[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2299 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>






116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2299

        To establish a review of United States multilateral aid.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 12, 2019

 Mr. Buck (for himself and Mr. McCaul) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL


 
        To establish a review of United States multilateral aid.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Multilateral Aid Review Act of 
2019''.

SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

    The purpose of this Act is to establish a United States 
Multilateral Aid Review (in this Act referred to as the ``Review'') to 
publicly assess the value of United States Government investments in 
multilateral entities.

SEC. 3. APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES DEFINED.

    In this Act, the term ``appropriate congressional committees'' 
means--
            (1) the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on 
        Appropriations of the Senate; and
            (2) the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on 
        Financial Services, and the Committee on Appropriations of the 
        House of Representatives.

SEC. 4. OBJECTIVES.

    The objectives of the Review are as follows:
            (1) Provide a tool to guide the United States Government's 
        decisionmaking and prioritization with regard to funding 
        multilateral entities and to provide a methodological basis for 
        allocating scarce budgetary resources to entities that advance 
        relevant United States foreign policy objectives.
            (2) Incentivize improvements in the performance of 
        multilateral entities to achieve better outcomes on the ground 
        in developing, fragile, and crisis-afflicted regions.
            (3) Protect United States taxpayer investments in foreign 
        assistance by improving transparency with regard to the funding 
        of multilateral entities.

SEC. 5. SCOPE.

    The Review shall include in its assessment multilateral entities to 
which the United States Government contributes voluntary or assessed 
funding, whether cash or in-kind.

SEC. 6. TRIENNIAL REPORT ON REVIEW.

    (a) In General.--Not later than twenty-one months after the date of 
the enactment of this Act, and every three years thereafter, the United 
States Multilateral Aid Review Task Force established under section 7, 
in regular consultation with the Peer Review Group established under 
section 8, shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a 
final report on the findings of the Review. The Secretary of State 
shall publish the report on the internet website of the Department of 
State within seven days of submitting the report to the appropriate 
congressional committees.
    (b) Methodology.--
            (1) Use of criteria.--The Task Force shall establish an 
        analytical framework and assessment scorecard for the Review 
        using the criteria set forth in subsection (c).
            (2) Consultation with congress.--Not later than 120 days 
        after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Task Force 
        shall submit the methodology for the initial Review to the 
        appropriate congressional committees. The Task Force may not 
        proceed with the Review until 30 days after submission of the 
        methodology to the appropriate congressional committees, taking 
        into consideration the views of the Chairmen and Ranking 
        Members of each of the appropriate congressional committees. 
        For each subsequent Review, the Task Force shall consult with 
        the Chairmen and Ranking Members of each of the appropriate 
        congressional committees regarding any changes to the 
        methodology.
    (c) Assessment Criteria.--The assessment scorecard shall include 
the following criteria:
            (1) Relationship of stated goals to actual results.--The 
        extent to which the stated mission, goals, and objectives of 
        the entity have been achieved during the review period, 
        including--
                    (A) an identification of the stated mission, goals, 
                and objectives of each entity;
                    (B) an evaluation of the major projects and 
                programs selected for implementation by the entity in 
                comparison with the stated mission, goals, and 
                objectives of the entity;
                    (C) an evaluation of whether the major projects and 
                programs selected by the entity within the given review 
                period were more likely than not to further the 
                achievement of the stated mission, goals, and 
                objectives of the entity;
                    (D) an evaluation of the extent to which the major 
                selected projects and programs met their own stated 
                implementation timelines and achieved declared results; 
                and
                    (E) an evaluation of whether the entity optimizes 
                resources to achieve the stated mission, goals, and 
                objectives of the entity.
            (2) Responsible management.--The extent to which management 
        of the entity follows best management practices, including--
                    (A) an evaluation of the ratio of management and 
                administrative expenses to program expenses, including 
                an evaluation of entity resources spent on 
                nonprogrammatic expenses;
                    (B) an evaluation of program expense growth, 
                including a comparison of the annual growth of program 
                expenses to the annual growth of management and 
                administrative expenses; and
                    (C) an evaluation of whether the entity has 
                established appropriate levels of senior management 
                compensation.
            (3) Accountability and transparency.--The extent to which 
        the policies and procedures of the entity follow best practices 
        of accountability and transparency, taking into consideration 
        credible reporting regarding unauthorized conversion or 
        diversion of entity resources, and including--
                    (A) an evaluation of whether the entity has 
                established and enforced appropriate auditing 
                procedures;
                    (B) an evaluation of whether the entity has 
                established and enforced appropriate rules to reduce 
                the risk of conflicts of interest among the senior 
                leadership of the entity;
                    (C) an evaluation of whether the entity has 
                established and enforced appropriate whistleblower 
                policies;
                    (D) an evaluation of whether the entity has 
                established and maintained appropriate records 
                retention policies and guidelines;
                    (E) an evaluation of whether the entity has 
                established and maintained best practices with respect 
                to transparency and public disclosure; and
                    (F) an evaluation of whether the entity has 
                established and maintained best practices with respect 
                to disclosure of the compensation of senior leadership 
                officials.
            (4) Alignment with united states foreign policy 
        objectives.--The extent to which the policies and practices of 
        the entity align with relevant United States foreign policy 
        objectives, including--
                    (A) an evaluation of the entity's stated mission, 
                goals, and objectives in comparison to relevant United 
                States foreign policy objectives;
                    (B) an evaluation of whether continued 
                participation by the United States in the entity 
                contributes a net benefit towards achieving relevant 
                United States foreign policy objectives, including the 
                reasons for the conclusion; and
                    (C) an evaluation of any divergence between the 
                actions of the entity and relevant United States 
                foreign policy objectives.
            (5) Multilateral approach compared to bilateral approach.--
        The extent to which pursuing relevant United States foreign 
        policy objectives through a multilateral approach is effective 
        and cost-efficient compared to a bilateral approach, 
        including--
                    (A) an evaluation of whether relevant United States 
                foreign policy objectives are effectively pursued 
                through the entity, compared to existing or potential 
                bilateral approaches; and
                    (B) an evaluation of whether relevant United States 
                foreign policy objectives are pursued on a cost-
                effective basis through the entity, compared to 
                existing or potential bilateral approaches.
            (6) Redundancies and overlap.--The extent to which the 
        mission, goals, and objectives of the entity overlap with the 
        mission, goals, and objectives of other multilateral 
        institutions to which United States Government entities 
        contribute voluntary or assessed funding, whether cash or in-
        kind, including--
                    (A) an identification of significant redundancies 
                or overlap with the mission, goals, and objectives of 
                other multilateral entities to which United States 
                Government entities contribute voluntary or assessed 
                funding, whether cash or in-kind; and
                    (B) a comparison of the extent to which relevant 
                United States foreign policy objectives are effectively 
                pursued on a cost-effective basis through each of the 
                overlapping entities.

