Compact of Free Association: Micronesia Faces Challenges to	 
Achieving Compact Goals (10-JUN-08, GAO-08-859T).		 
                                                                 
From 1987 through 2003, the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM) 
received more than $1.5 billion in economic assistance under the 
original Compact of Free Association with the United States. In  
2003, the U.S. government approved an amended compact with the	 
FSM that provides an additional $2.3 billion from 2004 through	 
2023. The Department of the Interior's Office of Insular Affairs 
(OIA) is responsible for administering and monitoring this	 
assistance. The amended compact identifies the additional 20	 
years of grant assistance as intended to assist the FSM in its	 
efforts to promote the economic advancement and budgetary	 
self-reliance of its people. The assistance is provided in the	 
form of annually decreasing grants that prioritize health and	 
education, paired with annually increasing contributions to a	 
trust fund intended as a source of revenue for the country after 
the grants end in 2023. The amended compact also contains several
new funding and accountability provisions intended to strengthen 
reporting and bilateral interaction. Among these provisions is a 
requirement for the establishment of a joint economic management 
committee and a trust fund committee to, respectively, among	 
other duties, review the FSM's progress toward compact objectives
and assess the trust fund's effectiveness in contributing to the 
country's economic advancement and long-term budgetary		 
self-reliance. In 2003, we testified that these provisions could 
improve accountability over the assistance provided but that	 
successful implementation of these provisions would require	 
appropriate resources and sustained commitment from both the	 
United States and the FSM. Drawing on several more recent reports
as well as updated information, this report will discuss the	 
FSM's economic prospects, implementation of the amended compact  
to meet its long-term goals, and potential trust fund earnings.  
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-08-859T					        
    ACCNO:   A82312						        
  TITLE:     Compact of Free Association: Micronesia Faces Challenges 
to Achieving Compact Goals					 
     DATE:   06/10/2008 
  SUBJECT:   Cost analysis					 
	     Economic analysis					 
	     Economic development				 
	     Economic growth					 
	     Economic policies					 
	     Federal aid programs				 
	     Federal aid to foreign countries			 
	     Financial disclosure				 
	     Financial management				 
	     Foreign aid programs				 
	     Foreign economic assistance			 
	     Foreign financial assistance			 
	     Foreign governments				 
	     Foreign policies					 
	     International agreements				 
	     International economic relations			 
	     International relations				 
	     Trust funds					 
	     Funds management					 
	     Budget activities					 
	     Cost awareness					 
	     Cost estimates					 
	     Compact of Free Association with			 
	     Micronesia 					 
                                                                 
	     Federated States of Micronesia			 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-08-859T

   

     * [1]Summary
     * [2]Background

          * [3]Compact of Free Association: 1986-2003
          * [4]Amended Compact of Free Association: 2004-2023

     * [5]FSM Economic Prospects Remain Limited
     * [6]Numerous Factors Hinder Use of Compact Funds to Advance FSM
     * [7]FSM Trust Fund May Not Provide Sustainable Income after Comp
     * [8]Concluding Remarks and Prior Recommendations
     * [9]Contacts and Acknowledgements
     * [10]Attachment I: Related GAO Products
     * [11]Attachment II: U.S. Assistance to the FSM under the Amended
     * [12]Attachment III: Estimated FSM Per Capita Compact Grant Assis
     * [13]Attachment IV: Amended Compact Implementation Framework
     * [14]Attachment V: FSM Sector Grant Allocations, Fiscal Years 200
     * [15]Attachment VI: FSM Unspent Compact Grants by Sector, Fiscal
     * [16]Attachment VII: Projections of FSM Account Balance with Thre
     * [17]Attachment VIII: Probability of FSM Trust Fund Income Not Re
     * [18]Ordering Information.pdf

          * [19]Order by Mail or Phone

Testimony

Before the Insular Affairs Subcommittee, House Resources Committee, U.S.
House of Representatives

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO

For Release on Delivery Expected at 11:00 a.m. EST

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

COMPACTOF FREE ASSOCIATION

Micronesia Faces Challenges to Achieving Compact Goals

Statement of David Gootnick, Director

International Affairs and Trade

Compact of Free Association Compact of Free Association Compact of Free
Association Compact of Free Association Compact of Free Association
Compact of Free Association Compact of Free Association Compact of Free
Association Compact of Free Association Compact of Free Association
Compact of Free Association Compact of Free Association Compact of Free
Association Compact of Free Association Compact of Free Association
Compact of Free Association Compact of Free Association Compact of Free
Association Compact of Free Association Compact of Free Association
Compact of Free Association Compact of Free Association Compact of Free
Association

GAO-08-859T

Madame Chairwoman and Members of the Subcommittee:

I am pleased to be here today to discuss GAO's recent work regarding the
amended Compact of Free Association between the United States and the
Federated States of Micronesia (FSM).1

From 1987 through 2003,2 the FSM received more than $1.5 billion in
economic assistance under the original Compact of Free Association with
the United States.3 In 2003, the U.S. government approved an amended
compact with the FSM that provides an additional $2.3 billion from 2004
through 2023.4 The Department of the Interior's Office of Insular Affairs
(OIA) is responsible for administering and monitoring this assistance.

