oversight

United Nations: Observations on Reform Initiatives

Published by the Government Accountability Office on 1999-06-22.

Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)

                          United States General Accounting Office

GAO                       Testimony
                          Before the Committee on Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate




For Release on Delivery
Expected at
2:30 p.m., EDT
                          UNITED NATIONS
Tuesday,
June 22, 1999

                          Observations on Reform
                          Initiatives
                          Statement of Harold J. Johnson, Associate Director,
                          International Relations and Trade Issues, National Security
                          and International Affairs Division




GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
                     Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:

                     I am pleased to be here today to discuss the status of initiatives intended to
                     reform the United Nations. Reform, according to the U.N.
                     Secretary-General, means embracing fundamental measures that
                     strengthen the organization and its efficiency. Among these measures are
                     initiatives demanded by member states, such as increased accountability
                     and budget restraint. Other measures include initiatives the
                     Secretary-General announced in 1997.1 To help Congress assess what
                     progress has been made in reforming the United Nations, you asked us to
                     examine U.N. efforts intended to (1) unify and focus its organizational
                     structure; (2) control its budget and institute new budget procedures;
                     (3) improve oversight, program monitoring, and evaluation; and (4)
                     improve its human resources management. This testimony represents our
                     preliminary assessment. As requested, we will provide you a
                     comprehensive report later this year.

                     My testimony is based on publicly available U.N. documents as well as
                     documents available only to member delegations and our prior work on
                     U.N. activities, such as our recent report on procurement reform.2 We also
                     reviewed working files and records obtained from U.N. officials and
                     documents obtained from the Department of State and the U.S. Mission to
                     the United Nations. In addition, we held discussions with numerous U.N.
                     officials, including the Deputy Secretary General and several assistant
                     secretaries-general.

                     To provide context for my observations, I will first provide a brief
                     background on the conditions that led to the reform measures and
                     initiatives.



Background           For the past 25 years, U.N. member states and others have made attempts
                     to reform the United Nations, citing problems such as bureaucratic rigidity,
                     poor program performance, duplication and rivalry across its many
                     programs, and its high cost. A specific concern of member states,
                     particularly the major donors, was the constantly growing budget of the


                     1
                      Renewing the United Nations: A Programme for Reform , A/51/950 (New York, N.Y.: United Nations,
                     July 14, 1997); letter dated 17 March 1997 from the Secretary-General addressed to the President of the
                     General Assembly.
                     2
                      United Nations: Progress of Procurement Reform (GAO/NSIAD-99-71, Apr. 15, 1999).




             Leter   Page 1                                                                         GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
                  Secretariat and the seeming inability to restrain costs. Demands were
                  made that U.N. member states adopt procedures to control the budget, and,
                  in 1986, the U.N. General Assembly adopted consensus budgeting—a
                  process for reaching broad agreement without calling for a vote. The
                  United States supported this measure as a step toward ensuring that
                  sufficient attention would be paid to the views of the major contributors in
                  the development of the budget. Member states demanded other initiatives
                  to increase financial discipline, such as the adoption of results-based
                  budgeting and sunset provisions on new U.N. programs. In the early
                  1990s,the United States and other member states identified the lack of
                  effective internal oversight at the United Nations as a major problem. They
                  cited concerns about administrative waste and inefficiency. The
                  Secretariat itself identified a crisis in the U.N.’s procurement system that
                  raised serious concerns about financial controls. The U.N. Office of
                  Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) was created in 1994 in response to
                  concerns such as these. At the same time, member states also demanded
                  systems that could evaluate and monitor the relevance and effectiveness of
                  U.N. programs so they could decide which programs to retain.

                  In 1994, the Secretary-General reported that the U.N.’s management of
                  human resources was in crisis. The organization was faced with new
                  challenges, and its human resources management had failed to adequately
                  respond. Among the concerns of the Secretariat were a performance
                  appraisal system that did not rate staff fairly or consistently, the lack of a
                  code of conduct that clearly laid out staff rights and consequences for
                  misconduct, and the inability to plan its human resource needs.

                  These problems and the demands for change by member states culminated
                  in reform initiatives announced in 1997 by the Secretary-General.
                  According to the Secretary-General, the United Nations had become
                  fragmented, rigid, and, in some areas, irrelevant. The United Nations had
                  also created duplicative bodies, rather than instituting effective
                  management structures. To build a cohesive organization that acted with a
                  unity of purpose and deployed its resources strategically, the
                  Secretary-General incorporated many of the earlier demands for reform
                  into his initiatives, as well as other initiatives to restructure the United
                  Nations.



Summary           The Secretary General has said, and I agree, that reform is a process and
                  not an event. Based on our preliminary assessment, we believe that the
                  Secretary-General has undertaken a serious effort to reform the United



          Leter   Page 2                                                      GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
Nations to improve its relevance to member states and enhance its
operational efficiency. Although clear progress has been made in some
areas, the initiatives we examined have not been fully implemented.

Progress has been made in unifying and focusing the organizational
structure of the U.N. Secretariat, and the programs that are part of the
United Nations proper, to make the Secretariat a more cohesive
management unit. The Secretary-General appointed a deputy
secretary-general to function as the chief operating officer and to
strengthen internal coordination. A senior management group, composed
of the under secretaries-general and the heads of those programs that
report to the Secretary-General, was also created. This group meets
weekly to ensure U.N. actions are unified and focused on the same
objectives. In sharp contrast with the past, where under secretaries
operated with great autonomy, this new structure provides regular
opportunities to communicate, coordinate, and focus the work of U.N.
departments, offices, and programs on common objectives. While we
believe this new structure, now about 2 years old, is a positive move, the
proof of its success will be measured in the field, where programs are
actually implemented. Because we are still in the preliminary phase of our
evaluation, we have not yet tested the new structure’s actual impact on
improving program delivery and effectiveness. Also, I should add that this
new structure does not include the specialized agencies, such as the Food
and Agricultural Organization, the International Labor Organization, and
the World Health Organization, and consequently, the long-standing
concerns about overlap, duplication, and coordination within the U.N.
system as a whole are not being addressed by this organizational
restructuring.

