Country Selection Guide
FFP country and commodity prioritization runs on different salience than USDA's established non-emergency food-assistance programs. The PWS explicitly calls for a methodology that considers more than just financial inputs and includes a contingency-reserve formula for unforeseen events. USDA inherits the prioritization problem without a transparent reproducible methodology.
Why It Matters
Country selection drives commodity flow, partner allocation, and U.S. diplomatic engagement across the entire FFP portfolio. A non-transparent methodology invites political capture; a transparent methodology gives USDA defensible decisions in front of Congress, the OIG, and the public.
HSG's Approach
- 1Build a multi-factor weighted scoring methodology covering need severity, accessibility, host-government cooperation, U.S. strategic interest, commodity-supply alignment, and program-history continuity.
- 2Anchor the methodology in Maurice House's Deputy Administrator role at the FAS Office of Global Analysis — the same agency-level analytical discipline applied to FFP context.
- 3Develop the contingency-reserve formula incorporating historical drawdown patterns, seasonal risk windows, and supply-chain lead times — explicitly more than financial inputs per the PWS.
- 4Build the methodology as a reproducible spreadsheet model USDA can audit, run, and update annually.
Expected Deliverables
- Country Selection Guide (PWS Deliverable 6) — month 2 (earliest substantive deliverable)
- Multi-factor weighted scoring methodology with country score sheets
- Contingency-reserve formula with documented inputs
- Reproducible spreadsheet model for annual update
Expected Outcome
USDA can prioritize FFP geographies and commodities with a transparent, defensible, reproducible methodology — usable in Congressional testimony and OIG response.