not an embassy priority.  The public affairs officer later reconsidered and  issued a press release.
Moreover, agencies at embassies may receive conflicting guidance on  marking their assistance activities when an agency’s headquarters position  on marking differs from an embassy’s position. After USAID headquarters  developed its logo in 2004, the Serbia and Montenegro embassy developed  a logo (featuring the American and Serbian and Montenegrin flags) and  encouraged all agencies to use it. Most agencies used the logo to mark and  publicize their foreign assistance activities, and the logo was also used on  the embassy Web site. Subsequently, the USAID mission developed and  used a logo that combined the embassy logo and USAID’s logo. Although  the USAID mission’s logo was different from the embassy logo, the  ambassador agreed to the compromise, and USAID used that logo to mark  and publicize its assistance activities. However, in June 2006, USAID  headquarters told the mission that this new logo violated USAID standards  and required the mission to discard that logo and use USAID’s standard  logo.
subsections: section_title: DFA Faces Key Challenges in Coordinating Marking and Publicizing Efforts
paragraphs: The DFA has acknowledged that the lack of governmentwide guidance on  marking and publicizing foreign assistance activities limits agencies’ ability  to make recipients aware of the extent of U.S. assistance. In July 2006, the  DFA requested that his office and the Bureau for Public Diplomacy and  Public Affairs work together to ensure that U.S. embassies, USAID  missions, and all government agencies receive clear and consistent  guidance on marking and publicizing U.S. assistance. Also, the DFA  recommended that all foreign assistance be unified under one agency- neutral brand that would ensure that the assistance is recognized and  associated with the United States. The DFA and the Under Secretary of  State for Public Diplomacy are currently developing a proposal to provide  guidance to all federal agencies in 2007.
Despite these efforts to develop governmentwide guidance for marking  and publicizing all U.S. foreign assistance, it is unclear to what extent this  guidance will be implemented by agencies whose foreign assistance  programs are not under the DFA’s direct authority. According to DFA  officials, the DFA has budget authority over USAID, most State foreign  assistance activities, and activities of agencies funded by State or USAID.  Also, the DFA will have authority to coordinate the activities of some  foreign assistance activities managed by other agencies, because,  according to DFA officials, any activities funded by USAID or State that  are implemented by other agencies will fall under the authority of the  DFA. For example, the DFA will have the authority to coordinate some of  the technical foreign assistance and training programs administered by the  Department of Justice that are funded by State. However, according to  DFA officials, the director’s office will not have authority over about 20  percent of all U.S. foreign assistance. This includes some of State’s  programs, such as State’s Office of  U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator, which  is funded separately from the Department of State budget—though DFA  officials told us that the DFA’s office has reached an oral agreement with  the AIDS Coordinator to coordinate their activities. In addition, DFA has  no authority over, for example, DOD, HHS, USDA, Treasury, and MCC  activities that are funded by sources other than State or USAID.
section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: Some key U.S. agencies providing foreign assistance have established  policies, regulations, and guidelines on marking and publicizing U.S.  foreign assistance, and some have used varied methods to implement  these requirements. Despite these efforts, the United States lacks reliable  information to assess the impact of marking and publicity on increasing  awareness of U.S. assistance. According to U.S. public service awareness  campaign executives with whom we met, quantitative research that  includes pre- and post-tracking studies—as well as drawing from lessons  learned regarding which types of approaches are working more effectively  than others—are key practices that they use in measuring the impact of  their awareness campaign. Although State’s public opinion polls measure  general public opinion trends, they do not specifically provide information  on the impact of the U.S. government’s overall efforts to increase public  awareness of U.S. foreign assistance activities. USAID has only completed  a limited number of surveys to measure public awareness of U.S.  assistance, including a public opinion survey of U.S. post-tsunami efforts  in Indonesia. According to USAID officials and USAID surveys, marking  and publicizing the source of U.S. foreign assistance following the  December 2004 tsunami likely contributed to increasing favorable public  opinion about the United States in Indonesia. USAID has begun to develop  guidance on measuring the effectiveness of its publicity efforts.