The amended compact identifies the additional 20 years of grant assistance
as intended to assist the FSM in its efforts to promote the economic
advancement and budgetary self-reliance of its people. The assistance is
provided in the form of annually decreasing grants that prioritize health
and education, paired with annually increasing contributions to a trust
fund intended as a source of revenue for the country after the grants end
in 2023.5 The amended compact also contains several new funding and
accountability provisions intended to strengthen reporting and bilateral
interaction. Among these provisions is a requirement for the establishment
of a joint economic management committee and a trust fund committee to,
respectively, among other duties, review the FSM's progress toward compact
objectives and assess the trust fund's effectiveness in contributing to
the country's economic advancement and long-term budgetary self-reliance.
In 2003, we testified that these provisions could improve accountability
over the assistance provided but that successful implementation of these
provisions would require appropriate resources and sustained commitment
from both the United States and the FSM.6

1The FSM comprises four states--Chuuk, Kosrae, Pohnpei, and Yap--with 50
percent of the FSM population residing in Chuuk state. A list of relevant
GAO reports on the FSM is included in attachment I.

2In this testimony, all years cited are fiscal years (Oct. 1-Sept. 30).

3Under the original Compact of Free Association, the United States also
provided about $579 million of economic assistance to the Republic of the
Marshall Islands (RMI). In 2000, we reviewed assistance under the compact
and determined that the U.S., FSM, and RMI governments had provided
limited accountability over spending and that U.S. assistance had resulted
in little impact on economic development in the FSM and RMI. See
[20]GAO/NSIAD-00-216.

4This figure is based on a Department of the Interior projection included
in its Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Justification. The United States also
signed an amended compact with the RMI that provides about $1.5 billion
from 2004 through 2023.

5According to U.S. officials, the trust fund income is intended to be one
source of income, and the amended compact does not guarantee that the
trust fund will provide the maximum disbursements allowed by the trust
fund agreements.

Today, drawing on several more recent reports as well as updated
information,7 I will discuss the FSM's economic prospects, implementation
of the amended compact to meet its long-term goals, and potential trust
fund earnings.

Summary

The FSM has limited prospects for achieving budgetary self-reliance and
long-term economic advancement, and the FSM government has not yet
implemented policy reforms needed to enable economic growth. The FSM
economy depends on public sector spending of foreign assistance;
government expenditures, over half of which are funded by external grants,
account for about 65 percent of the FSM's gross domestic product (GDP).
The FSM government's budget is characterized by limited tax revenue and a
growing wage bill, and the two private sector industries identified as
having growth potential--fisheries and tourism--face significant barriers
to expansion because of the FSM's remote geographic location, inadequate
infrastructure, and poor business environment. Moreover, progress in
implementing key tax, public sector, land, and foreign investment policy
reforms necessary to improve growth has been slow. For example, although
the FSM has agreed on principles of reform to address its tax system that
has been characterized by experts as inefficient and inequitable, the FSM
government has made limited progress in implementing fundamental tax
reform. Also, the FSM's failure to implement key public sector reforms to
reduce wage and subsidy expenditures resulted in fiscal crisis in Chuuk
and Kosrae. In August 2006, nearly 2 years after the amended compact
entered into force, the FSM Joint Economic Management Committee (JEMCO)
began discussions of economic policy reform and has since approved some
funding to support FSM reform efforts; however, challenges to private
sector growth remain.

6See [21]GAO-03-988T , a testimony before the Committee on Resources,
House of Representatives.

7The amended compacts' implementing legislation instructs GAO to report 3
years following the enactment of the legislation and every 5 years
thereafter on the FSM's use and effectiveness of U.S. financial, program,
and technical assistance as well as the effectiveness of administrative
oversight by the United States. To update information for this testimony,
we met with U.S. and FSM officials and reviewed documentation from, among
other things, the April 2008 technical working group and the FSM's 2007
economic report. We conducted these performance audits in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards. See list of related GAO
products in attachment I.

Numerous factors have negatively affected the use of the compact grants
for FSM development goals. The FSM's grant allocations have reflected
compact priorities by targeting education, health, and infrastructure.
However, as of April 2008, the FSM had completed only three infrastructure
projects and approximately 82 percent of the $82.5 million in
infrastructure funds remained unexpended. Lack of progress in this sector
is owed to national and state disagreements over infrastructure
priorities, problems associated with the project management unit, and
Chuuk's inability to secure land leases. Additionally, the FSM has almost
$15 million in unspent funds for other sectors, or around 7 percent of
funds allocated from 2004 to 2007. Furthermore, the FSM's distribution of
grants among its four states has not been based on need, leading to
significant differences in per capita funding, while the FSM's long-term
planning has not taken into account the likely effects of the annual
funding decrement and other budgetary changes. The FSM has also lacked
accountability for the use of compact funds, as demonstrated by weaknesses
in its yearly financial statements and lack of compliance with
requirements of major federal programs. Moreover, the FSM has not
consistently monitored day-to-day grant operations or reported on progress
toward program and economic goals, owing to inadequate data, a lack of
required reporting, and an unwillingness to dedicate the resources
necessary. OIA has conducted administrative oversight of the sector
grants, but its oversight has been constrained by the need to assist the
FSM with its compact implementation activities such as preparing budgets
and addressing financial management problems such as the misuse of compact
funds by Chuuk and Kosrae in 2006 and 2007, respectively.