While budgets have been level for the past two bienniums, our assessment
thus far indicates that no fundamental changes have been made to the
budgeting process to control the growth of the regular budget. The process
for developing budgets is largely unchanged, and, adopting regular budgets
by member state consensus does not assure control of budget growth, as
initially hoped. For example, in developing the budget for 2000-2001 the
United States and Japan, which provide over 45 percent of the U.N.’s
financial support, objected that the preliminary budget ceiling was set too
high. However, no vote was taken to record their dissent, and the measure
passed by consensus. Also, the largest donors do not have permanent
seats on the Advisory Committee on Budgetary and Administrative
Questions, where they could most effectively advocate budget restraint.
Moreover, although the Secretariat supports implementing results-based



Page 3                                                    GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
budgeting and sunset provisions, initiatives intended to bring more
discipline to the budgetary process, these measures have not been adopted.
Nonetheless, some progress has been made. The Secretariat has instituted
a program intended to cut costs and increase efficiencies. It has thus far
reported over $13 million in savings by introducing more than 600
efficiency projects.

An area where important improvements have been made is in the oversight
of U.N. programs and activities; however, even here the effort should not be
considered complete. Through the efforts of Congress, the executive
branch, and other U.N. member states, the U.N. Office of Internal Oversight
Services was created in 1994. As we reported to you in 1997, OIOS has
established itself as the internal oversight mechanism for the U.N.
Secretary-General3 and, based on our continuing work at the United
Nations, this office appears to have become an institutional part of the
United Nations. OIOS has clearly enhanced and strengthened the audit,
inspection, and investigations functions at the United Nations. However,
progress has been much slower in developing and implementing a
monitoring and evaluation system to measure and report on program
performance and effectiveness that would help member states make
program decisions.

To begin addressing what the U.N. Secretariat considered a crisis in its
human resources management, it recently introduced several initiatives
and adopted a strategy to carry them out. These initiatives include a new
performance appraisal system, adoption of a staff code of conduct, and
actions to begin human resources planning. However, these initiatives
have not yet been fully implemented, and some problems have developed
in their implementation. For example, after the new merit-based appraisal
system, introduced in 1996, was applied during the most recent rating
period, the Secretary-General asked three departments to revise the ratings
because they were too high and were out of line with the rest of the
Secretariat. Also, the code of conduct, adopted in December 1998, does not
provide the Secretariat with clear procedures for applying related
disciplinary measures for systematic management problems, negligence,
and gross negligence. Additionally, while the Secretariat has begun using
an automated database as the basis for its human resources planning, the
information system is unable to account for and track all staff working for
the U.N. Secretariat.


3
 United Nations: Status of Internal Oversight Services (GAO/NSIAD-97-59, Apr. 9. 1997).




Page 4                                                                        GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
                            With that brief summary, I would like to discuss each of these reforms in
                            greater detail.



Organizational              To begin unifying and focusing the United Nations, the Secretary-General
                            announced a major reorganization in 1997 and since that time, has taken
Restructuring               action to implement the changes. In particular,

                            • a deputy secretary-general was appointed to essentially perform the
                              functions of a chief operating officer and ensure coordinated U.N.
                              operations;
                            • a senior management group was established to set overall policy
                              direction;
                            • four executive committees were formed to implement the policies and
                              ensure that the actions were coordinated among the U.N. organizations;
                            • the U.N. Development Assistance Framework was implemented to
                              coordinate the U.N.’s development efforts in the field;
                            • various departments and offices were restructured and consolidated to
                              strengthen and focus the U.N.’s response to humanitarian emergencies;
                              and
                            • human rights activities were consolidated, and steps were taken to
                              strengthen human rights activities and integrate them into the overall
                              activities of the organization.


Deputy Secretary-General    As an integral part of building a cohesive and unified management
and the Senior Management   structure, the Secretary-General asked the General Assembly to approve
                            the position of deputy secretary-general, whose job would be to strengthen
Group
                            coordination, collaboration, and uniformity of focus in U.N. operations.
                            The General Assembly approved the position in December 1997, and the
                            Secretary-General appointed an experienced diplomat as Deputy
                            Secretary-General in January 1998. Since then, the Deputy
                            Secretary-General has worked on many of the day-to-day operational issues
                            to ensure that U.N. activities are unified. The Deputy Secretary-General
                            chairs the senior management group in the Secretary General’s absence
                            and has also worked on ensuring a consistent U.N. response to personnel
                            reforms and a coordinated approach to U.N. activities, such as in
                            Afghanistan.

                            The Secretary-General also established a senior management group,
                            composed of all the under secretaries-general and the heads of the U.N.
                            funds and programs, to provide unified and clear leadership for the


                            Page 5                                                    GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
                       organization. (See app. I for a list of the members of the senior
                       management group.) According to the Under Secretary-General for
                       Internal Oversight, through the leadership of this group, communication
                       and coordination among U.N. organizations has improved. The senior
                       management group meets weekly with the Secretary-General to discuss
                       U.N. operations and agree on unified actions and policy direction. Full
                       attendance almost always occurs (sometimes by videoconference) because
                       important decisions for the United Nations as a whole are made, and the
                       senior managers all have a stake in these decisions. Previously, the heads
                       of the funds and programs and other senior managers had no regular
                       mechanism to coordinate overall U.N. activities; some met with each other
                       only once a year at the General Assembly.

                       According to the Deputy Secretary-General, the senior management group
                       discusses all major issues affecting the United Nations and agrees on a
                       common strategy for them. For example, decisions such as how the United
                       Nations would develop a unified response to the crisis in Kosovo and how
                       to implement personnel reforms consistently across the organization have
                       been discussed and agreed upon. In deciding on its responses to the
                       unfolding events in Kosovo, the High Commissioner for Refugees regularly
                       reports to the group and describes her field visits. Since the Emergency
                       Relief Coordinator is also one of the group’s members, a unified U.N.
                       response has been planned. As such, it was has been agreed that the High
                       Commissioner’s office will lead the U.N.’s immediate response to the
                       humanitarian crisis in Kosovo with help from the Emergency Relief
                       Coordinator. According to the Deputy Secretary-General, the work of the
                       executive committees provides a good indicator of how well the senior
                       management group is working because the executive committees plan and
                       implement programs in accord with the direction set by the senior
                       management group.


