The Perspective
Atlanta, Georgia
April 6, 2020

Would deadly diseases (i.e., Ebola, Coronavirus, etc.) spread so fast in poor countries if UNICEF (United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund) had directly transferred to beneficiaries “Cash Assistance” of $2.2B? (Page # 171 of UNICEF 2018 Financial Statements).

It transferred “Cash Assistance” of $2B to other NGOs, and directly transferred to beneficiaries only $141 million, (see page #171 of UNICEF 2018 Financial Statements). With 13,000 good-salary-paying employees, UNICEF had the manpower to directly transfer to beneficiaries the $2.2B “Cash Assistance.” Or better yet, why did UNICEF not reduce some of their $1.4 billion pay for employees benefits and use the savings to finance education, healthcare, etc.?

Or, what if UNICEF re-allocated some of the $10 million paid to the (32) thirty-two chief executives of UNICEF in 2018 to finance child nutrition? Could it have financed water and sanitation programs with some of Ms. Caryl Stern’s $526,000 salary paid to her as UNICEF chief executive? Most importantly, what amount of 2018 $6.6B donors’ contributions did UNICEF use to finance children's education, hospitals, food-producing projects, etc.?

Certainly, a better food-feeding system and preventive healthcare system would help to reduce the spread of diseases. This is true since food and preventive healthcare system are the primary lines of defense against diseases, which are limited in Africa. Cognizant of these problems, the United Nations founded many institutions such as the World Food Program (WFP) and UNICEF to assist poor countries. 

In 1946, the United Nations founded UNICEF and expanded its functions in 1953 to support child health and nutrition, safe water and sanitation, quality education, etc. Donors, trying to protect their donations from corrupt officials, finance programs through NGOs such as UNICEF. Corruption is rampant in poor countries. For instance, Chairman Mulbah Morlu of the Ruling Party of Liberia stated that President George Weah used government resources to build his 48 commercial properties.

So, UNICEF, for example, and implementing partners are executing programs that governments had performed years ago. However, the question is are NGOs such as UNICEF effective? Is UNICEF using its 13,000 employees effectively? Why is this useful to ask? Because as I write this article a virus is spreading rampantly in 2020; and viruses and other diseases have spread in the past in countries that UNICEF operates (e.g. Ebola).

In the case of UNICEF, its 2018 Audited Financial Statements say yes. It added that “…UNICEF continued to lead in nutrition, education, and water, sanitation, hygiene clusters, and child protection programs.” Further, it stated that “…UNICEF country offices invested $1.5B in activities related to strengthening of national system…”

Additionally, Subah-Belleh Associates, an independent evaluator based in Liberia, concurred with UNICEF’s assertions, according to the 2015 evaluation of the “Cash Assistance” Program in Bomi and Margibi Counties of the Republic of Liberia. The Firm stated that “…SCT programme improved the food security, health, education and economic conditions of participating households. Cash transfer programme households reported improved food intake and larger food stores that lasted longer.”

Is UNICEF properly spending donors’ contributions? UNICEF takes in a lot of money ($6.6B), and only uses half ($3B) on the countries it supposed to support. In fact, the $3B is questionable since it transferred $2.08B to other NGOs. Or to view it differently, each of the 190 countries, on the average, received $5M in 2018. However, if UNICEF had used all of their donor money on programming that would be $34M per country per year.

Further, let us compare the costs to the benefits of UNICEF activities in 2018 by analyzing the $6B expenses. The total expenses UNICEF reported was $6B in 2018, which was principally split between Services/Programs and salaries/fees.

(1) Services/Programs (i.e., Cash Assistance of $2.4B and Programs of $0.98B);
(2) Salaries/fees (i.e., employees’ benefits of $1.4B and consultants fees of $0.4b).

However, UNICEF directly distributed $0.141B “Cash Assistance” of the total $2.4B “Cash Assistance” reported in 2018. This is because “Implementing Partners,” presumably, NGOs, were responsible for the $2.08B of the total $2.2B Cash Assistance reported in 2018. 

Please review UNICEF 2017 and 2018 expense schedules

(All amounts are in U.S. currency).

In its self-evaluation, UNICEF believes that it is effective, the same approach many international agencies continue to reach, according to Johannes Linn, who served as an external peer reviewer of the self-evaluation of the World Bank in 2011. He argued that “…evaluations of many of the international agencies, including UNICEF do not cover the right issues, such as growth and poverty; problems of fragile and conflict states; educational system in poor countries., etc.”
Even though UNICEF continues to report success, critics dispute their stories. For example, the Associated Press, quoting from a Study,  stated that the UNICEF program has failed in West Africa after UNICEF spent $27 million to decrease child deaths from the disease. In another study funded by the Canadian Government, Philip Stevens, of the London think-tank International Policy Network, stated that the UNICEF program was “…a complete flop.”
UNICEF should directly distribute to countries it is supposed to support the entire amount earmarked for “Cash Assistance” and end giving the $2.0B to other NGOs. Also, UNICEF should employ more specialists such as healthcare providers, lawyers, policy-analysts, engineers, etc. Further, UNICEF should re-locate UNICEF Headquarters from New York City to communities  that actually need employees of UNICEF.

SOURCE:
https://www.unicef.org/about/execboard/files/A-74-5-Add3-BOA_report-ODS-EN.pdf
UNICEF 2018 Audited Financial Statements.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/unicef-program-failed-to-save-children-study-1.939386The Study found that UNICEF failed to save children lives.
(https://www.unicef.org/about-unicef/frequently-asked-questions)

https://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=1443
“But critics of UNICEF claim the agency and Bellamy have contributed to the crisis by focusing on political causes and steering UNICEF away from the “core business” of ensuring children’s survival.”

https://www.unicef.org/about/employ/index_careers.html
“More than 13,000 staff work with UNICEF, with approximately 85 per located in the field in 190 countries”.

(https://www.unicef.org/evaldatabase/index_86282.html)

“2015 Liberia: Final Evaluation Liberia Social Cash Transfer Programme.”

https://www.liveabout.com/salaries-of-charity-ceos-real-or-inflated-4076002)
The worst offender yet again for the 11th year in a row is the UNICEF CEO; he receives $1,200,000 per year, (plus use of a Rolls Royce for his exclusive use wherever he goes and an expense account that is rumored to be well over $150,000.) Only pennies from the actual donations go to the UNICEF cause (less than $0.14 per dollar of income).

https://www.unicef.org/policyanalysis/index_49070.html
UNICEF to look toward adjusting and augmenting our programming and support in areas such as health, nutrition, water and sanitation, HIV/AIDS, education and child protection

---