The FSM's trust fund may not provide sustainable income for the country
after compact grants end--a potential outcome that the FSM trust fund
committee has not yet addressed. Market volatility and the choice of
investment strategy could cause the FSM trust fund balance in some years
to fall short of the maximum disbursement level allowed--an amount equal
to the inflation-adjusted compact grants in 2023--or to be unable to
disburse any income. Moreover, the probability of shortfalls increases
over time. The trust fund income could be supplemented from several
sources, including funding from other donors, increased tax revenue, or
securitization. However, the FSM has not attracted other donors, its
limited development prospects constrain its ability to raise tax revenues,
and securitization--issuing bonds against future U.S.
contributions--carries the risk of lower fund balances and reduced income.
Furthermore, because management challenges affecting the FSM trust fund
committee delayed the fund's investment, the fund remained in a
low-interest savings account for 22 months. Additionally, despite the
likely impact of market volatility and investment strategy on the trust
fund balance, the trust fund committee has not assessed the fund's
potential adequacy as a source of revenue after the compact grants end in
2023.

Our previous reports on the amended compacts recommended, among other
things, that Interior's Deputy Assistant Secretary for Insular Affairs
ensure that the compact management committee addresses the FSM's lack of
progress in implementing economic reforms; work with the FSM to develop
plans for minimizing the impact of the declining grants; work with the FSM
to fully develop a reliable mechanism for measuring progress toward
compact goals; and ensure the trust fund committee's timely reporting on
the fund's likely status as a source of revenue after 2023. Interior
generally concurred with our recommendations and has taken some actions in
response to several of them, although key challenges to effective compact
implementation remain unaddressed.

Background

Compact of Free Association: 1986-2003

In 1986, the United States entered into its original Compact of Free
Association with the FSM.8 The compact comprised a framework for the
United States to work toward achieving three main goals: (1) to secure
self-government for the FSM, (2) to ensure certain national security
rights for all parties, and (3) to assist the FSM in its efforts to
advance economic development and self-sufficiency. Under the original
compact, the FSM also benefited from numerous U.S. federal programs, and
their citizens were allowed to live and work in the United States as
nonimmigrants and to stay for long periods of time.

Although the original compact's first and second goals were met, the FSM
did not achieve economic self-sufficiency. The FSM gained independence in
1978, and key defense rights were established. However, the compact's
third goal was to be accomplished primarily through U.S. direct financial
assistance totaling about $1.5 billion from 1987 through 2003.9 Although
U.S. financial assistance maintained higher income levels than the FSM
could have achieved without support, FSM estimated per capita GDP at the
compact's close did not differ substantially, in real terms, from its per
capita GDP in the early 1990s.10 In addition, we found that the U.S. and
FSM governments provided little accountability over compact expenditures
and that many compact-funded projects encountered problems related to poor
planning and management, inadequate construction and maintenance, or
misuse of funds.11

8Under the initial Compact of Free Association, the United States also
entered into a compact with the RMI, with a similar set of goals and
compact framework.

Amended Compact of Free Association: 2004-2023

In 2003, the United States approved an amended compact with the FSM that
(1) continues the defense relationship; (2) strengthens immigration
provisions; and (3) provides an estimated $2.3 billion to the FSM for 2004
through 2023 (see attachment II). The amended compact, which took effect
in June 2004, identifies the additional 20 years of grant assistance as
intended to assist the FSM in its efforts to promote the economic
advancement and budgetary self-reliance of its people. Financial
assistance is provided in the form of annual sector grants and
contributions to the trust fund. 12 The amended compact and its subsidiary
agreements, along with the FSM's development plan, target the grant
assistance to six sectors--education, health, public infrastructure, the
environment, public sector capacity building, and private sector
development--prioritizing two sectors, education and health.13 To provide
increasing U.S. contributions to the FSM's trust fund, grant funding
decreases annually and will likely result in falling per capita grant
assistance over the funding period and relative to the original compact
(see attachment III). For example, in 2004 U.S. dollar terms, FSM per
capita grant assistance will likely fall from around $1,352 in 1987 to
around $562 in 2023.

9This estimate represents total nominal outlays. It does not include
investment development funds provided under section 111 of Public Law
99-239 or the cost of compact-authorized federal services.

10In fiscal year 2003 dollars, estimated FSM per capita GDP was around
$2,150 in 2003, compared with an average of around $2,120 in 1991-1995.
See [22]GAO-06-590 .

11See [23]GAO/NSIAD-00-216 .

12U.S. contributions to trust funds were conditioned on the FSM making its
own required contribution. The FSM made its required initial contribution
of $30 million to its trust fund on October 1, 2004, one day after the
September 30, 2004 deadline.

13In the compacts' implementing legislation, Congress also suggested that
the FSM allocate for infrastructure improvement and maintenance at least
30 percent of its total sector grant allocation.

Under the amended compact, annual grant assistance is to be provided
according to an implementation framework with several components (see
attachment IV). For example, prior to the annual awarding of compact
funds, the FSM must submit a development plan that identifies goals and
performance objectives for each sector. The FSM government is also
required to monitor day-to-day operations of sector grants and activities,
submit periodic financial statements and performance reports for the
tracking of progress against goals and objectives, and ensure annual
financial and compliance audits. In addition, the U.S. and JEMCO are to
approve annual sector grants and evaluate the countries' management of the
grants and their progress toward program and economic goals. The amended
compact and subsidiary trust fund agreement also provide for the formation
of an FSM trust fund committee to, among its other duties, hire a money
manager, oversee the fund's operation and investment, and provide annual
reports on the fund's profitability.