Executive Committees   Four new executive committees—(1) peace and security, (2) humanitarian
                       affairs, (3) economic and social affairs, and (4) development operations—
                       were established to plan and implement focused and unified U.N. action as
                       agreed to by the senior management group. The Secretary-General placed
                       U.N. departments, offices, and the programs and funds into appropriate
                       groups; named a convenor of each committee from the senior management
                       group; and expected the committees to coordinate, plan, and implement
                       U.N. activities as teams. (App. II compares the U.N. organization before and
                       after these reforms.) According to senior U.N. officials, the concept of the
                       senior management group and executive committees grew out of



                       Page 6                                                    GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
                       recognition that the U.N. system was too vertical, with each organization
                       operating in a stovepipe fashion, reporting only to the Secretary-General
                       and, in some cases, their governing committees. There was also frustration
                       that some programs, with their own sources of funding, did not consider
                       systemwide U.N. programming a priority.

                       All executive committees have been meeting regularly since late 1997. For
                       example, as of April 1999, the economic and social affairs committee had
                       met formally 15 times. According to members of these committees, the
                       under secretaries-general and heads of offices frequently attend the
                       meetings because they all have a stake in shaping overall U.N.
                       programming in their areas. Some examples of the committees’ work
                       include the following:

                       • The Executive Committee for Peace and Security developed a unified
                         plan for the referendum in East Timor, involving the Departments of
                         Peacekeeping Operations and Political Affairs, the Human Rights
                         Coordinator, and other committee members.
                       • The Executive Committee for Humanitarian Affairs developed a unified
                         U.N. response to Hurricane Mitch and negotiated U.N. access to areas
                         controlled by the Union for the Total Independence of Angola, on behalf
                         of all committee members including the High Commissioner for
                         Refugees, the U.N. Development Program, and the U.N. Children’s Fund.
                       • The Executive Committee for Economic and Social Affairs developed an
                         online statistical database of all activities undertaken by 12 of its
                         members, which can sort the activities by issue, type of activity (such as
                         a conference or publication), location, and date.
                       • The Executive Committee for Development Operations has begun
                         implementing the U.N. Development Assistance Framework after
                         completing pilot tests in 18 countries. (The framework is more fully
                         described below.)


U.N. Development       To better coordinate the efforts of U.N. organizations and build an
Assistance Framework   integrated program for its development activities, the United Nations is
                       implementing the U.N. Development Assistance Framework in countries
                       where it provides assistance. One view of the framework is that it
                       translates a country's need for development assistance into a coordinated
                       operational plan of action among U.N. agencies. The framework document
                       is prepared jointly by a team composed of all U.N. organizations in a
                       country. The team agrees upon and specifies U.N. objectives; strategies of
                       cooperation; projects to be undertaken; and proposals for follow-up,



                       Page 7                                                    GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
monitoring, and evaluation. In August 1997, a pilot phase was initiated to
test the framework in 18 countries. In May 1998, an assessment of the pilot
phase was started, with all the principal framework organizations in
attendance. In April 1999, the United Nations approved the guidelines for
preparing and implementing the framework, and the General Assembly
passed a resolution recognizing the move to full implementation.4 As of
April 1999, final frameworks had been completed in 11 countries, with
6 frameworks co-signed by the World Bank.5

While progress has been made in implementing the framework, the critical
question is whether participating U.N. organizations will work together. At
the assessment workshop in September 1998, it was noted that a cultural
change is required for the framework to succeed. This necessitates
commitment at all levels of the U.N. system. The experience in Guatemala
illustrates the issue. Seventeen U.N. system organizations have activities in
Guatemala, with a portfolio of about $400 million and a total staff of about
800 local and international workers. The U.N. organizations and the World
Bank participated in developing the framework and identifying priority
objectives with the Guatemalan government. A shared information
database with indicators was also developed, and lead agencies were given
specific tasks. However, according to the U.N. country team’s report to the
U.N. Economic and Social Council, the headquarters of each U.N. agency
set the tone for cooperation. The message from headquarters to the field
was that individual agency results were more important than overall U.N.
system results. Our own reports have found similar problems in U.N.
cooperation. Our 1998 evaluation of the Joint U.N. Program on the Human
Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome found that
U.N. agencies in the field had difficulty working together and coordinating
their activities.6 Concerns about a joint program led to lack of commitment
to working together on the part of some agency officials.




4
 Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly, A/RES/53/192 (New York, N.Y.: United Nations, Feb. 25,
1999).
5
 The World Bank has introduced the Comprehensive Development Framework to involve all aid donors
in planning assistance activities within a country. The U.N. Development Assistance Framework and
the Bank’s Comprehensive Development Framework are intended to be complementary.
6
  HIV/AIDS: USAID and U.N. Response to the Epidemic in the Developing World (GAO/NSIAD-98-202,
July 27, 1998).




Page 8                                                                      GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
Restructuring Humanitarian   In March 1998, the United Nations began reorganizing Secretariat units to
Affairs                      launch coherent and coordinated humanitarian operations. The
                             Department of Humanitarian Affairs was dissolved and replaced with the
                             Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, headed by the
                             Emergency Relief Coordinator. The office’s role was narrowed to focus on
                             three core functions: (1) policy planning and development, (2) advocacy
                             (including fund-raising), and (3) coordination of humanitarian emergency
                             response. Other emergency-related activities were redistributed within the
                             U.N. system. For example, demining activities were transferred to the
                             Department of Peacekeeping Operations, and demobilization of
                             combatants was transferred to the U.N. Development Program. In
                             addition, the Office of the Emergency Relief Coordinator was reorganized
                             and its staff was reduced from 250 to 137 professionals. According to a
                             Department of State official, this change represented the most visible and
                             positive indication of reform, as the previous directorate was overstaffed
                             and lacked leadership.

                             As part of the restructuring of humanitarian affairs, the United Nations
                             initiated the Strategic Framework concept. The framework is intended to
                             unify the actions of U.N. agencies in countries that are in conflict or have
                             just completed peace agreements. To date, the Strategic Framework has
                             been employed only in Afghanistan, but the United Nations plans to utilize
                             the approach in Sierra Leone. According to Department of State officials,
                             the Strategic Framework faces challenges of coordination similar to the
                             U.N. Development Assistance Framework. A U.N. report on the experience
                             in Afghanistan has not been completed.


Human Rights                 In his reform proposals, the Secretary-General committed to strengthening
                             the U.N.’s human rights programs and fully integrating them into the
                             organization’s activities. As a first step, representatives from the High
                             Commissioner for Human Rights were placed on all four executive
                             committees. According to a senior official in the New York Human Rights
                             Office, the High Commissioner has taken advantage of this opportunity and
                             made human rights activities a part of all programs. For example, the High
                             Commissioner provided input into the formulation of guidelines for the
                             development assistance framework. Human rights activities are now a
                             component of each framework and are included in country programs such
                             as Guatemala, Malawi, and Mozambique in the form of specific training and
                             outreach programs on human rights. According to U.N. officials, the
                             elevation of human rights as an issue and its inclusion into these programs
                             represents a marked change from less than 2 years ago.


