No. They just fired everyone they could legally, which is anyone hired within the last year. So dumb. All their best new recruits are lost.
The idea that these are DEI hires is absurd. The agency just went thru a major reorganization and was directed by congress (via growing mandates) to staff up. That plan is now out the window. Just plain stupid. And for what?
For what? Eliminate waste and do-nothing make work. Align policy with reality. Dump political favoritism and nepotism.
"directed by congress (via growing mandates) to staff up" under Biden's hire DEI first policies? Supporting net zero, EV mandates, and fake renewable energy? Shutting down nuclear power and blowing up coal plants?
Face it, DFC is the swamp, and has been helping rather than hurting China and Russia.
I’d like to think the new DFC will make a decision on a legitimate uranium production facility in Africa that has been held up for a year for no good reason that I can see.
"To continue providing effective oversight in a portfolio of DFC’s size and
complexity, the OIG must attract and retain skilled, experienced auditors, evaluators, investigators,
attorneys, and other professionals. The current staffing ratio is 42:1, for every one OIG employee, there are 42 DFC employees. We will need additional staff if we are to keep pace with the growth of DFC’s staff andinvestment portfoli"
"The OIG made its first suspension and debarment referral to DFC in September 2023 based on an
investigation that confirmed a loan applicant submitted false financial statements to DFC .... DFC’s suspension and debarment rules became effective on May 30, 2024, after several years of collaboration between the OIG and DFC. The OIG looks forward to working with DFC to ensure bad actors do not have access to American taxpayer dollars."
"the OIG has submitted its own draft legislation for reauthorization, which is intended to complement DFC’s proposal. Our top requests are law enforcement authority and improved access to records and information."
"DFC OIG is hampered in its ability to independently conduct certain law enforcement activities because we do not have law enforcement authority. Our request for such authority has been pending with the U.S. Attorney General’s Office for what will be four years this December. Prior to the BUILD Act, USAID OIG served as the OIG for DFC’s predecessor, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC). When Congress established DFC OIG as DFC’s dedicated OIG,
we were given responsibility for overseeing the newly formed DFC but were not given the law enforcement authority that USAID – and most federal OIGs – have.
Our lack of law enforcement authority has hampered our ability to recruit, hire, and retain experienced criminal investigators, who naturally want to continue their law enforcement careers. Indeed, we lost our sole investigator this year when he returned to his prior OIG, which has law enforcement authority.
In addition to hampering our ability to recruit, hire, and retain experienced criminal investigators, our lack of law enforcement authority has prevented us from accessing critical law enforcement databases and information."
"As we conduct audits, investigations and other reviews of DFC’s programs and operations, we need access to records and information. This includes access not only to DFC records and personnel, but also to those of DFC’s contractors, investment partners, end-users, and third-
party beneficiaries. Often, these entities and individuals are overseas and thus outside of IG or grand jury subpoena authority. Thus far, DFC has not agreed to our requests to include a standard provision in its investment agreements that would give the OIG contractual rights of access to such records and personnel.
Our reauthorization proposal includes a statutory requirement that DFC include such a provision in its agreements. Our reauthorization proposal also includes a statutory requirement that DFC include a provision in its investment agreements requiring project sponsors to report suspected fraud, corruption, and other criminal conduct, as required by federal law. "
Note that the personnel audit began late last November. Unlikely as it is to be completed yet, the only investigator was transferred out, and the existing staff and new probationary hires were unchecked by rules common to other agencies and required by law. Even with these restrictions, the IG found major fraud and stopped grants from going to bad actors, one to a project with USAID.
Until now, they had not gone through a "major shakeup" in staff but a hiring binge. "Best new recruits" were hired, without additional oversight staff, due to a Biden directive under guidlines to hire with preference for candidate grievance score over competence -- both DEI hiring and discriminatory.
DFC was the swamp. It may be recoverable, but the purge was needed and is probably not over, yet.
"DFC officials on the staff call said the agency was making the cuts to comply with the general guidance on reductions of the federal workforce taking place across various agencies. "
Sorry, I didn't realize that you don't answer questions. I wouldn't have made that remark rhetorical.
I am assuming that you are agreeing with the DEI hires being axed. That is what the article said:
"DFC officials on the staff call said the agency was making the cuts to comply with the general guidance on reductions of the federal workforce taking place across various agencies. "
No. They just fired everyone they could legally, which is anyone hired within the last year. So dumb. All their best new recruits are lost.
The idea that these are DEI hires is absurd. The agency just went thru a major reorganization and was directed by congress (via growing mandates) to staff up. That plan is now out the window. Just plain stupid. And for what?
For what? Eliminate waste and do-nothing make work. Align policy with reality. Dump political favoritism and nepotism.