FSM Economic Prospects Remain Limited

The FSM economy shows limited potential for developing sustainable income
sources other than foreign assistance to offset the annual decline in U.S.
compact grant assistance. Moreover, the FSM has not enacted economic
policy reforms needed to improve its growth prospects.

The FSM's economy shows continued dependence on government spending of
foreign assistance and limited potential for expanded private sector and
remittance income.

           o Total government expenditures in 2006, over half of which were
           funded by external grants, accounted for about 65 percent of GDP.

           o The FSM's government budget is characterized by limited tax
           revenue paired with growing government payrolls. For example, FSM
           taxes have consistently provided less than 25 percent of total
           government revenue; however, payroll expenditures have increased
           as a percentage of total government spending, from 38 percent in
           2000 to 45 percent in 2006.

           o The FSM development plan identifies fishing and tourism as key
           potential private sector growth industries. However, the two
           industries together provide only about 6 percent of employment.
           Further, according to economic experts, growth in these industries
           is limited by factors such as the FSM's geographic isolation, lack
           of tourism infrastructure, inadequate interisland shipping,
           limited pool of skilled labor, and growing danger of overfishing.

           o Although remittances from emigrants could provide increasing
           monetary support to the FSM, evidence suggests that FSM emigrants
           are currently limited in their income-earning opportunities
           abroad, owing to inadequate education and vocational skills.

           Although the FSM has undertaken some efforts aimed at economic
           policy reform, it has made limited progress in implementing key
           tax, public sector, land, and foreign investment reforms that are
           needed to improve its growth prospects. For example:

           o Tax reform. After several years of national policy dialogue to
           address a tax system that economic experts describe as inequitable
           and inefficient, the FSM established a tax reform executive
           steering committee in December 2005. The committee endorsed key
           elements of tax reform recommended by experts and the FSM's Tax
           Reform Task Force, such as a value-added tax (VAT), a net profit
           tax, and a unified tax authority. In April 2007, the committee
           endorsed a 3-year implementation plan. However, as of April 2008,
           legislation required for implementing these measures had not yet
           been passed.

           o Public sector reform. Although the FSM has endorsed public
           sector reform aimed at reducing wage and subsidy expenditures,
           limited progress has been made in addressing annual fiscal
           deficits, which amounted to about 5 percent of GDP in 2005 and
           2006. Slow progress in implementing public sector reforms,
           combined with a lower level of grant assistance, precipitated
           fiscal crises in Kosrae and Chuuk. Fiscal adjustment programs were
           subsequently created for the two states based on, among other
           things, reductions-in-force wage savings and increased state tax
           rates. Kosrae completed its adjustment program in 2007, but
           Chuuk's implementation of its program began only recently.14
           Moreover, all FSM governments continue to conduct a wide array of
           commercial enterprises that require subsidies.
           o Land reform. In attempts to modernize a complex land tenure
           system, the FSM has established land registration offices.
           However, these offices have lacked a systematic method for
           registering parcels, instead waiting for landowners to voluntarily
           initiate the process. Continued uncertainties over land ownership
           and land values create costly disputes, disincentives for
           investment, and problems regarding the use of land as an asset.

           o Foreign investment reform. Economic experts and private sector
           representatives describe the overall climate for foreign
           investment in the FSM as complex and nontransparent. Despite
           attempts to streamline the process, foreign investment regulations
           remain relatively burdensome, with reported administrative delays
           and difficulties in obtaining permits for foreign workers. Some
           FSM states also require a certain percentage of local ownership in
           foreign investment.

           Although the FSM development plan includes objectives for economic
           reform, JEMCO did not begin to address the country's slow progress
           in implementing these reforms until August 2006, 2 years into the
           amended compact. Further, while JEMCO recently approved some
           funding to support FSM efforts at public sector reform,15 key
           challenges to improving private sector growth remain.

           Although the FSM has allocated compact grants to the sectors
           targeted by the compact, immediate problems in some sectors
           persist, and several factors have hindered the FSM's use of the
           funds to meet long-term development goals. In addition,
           administrative deficiencies have limited the FSM's ability to
           account for its use of the grants for these long-term goals.
           Further, although OIA has monitored early compact activities,
           program implementation challenges have hampered its oversight.

           In 2004 through 2008, the FSM targeted compact grants largely
           according to compact priorities,16 allocating 35 percent of the
           funds for education, 27 percent for infrastructure, and 22 percent
           for health (see attachment V). However, the FSM has completed only
           three infrastructure projects, and more than $67 million of the
           $82.5 million (approximately 82 percent) allocated for
           infrastructure grants in 2004 through 2007 remains unspent. Lack
           of progress in this sector is owed to national and state
           disagreements over infrastructure priorities, problems associated
           with the project management unit, and Chuuk's inability to secure
           land leases.17 Unspent funds for other sector grants from 2004 to
           2007 amounts to an additional $14.9 million, or around 7 percent
           of funds allocated (see attachment VI).