                             Page 9                                                    GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
                     The United Nations has taken other steps to strengthen human rights
                     activities, such as

                     • consolidating the Center for Human Rights into the Office of the High
                       Commissioner for Human Rights and restructuring the Office by
                       reducing the number of divisions from five to three,
                     • upgrading the head of the High Commissioner’s office in New York to
                       the level of director and adding five staff,
                     • conducting an analysis of technical assistance related to human rights
                       provided by U.N. agencies in order to formulate proposals for their
                       improvement, and
                     • working to establish a human rights data bank to disseminate
                       information and analysis.

                     Despite the gains made in reforming the U.N.’s human rights program,
                     challenges persist. For example, including human rights as a basic
                     consideration in U.N. activities is not supported by all countries.
                     According to a Department of State official, human rights issues are highly
                     political for member states, and U.N. agency officials are often hesitant to
                     raise these issues with member governments out of fear of jeopardizing
                     their access in the country and damaging their particular program.
                     Reforms related to increasing the efficiency of the human rights entities
                     have also not progressed. According to State Department officials, the
                     High Commissioner has not reduced the duplication and overlap in human
                     rights reporting by the 11 treaty bodies and 37 Special Rapporteurs because
                     member states control the requirements and have not agreed to changes.7



Budget Control and   Although the United Nations has maintained level budgets for the past two
                     bienniums, our preliminary assessment indicates that no fundamental
Results-Based        changes have been made to the budgeting process to control the growth of
Budgeting            the regular budget—an area of long-standing concern of your Committee.
                     Under procedures adopted by the General Assembly in 1986, the U.N.’s


                     7
                      Several U.N. human rights treaties, aimed at providing increased protection to vulnerable groups, have
                     been adopted and come into force upon ratification by the requisite number of States parties, such as
                     the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1965) and the
                     Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984).
                     The implementation of these core human rights treaties is monitored by committees, or “treaty
                     monitoring bodies.” The Commission on Human Rights and the Economic and Social Council have
                     established a number of extra-conventional procedures and mechanisms that have been entrusted to
                     Special Rapporteurs or experts. Their mandates are to examine, monitor, and publicly report on human
                     rights situations in specific countries or on major human rights violations worldwide.




                     Page 10                                                                        GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
regular budget is approved by consensus.8 Under consensus budgeting, the
Secretary-General submits to the General Assembly a budget outline that
contains a preliminary estimate of funding requirements. The Advisory
Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions reviews the
proposed funding requirements. A larger administrative committee, the
Fifth Committee, then tries to obtain the broadest possible agreement
among members in approving a level for the Secretary-General to use in
preparing the budget.

The process does not appear to have assured that the views of the major
donors have been sufficiently considered thus far in formulating the
2000-2001 budget. In 1998, the General Assembly approved a preliminary
budgeting level equivalent to $2.655 billion for the 2000-2001 biennium, in
comparison to the estimated $2.527 billion for 1998-99 budget. Any
member state can request a vote in the General Assembly if it dissents, thus
breaking the consensus on the preliminary level.9 The United States and
Japan, which together pay about 45 percent of the regular budget, did not
agree. However, neither member requested a vote. Consequently, the level
was formally approved by consensus, even though the two largest donors
dissented. State officials predicted that the actual budget—developed later
in the year—would be lower than the preliminary estimate. State officials
said they would consider requesting a vote if the final budget level was
considered to be too high.

Another aspect of controlling the level of the budget involves the work of
the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions.
Although the advisory committee plays a crucial role in determining the
regular budget level, member states that pay the largest share of the budget
do not have permanent seats on the committee. For example, the United
States, Japan, Germany, France, and Italy combined are assessed about
67 percent of the regular budget, but none has a permanent seat on this key
financial committee.10 The committee’s role is to review the budgets and
finances of the United Nations and make recommendations to the General


8
Review of the Efficiency of the Administrative and Financial Functioning of the United Nations, GA
Res. 41/213 (New York, N.Y.: United Nations Dec. 19, 1986).
9
 Rules and Procedures of the General Assembly (A/520/Rev.15) (New York, N.Y.; United Nations, Dec.
31, 1984)
10
   France, Italy, and Japan are current members of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and
Budgetary Questions. The 16 members of the committee are elected by the General Assembly and serve
3 year terms. The rules of procedure of the Committee are confidential.




Page 11                                                                      GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
Assembly on budget levels and other financial issues. According to State
Department officials, the committee is particularly influential because its
members have the most knowledge of and expertise about the U.N. budget
process.

You requested that we examine whether the regular U.N. budget for 1998-99
will have zero nominal growth. At this point, it is uncertain whether there
will be zero nominal growth in the 1998-99 budget compared to the prior
biennium, although the Secretariat estimates that the final budget amount
for 1998-99 will be lower than the final amount for 1996-97. However, the
uncertainty comes about because in comparing budgets, the amount for
1998-99 needs to be adjusted to reflect new accounting procedures used in
determining the budget levels.11 To make a valid comparison with the
1996-97 biennium, the costs of jointly funded activities would need to be
included in the 1998-99 budget.

Another indicator of budget restraint is holding spending to the level
initially approved. For the 1996-97 biennium, U.N. budget expenditures
were about $61 million less than the initially approved budget. However,
expenditures were lower than forecast because the strong U.S. dollar
resulted in currency exchange gains of about $49 million and the United
Nations hired fewer staff than it had budgeted for, saving an additional
$34 million. Some savings were used to pay for the costs for special
political missions, such as the mission in Guatemala.12 The United Nations
will likely maintain a budget level at or below the approved level for the
1998-99 biennium. The United Nations estimates that it will spend about
$6 million less than the initially approved budget. However, savings of
more than $56 million from a strong U.S. dollar, lower-than-expected staff
costs, and a lower-than-expected inflation rate are expected to provide the
Secretariat a cushion.13




11
   Under the accounting change adopted in 1998-99, net budgeting is used. Member states are assessed
only their share of costs payable for jointly funded activities. Programme Budget for the Biennium
1998-1999, First Performance Report, A/53/693 (New York, N.Y.: United Nations, Nov. 23, 1998).
12
 Programme Budget for the Biennium 1996-1997, Second Performance Report, A/C.5/52/32 (New York,
N.Y.: United Nations, Dec. 11, 1997).
13
   The Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions has considered ways to stabilize
the budget from currency fluctuations, neither creating a windfall when the dollar is strong nor a deficit
when the dollar is weak. To accomplish this, a separate account needed to be established, and this
action was not supported by member states.