SEC. 7. UNITED STATES MULTILATERAL REVIEW TASK FORCE.

    (a) Establishment.--The President shall establish an interagency 
Multilateral Review Task Force (referred to in this Act as the ``Task 
Force'') to review and assess United States participation in 
multilateral entities identified in section 5 and to develop and 
transmit to the appropriate congressional committees the reports 
required under section 6.
    (b) Leadership.--The Task Force shall be chaired by the Secretary 
of State. The Secretary may delegate his or her responsibilities under 
this Act to an appropriate senior Senate-confirmed official.
    (c) Membership.--The President may appoint to the interagency Task 
Force senior Senate-confirmed officials from the Department of State, 
the Department of the Treasury, the United States Agency for 
International Development, the Office of Management and Budget, and any 
other relevant executive branch department or agency.
    (d) Consultation.--In the preparation of each report under section 
6, including the initial review of methodology, the Task Force shall 
consult regularly with the Peer Review Group established under section 
8.

SEC. 8. UNITED STATES MULTILATERAL AID REVIEW PEER REVIEW GROUP.

    (a) Establishment.--There is established the United States 
Multilateral Aid Review Peer Review Group (referred to in this Act as 
the ``Peer Review Group'').
    (b) Membership.--
            (1) Composition.--The Peer Review Group shall be composed 
        of 8 nongovernmental volunteer members, of whom--
                    (A) two shall be appointed by the majority leader 
                of the Senate;
                    (B) two shall be appointed by the minority leader 
                of the Senate;
                    (C) two shall be appointed by the Speaker of the 
                House of Representatives; and
                    (D) two shall be appointed by the minority leader 
                of the House of Representatives.
            (2) Appointment criteria.--The members of the Peer Review 
        Group shall have appropriate expertise and knowledge of the 
        multilateral entities subject to the Review established by this 
        Act. In making appointments to the Peer Review Group, potential 
        conflicts of interest should be taken into account.
            (3) Date.--The initial appointments of the members of the 
        Peer Review Group shall be made not later than 100 days after 
        the date of the enactment of this Act, and the terms of such 
        appointments shall begin on that date.
            (4) Chairman and vice chairman.--The Peer Review Group 
        shall select a Chairman and Vice Chairman from among the 
        members of the Peer Review Group.
    (c) Expert Analysis.--The Peer Review Group shall meet regularly 
with the Task Force, including regarding the initial review of 
methodology, to offer their expertise of the funding and performance of 
multilateral entities.
    (d) Review of Report.--
            (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days before submitting 
        each report required under section 6(a), the Task Force shall 
        transmit a draft of the report to the Peer Review Group and the 
        appropriate congressional committees.
            (2) Review.--The Peer Review Group shall review the draft 
        report submitted under paragraph (1) and provide to the Task 
        Force and the appropriate congressional committees not later 
        than 90 days before the submission of each report required 
        under section 6(a) the following:
                    (A) An analysis of the conclusions of the report.
                    (B) An analysis of the established methodologies 
                used to reach conclusions in the report.
                    (C) An analysis of the evidence used to reach 
                conclusions in the report.
                    (D) Any additional comments to improve the 
                evaluations and analysis of the report.
    (e) Period of Appointment; Vacancies.--
            (1) In general.--Each member of the Peer Review Group shall 
        be appointed for a 6-year term and may be reappointed under 
        subsection (b)(1) for one additional term.
            (2) Vacancies.--Any vacancy in the Peer Review Group--
                    (A) shall not affect the powers of the Peer Review 
                Group; and
                    (B) shall be filled in the same manner as the 
                original appointment.
    (f) Meetings.--
            (1) In general.--The Peer Review Group shall meet at the 
        call of the Chairman.
            (2) Initial meeting.--Not later than 120 days after the 
        date of the enactment of this Act, the Peer Review Group shall 
        hold its first meeting.
            (3) Quorum.--A majority of the members of the Peer Group 
        shall constitute a quorum, but a lesser number of members may 
        hold meetings.

SEC. 9. TERMINATION.

    The authorities and requirements provided under this Act shall 
terminate 11 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>