           Additionally, numerous factors have limited the government's use
           of compact funds to meet long-term development needs. For example:

           o Lack of government consensus. Interior and State officials
           reported that the FSM's weak federal structure inhibits compact
           grant implementation. Because each state has its own constitution
           and authority over budgetary policies, the FSM central government,
           which is represented on JEMCO, does not control the majority of
           compact funds and has been unable to secure agreement from the
           state governments regarding the use of compact funds.

           o Lack of needs analysis. The allocation of FSM grants among its
           four states is not needs based and has resulted in significant
           differences in per capita funding, creating varying levels of
           government services across the states. 18 For example, in 2006,
           Yap state received approximately $1,963 in education funding per
           student, while Chuuk state received $626 per student. More
           recently, in 2007, the national government's share of grant
           funding increased from 8.65 percent to 10 percent and the
           allocation of compact funds to the four states decreased.

           o Lack of planning for declining U.S. assistance. A lack of viable
           plans to address the annual decrement in compact funding and the
           elimination of nonconforming uses of the public-sector capacity
           building (PSCB) grant could limit the FSM's ability to sustain
           current levels of government services.19 JEMCO required the FSM in
           2004 to develop a plan to eliminate funding for the nonconforming
           uses of the PSCB by 2009. While FSM officials indicated that they
           plan to replace the PSCB funds with local monies, recent tax
           revenues have largely stagnated and, in 2006, the FSM requested
           that the deadline for its elimination of nonconforming funding be
           extended to 2011. OIA indicated that the steps the FSM takes
           toward overall public sector reform will affect whether it
           recommends to JEMCO to approve this request.

           o Lack of accountability over compact funds. The FSM's
           accountability for its use of compact funds has been limited.
           Although the timeliness of the FSM's single audits has
           improved--in 2006, only Chuuk and the national government
           submitted audit reports after the deadlines--auditors have
           continued to find weaknesses with financial statements and lack of
           compliance with requirements of major federal programs. For
           example, the lack of audited financial statements for several
           subgrantees led the auditors to render qualified and disclaimed
           opinions.20

           The FSM has failed to consistently monitor day-to-day sector grant
           operations or report on progress.

           o Inadequate authority. The FSM's first effort to monitor and
           report on compact progress was through the Office of Compact
           Management (OCM), which lacked the authority and resources to
           carry out its function. In 2007, the FSM created a Statistics,
           Budget and Overseas Development Assistance and Compact Management
           (SBOC) office. According to OIA, the SBOC may have a role in
           conducting compact coordination, ensuring sector-by-sector
           compliance, and providing technical assistance to the states.
           Nonetheless, as of April 2008, SBOC had not addressed performance
           problems, such as missing reports and data, and had failed to hold
           the FSM governments accountable for not meeting JEMCO resolutions
           and grant requirements.
           o Data deficiencies. Although the FSM established performance
           measurement indicators, a lack of complete and reliable data
           prevents the use of these indicators to assess progress. For
           example, the FSM provided the first complete set of education
           indicators in 2007. However, OIA found that the data were not
           consistently reliable for monitoring scholastic improvements,
           owing to problems in establishing baselines and collecting data
           for all of the indicators. Likewise, determining performance in
           the health sector was difficult due to a lack of standardized data
           collection.

           o Report problems. The FSM continues to have difficulty in
           submitting its required annual report to the U.S. President on
           time. As of April 2008, the FSM had not begun work on the 2007
           annual report to the U.S. President, which was due in February
           2008, and it submitted the 2006 annual report 10 months late. The
           quarterly reports have also been regularly incomplete or
           inconsistent, preventing their use for monitoring progress. Most
           recently, OIA rejected the FSM's 2007 fourth quarter reports,
           stating that most of the submitted forms were completely blank or
           missing data.

           o Capacity constraints. The FSM has not allocated available
           compact resources to develop the capacity for, and to provide,
           regular monitoring of sector grants. As a result, the skills
           necessary to improve financial and programmatic reporting are
           lacking. For example, the FSM's single audit reports for 2005 and
           2006 showed that the FSM's ability to account for the use of
           compact funds was limited, as shown by weaknesses in its financial
           statements and lack of compliance with requirements of major
           federal programs. The FSM's Compact Fiscal Adjustment and
           Transition Plan, in August 2006, reiterated that capacity
           weaknesses continue, especially in the areas of financial
           management, economic planning, and statistics.

           OIA has carried out various duties as administrator of the amended
           compact grants but has not addressed the FSM's worsening
           compliance with compact reporting requirements, and several
           challenges continue to hamper its compact oversight. For example,
           in monitoring the sector grants, OIA determined that Chuuk, in
           2006, and Kosrae, in 2007, had each misused approximately $1
           million in compact funds through the commingling of compact and
           general funds. OIA required both states to repay the misused
           funds, a requirement met in 2007. However, OIA has generally
           failed to hold the FSM accountable for not submitting required
           reports, including 2006 and 2007 quarterly performance reports and
           the annual report to the U.S. President, and for not meeting
           requirements imposed as grant conditions by JEMCO. Additionally,
           OIA's oversight continues to be constrained by time-consuming
           demands associated with poor compact implementation. For example,
           because the FSM state and national government budgets are not
           presented in unified format or linked to performance measures, OIA
           reports that it has continued to spend an inordinate amount of
           time reviewing them for the JEMCO meetings.