Page 12                                                                          GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
Results-based Budgeting   The Secretary General recommended a shift to performance, or
and Sunset Provisions     results-based budgeting, to focus the organization more on accountability
                          for achieving results rather than completing tasks. Although strongly
                          supported by the United States and other major donors, this measure was
                          not adopted because some members, mainly developing countries, did not
                          support it. Results-based budgeting requires program managers to identify
                          indicators for judging the substantive impact of their programs and justify
                          their programs’ effectiveness based on these results. According to senior
                          U.N. and U.S. officials, implementing this system would require “a major
                          cultural shift” among members and U.N. managers and a valid system for
                          evaluating program effectiveness. At the General Assembly’s request, the
                          Secretary-General has produced several reports in support of this
                          initiative14 and provided prototypes of a results-based budget for sections
                          of the Secretariat.15 Although the General Assembly has considered these
                          reports, it has not adopted the initiative.

                          The Secretary-General’s initiatives also called for new program mandates
                          to include specific time limits, or “sunset” provisions. Sunset provisions
                          would require the General Assembly to renew programs periodically, based
                          on an evaluation of their effectiveness. As with results-based budgeting,
                          this initiative was supported by the United States and other major donors,
                          but some member states, particularly developing countries, did not support
                          it. Many of these members are reluctant to approve an initiative that they
                          perceive could threaten the continuation of programs they deem important.


Initiatives to Reduce     As part of the overall effort to improve U.N. operations, the
Overhead Costs            Secretary-General proposed to reduce overhead costs from 38 percent of
                          the U.N. regular budget to 25 percent and set a savings goal of $200 million.
                          These savings would be placed in a development account. Projects to
                          eliminate duplication and waste were to generate these savings. The
                          Secretariat has initiated over 600 such projects, some of which have
                          resulted in considerable savings. The Secretariat has not released an
                          estimate of the total savings generated by efficiency projects, but officials
                          believe the goal of saving $200 million is optimistic. Thus far, the



                          14
                             See, for example, Report of the Secretary General: Addendum Results-based Budgeting, A/51/950/Add.
                          6 (New York, N.Y.: United Nations, Nov. 12, 1997).
                          15
                           United Nations Reform: Measures and Proposals, A/53/500/Add. 1 (New York, N.Y.: United Nations,
                          Oct. 15, 1998).




                          Page 13                                                                      GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
                         Secretariat reports that $13 million from these projects, primarily from
                         consolidation of services and departments, has been put into a
                         development account. Examples of some efficiency projects undertaken
                         with estimated savings are

                         • abolishing the High-level Board on Sustainable Development, which
                           saved an estimated 362,000;
                         • shifting from subsidizing food services to a profit-sharing arrangement
                           with contractors, which generates at least $500,000 in income annually;
                         • chartering air service for police monitors rather than purchasing
                           individual tickets, which saved an estimated $1 million in 1997; and
                         • consolidating mainframe computer operations, which saves an
                           estimated $1.2 million annually.



Oversight, Monitoring,   At the insistence of member states, the United Nations took steps to
                         improve internal oversight of its programs by establishing OIOS. Since
and Evaluation           then, the United Nations has improved oversight, and accountability is
                         being taken more seriously. For example, in 1997, we reported to you that
                         OIOS had resolved its start-up and operational problems in an
                         organizational environment that had previously operated without effective
                         internal oversight mechanisms for almost half a century.16 We noted,
                         however, that OIOS is not required to and does not submit all reports to the
                         Secretary-General and the General Assembly, and we suggested that it
                         clarify its criteria for which reports it will submit. In response, the Under
                         Secretary-General for Internal Oversight said he would publish the titles of
                         all reports in the annual report. Since then, he has done so. As of April
                         1999, OIOS had completed 64 reports that were available to all member
                         states. Some have been hard-hitting reports. One found serious
                         deficiencies, improprieties, and weaknesses in management control in the
                         U.N. operation in Angola that may have fostered fraud and financial
                         abuse.17 Another report found that a senior U.N. official had used his
                         position to commit 59 separate instances of fraud to steal large amounts of
                         the organization’s project funds, without triggering internal alarms.18 As of


                         16
                           United Nations: Status of Internal Oversight Services .
                         17
                          Report of the Secretary-General on the Activities of the Office of Internal Oversight Services: Note by
                         the Secretary-General, A/52/881 (New York, N.Y.: United Nations, Apr. 28, 1998).
                         18
                          Allegations of Theft of Funds by a United Nations Conference on Trade and Development Staff
                         Member: Note by the Secretary-General, A/5381 (New York, N.Y.: United Nations, Jan. 28, 1999).




                         Page 14                                                                         GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
             June 1998, OIOS had issued 4,042 recommendations for management
             improvement or action to address misconduct. The Secretariat had
             implemented 73 percent of these recommendations, according to OIOS
             records. We have not analyzed the recommendations or the actions taken
             to implement them.

             An indication that oversight and accountability are being taken more
             seriously is the consistent number of waste, fraud, and abuse reports made
             to OIOS’ investigations section. Between 1994, when OIOS was
             established, and December 1998, the investigations section received
             846 reports. In 1994, it received 110 reports and since then has received at
             least 165 reports a year. According to the head of OIOS’ investigations unit,
             595 investigations have been completed, and action has been taken on
             every report in which a corrective personnel measure or disciplinary action
             was recommended. Also, unit managers have increasingly asked OIOS to
             conduct investigations within their units because they know they have a
             problem and need advice on how to deal with it, according to the Under
             Secretary-General for OIOS.