"directed by congress (via growing mandates) to staff up" under Biden's hire DEI first policies? Supporting net zero, EV mandates, and fake renewable energy? Shutting down nuclear power and blowing up coal plants?
Face it, DFC is the swamp, and has been helping rather than hurting China and Russia.
I’d like to think the new DFC will make a decision on a legitimate uranium production facility in Africa that has been held up for a year for no good reason that I can see.
You wrote: "Winston, maybe only comment when you know something. "
Here goes:
https://www.dfc.gov/sites/default/files/media/documents/IG%20Zakel_Testimony_HFAC_Subcommittee_Oversight_Accountability_PHearing_9-26-24FINAL.pdf
DFC IG Zakel Testimony to Congress 26 Sept 24
Link above. Some excerpts.
"To continue providing effective oversight in a portfolio of DFC’s size and
complexity, the OIG must attract and retain skilled, experienced auditors, evaluators, investigators,
attorneys, and other professionals. The current staffing ratio is 42:1, for every one OIG employee, there are 42 DFC employees. We will need additional staff if we are to keep pace with the growth of DFC’s staff andinvestment portfoli"
"The OIG made its first suspension and debarment referral to DFC in September 2023 based on an
investigation that confirmed a loan applicant submitted false financial statements to DFC .... DFC’s suspension and debarment rules became effective on May 30, 2024, after several years of collaboration between the OIG and DFC. The OIG looks forward to working with DFC to ensure bad actors do not have access to American taxpayer dollars."
"the OIG has submitted its own draft legislation for reauthorization, which is intended to complement DFC’s proposal. Our top requests are law enforcement authority and improved access to records and information."
"DFC OIG is hampered in its ability to independently conduct certain law enforcement activities because we do not have law enforcement authority. Our request for such authority has been pending with the U.S. Attorney General’s Office for what will be four years this December. Prior to the BUILD Act, USAID OIG served as the OIG for DFC’s predecessor, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC). When Congress established DFC OIG as DFC’s dedicated OIG,
we were given responsibility for overseeing the newly formed DFC but were not given the law enforcement authority that USAID – and most federal OIGs – have.
Our lack of law enforcement authority has hampered our ability to recruit, hire, and retain experienced criminal investigators, who naturally want to continue their law enforcement careers. Indeed, we lost our sole investigator this year when he returned to his prior OIG, which has law enforcement authority.
In addition to hampering our ability to recruit, hire, and retain experienced criminal investigators, our lack of law enforcement authority has prevented us from accessing critical law enforcement databases and information."
"As we conduct audits, investigations and other reviews of DFC’s programs and operations, we need access to records and information. This includes access not only to DFC records and personnel, but also to those of DFC’s contractors, investment partners, end-users, and third-
party beneficiaries. Often, these entities and individuals are overseas and thus outside of IG or grand jury subpoena authority. Thus far, DFC has not agreed to our requests to include a standard provision in its investment agreements that would give the OIG contractual rights of access to such records and personnel.
Our reauthorization proposal includes a statutory requirement that DFC include such a provision in its agreements. Our reauthorization proposal also includes a statutory requirement that DFC include a provision in its investment agreements requiring project sponsors to report suspected fraud, corruption, and other criminal conduct, as required by federal law. "
Note that the personnel audit began late last November. Unlikely as it is to be completed yet, the only investigator was transferred out, and the existing staff and new probationary hires were unchecked by rules common to other agencies and required by law. Even with these restrictions, the IG found major fraud and stopped grants from going to bad actors, one to a project with USAID.
Until now, they had not gone through a "major shakeup" in staff but a hiring binge. "Best new recruits" were hired, without additional oversight staff, due to a Biden directive under guidlines to hire with preference for candidate grievance score over competence -- both DEI hiring and discriminatory.
DFC was the swamp. It may be recoverable, but the purge was needed and is probably not over, yet.
"DFC officials on the staff call said the agency was making the cuts to comply with the general guidance on reductions of the federal workforce taking place across various agencies. "
https://www.devex.com/news/scoop-staff-cuts-coming-to-dfc-109296
Of course, Devex is a great source of unbiased information, as it is partly funded by USAID.
Sorry, I didn't realize that you don't answer questions. I wouldn't have made that remark rhetorical.
I am assuming that you are agreeing with the DEI hires being axed. That is what the article said:
"DFC officials on the staff call said the agency was making the cuts to comply with the general guidance on reductions of the federal workforce taking place across various agencies. "
https://www.devex.com/news/scoop-staff-cuts-coming-to-dfc-109296
But maybe you didn't see that.
FYI members of congress do obtain use influence positions for people they favor. Long tradition.
It couldn't possibly be that, after four years of Biden, DFC now has a cadre of DEI hires and congressional appointees, could it?
Winston, maybe only comment when you know something. Congress doesn’t appoint to federal agencies. Sorry. Feel free to unsubscribe.