Contract Ird

Contract Ird

Contract Ird

Posted on: February 11, 2012 - 12:04 pm
by Admin

As part of America’s $85 billion reconstruction program in Afghanistan, USAID has spent more than $15 billion since 2002, more than in any other country. As in Iraq, the program in Afghanistan has been repeatedly disrupted by the spread of the insurgency across the country, poor oversight, an overreliance on outside contractors, cost overruns and corruption, according to U.S. officials and government investigative reports.

A $260 million effort to upgrade southern Afghanistan’s Kajaki hydroelectric dam has repeatedly faltered and remains incomplete. Meanwhile, a $300 million contract to build a major power plant outside Kabul cost more than twice the original estimate and remains largely idle as Afghanistan relies on cheaper power from its neighbors.

But road projects have received the single largest slice of USAID money—more than $2 billion. One of the biggest beneficiaries has been IRD, founded in 1998 by Arthur Keys.

From the start, President Barack Obama’s administration saw road construction as key for winning support from Afghans by making it easier to travel, by opening up new trade routes—and by connecting remote villages to Afghan government institutions and services.

Officials at USAID and IRD say that the Afghanistan Strategic Roads Project wasn’t a roads program in the usual sense. They said building roads was, in many ways, a secondary goal; the main objective was spreading jobs and money to win over rural communities that harbor insurgents.

“As a grant, this was never intended to be a major road construction project,” says Jeff Grieco, a former USAID official who now serves as communications director at IRD. “It was intended to be a capacity building program. We have dramatically improved Afghan capacity to build roads and to do community development work.”

It certainly wasn’t the cheapest way to get roads built. A typical gravel road in Afghanistan is supposed to cost about $290,000 per mile, according to USAID. It cost American taxpayers about $2.8 million for each mile of gravel road completed by IRD, making them the most expensive miles of road ever built by the U.S. government in Afghanistan.

Less than half the $269 million spent on the project went to actual road construction, IRD officials say. A quarter of the funds were paid to IRD administration and staff. About 15% was spent on security, and 8% was allocated to the community-development projects IRD said were central to the success of the project.

As part of the Strategic Roads Project, USAID set aside millions of dollars in the contract to set up small soap factories, run reading programs for illiterate villagers, dig wells and teach sewing to Afghan women—all with the expectation that it would win American troops good will.

But the community program was hobbled when IRD put a halt to awarding grants in southeastern Afghanistan for eight months after discovering that IRD staff were falsifying reports and exaggerating the impact of the development projects, according to former IRD workers. After revamping the staff and project, IRD resumed handing out grants for things like “flower literacy” programs that taught Afghan women how to make flower arrangements.

Then, after conferring with USAID, IRD tried to press ahead with construction without setting up new community projects, said U.S. officials.

“You had these villages with no community ownership or buy in and they just made the situation worse,” said one USAID official. “That’s when things really started going sour.”

In Khost, the volatile eastern province along the Pakistani border where Mr. Hasas was paid $3 million to build seven miles of gravel road, tensions flared soon after he began work in 2008.

Ajab Noor Mangal, a local construction-company owner hired to work on the project, said Mr. Hasas alienated the community by only hiring workers from two of the five local clans.

Afghans excluded from the project looted Mr. Hasas’s construction sites and stripped them bare. At one point, Mr. Hasas said, four men affiliated with the project were kidnapped, killed and dumped in public with a warning note signed by insurgents. The deaths brought construction to a halt.

“We couldn’t find a single person to work on the road,” Mr. Hasas recalls.

Under the IRD contract, Mr. Hasas and the other Afghan firms working on their roads were responsible for providing their own security. So Mr. Hasas said he cobbled together nearly 100 gunmen and armed them with rented rocket-propelled grenades and heavy machine guns.

Things reached a nadir in the fall of 2010, when around 100 angry Afghans, including a small number of suspected insurgents, tried to storm the construction site, according to Messrs. Hasas and Mangal.

Mr. Mangal, who was in Kabul at the time, says he ordered the contractor’s gunmen to open fire on the demonstrators, including some armed protesters who he said shot at the security team. Mr. Mangal says he is still paying for the wounded villagers’ medical treatment.