Monitoring   An adequate system of monitoring program performance is essential in
             ensuring greater accountability. However, not much progress has been
             made in improving the Secretariat’s system for monitoring programs.
             Although many U.N. offices and departments now provide on-line data
             about program outputs, such as the number of conferences held, member
             states find this data to be of limited value because it does not indicate
             whether the program is accomplishing its mandate. For example, the
             performance report on crime control states that 78 programs on planning,
             crime prevention, and collaborative effort have been implemented. The
             narrative explains that an implementation rate of 77 percent was achieved,
             including over 70 advisory missions to member states. However, there are
             no indicators or assessment of what was achieved in planning and crime
             prevention or on these advisory missions or how they helped the
             beneficiaries. For years, the U.N. Committee for Programme and
             Coordination has recognized the limitations of this system and has
             recommended improvements. In 1998, the Committee concluded there was
             a need to monitor and evaluate the quality of performance and
             recommended that the Secretary-General propose ways in which the




             Page 15                                                    GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
             quality of mandated programs and activities could be better assessed and
             reported to member states.19


Evaluation   Currently, the United Nations does not have an adequate system for
             evaluating the effectiveness of its programs, including a standard
             methodology that uses performance indicators and would support
             results-based budgeting. Although many U.N. departments and offices
             have their own evaluation units and they conduct various types of
             evaluations, ranging from efficiency reviews to self-evaluations to lessons
             learned, they do not have standard methodology guidelines or criteria.20
             According to the Director of OIOS’ Central Evaluation Unit, evaluation
             guidelines on methodology are being drafted but do not focus on program
             effectiveness.21 Evaluation emphasis is moving away from determining
             program effectiveness in meeting goals and objectives to management and
             problem-solving reviews, according to this official.22

             Despite the emphasis on broad-based management reviews, developing an
             adequate system for determining program effectiveness is important for
             member states. The U.N. Committee for Programme and Coordination
             recently stressed that evaluation should be based on standards that enable
             member states to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the program. It
             further stressed that evaluation standards and analysis should utilize
             performance indicators.23 According to the Under Secretary-General for
             OIOS and other U.N. officials, the United Nations still has a long way to go
             in developing a framework to evaluate the effectiveness of its programs.
             The Secretary-General also agreed that evaluations of U.N. programs have


             19
                Report of the Committee for Programme and Coordination on the first part of its thirty-eighth session,
             A/53/16, part 1 (New York, N.Y.: United Nations, Jul. 8, 1998); Report of the Secretary-General:
             Methodology for Monitoring and Reporting the Programme Performance of the United Nations,
             A/46/173 (New York, N.Y.: United Nations, May 14, 1991).
             20
              Strengthening the Role of Evaluation Findings in Programme Design, Delivery and Policy Directives,
             A/53/90 (New York, N.Y.: United Nations, Mar. 25, 1998).
             21
                Existing U.N. monitoring and evaluation guidelines do not provide methodologic guidance but state
             that each major activity should be the subject of a critical assessment every 4 years that examines both
             the efficiency of the activity and its effectiveness. The guidelines also note that findings should be
             based on evidence, including records of opinions of independent experts and the views of clients and
             users.
             22
              Strengthening the Role of Evaluation Findings in Programe Design, Delivery and Policy Directives,
             A/49/99 (New York, N.Y.: United Nations, Mar. 23, 1994).
             23
               Report of the Committee for Programme and Coordination on the work of its thirty-eighth session.




             Page 16                                                                          GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
                  been primarily management oriented and have not addressed the question
                  of the continuing validity of the programs themselves.24



Human Resources   The Secretariat has begun to reform its human resources management,
                  introducing initiatives such as a new merit-based staff appraisal system and
Management        a code of conduct and beginning to plan for its human resources needs.
                  The Secretariat also developed a comprehensive plan for reforming its
                  management of human resources and laid out a strategy for implementing
                  it.25 According to U.N. officials, the success of their plan will require the
                  full cooperation of managers and staff and the support of member states.
                  Currently, however, the initiatives we examined have not been fully
                  implemented, and there have been problems in carrying them out.

                  For example, for the year 1996, the United Nations introduced a
                  merit-based performance appraisal system. The appraisal requires the
                  rater and the ratee to agree on goals that the ratee will achieve during the
                  rating period and to specify measurable criteria or indicators of success in
                  reaching these goals. The ratee is rated on a 5-point scale, ranging from
                  “does not meet performance expectations” to “consistently exceeds
                  performance expectations.” The guidelines state that the rating system is
                  not intended to impose a mandatory bell curve. However, the guidelines
                  also state that when staff are honestly and appropriately appraised, about
                  5 percent will have the highest and lowest rating.

                  The Secretariat used its performance appraisal system for a third time in
                  its 1998 annual assessment cycle. About 8,000 of the 14,000 staff directly
                  supervised under U.N. authority were covered by the appraisal system,
                  according to U.N. human resources officials. Out of the 8,000 staff
                  participating in the 1998 appraisal cycle, U.N. officials stated that fewer
                  than 10 individuals had received the bottom rating, the consequences of
                  which could be dismissal for poor performance. Three departments were
                  judged to have inflated ratings, and the Secretary-General sent letters to
                  the managers of these departments, telling them to ensure the ratings were
                  consistent with the rest of the Secretariat. The Secretariat did not provide




                  24
                    Report of the Secretary-General on the Activities of the Office of Internal Oversight Services.
                  25
                     Human Resources Management Reform: Report of the Secretary-General, A/53/414 (New York, N.Y.:
                  United Nations, Oct. 13, 1998).




                  Page 17                                                                          GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
                          us with summary statistics for the 1998 performance appraisal cycle,
                          stating that the results are under review.

                          One problem with the current performance appraisal system is that
                          organizational skills are not clearly defined and benchmarks for
                          determining performance on those skills are lacking. In October 1998, the
                          Secretary-General reported that a statement of core and managerial
                          competencies was still under development and that it would become a base
                          for building other human resource systems, including performance
                          appraisals.26


Code of Conduct and       In December 1998, the United Nations issued a code of conduct for its
Disciplinary Procedures   employees: Status, Basic Rights and Duties of United Nations Staff
                          Members. The United Nations used the new code to clarify the
                          applicability of the U.N. regulations and rules to all staff under the
                          Secretary-General’s authority, including the funds and programs. The code
                          established systemwide guidelines for conduct rooted in the U.N. charter.
                          The code stated that the paramount considerations for staff employees are
                          competence, efficiency, and integrity. Accountability is also of primary
                          concern. For example, the code has conflict-of-interest provisions such as
                          that staff members shall not be actively associated with the management of
                          or hold a financial interest in any profit-making, business, or concern, if
                          the staff member or the profit-making business or other concern might
                          benefit from such association because of the staff member’s position with
                          the United Nations. Staff members at the Assistant Secretary-General level
                          and above are also required to file financial disclosure statements. In
                          another section of the code, staff are obligated to respond fully to requests
                          for information from officials of the United Nations authorized to
                          investigate possible misuse of funds, waste, or abuse. Finally, the code
                          makes it clear that failure to comply with the code’s obligations and the
                          U.N.’s standards of conduct will subject a staff member to disciplinary
                          procedures.

