A Senate investigation found that the Obama administration knowingly funded al-Qaida affiliates, according to the National Review
The nonprofit humanitarian agency World Vision United States improperly traded with the Islamic Relief Agency (ISRA) in 2014 with the approval of the Obama administration to send government funds to an organization sanctioned for its ties to terrorism, according to a new report.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) recently released a report detailing the results of an investigation his staff began in February 2019 into the relationship between World Vision and ISRA.
The investigation found that World Vision was unaware that Islamic Relief had been under U.S. sanctions since 2004 after funneling approximately $5 million to Maktab al-Khidamat, the predecessor of al-Qaida controlled by Osama bin Laden.
This ignorance, however, stems from inadequately vetted practices, according to the report.
“World Vision is committed to helping people in need around the world, and this work is admirable,” Grassley said in a statement.” While it may not have known that Islamic Relief was on the sanctions list or that it was listed because of its ties to terrorism, it should have known. Ignorance is no excuse. The change in World Vision’s vetting practices is a good first step, and I look forward to its continued progress.”
The investigation was sparked by a July 2018 National Review article in which Sam Westrop, director of the Middle East Forum’s Islam Watch, detailed the Middle East Forum’s findings that the Obama administration approved “$200,000 in taxpayer funds to be awarded to Islamic Relief.”
Westrop writes that administration officials specifically authorized the release of “at least $115,000” of the grant, even after learning it was a designated terrorist organization.
According to the Senate report, World Vision submitted a grant application to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) on Jan. 21, 2014, to implement its “Blue Nile Recovery Program.” The proposed program seeks to provide food security, sanitation equipment and health services to areas in the Blue Nile region of Sudan that have been severely affected by conflict.
USAID provided World Vision with a $723,405 project grant. The following month, Islamic Relief agreed to provide humanitarian services to parts of the Blue Nile region for World Vision, according to the report. The two organizations had also worked together on several projects in 2013 and 2014.
World Vision only found out about the sanctions against Islamic Relief after the evangelical humanitarian nonprofit discussed partnering with the International Organization for Migration (IOM) on a separate humanitarian project in Sudan. During a routine review of World Vision and its partners, IOM discovered the sanctioned status of Islamic Relief and contacted the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) compliance team for confirmation.
After receiving confirmation from OFAC, IOM declined World Vision’s offer to cooperate, according to the report.
World Vision’s legal department was informed in September 2014 that Islamic Relief may be a sanctioned entity and immediately stopped all payments to the organization while an investigation was conducted.
The nonprofit organization sent a letter to OFAC on November 19, 2014, requesting clarification of Islamic Relief’s status and a temporary license to complete the organization’s existing contracts in the event that Islamic Relief was sanctioned.
Two months later, Treasury responded, confirming that Islamic Relief was sanctioned and denying the license application to work with the organization because it was “inconsistent with OFAC policy.”
A month later, World Vision submitted another license application to transact with Islamic Relief, paying them $125,000 for their services to avoid facing legal consequences and possible deportation from Sudan.
On May 4, 2015, the Obama administration’s State Department recommended that the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) approve World Vision’s application for a license to transact. The next day, OFAC approved the license, paid Islamic Relief $125,000 for its services, and subsequently sent a “letter of caution” to the nonprofit to make it aware that its cooperation with Islamic Relief appeared to be a violation of the Global Terrorism Sanctions Regulations.
The investigation “found no evidence that World Vision intended to circumvent U.S. sanctions by cooperating with Islamic Relief,” the report said.
“Nor did we find any evidence that World Vision knew that Islamic Relief was a sanctioned entity prior to receiving notification from the Treasury Department,” the report added.” However, based on the evidence presented, we conclude that World Vision had access to appropriate public information and should have known how but failed to properly vet Islamic Relief as a sub-grantee, resulting in the transfer of U.S. taxpayer funds to an organization with an extensive history of supporting terrorist organizations [sic] and terrorists, including Osama bin Laden.”
The report called World Vision’s vetting system for potential subgrantees “borderline negligent” and said the organization “ignored basic investigative procedures.”
The report says World Vision spent weeks investigating the claim after being notified by the International Organization for Migration of Islamic Relief’s sanction status, but was unable to reach a conclusion, relying on “what can only be described as flawed logic.”
The report accuses World Vision of trying to avoid responsibility and notes that IOM “was able to quickly review IR and determine its status as a sanctioned entity.”
“If World Vision had applied the same due diligence and similar methods used by IOM, taxpayer dollars would not have been exchanged with an organization known to fund terrorist organizations.” The report said.
While World Vision has developed additional screening methods, the report said, “the Finance Committee staff has reservations about its ability to avoid similar situations in the future.”
“World Vision has a responsibility to ensure that funds received from the U.S. government or donated by Americans do not end up supporting terrorist activities,” it said.” Of particular concern to this committee is World Vision’s attempt to place the blame for its inability to properly vet subcontractors on the federal government. A more robust and fundamentally sound system of screening and vetting is needed to restore public trust that donations to World Vision are not funding illegal organizations.”
“Moreover, while we found no reason to doubt World Vision’s claim that the funds were used entirely by Islamic Relief for humanitarian purposes, the funds inevitably aided their terrorist activities,” the report concludes.
Recent Comments