Cti 2013 Final Web 0
Cti 2013 Final Web 0
FY2014
Choose to Invest in
Introduction
5 6 8 9 10 11 What is Poverty-Focused Development and Humanitarian Assistance? Compassionate and Moral Leadership Invest in Future Trading Partners Alleviating Poverty is Key to Americas Security Results Start With Transparency and Accountability InterAction FY2014 Funding Recommendations Summary Table
Contents
13 Global Health Programs 15 Maternal and Child Health 17 Family Planning and Reproductive Health 19 Nutrition 21 Malaria 23 Tuberculosis 25 Neglected Tropical Diseases 27 HIV/AIDS, PEPFAR and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria 29 NIH Global Health 31 CDC Global Health 33 Development Assistance 35 Food Security and Agriculture 37 Microfinance 39 Basic Education 41 Climate Change Response (Bilateral) 43 Climate Change Response (Multilateral) 45 Biodiversity 47 Water 49 Millennium Challenge Account 51 International Organizations and Programs 53 International Development Association 55 Global Agriculture and Food Security Program 57 International Fund for Agricultural Development 59 McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition
61 63 65 67
69 71
73
75 Other Key Development and Humanitarian Accounts 77 InterAction FY2014 Budget Table
Humanitarian relief programs help save lives and alleviate the suffering of those who have been affected by natural and man-made disasters such as conflict, drought and floods by providing emergency access to food, medical assistance, water and shelter.
Our compassion, and for some our faith, calls us to do the right thing
InterActions more than 180 member organizations support poverty-focused development and humanitarian relief because we believe America can be a force for good in the world. Helping those most in need is a moral imperative. Whether driven by religious convictions or a sense of common humanity, we share the view that the United States should be a moral leader in helping people around the world who live in extreme poverty. We believe our actions should fit our values. We believe every person has dignity and rights that cannot be denied, including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. People around the world share our aspirations: a desire to create better lives for their children with access to basic necessities such as clean water, nutritious food, safe shelter, education and health care.
Victims of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami receive supplies sent by the U.S.
Ocean tsunami and the famine in the Horn of Africa, to the millions of people in Syria who have been forced to flee their homes, needs are increasing at an alarming rate. The United States should be there to help them get back on their feet. By investing a tiny fraction of our national budget less than 1% we can provide people emergency access to food, medical assistance, water and shelter. And we can help them begin the process of healing and moving one step closer to resuming normal life.
Success is achievable
A great example of success is PEPFAR the Presidents Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. Initiated with bipartisan support by President George W. Bush, PEPFAR has directly supported lifesaving antiretroviral treatment for over 5 million men, women and children in 2012. Since its inception, millions of people have been able to once again become healthy, productive members of their communities.
When the United States makes an investment, others follow suit. Nations in Europe, Asia or the Americas, and other private donors, leverage and amplify the investments made by the United States. The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria is a great example of this leveraging. While the United States is the Global Funds largest donor, the U.S. portion is capped at one-third of total contributions. This means that for every $1 contributed by the United States, at least $2 must come from the international community.
India graduates from college even though her parents did not finish grade school. When we choose to invest in humanity, we help all people to live with dignity.
Creating self-sufficiency
We believe foreign assistance plays a critical role in creating self-sufficiency in developing nations. Effective aid helps people help themselves. After all, the greatest human dignity is being able to provide for oneself and ones family. This is why we invest heavily in programs that teach people how to fish. It is also why we strongly support programs that grant people access to the resources they need to start their own businesses and invest in their futures. We know this is not easy. But we see the fruits of our labor every day, such as when a microloan helps a woman in Kenya start a business, or when a child in
$1 billion
in private, nongovernmental resources to help small-holder farmers improve their yields and better provide for their families.
U.S. businesses understand that diplomacy and development assistance play vital roles in building economic prosperity, protecting our national security, and promoting Americas humanitarian values. The International Affairs Budget is critical to U.S. economic engagement with the world, especially at a time when there is a wide recognition of the need to boost U.S. exports to create American jobs.
U.S. Chamber of Commerce Letter to Congress, March 29, 2011
These economic benefits are also surprisingly inexpensive. At less than 1% of the federal budget, foreign assistance programs bring remarkable dividends for a relatively small investment. Whether your interest is in preserving Americas global economic edge or in growing jobs here at home, supporting poverty-focused development assistance is a smart, costeffective investment and one that is likely to bring great benefit to the U.S. for years to come.