                          Although the United Nations has adopted a code of conduct, member states
                          have questioned the Secretariat's ability to follow up and discipline staff for
                          misconduct. Concern about actions such as this have been an issue



                          26
                             Performance Management: Report of the Secretary-General, A/53/266 (New York, N.Y.: United Nations,
                          Aug. 14, 1998).




                          Page 18                                                                      GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
                           for years.27 Recently, the U.N. General Assembly requested the
                           Secretary-General to submit to it a report on the follow-up of management
                           irregularities that caused financial losses to the organization. The
                           Secretary-General submitted his report to the General Assembly in March
                           1999,28 but the General Assembly considered it incomplete. It did not
                           explain what had been done since 1994 to develop procedures to deal with
                           cases of fraud and other actions causing financial losses to the
                           organization.29

                           The Secretariat does have procedures for dealing with fraud, including
                           summary dismissal. However, according to the Assistant
                           Secretary-General for Human Resources, the Secretariat does not have
                           clear procedures or policies for dealing with cases such as systematic
                           management problems, negligence, and generally poor performance. Its
                           record on taking action against individuals falling into these categories has
                           been inconsistent. Commenting generally on the situation, an official in the
                           Human Resources section said the Secretariat recognizes it has a problem
                           in this area and is now acting to address it.


Human Resources Planning   As part of its reform measures, the United Nations has committed to
                           long-range human resources planning so it can place the right staff in the
                           right place at the right time. As part of this effort, it has been developing an
                           automated database that would account for and track staff employed
                           worldwide. The automated database is the U.N.’s Information
                           Management System (IMIS), which uses satellite relays to link field offices
                           with headquarters. The IMIS database contains basic management
                           information, such as data on employees, including position, years of
                           service, specialization, and payroll information. However, IMIS is not yet




                           27
                            Alleged Cases of Fraud in the United Nations: Study of the Possibility of the Establishment of a New
                           Jurisdictional and Procedural Mechanism or of the Extension of Mandates and Improvement of the
                           Functioning of Existing Jurisdictional and Procedural Mechanisms, A/AC.243/1994/L.3 (New York, N.Y.:
                           United Nations, Apr. 4, 1994).
                           28
                              Management Irregularities Causing Financial Losses to the Organization, A/53/849 (New York, N.Y:
                           United Nations, Mar. 3, 1999).
                           29
                            Management Irregularities Causing Financial Losses to the Organization: Report of the Advisory
                           Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions, A/53/954 (New York, N.Y.: United Nations, May
                           11, 1999).




                           Page 19                                                                       GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
                  functioning worldwide.30 According to U.N. officials, they still have to
                  contact individual field offices and posts to get the number of various
                  employees and manually incorporate them into the database at
                  headquarters.

                  Also, as part of the U.N. reform initiatives, the Secretary-General set a goal
                  of reducing 1,000 posts paid for under the regular budget. Based on a
                  comparison of the number of posts authorized in the 1996-97 and 1998-99
                  biennium budgets, 954 posts have been eliminated. The number of posts
                  has been reduced from 10,012 to 9,058. According to Secretariat officials,
                  no staff were let go as a result of the reduction. As staff retired or
                  voluntarily left the organization, their posts became vacant, and many of
                  these posts were eliminated. As you requested, we provide additional
                  information in appendix III about the number of staff hired by the U.N.
                  system.


                  Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, this completes my prepared
                  statement. I will be happy to respond to any questions you may have.



Contact and       For future contacts regarding this testimony, please contact Harold J.
                  Johnson at (202) 512-4130. Individuals making key contributions to this
Acknowledgments   testimony included Tet Miyabara, Richard Boudreau, Pat Dickriede, Mike
                  Rohrback, Mark Speight, Richard Seldin, and Rona Mendelsohn.




                  30
                   Report of the Office of Internal Oversight Services on the Increase in Costs of the Integrated
                  Management Information System Development Contract: Note by the Secretary-General, A/53/829
                  (New York, N.Y.: United Nations, Feb. 16, 1999).




                  Page 20                                                                      GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
Page 21   GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
Appendix I

Members of the U.N. Senior Management
Group                                                                                  AppIex
                                                                                            ndi




              Secretary-General
              Deputy Secretary-General
              Under Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs
              Under Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs
              Under Secretary-General for Political Affairs
              Administrator, U.N. Development Program
              Under Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs
              Under Secretary-General for Administration and Management
              Under Secretary-General for Internal Oversight
              Under Secretary-General for Legal Affairs
              Under Secretary-General for General Assembly Affairs and Conference
              Services
              Under Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Opertions
              Chef de Cabinet, Executive Office of the Secretary-General
              Under Secretary-General, Executive Director for the U.N. Fund for
              Population Activities
              Under Secrertary-General, Special Representative of the Secretary-General
              for Children in Armed Conflict
              Under Secretary-General and Director General of the U.N. Office in Geneva
              High Commissioner for Refugees
              High Commissioner for Human Rights
              Secretary-General of the U.N. Conference on Trade and Development
              Under Secretary-General and Director General of the U.N. Office in Vienna
              Under Secretary-General and Director General of the U.N. Office in Nairobi
              and the Executive Director of the U.N. Environment Program
              Executive Director, World Food Program




              Page 22                                                 GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
Appendix II

Organization of the United Nations                                                                                                                                                 ApIpex
                                                                                                                                                                                        ndi




       As o f M ay
                                                                                     Secretary-
       1996                                                                           G eneral
                                                            Executive O ffice                           Internal O versight




                    Legal     Political      Peacekeeping    Hum anitarian   Developm ent         Econ/Soc            Policy           Public       Managem ent
                    Affairs   Affairs        O perations     Affairs          Support             Inform ation      Coordination   Inform ation




             G eneva   Vienna             Nairobi    Com m issioner         Conference               Evironm ent    Habitat    Drug       Com m issioner   Palestine
             O ffice    O ffice            O ffice   Hum an Rights        T rade & Developm ent     Program                    Control     Refugees      Relief & works