           FSM trust fund balances in 2023 could vary widely owing to market
           volatility and choice of investment strategy, preventing trust
           fund disbursements in some years. Moreover, the FSM's ability to
           supplement its trust fund balance with additional contributions or
           other sources of income is uncertain and entails risks. Further,
           the FSM's trust fund committee has faced challenges in managing
           the fund's investment and has not evaluated the fund's adequacy as
           a source of future revenue.

           Market volatility and investment strategy could have a
           considerable impact on projected trust fund balances in 2023 (see
           attachment VII). Our analysis indicates that, under various
           scenarios, the FSM's trust fund could fall short of the maximum
           allowed disbursement level21--an amount equal to the
           inflation-adjusted compact grants in 2023--after compact grants
           end, with the probability of shortfalls increasing over time (see
           attachment VIII).22 For example, under a moderate investment
           strategy, the fund's income is about 30 percent likely to fall
           short of the maximum distribution by 2031; however, this
           probability rises to almost 70 percent by 2050. Additionally, our
           analysis indicates a positive probability that the fund will yield
           no disbursement in some years; under a moderate investment
           strategy, the probability is around 19 percent by 2050.

           FSM trust fund income could be supplemented by sources such as
           other donors, increased taxes, and securitization. However, this
           potential is uncertain.

           o Other donors. The trust fund agreement allows the FSM to seek
           funding from other donors; however, the FSM has not yet received
           other contributions.23

           o Increased taxes. The FSM's limited development prospects
           constrain its ability to raise tax revenues to supplement the
           fund's income.

           o Securitization. Securitization--issuing bonds against future
           U.S. contributions--could increase the fund's earning potential by
           raising its balances through bond sales. However, securitization
           could also lead to lower balances and reduced fund income if
           interest owed on the bonds exceeds investment returns. In October,
           2007, the committee contracted for a study of securitization.24

           The FSM trust fund committee has experienced management challenges
           in establishing the trust fund to maximize earnings and has not
           yet evaluated the fund's adequacy as a source of future revenue.
           Contributions to the trust fund were initially placed in a
           low-interest savings account and were not invested until 22 months
           after the initial contribution. The months when the fund remained
           in a low-interest account prior to investment likely reduced its
           potential investment earnings significantly; we estimate this loss
           at $720,000 per month, after taking into account stock market
           investment fees.25 As we reported in June 2007, contractual delays
           and committee processes for reaching consensus and obtaining
           administrative support contributed to the time taken to establish
           and invest funds. The committee has since hired an Executive
           Administrator in September 2007, and some steps were taken to
           improve committee processes; however, the Administrator reports
           that communication and administrative delays remain. Also, despite
           the likely impact of market volatility and investment strategy,
           the trust fund committee's reports have not yet assessed the
           fund's potential adequacy as a source of revenue for meeting the
           FSM's long-term economic goals.

           Since enactment of the amended compact, the U.S. and FSM
           governments have made efforts to meet new requirements for
           implementation, performance measurement, and oversight. However,
           after 5 years--one quarter of the amended compact's duration--the
           FSM faces significant challenges in working toward the compact
           goals of economic advancement and budgetary self-reliance. The FSM
           economy shows continued dependence on government spending of
           foreign assistance. However, despite the budgetary impact of
           declining annual grant assistance, the FSM has made little
           progress in implementing key reforms needed to improve tax income
           or increase private sector investment opportunities. The FSM has
           also been unable to utilize more than $67 million in
           infrastructure and almost $15 million in other sector grant
           monies. Moreover, persistent deficiencies in needs assessment,
           long-term planning, and financial accountability continue to
           hinder the U.S. and FSM governments and JEMCO from ensuring
           effective implementation of those grants that have been spent.
           Although OIA has carried out various duties as administrator of
           compact grants, U.S. and FSM monitoring of grant operations
           remains deficient owing to continued problems with oversight
           authority in the FSM, consistently poor data and reporting, and
           unaddressed capacity constraints. Further, the FSM trust fund
           committee has yet to assess the potential status of the trust fund
           as an ongoing source of revenue after compact grants end in 2023.
           Because the trust fund's earnings are intended as a main source of
           U.S. assistance to the FSM after compact grants end, the fund's
           potential inadequacy as a source of sustainable income in some
           years could impact the FSM's ability to provide future government
           services.

           To maximize the benefits of compact assistance, our prior
           reports26 include recommendations that the Secretary of the
           Interior direct the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Insular
           Affairs, as chair of the FSM management and trust fund committees,
           to take a number of actions, including the following:

           o ensure that JEMCO address the lack of FSM progress in
           implementing reforms to increase investment and tax income;
           o coordinate with other U.S. agencies on JEMCO to work with the
           FSM to establish plans to minimize the impact of declining
           assistance;
           o coordinate with other U.S. agencies on JEMCO to work with the
           FSM to fully develop a reliable mechanism for measuring progress
           toward compact goals; and
           o ensure the FSM trust fund committee's assessment and timely
           reporting of the fund's likely status as a source of revenue after
           2023.

           Interior generally concurred with our recommendations and has
           taken actions in response to several of them. However, unless the
           challenges we identified are addressed, the U.S. and FSM are
           unlikely to meet compact goals of the FSM's economic advancement
           and budgetary self-reliance.

           Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, this completes my
           prepared statement. I would be happy to respond to any questions
           you may have at this time.

           For future contacts regarding this testimony, please call David
           Gootnick at (202) 512-3149 or [24][email protected] . Individuals
           making key contributions to this testimony included Emil Friberg,
           Jr. (Assistant Director), Ming Chen, Julie Hirshen, Reid Lowe,
           Mary Moutsos, Kendall Schaefer, and Eddie Uyekawa.

           Compacts of Free Association: Trust Funds for Micronesia and the
           Marshall Islands May Not Provide Sustainable Income,
           [25]GAO-07-513  (Washington, D.C.: July 15, 2007).

           Compact of Free Association: Micronesia and the Marshall Island's
           Use of Sector Grants, [26]GAO-07-514R  (Washington, D.C.: May 25,
           2007).

           Compacts of Free Association: Micronesia and the Marshall Islands
           Face Challenges in Planning for Sustainability, Measuring
           Progress, and Ensuring Accountability, [27]GAO-07-163 
           (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 15, 2006).

           Compacts of Free Association: Development Prospects Remain Limited
           for the Micronesia and the Marshall Islands, [28]GAO-06-590 
           (Washington, D.C.: June 27, 2006).

           Compacts of Free Association: Implementation of New Funding and
           Accountability Requirements is Well Under Way, but Planning
           Challenges Remain, [29]GAO-05-633  (Washington, D.C.: July 11,
           2005).

           Compact of Free Association: Single Audits Demonstrate
           Accountability Problems over Compact Funds, [30]GAO-04-7
           (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 7, 2003).

           Compact of Free Association: An Assessment of the Amended Compacts
           and Related Agreements, [31]GAO-03-988T (Washington, D.C.: June
           18, 2003).

           Foreign Assistance: Effectiveness and Accountability Problems
           Common in U.S. Programs to Assist Two Micronesian Nations,
           [32]GAO-02-70 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 22, 2002.

           Foreign Relations: Migration From Micronesian Nations Has Had
           Significant Impact on Guam, Hawaii, and the Commonwealth of the
           Northern Mariana Islands, [33]GAO-02-40 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 5,
           2001).

           Foreign Assistance: U.S. funds to Two Micronesian Nations Had
           Little Impact on Economic Development, [34]GAO/NSIAD-00-216 
           (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 22, 2000).

           Source: Pub. L. No. 108-188.

           Notes:

           The annual grant amounts include $200,000 to be provided directly
           by the Secretary of the Interior to the Department of Homeland
           Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, for disaster and
           emergency assistance purposes. The grant amounts do not include
           the annual audit grant, capped at $500,000.

           These dollar amounts shall be adjusted each fiscal year for
           inflation by the percentage that equals two-thirds of the
           percentage change in the U.S. gross domestic product implicit
           price deflator, or 5 percent, whichever is less in any one year,
           using the beginning of 2004 as a base. Grant funding can be fully
           adjusted for inflation after 2014, under certain U.S. inflation
           conditions.

           Note: Compact grant assistance under the original compact
           decreased in 1991, 1996, and 2001 and increased in 2002 and 2003
           to equal an average of the funding provided during the previous 15
           years. Compact grant assistance under the amended compacts
           (2004-2024) decreases annually. U.S. contributions to the FSM's
           compact trust fund increase by the same amount as the grant
           decrement. Funding for compact-authorized federal services and
           trust fund contributions is not included.

           Notes: The chart depicts results from 1,000 trial runs. The change
           from one year to the next may not always be monotonic, but the
           general time trend is clear. As the number of trial runs increase,
           the time trend becomes smoother.

14Chuuk's debt levels currently amount to about $37 million, and the
anticipated time required to complete its adjustment program, including
the servicing of this debt, is 5 to 7 years. Chuuk's efforts to reduce its
public sector workforce are ongoing. Although Chuuk has reduced the work
week for certain public sector employees, the list of positions for
elimination has not yet been published.

Numerous Factors Hinder Use of Compact Funds to Advance FSM Development Goals

15In August 2007 and February 2008 respectively, JEMCO approved use of
public-sector capacity building grant funds to provide one-year's annual
salary as a buy-out to support public sector reforms in Kosrae and Chuuk.

16The priority for infrastructure spending was designated by a sense of
the U.S. Congress laid out in the Compact's enabling legislation.

17Additionally, only Pohnpei has contributed to the FSM infrastructure
maintenance fund. None of the other states have made their required
contribution to this fund and are therefore unable to use it.

18The FSM distributed overall compact funding among its four states
according to a formula established in an FSM law enacted in January 2005
and in force through 2006 that allotted a set percentage to each state and
the national government without fully accounting for states' differing
population sizes or funding needs. The states decide their own
distribution of funds between the sectors, from their allocation.

19The FSM has been using PSCB funds to support basic government
operations, rather than for the grant's intended purpose to support the
efforts of the FSM to develop internal expertise needed to build an
effective, accountable, and transparent government.

20A "qualified" opinion is given when the auditor finds conditions, such
as a lack of supporting evidence or a restriction on the scope of the
audit. An auditor issues a "disclaimer" of opinion when unable to perform
all of the procedures necessary to complete an audit, indicating the
reliability of the financial statements is not known. An "adverse" opinion
is given when the auditor concludes that the financial statements are not
fairly presented. Pohnpei and Kosrae states' reports for 2006 contained an
unqualified opinion on the financial statements. However, other reports
contained qualified, adverse, or disclaimed opinions.