In addition, the DFA acknowledges that because there is no  governmentwide guidance on marking and publicizing assistance, there  may have been missed opportunities to increase recipient awareness of  the extent of U.S. foreign assistance. To address this issue, the DFA plans  to establish marking and publicizing guidance for all U.S. agencies  providing assistance abroad in 2007. However, obtaining the cooperation  of those agencies implementing foreign assistance programs not under the  DFA’s direct authority is critical to a successful U.S. governmentwide  marking and publicizing approach and remains a challenge.
section_title: Recommendations for Executive Action
paragraphs: To help the United States ensure that recipients of its foreign assistance  are aware that this assistance is provided by the United States and its  taxpayers, we are making two recommendations.
To enhance U.S. marking and publicity efforts, and to improve the  information used to measure the impact of U.S. marking and publicizing  programs, we recommend that the Secretary of State, in consultation with  other U.S. executive agencies, develop a strategy, which appropriately  utilizes techniques such as surveys and focus groups, to better assess the  impact of U.S. marking and publicity programs and activities on public  awareness.
To facilitate State’s effort to implement its planned governmentwide  guidance for marking and publicizing all U.S. foreign assistance programs  and activities, we recommend that the Secretary of State, in consultation  with other U.S. executive agencies, establish interagency agreements for  marking and publicizing all U.S. foreign assistance.
section_title: Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
paragraphs: We provided a draft of this report to USAID, State, Agriculture, DOD, HHS,  Justice, the Treasury, and MCC. We obtained written comments from State  (see app. V). State concurred with our recommendations and indicated  that a Policy Coordination Committee formed by the Under Secretary of  State for Public Diplomacy in the National Security Council plans to  develop a governmentwide Strategic Communications Plan that will  address assessment of marking and publicity programs and will develop  governmentwide marking and publicity guidance. We also received  technical comments on this draft from USAID, State, DOD, and MCC,  which we incorporated where appropriate.
We are sending copies of this report to interested congressional  committees, USAID, the Departments of State, Agriculture, Defense,  Health and Human Services, Justice, the Treasury, and Millennium  Challenge Corporation. We will also make copies available to others upon  request. In addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO  Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me  at (202) 512-4268. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional  Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report.  GAO staff who made major contributions to this report are listed in  appendix VI.
section_title: Appendix I: Scope and Methodology
paragraphs: To determine the regulations and policies that agencies have established  to mark and publicize foreign assistance, we analyzed legislation  establishing the statutory basis for marking and publicizing foreign  assistance, including legislation providing funding for foreign assistance  activities, and organic legislation establishing the various foreign  assistance agencies. We reviewed major foreign assistance legislation  including the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and Public Law 480. We also  reviewed the Intelligence Reform Act of 2004, which assigns the  Department of State (State) a coordination role in publicizing foreign  assistance, as well as legislation that authorized foreign assistance  programs separate from the Foreign Assistance Act, such as the  Millennium Challenge Act of 2003 that established the Millennium  Challenge Corporation (MCC). We discussed these laws with agency  officials at the United States Agency for International Development  (USAID), State, the Departments of Agriculture, Defense (DOD), Health  and Human Services (HHS), Justice, the Treasury, as well as MCC who are  responsible for their implementation as it applies to marking and  publicizing their foreign assistance activities. In addition, we reviewed  regulations these agencies had established to implement legislative  marking requirements related to agencies’ policies and other relevant  documents. We also discussed the agencies’ regulations and policies with  cognizant officials at each agency.
To determine how USAID, State, and other agencies are marking and  publicizing their foreign assistance activities, we discussed their activities  with cognizant officials at their headquarters in Washington, D.C. We also  met with representatives of nongovernmental organizations (NGO) and  contractors in the Washington, D.C., area—such as Food For The Hungry,  National Democratic Institute, the American Bar Association/Central  European and Eurasian Law Initiative, Chemonics, and Development  Alternatives, Inc.—who implement many of the agencies’ foreign  assistance activities. In addition, we traveled to U.S. embassies and USAID  missions in Indonesia, Peru, Serbia, Montenegro, and South Africa. In  those countries, we (1) met with agency officials at the embassies and  missions and representatives of NGOs and contractors who implement  foreign assistance activities; (2) collected and analyzed agency documents,  regarding their foreign assistance marking and publicizing efforts; and (3)  visited several sites in each country to observe marking and publicizing  activities of U.S. agencies and their implementing organizations. In  particular, we visited various recipients of U.S. foreign assistance in  Belgrade, Serbia; Podgorica, Montenegro; and Pretoria, South Africa. We  also traveled to Banda Aceh, Indonesia, and several locations in Serbia,  Montenegro, and Peru, to observe marking and publicizing activities and  discuss those activities with U.S. government officials, representatives of  implementing organizations, and recipients of foreign assistance. We also  traveled to Liberia and met with embassy and USAID mission officials.
