Sen. Charles Grassley is demanding the American Red Cross explain how it spent nearly half a billion dollars raised after the 2010 Haiti earthquake.
In a letter yesterday to Red Cross CEO Gail McGovern, the Iowa Republican gave the venerated charity until July 22 to answer 17 detailed questions, many of which it has never addressed publicly.
Grassley’s letter was prompted by a ProPublica and NPR report last month on how the charity broke multiple promises in its effort to help the impoverished country, including by building just six permanent homes.
“A few months ago I met with you and your team to discuss performance, improvements and whistleblower issues,” Grassley wrote. “I was assured that the Red Cross had made substantial steps forward in improving efficiencies and reducing waste, fraud and abuse within the organization. However, the recent news articles cast doubt on some representations made by the Red Cross.”
Red Cross spokesperson Suzy DeFrancis said in a statement the charity “is proud of our work to help the people of Haiti and we welcome the opportunity to respond to Senator Grassley’s questions and set the record straight.”
Some of the information Grassley is asking for:
- A breakdown of all the projects the American Red Cross funded in Haiti, how much was spent on each project, and how many people were helped. As we noted in our story, the Red Cross has so far declined to give a detailed breakdown of its spending in Haiti.
- The criteria used to determine that a person in Haiti was successfully helped. The Red Cross has previously said it helped nearly half the population of the country, but Haitian officials doubt that figure.
- Just how much of the money donated for Haiti went to overhead and management. Our reporting found it was less than the 9 percent that the Red Cross has claimed.
- An explanation of what McGovern meant when she floated a “wonderful helicopter idea” in an email grasping for ways to spend remaining Haiti funds. We asked the Red Cross about the email and they didn’t explain the reference.
- An explanation of the Red Cross’ response to a 2011 memo by the then-director of the Haiti program, who warned of “serious program delays cause by internal issues that go unaddressed.”
- A breakdown of how many employees and whistleblowers contacted the Red Cross’ internal ombudsman about its Haiti program, what types of issues were raised and whether those disclosures have resulted in positive change.
Grassley, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, is well known for his scrutiny of the nonprofit sector and particularly the Red Cross. His oversight of the group began more than a decade ago, after a controversy involving the use of money donated for victims of the September 11 attacks.
In 2007, Grassley pushed through a law overhauling the Red Cross’ governance structure and creating the ombudsman’s office following another scandal after Hurricane Katrina.
Grassley asked the Red Cross earlier this year to explain misleading statements by McGovern about the portion of donations it spends on overhead after previous reporting by ProPublica and NPR.
While the Red Cross is not a federal agency, it was created by congressional charter more than a century ago and has a formal role to work with the government after disasters.
Meanwhile, the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, is finishing up work on a report that will cover the Red Cross’ flawed response to Hurricane Sandy in New York, among other issues. That report is expected later this summer.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.