Villagers who took part in the demonstration told a different story. Two men involved in the protest said IRD security sparked a larger confrontation after opening fire on a dozen unarmed men protesting IRD’s refusal to move staff from an office overlooking homes where outsiders could see into private family compounds—a major slight in the conservative culture.

“All the villagers criticize the construction company because they were just here to earn money and they did not care about the quality of the road,” said Najib, a local resident who worked on the road project and had two relatives injured during the protest.

IRD officials say they never heard about the conflict between the contractor and the villagers.

The project was part of the ongoing “Afghan First” initiative meant to support Afghan companies instead of the international firms that have received the lion’s share of the billions in aid that have flooded Afghanistan.

But IRD is still embroiled in payment disputes with Afghan subcontractors who say that the company has failed to pay its bills. Now that the project is shut down, IRD said it has told contractors final payment decisions rest with USAID. USAID said it couldn’t comment on the question of payments.

The animosity escalated in 2010 when embittered Afghan subcontractors secured arrest warrants for two IRD officials. Afghan police briefly detained one of the Westerners in Kabul who oversaw the project, according to officials familiar with the incident.

Faced with more arrest threats during the spring, IRD hid another top manager in the back of an SUV, flew her to Kandahar and quietly spirited her out of the country before she, too, could be detained, according to former IRD employees familiar with the controversy. IRD declined to comment on the incident.

USAID officials say the agency moved swiftly to scale back and shut down the IRD roads project as it became clear in 2010 that it was foundering. “How quickly can you stop a dump truck?” said one USAID official. “You get the momentum going and one thing we committed to doing isn’t stopping it and creating a wreck.”

Mr. Thier said his agency has learned important lessons from the problems in the IRD project and has changed the way it operates. USAID tripled its Afghanistan-based staff, beefed up its screening of Afghan partners, established new independent monitoring procedures and added more people to directly oversee such programs, he said.

The steep drop-off in U.S. reconstruction funds for Afghanistan has also prompted USAID to shift its focus from big ticket stabilization projects to more modest proposals, including agricultural development programs, that can be successfully taken over by Afghan officials.

In November, as part of a wider shift at the State Department, USAID established a new Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations that is meant to address some of the long-standing coordination and strategic problems with America’s reconstruction missions abroad.

Still, the project’s failures appeared to have no impact on USAID’s confidence in IRD. Last year, as construction delays mounted and American officials moved to shut the program down, USAID awarded IRD nearly $140 million to launch three new projects in Afghanistan, though none involved roads. USAID officials said they still had confidence in IRD’s ability to carry out big projects in Afghanistan.

 


French global IT services company Capgemini, which announced in November that it was returning to New Zealand after a nine-year absence, has been appointed by Inland Revenue to help in the next phase of the department’s transformation planning.

Inland Revenue commissioner Bob Russell says in a statement to Computerworld that the terms of the contract can’t be disclosed because of commercial confidentiality.

“However, we have taken every possible step to ensure we selected the right partner to work with us,” he says. “This included proactively contacting firms to make them aware of the request for proposal, engaging an independent external service to prepare the RFP, and gaining independent advice regarding the selection process.

“We are confident we have chosen the right transformation partner. One of the criteria was experience in guiding large public sector organisations through a major business transformation, including modernisation of information technology.

“Working with Capgemini will enable us to learn from other organisations that have experienced change on a similar scale, and to adopt international best practice in our approach to transformation.

“The experience will complement and grow our expertise within Inland Revenue.”

The department says in a recently published request for information about mainframe services (see IRD seeks mainframe support) that it will stay on the 20-year-old FIRST system for the foreseeable future. However, it is looking to eventually move to a modern Oracle-based platform.

Capgemini announced in November that it had plans to create a 100-strong software testing practice in Wellington and Auckland. Australia chief executive Paul Thorley said at the time that Capgemini believed New Zealand was bouncing back.

“There is a lot of diversification from the traditional sectors into hi-tech, and the government is transforming with cost reductions and welfare reform, so I seed quite a lot of project work,” he said.

An Inland Revenue source told Computerworld that the IRD contract was the reason Capgemini decided to return to New Zealand.

Capgemini has 115,000 staff in 40 countries. In 2002, it sold its New Zealand business to local managers, creating CGNZ, with which it retained an affiliation.

Hewlett-Packard bought CGNZ in 2005 in a multi-million-dollar deal.