To determine the challenges the United States faces in marking and  publicizing foreign assistance activities, we met with cognizant agency  officials in Washington, D.C., and the U.S. embassies and USAID missions  in Indonesia, Peru, Serbia, Montenegro, and South Africa. We also  analyzed agency documents, including Mission Performance Plans and  other policy and guidance documents at headquarters, U.S. embassies, and  USAID missions in Indonesia, Peru, Serbia, Montenegro, and South Africa.  In addition, we analyzed surveys and polls conducted for USAID and State,  communications manuals, and training materials used as part of USAID’s  and State’s efforts to determine foreign audiences’ opinions about the  United States and their awareness of U.S. foreign assistance activities.  Further, we discussed those surveys and polls with cognizant agency  officials in USAID and State.
To determine foreign government organizations’ marking and publicity  practices, we held discussions with representatives of international  foreign assistance organizations, including the Australian Government’s  Overseas Aid Program (AusAID), the Canadian International Development  Agency (CIDA), the Department for International Development (DFID) of  the United Kingdom, the European Union (EU) assistance implemented  through the European Agency for Reconstruction, German Agency for  Technical Cooperation (GTZ), the Icelandic International Development  Agency (ICEIDA), and the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA).  We also reviewed relevant documents provided by these organizations on  their marking and publicity practices, including guidelines on marking and  communications.
We included in the scope of this review foreign assistance programs  administered or implemented by USAID, State, Agriculture, DOD, HHS,  Justice, the Treasury, and MCC. Among these entities, we included  programs in the following categories—bilateral development foreign  assistance; humanitarian assistance; and economic assistance in support  of U.S. political and security goals, with the exception of payments to  support countries involved in the Middle East Peace Process, including  countries of importance in the war on terrorism, and programs that  address issues of weapons proliferation. We excluded from the scope of  this review multilateral economic contributions or payments that are  combined with funds from other donor countries to finance multilateral  development projects of international organizations that include the  United Nations, the World Bank, and other multilateral development  banks. We also excluded military foreign assistance provided to help  selected countries acquire U.S. military equipment and training. We  conducted our work from December 2005 through January 2007 in  accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
section_title: Appendix II: Key Marking and Publicity Practices Used in the Public Sector
paragraphs: Ad Council executives with whom we met with identified key practices  that they use to guide their public service campaigns. These practices  relate to areas that we assessed as part of our examination of U.S.  government efforts to mark and publicize foreign assistance. Specifically,  the key practices identified include the following:    Determine what is appropriate to be marked. It is important to maintain  flexibility and conduct research to ensure that efforts do more good than  harm. Be mindful of potential unintended effects of branding.
Maintain a simple message. Conduct research regarding sensitivity of  wording and language.
Articulate the universal truth or message differently, as appropriate for  specific demographics and international backdrops. It is critical to  separate programs from political issues to prevent programs and policies  from being linked together.
Use targeting or tailoring to help create connection with audience.
Examine best practices, identify where the practices have worked well,  and learn how to emulate them. Also examine cases where branding has  been ineffective and implement some policies that could alleviate the  situation.
Conduct quantitative research, such as surveys, to measure results of  efforts. Conduct pre- and post-tracking studies to benchmark attitudes and  behaviors.
section_title: Appendix III: Other Governments’ Donor Organizations and the GTZ Marking and Publicity Practices
paragraphs: While other governments’ donor organizations and the German Agency for  Technical Cooperation (GTZ) generally mark and publicize their  assistance, none of these organizations have undertaken a campaign to  develop a mark for their foreign assistance abroad on the scale that USAID  has to date. Like the United States, other governments’ organizations  generally use marking to gain recipient recognition for their contributions.  We found that the six donors and the GTZ generally had some form of  marking implementing policies and procedures. However, unlike most U.S.  foreign assistance publicizing efforts, other government organizations’  efforts to communicate about foreign assistance were more targeted  toward their own constituents rather than host country citizens. These  organizations generally do not formally monitor or measure their marking  or publicity efforts.