                                                                                R egional   C om m is sions



                                                         Africa    Latin Am erica       Europe     Asia/Pacific    W estern Asia




                                                                                     Secretary-
                                                                                      G eneral


                                                                                                                                       S upport
        As o f June                                                                  D eputy S .G .                                    services
        1999
                                                                                                                                      Legal Affairs
                                                                                                                                      Managem ent
                                                                                                                                      G eneral Assem bly Affairs
                                                                                                                                      Public Inform ation
                                                                                                                                      Internal O versight
                                                                             S enior M anagem ent G roup


                                                                             Executive Com m ittees
           P eace and                                    H um anitarian                                       E conom ic and                             D evelopm ent
           S ecurity                                     A ffairs                                             S ocial                                    O perations
      Departm ents                                   Departm ents                                      Departm ents                                 Progam s and Funds
        Political Affairs                              Hum anitarian Affairs                             Econom ic & Social Affairs                   Developm ent Program
        Peacekeeping                                     (Em ergency Coordinator)                      Regional Com m issions                         W orld Food Program
        Disarm am ent Affairs                          Political Affairs                                 Europe                                       Children's Fund
        Hum anitarian Affairs                          Peacekeeping                                      Latin Am erica/Caribbean                     Fund Population Activities
         (Em er. Relief Coordinator)                   Disarm am ent Affairs                             Africa                                       Drug Control Program
        O ffice Legal Affairs                          O ffice Legal Affairs                             Asia and the Pacific                         Hum an Settlem ents
        O ffice at G eneva                             O ffice at G eneva                                W estern Asia                                Fund for W om en
        Children in Arm ed Conflict                    Children in Arm ed Conflict                     Program s and Funds                            Progam on HIV/AIDS
      Program s and Funds                            Program s and Funds                                 Conference T rade & Dev.                     Conterence T rade & Dev.
        Developm ent Program                           Developm ent Program                              Environm ent                                 Fund Agricultural Dev.
      High Com m issioner                            High Com m issioner                                 Centre Hum an Settlem ents                 High Com m issioner
        Refugees                                       Refugees                                          U.N. University                              Refugees
        Hum an Rights                                  Hum an Rights                                   High Com m issioner                            Hum an Rights
                                                                                                         Refugees
                                                                                                         Hum an Rights




         Source: U nited N ations docum ents




                                                              Page 23                                                                                          GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
Appendix III

Staff of the United Nations System, as of
December 31,1998                                                                                                           AIpIex
                                                                                                                                ndi




                                              Table III.1 provides a snapshot of U.N. staff with an appointment or
                                              contract of 1 year or more who worked for the U.N. Secretariat, the funds
                                              and programs, and the Specialized Agencies—commonly referred to as the
                                              U.N. system—as of December 31, 1998. As of December 31, 1998, staff
                                              financed from the U.N. Secretariat’s regular budget numbered 7,738 or 15
                                              percent of system-wide total U.N. staff of 51,832. These numbers reflect
                                              the actual total of staff on-board, including all U.N. employees with a
                                              contract of 1 year or longer. This total number differs from the number of
                                              authorized posts, which may be vacant.



Table III.1: U.N. Staff, as of December 31, 1998
                                                                         Regular        Extrabudgetary
                                                                         Budget                 Funds                 Total
U.N. Secretariat
 Secretariat                                                               7,738                 6,385               14,123
 Peacekeeping Missions (Support account)                                       0                   319                 319
Secretariat Total                                                          7,738                 6,704               14,442
 U.N. Development Program                                                  3,631                 1,325                4,956
 U.N. Fund for Population Activiites                                         816                    74                 890
 U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees                                         218                 3,827                4,045
 U.N. Children’s Fund                                                      1,811                 5,193                7,004
 U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the                   97                    12                 109
 Near East
 U.N. Training Institute                                                       0                    16                  16
 U.N. Office for Project Services                                              0                  1032                1032
 U.N. Staff College                                                            0                    22                  22
 U.N. University                                                               2                   113                 115
 International Court of Justice                                               31                     0                  31
 International Civil Service Commission                                        0                    38                  38
 International Trade Commission                                                0                   186                 186
 Joint U.N. Program on HIV/AIDS                                              151                     0                 151
 World Food Program                                                            0                 1,038                1,038
Total for U.N. Subsidiary Bodies                                           6,759                12,876               19,633
 Food and Agricultural Organization                                        2,768                 1,322                4,090
 International Civil Aviation Organization                                   639                    74                 713
 International Fund for Agricultural Development                             272                    32                 304
 International Labor Organization                                          1,560                   228                1,788
 International Maritime Organization                                         252                    22                 274




                                              Page 24                                                    GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
                                                 Appendix III
                                                 Staff of the United Nations System, as of
                                                 December 31,1998




                                                                                   Regular    Extrabudgetary
                                                                                   Budget             Funds                 Total
 International Telecommunications                                                       710              27                  737
 Union
 U.N. Educational, Scientific, and Cultural                                           2,049             256                 2,305
 Organization
 U.N. Industrial Development Organization                                               610               0                  610
 Universal Postal Union                                                                 151              22                  173
 World Health Organization                                                            2,437            1,178                3,615
 World Intellectual Property Organization                                               683               0                  683
 World Meteorological Organization                                                      204              45                  249
 International Atomic energy Agency     (IAEA)                                        1,674             542                 2,216
Total for U.N. Specialized Agencies                                                  14,009            3,748               17,757
 and the IAEA
Grand Total U.N. System                                                              28,504           23,328               51,832
                                                 Source: United Nations.




(711417)                  eL
                           rtet                  Page 25                                                       GAO/T-NSIAD-99-196
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.
Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the
following address, accompanied by a check or money order made
out to the Superintendent of Documents, when necessary, VISA and
MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are
discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office
P.O. Box 37050
Washington, DC 20013

or visit:

Room 1100
700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)
U.S. General Accounting Office
Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000
or by using fax number (202) 512-6061, or TDD (202) 512-2537.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and
testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list
from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone
phone. A recorded menu will provide information on how to obtain
these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET,
send an e-mail message with “info” in the body to:

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at:

http://www.gao.gov
United States                       Bulk Mail
General Accounting Office      Postage & Fees Paid
Washington, D.C. 20548-0001           GAO
                                 Permit No. GI00
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested