The mission of ILAB involves improving working conditions, promoting workers’ rights, and addressing the workplace exploitation of children and other vulnerable populations overseas. This work is carried out by its Office of Child Labor, Forced Labor, and Human Trafficking (OCFT, referred to here as the child labor office) and its Office of Trade and Labor Affairs (OTLA, referred to here as the trade and labor office), through projects developed and funded by the offices and generally implemented by international or nongovernmental organizations. Figure 1 shows the structure of the ILAB office. In fiscal year 2013, Congress appropriated about $66.5 million to ILAB for international technical assistance provided that “$40 million shall be for programs to combat exploitative child labor internationally” and “not less than $6.5 million shall be used to implement model programs that address worker rights issues.” Of that amount, the child labor office obligated about $56 million, and the trade and labor office obligated about $6.5 million for technical assistance projects. From fiscal year 2011 through fiscal year 2013, ILAB obligated about $225 million. During that time the child labor office obligated about $176 million and the trade and labor office obligated about $49 million. The child labor office’s technical assistance includes direct educational services, capacity building, and supporting research on international child labor, forced labor, and human trafficking. Among other responsibilities, the office funds and oversees cooperative agreements and contracts to organizations engaged in efforts to eliminate exploitative child labor around the world. It funded 40 projects between fiscal years 2011 and 2013. For example, in fiscal year 2011, the office funded a $13 million project to combat rural exploitative child labor in Peru that included education services, livelihoods assistance, and research on child labor. The trade and labor office’s technical assistance focuses on projects to improve worker rights. It funded 34 projects between fiscal years 2011 and 2013. For example, in fiscal year 2011 the office provided $1 million to improve labor compliance in the footwear industry in Cambodia and to improve the capacity of labor law enforcement. ILAB has guidance and criteria for developing project ideas. Officials from both the trade and labor office and child labor office told us the criteria are not formally weighted and that they consider many factors in deciding where to provide technical assistance, including the nature and extent of the problem, U.S. government priorities, and host government commitment. Before ILAB can publish a grant solicitation, it must go through Labor’s agency-wide clearance process. The child labor and trade and labor offices each have general guidance for developing project ideas, including guidance on stakeholder involvement and identifying targets of opportunity. In addition, the trade and labor office guidance includes templates for assessing initial project ideas. Both offices have several high-level criteria for project development, including sustainability and host government commitment. (See appendix II for the full list of criteria.) According to ILAB officials, they can consider additional factors when developing projects, including leadership priorities. They told us that ILAB’s formal leadership priorities are outlined in its annual operation plan and 5-year strategic plan. ILAB officials said that office directors from both the trade and labor office and child labor office meet every week with the office of the deputy undersecretary for international affairs to discuss issues. For example, trade and labor office officials told us a current priority is building the capacity of other governments to enforce their labor laws by, for instance, improving the capacity and skills of labor inspectors. Officials also said that if there is a significant event, such as the garment factory fires and factory collapse in Bangladesh, their priorities can adjust to reflect new situations. In addition, officials from the child labor office said that in the 1990s, they funded projects targeting child soldiers and commercial sexual exploitation. However, they found that to have greater impact, they needed to develop projects that intervene earlier, before children become soldiers or sex workers. Officials told us they have increased their focus on prevention in addition to removing children from child labor. ILAB officials said the criteria they use for project development and selection are not formally weighted and the importance of individual criteria can vary depending on the situation. For example, ILAB officials told us that regardless of the severity of a problem, they generally do not provide assistance in a country where the government does not welcome an ILAB project. ILAB officials told us they look for opportunities for discernible impact and likelihood of success. They define success as not only meeting the goals of the project, but also developing strategies that could be applied more widely. Officials from the child labor office told us that their main criterion is the nature and extent of exploitative child labor, but other factors can take precedence in determining where to provide technical assistance. For example, they do not necessarily target their assistance to the countries with the highest incidences of child labor or with the worst forms of child labor. The projects we reviewed, for instance, include countries where the percentage of children working varies from about 7 percent in Panama to 50 percent in Ethiopia, according to recent statistics in ILAB’s Findings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor. However, child labor officials said that, even taking into account other factors, their projects generally result in a focus on the worst forms of child labor or hazardous work. For example, of the six solicitations for direct services in our sample that were posted in 2011 and 2012, half explicitly mention children engaged in the “worst form of child labor” or “hazardous work” as the target population. Although the other half of solicitations did not explicitly use these terms, the solicitations described working conditions that fall under the definition of hazardous work. ILAB has a review process for developing and approving potential projects and grant solicitations. According to ILAB officials, project managers on both trade and labor and child labor grants develop a list of potential projects using the criteria and information discussed above. The office division chiefs review and refine the list and provide project recommendations to the directors of each of the offices. The office directors further refine the list of recommended projects, which they give to the deputy undersecretary for international affairs for final selection. In 2013, officials estimated that child labor project managers developed around 20 project proposals (including country-specific projects, research projects, and monitoring and evaluation projects), 15 of which were submitted to the deputy undersecretary, and 12 of those are under consideration. Officials estimated that trade and labor project managers developed around 20 project ideas, 8 of which were forwarded to the deputy undersecretary, and 6 of those are under consideration. According to ILAB guidance, once a potential project is approved, project managers conduct a needs assessment to further develop the project idea and write the scope of work for the grant solicitation. The needs assessment can be comprised of different efforts depending on the situation; for example, it could involve desk research and a visit to the target country to help determine the scope of each project. ILAB guidance also states that they will consult with stakeholders, including other U.S. government agencies and the U.S. embassy in the target country, and obtain written approval from the host country government to implement the project. According to ILAB guidance, Labor publishes a Notice of Intent on the grants.gov web portal to notify the public and potential bidders that ILAB intends to issue a solicitation. According to ILAB officials, project managers then write the scope of work for the solicitation, which they send to the child labor and trade and labor office directors for approval. According to officials, the scope of work identifies the problem to be addressed, while the applicant should propose the way to address the problem. After the ILAB office directors approve the solicitation, according to officials, it is sent to the deputy undersecretary for international affairs for clearance, then to all agencies in Labor for review and comment, and clearance by the office of the executive secretary. Finally, the solicitation for grant applications is published on grants.gov. Labor has established procedures to evaluate competitive and noncompetitive applications for cooperative agreements. In addition, noncompetitive grants need approval from the Labor Procurement Review Board. ILAB has faced challenges in maximizing competition, broadening the pool of organizations that apply for grants, because that pool is potentially constrained by the specialized nature of the work, challenging location of grants, and size and complexity of the grants. ILAB officials told us they take steps to maximize competition, including writing scopes of work that are broad enough for an applicant to develop its own strategy and publishing Notices of Intent to give applicants more time to develop proposals. For competitive solicitations, once the application deadline has passed, a grant officer in Labor’s procurement office conducts a review of the applications to determine whether applicants have met all requirements to be eligible for award consideration. According to Labor officials, in 2011, the procurement office began using a responsiveness review checklist to determine whether documents required in the solicitation are included in the application file. For example, the checklist contains fields for whether the applicant submitted technical and cost proposals; past performance information; an audit opinion letter and summary of findings; and whether the applicant is registered in the System for Award Management, which includes information on excluded parties. Applications found eligible by the procurement office are provided to a technical evaluation panel for review and evaluation. ILAB selects and identifies the technical evaluation panel members and chair. According to ILAB officials, the panel chair is often the project manager who developed the solicitation. The panel chair is responsible for, among other things, ensuring compliance with proceedings, applicable regulations, and solicitation requirements; keeping a record of panel proceedings; and submitting a record of the proceedings of the panel to the procurement office. The individual panelists are each responsible for reading and completing evaluations for all applications. ILAB officials said that influence of the panel chair is moderated by the other panel members, and that the chair’s role is to facilitate and organize the process, not to dictate the review.