subsections: section_title: Other Governments’ Donor Organizations and the GTZ Use Marking to Gain Recognition for Their Contributions
paragraphs: Other governments’ donor organizations and the GTZ that we studied  generally use marking to gain recognition or maintain domestic support  for their contributions. Donor organizations and the GTZ that we  contacted identified a number of practices for marking, including adapting  such efforts for each host country, and ensuring high-level stakeholder  cooperation to facilitate implementation of these marking efforts.  Additionally, in some countries, to ensure marking consistency,  governments require all organizations, including bilateral donors, to use  the national symbol along with the organization’s logo. For example, the  Australian Government’s Overseas Aid Program (AusAID) and the  Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) marks include the  national symbols of Australia and Canada, respectively, and assistance  provided by the European Union (EU) are generally marked with the EU  logo. Other organizations, including the Department for International  Development (DFID) of the United Kingdom, GTZ, the Icelandic  International Development Agency (ICEIDA), and the Japan International  Cooperation Agency (JICA) have their own unique organization logos. In  addition, some donors are more flexible than others with their marking  requirements. For example, according to representatives of ICEIDA, their  marking procedures are not mandatory, but implementing partners often  use their marks on publications. Conversely, AusAID requires its partners  to mark all of its assistance. Figure 10 illustrates each of the selected  organizations’ marks.
section_title: Other Governments’ Donor Organizations and the GTZ, to Varying Degrees, Have Marking Procedures or Guidance
paragraphs: The marking efforts for the six donors and the GTZ that we reviewed have  some form of procedures or guidance for implementation. The following  provides a brief description of each organization’s procedures or guidance.
AusAID’s standard mark is used on its foreign assistance. The  organization’s written guidelines apply to all contractors and  implementing partners to ensure marking consistency. The Australian  government has also developed a unique mark and design manual for its  Indonesia program.
CIDA has a corporate identity logo, and grant and contribution agreements  require recipients to recognize CIDA’s contribution with acknowledgments  or use of CIDA’s logo in their publications, advertising, and promotional  products.
DFID has a standard mark, which is guided by its Identity Standards  Manual. The mark is used mostly for project-based foreign assistance and  not budgetary support programs or activities. Humanitarian assistance is  branded with the United Kingdom Emergency Aid logo. This branding  applies to DFID staff and to large nonperishable items. It will not be used when it may detract from humanitarian operations or increase risk to staff  or beneficiaries.
The European Union has Visibility Guidelines specifying how technical  foreign assistance, supplies and equipment, and infrastructure projects are  to be marked.
GTZ uses a standard logo and a tagline, “German Technical Cooperation”  on its information material in partner countries. An optional slogan,  “Partner for the Future. Worldwide” may be used. Although not required,  the tagline is frequently used on project information, brochures, products,  and presentations, and, in partner countries, the name of the country is  included.
ICEIDA uses a standard logo on all of its publications. Although not  required, implementing partners often include the mark on their  publications.
JICA has a logo that is to be used on publications, business cards,  envelopes, and vehicles. JICA also has a slogan, “For a better tomorrow  for all.”, and has translated this into English, French, Spanish, Portuguese,  and Russian. A Corporate Identity Design Manual was produced in 2003  that provides color, font, and usage guidance.
section_title: Other Donors’ and the GTZ Publicizing Efforts Generally Target Domestic Constituents Rather Than Host Country Recipients
paragraphs: According to representatives of most of the organizations with whom we  spoke, domestic constituents and not foreign audiences are the target of  their communications about foreign assistance efforts. In contrast to  marking intended to ensure that governments receive recognition for their  contributions, these organizations’ publicizing efforts generally focus on  informing the general public in their respective countries about their  initiatives to enhance the reputation of the aid agencies, engage the public,  create interest among civil society, and highlight success stories.  According to ICEIDA, for example, it is required by law to publicize its  foreign assistance efforts domestically. The organizations implement these  efforts by, among other things, coordinating publicity activities between  implementers’ and donors’ information units; constructing project Web  sites; and through other communication mechanisms such as special  events, press releases, conferences, publications, Web pages, and plaques.
Two of the organizations required that their projects have a  communications plan targeting recipient countries. For example, CIDA  requires a communications plan on how to inform the public in the  recipient country of their projects prior to approval.
section_title: Other Donors’ and the GTZ Generally Do Not Formally Monitor or Measure Marking or Publicity Efforts
paragraphs: Only one of the organizations, AusAID, told us that it monitors  implementation of its marking and publicity efforts domestically and  internationally. AusAID monitoring is done through (1) domestically  focused community awareness research and (2) a mix of qualitative and  quantitative measures, including press releases, special events, correct  markings or signage, and newsletter subscriptions. AusAID also attempts  to determine the quality of its relationships with its partners and assesses  who the assistance is reaching and how often. Representatives from CIDA  and DFID told us that they conduct public opinion surveys, but these  surveys are intended to gauge public opinion about the agency or support  for assistance in general and not to measure marking or publicity efforts.
section_title: Appendix IV: Statutes, Policies, Regulations, and Guidance for Marking or Publicizing Foreign Assistance
subsections: section_title: Content of marking or publicizing provision
paragraphs: Provides that “programs  under this Act shall be  identified appropriately  overseas as ‘American  Aid.’ ”
HHS: Follows State policy on placing PEPFAR logo on  all materials procured by HHS; policy memorandum on  the appropriate use of logos on conference material;  policy on marking health projects.
Justice: Relies on individual component agencies to  determine appropriateness of marking or publicizing  activities.
State: State Financial Assistance Standard Terms and  Conditions, Part II, Attachment 1-MEPI.
Treasury: OTA Instruction 4035.1—guidance for  marking certain types of assistance.
USAID: 22 C.F.R. Part 226, sec. 226.91— regulations  prescribing marking requirements for grants and  cooperative agreements; 22 C.F.R. Part 201, sec.  201.31(d)—regulations regarding marking shipping  containers and commodities; AIDAR Clause  752.7999—-standard clause in contracts regarding  marking of foreign assistance; ADS 320-policy  directives and procedures on marking USAID-funded  activities; AAPD 05-11—policy directive regarding  acquisition and assistance regulations and procedures.
Requires that, to the  extent practicable,  commodities provided  under that act be clearly  identified with appropriate  markings in the local  language as being  furnished by “the people of  the United States.”
USDA: 7 C.F.R. Part 1599, sec. 1599.12(b)— regulations on labeling of commodities donated under  USDA’s international food education and child nutrition  program.
USAID: 22 C.F.R. Part 226, sec. 226.91— regulations  prescribing marking requirements for grants and  cooperative agreements; 22 C.F.R. Part 211, sec.  211.5(h)—regulations prescribing marking and publicity  requirements for USAID’s Food for Peace program; 22  C.F.R. Part 201, sec. 201.31(d)— regulations regarding  marking shipping containers and commodities.
Requires that foreign  countries and private  entities receiving P.L. 480  commodities will widely  publicize “to the extent  practicable” in the media  that the commodities are  provided “through the  friendship of the American  people as food for peace.”
USDA: 7 C.F.R. Part 1599, sec. 1599.12(b)— regulations on labeling for commodities donated under  USDA’s international food education and child nutrition  program.
USAID: 22 C.F.R. Part 211, sec. 211.5(h)—regulations  on marking and publicity requirements for USAID’s  Food for Peace program.
Directed the Secretary of  State to coordinate the  public diplomacy activities  of federal agencies and  called for cooperation  between State and USAID  to ensure that information  related to U.S. foreign  assistance is widely  disseminated.
MCC: Standards for Global Marking—guidelines on the  use and placement of MCC logo or other appropriate  logos.
DOD: Policy and Program Guidance for Overseas  Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid Activities—policy  and guidance for overseas humanitarian, disaster, and  civic aid activities and assistance.
section_title: Appendix V: Comments from the Department of State
section_title: Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: Jess Ford, (202) 512-4268 or fordj@gao.gov.
subsections: section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: Zina Merritt served as Assistant Director responsible for this report, and  Maria Oliver was the Analyst-in-Charge. In addition to those named above,  the following individuals made significant contributions to this report:  Virginia Chanley, Lauren Geetter, Ernie Jackson, and James Strus. The                      team benefited from the expert advice and assistance of Joe Carney,                      Etana Finkler, Lessie Burke-Johnson, Cynthia Taylor, and Wilda Wong.