1 Over 50 Top Business Leaders Urge Congress to Support International Affairs Budget, USGLC. http://www.usglc.org/ downloads/2012/07/FY13-Business-Leaders-Letter-to-Congress.pdf. 2 Ibid. 3 Trade and American Jobs, Business Roundtable. http:// businessroundtable.org/uploads/studies-reports/downloads/Trade_ and_American_Jobs.pdf.
We firmly believe the development and diplomacy programs in the International Affairs Budget are critical to Americas national security.
Military Leaders Letter to Congress
Recent U.S. National Security Strategies see our national security apparatus as three-pronged, with defense, diplomacy and development each having important roles. As a group of retired flag and general officers from all branches of the U.S. Armed Services wrote in a March 2012 letter to Congress: We firmly believe the development and diplomacy programs in the International Affairs Budget are critical to Americas national security Development and diplomacy keep us safer by addressing threats in the most dangerous corners of the world and by preventing conflicts before they occur.1 The 2010 National Security Strategy similarly calls international development a strategic, economic, and moral imperative for the United States. U.S. foreign policy has long been guided by the belief that people are more peaceful and less likely to become entangled in conflict when they have hope, dignity and the power to shape their own destinies: when they have a sense of human security. One of the best ways to create an environment of peace around the world is to support poverty-focused development assistance.
A wise investment
Why is it that, year after year, Americas military and diplomatic leaders ask Congress to support our international development budget? It is because they believe that robust U.S. investment overseas can help prevent conflict, spread peace and security, and give people hope in their futures.
1 U.S. Global Leadership Coalition, Military Leaders Letter to Congress, March 27, 2012. http://www.usglc.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/ NSAC-Letter-2012.pdf.
Alissa Everett
Where governments are weak, corrupt and unaccountable, the U.S. should support communities directly to meet their own needs.
Augusto Camba
government accountable and lets local development actors give their own feedback on the quality of that assistance. We applaud the U.S. decision to publish aid information under the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI). The purpose behind IATI is to make information about aid spending easier to find, use and compare. InterAction has encouraged the administration to publish information from all U.S. agencies that distribute foreign aid to the Foreign Assistance Dashboard (www.foreignassistance.gov), a website devoted to showing where our foreign aid money goes and the impact of that assistance. We have also called for the establishment of an advisory panel on U.S. foreign aid transparency to provide guidance on how the United States can become more transparent. We firmly believe these actions will improve transparency and accountability in foreign assistance and significantly improve the return on investment of American taxpayer dollars.
10
3,268,000 750,000 750,000 200,000 23,000 350,000 670,000 400,000 125,000 4,492,860 1,650,000 605,700 362,900 3,175,000 1,445,000 265,000 925,000 468,000 200,000 400,000 900,000 385,000 1,408,500 158,330 32,243 209,500 50,000 5,000 100,000 300,000 1,600,000 2,800,000 100,000 1,840,000 2,179,000 257,000 1,400,000
11
Funding History
$9.41 billion
Purpose
Justification
Investments in global health save lives and ensure the progress made thus far is not lost. Since national borders do not stop the spread of disease, addressing global health issues is also important to protect the health of Americans. U.S. global health programs have treated approximately 5.1 million people living with HIV and prevented HIV transmission to millions more.1 Immunization programs save more than 3 million lives each year2 and in FY 2011 alone, the Presidents Malaria Initiative and its partners distributed more than 42 million long-lasting insecticidetreated mosquito nets and provided treatment to 45 million individuals.3 Programming also addresses diseases such as polio, tuberculosis and neglected tropical diseases as well as preventing malnutrition, decreasing maternal mortality, improving infant health, developing new health technologies and vaccines, and assisting women with the proper timing and spacing of pregnancies. Global health efforts also focus on training capable health workers throughout developing nations in order to strengthen health systems abroad. Building the capacity of country health systems ensures healthier and safer populations, creates more prosperous economies and reduces dependency on foreign aid. Additionally, global health programs develop and implement new technologies and tools to help countries get ahead of health challenges. Sustaining U.S. investments in global health is crucial; health problems will only be more expensive and difficult to resolve in the future.
State and USAID global health funding helps to reduce child mortality, slow the spread of diseases such as HIV/AIDS, respond to health emergencies, prevent malnutrition and support initiatives such as the Presidents Malaria Initiative and Presidents Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). Relatively modest investments by the United States have not only saved lives, but also improved the economic growth and stability of developing nations.