FSM Trust Fund May Not Provide Sustainable Income after Compact Grants End

21The FSM trust fund agreement specifies that in 2024 and thereafter, the
FSM trust fund committee may disburse amounts up to the annual grant
assistance in 2023, fully adjusted for inflation, provided that this
amount is available.

22Our methodology for projecting the trust fund income is base on a
technique known as Monte Carlo simulation. We built a Monte Carlo
simulation model--based on the trust fund agreements, contributions to
date, and historical returns of the market--to project the trust fund's
likely income levels given market volatility as well as historical returns
of various asset classes, including large company stocks, treasury bills,
and international stocks from 1970 to 2005. See [35]GAO-07-513 .

23 In contrast, in May 2005, the RMI and Taiwan reached an agreement that
Taiwan will contribute a total of $40 million to the RMI's trust fund from
2004 to 2023.

24We previously reported that some members of the trust fund committee
believe that securitization could bring great financial benefits, as a
company that performs securitization had asserted in presentations to the
committee. Others raised concerns of whether the trust fund could pursue
securitization under the current amended compact and trust fund agreement
or whether amendments to the agreement would be required. See
[36]GAO-07-513 .

25From October 2004 through August 2006, the FSM trust fund--with an
October 2005 balance of approximately $80 million--earned about 3 percent
interest, compared with potential stock market earnings of about 15
percent. See [37]GAO-07-513 .

Concluding Remarks and Prior Recommendations

26 [38]GAO-05-633 , [39]GAO-06-590 , [40]GAO-07-163 , [41]GAO-07-513 ,
[42]GAO-07-514R .

Contacts and Acknowledgements

Attachment I: Related GAO Products

Attachment II: U.S. Assistance to the FSM under the Amended Compact,
2004-2023

(Dollars in millions)
Fiscal year FSM grants (Section 211) FSM trust fund (Section 215) 
2004                           $76.2                        $16.0 
2005                            76.2                         16.0 
2006                            76.2                         16.0 
2007                            75.4                         16.8 
2008                            74.6                         17.6 
2009                            73.8                         18.4 
2010                            73.0                         19.2 
2011                            72.2                         20.0 
2012                            71.4                         20.8 
2013                            70.6                         21.6 
2014                            69.8                         22.4 
2015                            69.0                         23.2 
2016                            68.2                         24.0 
2017                            67.4                         24.8 
2018                            66.6                         25.6 
2019                            65.8                         26.4 
2020                            65.0                         27.2 
2021                            64.2                         28.0 
2022                            63.4                         28.8 
2023                            62.6                         29.6 

Attachment III: Estimated FSM Per Capita Compact Grant Assistance, Fiscal
Years 1987-2023

Attachment IV: Amended Compact Implementation Framework

Attachment V: FSM Sector Grant Allocations, Fiscal Years 2004-2008

Attachment VI: FSM Unspent Compact Grants by Sector, Fiscal Years 2004 to
2007

Attachment VII: Projections of FSM Account Balance with Three Possible
Investment Strategies

Attachment VIII: Probability of FSM Trust Fund Income Not Reaching the
Maximum Disbursement Levels Allowed, Fiscal Years 2024-2050

This is a  work of the  U.S. government  and is not  subject to  copyright
protection in the United States.  The published product may be  reproduced
and distributed  in  its entirety  without  further permission  from  GAO.
However, because  this  work  may  contain  copyrighted  images  or  other
material, permission from  the copyright  holder may be  necessary if  you
wish to reproduce this material separately.

GAO's Mission

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site ( [43]www.gao.gov ). Each weekday, GAO posts
newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To
have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
[44]www.gao.gov and select "E-mail Updates."

Order by Mail or Phone

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to:

U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
DC 20548

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs

Contact:

Web site: [45]www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail:
[46][email protected] Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202)
512-7470

Congressional Relations

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, [47][email protected] , (202) 512-4400 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 Washington,
DC 20548

Public Affairs

Chuck Young, Managing Director, [48][email protected] , (202) 512-4800 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington,
DC 20548

References

Visible links
1. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_369
2. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_369
3. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_369
4. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_369
5. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_369
6. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_369
7. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_369
8. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_369
9. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_369
  10. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_933
  11. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_648
  12. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_643
  13. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_638
  14. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_633
  15. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_628
  16. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_623
  17. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_368
  18. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#None
  19. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#LinkTarget_333
  20. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO/NSIAD-00-216
  21. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-988T
  22. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-590
  23. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO/NSIAD-00-216
  24. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#mailto:[email protected]
  25. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-513
  26. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-514R
  27. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-163
  28. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-590
  29. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-633
  30. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-7
  31. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-988T
  32. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-02-70
  33. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-02-40
  34. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO/NSIAD-00-216
  35. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-513
  36. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-513
  37. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-513
  38. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-633
  39. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-590
  40. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-163
  41. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-513
  42. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-514R
  43. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/
  44. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/
  45. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
  46. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#mailto:[email protected]
  47. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#mailto:[email protected]
  48. file:///home/webmaster/infomgt/d08859t.htm#mailto:[email protected]
*** End of document. ***