For more information, contact: Erin Jeffery Advocacy and International Development Coordinator InterAction [email protected]
13
References
1 World AIDS Day 2012 Update, PEPFAR. http://www.pepfar.gov/funding/results/index.htm. 2 Combination Prevention in PEPFAR: Treatment, PEPFAR. http://www.pepfar.gov/documents/organization/183299.pdf. 3 Sixth Annual Report to Congress, Presidents Malaria Initiative. http://pmi.gov/resources/reports/pmi_annual_execsum12.pdf.
Funding History
$750 million
Purpose
Funding for maternal and child health (MCH) programs supports proven, cost-effective interventions that protect the lives of children and mothers. In 2012, the United States led the world in pledging to end preventable child deaths in a generation. To make a down payment on this and other commitments, the United States should provide a least $750 million for MCH.
Justification
Investing in MCH is critical to making good on U.S. commitments as a global leader in maternal and child health and to build health and prosperity for the worlds children. Each year, USAID interventions help save the lives of more than 6 million children under the age of 5 and help significantly reduce maternal deaths from pregnancy-related causes.1 These interventions range from prenatal care and preventing maternal deaths during childbirth to pediatric immunizations and child nutrition. However, each year, 6.9 million children under the age of 5 die from preventable causes such as pneumonia, malnutrition, diarrhea and malaria;2 and each day, approximately 800 women die from preventable causes during pregnancy and childbirth.3 MCH funding supports cost-effective interventions like vaccines and nutritional supplements, and trains community health workers on basic prevention, treatment and management of maternal and child illness, such as malaria, diarrhea, pneumonia and malnutrition. Scaling up these programs will help put a stop to child and maternal mortality. MCH funding also fulfills U.S. commitments to polio eradication and the Global Alliance for Vaccinations and Immunizations (GAVI). Additionally, funding for child and maternal health is directly connected to funding for global nutrition, water and sanitation, UNICEF, PEPFAR and global health research supported by NIH and CDC.
For more information, contact: Erin Jeffery Advocacy and International Development Coordinator InterAction [email protected]
15
References
1 USAID Maternal and Child Health, USAID. http://www.usaid.gov/what-we-do/global-health/maternal-and-child-health. 2 Committing to Child Survival: A Promise Renewed, Progress Report 2012, UNICEF. http://uni.cf/QQB5wA. 3 Maternal Mortality World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs348/en/index.html.
ChildFund International
Funding History
$750 million
Purpose
Funding in this account expands access to voluntary contraceptive and family planning methods, reduces maternal mortality and improves infant health. Since 1965, the 27 countries with the largest USAID investments in family planning have increased contraceptive use from under 10% to 37%, and reduced the number of children per family from more than 6 to 4.5.1
Justification
According to the Guttmacher Institute, in 2012 the use of modern contraceptives in the developing world prevented an estimated 218 million unintended pregnancies, 55 million unplanned births, 138 million abortions, 118,000 maternal deaths and 1.1 million infant deaths.2 Family planning provides women with the ability to time and space pregnancies. These programs are cost-effective and deliver real and sustainable results. Data from seven countries across three continents shows that for every dollar invested in family planning, there are significant savings to governments in the health and education sectors, ranging from $2 in Ethiopia to more than $6 in Bangladesh and Guatemala, and up to $9 in Bolivia.3 Additionally, several countries, including Brazil, Mexico, Korea and Thailand, no longer require U.S. government support for family planning programs.4 One hundred members of Congress signed a letter on December 19, 2012, requesting $1 billion for family planning for FY2014; and while InterAction supports that amount, we believe $750 million is the absolute minimum to continue these essential programs.
For more information, contact: Erin Jeffery Advocacy and International Development Coordinator InterAction [email protected]
17
References
1 Family Planning, USAID. http://www.usaid.gov/what-we-do/global-health/family-planning. 2 Costs and Benefits of Investing in Contraceptive Services in the Developing World, Guttmacher Institute (2012). 3 Family Planning Saves Lives, Population Reference Bureau. http://www.prb.org/pdf09/familyplanningsaveslives.pdf. 4 Fast Facts: Family Planning, USAID. http://transition.usaid.gov/our_work/global_health/pop/news/issue_briefs/fp_fastfacts.pdf.
Funding History
Nutrition
FY2014 Recommendation:
$200 million
Purpose
Despite the far-reaching consequences of malnutrition and its impact on child mortality, nutrition has been a low priority on global health and development agendas. InterAction recommends $200 million in the Global Health Programs account to adequately fund integrated nutrition programs and recommends additional focus on the integration of nutrition within Feed the Future.
Justification
Malnutrition, one of the worlds most serious yet least addressed development challenges, contributes to the death of some 2.5 million children under 5 each year.1For the 165 million children characterized as stunted,2 malnutrition is a life sentence, resulting in irreversible physical and cognitive damage. Research has shown that early nutrition, particularly during the 1,000 days between a womans pregnancy and her childs second birthday, can determine the future of a persons health, educational attainment and lifetime earning potential. Thus, poor nutrition becomes a significant drain on economic productivity and a burden on health care systems, making progress on poverty alleviation harder and costlier to achieve. In some cases, child malnutrition costs as much as 11% of a countrys GDP.3 Yet globally, nutrition funding represents only 0.3% of total official development assistance4 and 1.2% of the FY2012 Global Health Programs account within the U.S. foreign assistance budget.
For more information, contact: Katie Lee Advocacy and Policy Coordinator for International Development InterAction [email protected] Erin Jeffery Advocacy and International Development Coordinator InterAction [email protected]
Research has found that every $1 invested in nutrition generates as much as $138 in better health and increased productivity.5 U.S. government investments and continued leadership are critical to achieving a significant and lasting progress in preventing malnutrition.
19
He had swelling of his face, legs and both feet, said Boxer. He lost his appetite and his skin was very shiny. These are signs of edema, and his case was very serious. There are four grades of edema; his was grade three, which meant his life was in danger. Boxer told the boys parents they must take Vekelani to the hospital right away. Boxer was very concerned about Vekelani because a childs development in the first few years will inform the rest of his life. But when Boxer checked back two days later he was surprised they had not gone. They are superstitious. They thought someone was using witchcraft and black magic against their children. They said that was the only possible explanation for why their children were sick so much. Boxer went back to the familys house many times to try to convince them to take Vekelani to the hospital. Finally, after three weeks, he succeeded. The district hospital admitted Vekelani to its outpatient therapeutic program and gave him a ready-to-use-food: a special mixture of powdered milk, peanut paste, vitamins and minerals. Vekelani likes it, and his health is improving gradually. Boxer, who was trained in Save the Childrens community-based maternal and newborn care (CBMNC) program funded by USAID/Child Survival 22, still visits the family often to check on Vekelanis progress and to counsel the parents about nutrition and hygiene. I go with them to their garden and give advice about how to make balanced meals, he said. They are beginning to take my recommendations. The last time I was there, for the first time, Vekelani looked happy and he smiled at me!
References
1 Committing to Child Survival: A Promise Renewed Progress Report 2012, UNICEF. http://www.unicef.org/publications/files/APR_Progress_ Report_2012_11Sept2012.pdf. 2 Ibid. 3 Black, R.E., L.H. Allen et al. Maternal and child undernutrition global and regional exposures and health consequences, The Lancet, 2008, Vol. 371. 4 World Bank Global Monitoring Report: 2012: Food Prices, Nutrition and the Millennium Development Goals, World Bank. http://siteresources. worldbank.org/INTPROSPECTS/Resources/334934-1327948020811/8401693-1327957211156/8402494-1334239337250/Full_Report.pdf. 5 Copenhagen Consensus Challenge Paper, Copenhagen Consensus, 2012.
Funding History
Malaria
FY2014 Recommendation:
$670 million
Purpose
Malaria funding prevents and treats illness and death associated with malaria. Annually, 216 million people contract malaria and 655,000 individuals die as a result. Eighty-six percent of malaria deaths occur in children under the age of 5. Thanks to the leadership of the Presidents Malaria Initiative, the U.S. operates in 19 countries to combat this disease.
Justification
Malaria is prevalent in 106 countries and imposes significant costs to both individuals and governments. Direct costs such as illness, treatment or premature death have an estimated price tag of at least $12 billion per year.1 U.S. investments through the bilateral Presidents Malaria Initiative and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria have had a significant impact on containing the disease and creating innovative tools and technologies poised to deliver further successes: 50 countries are on track to reduce malaria incidence by 75% by 2015;2 Estimated new cases of malaria have decreased by 17% globally since 2000; The overall annual malaria death toll has declined from 985,000 to 655,000 people a 26% reduction in global malaria mortality;3 and U.S. funding has advanced several vaccine candidates into the human testing stage. Malaria prevention and treatment programming is a model of costeffective success: by sharing responsibility, we are saving millions of lives while strengthening emerging economies and health systems. In 2012, the United Nations released a study showing that for every $1 invested in malaria control in Africa, on average, $40 is returned in higher economic growth. The gains, however, are fragile, and retreating on investment now would not only reverse todays progress but also allow malaria to reemerge. Luckily, the costs are small: $4 provides an insecticide-treated bed net that lasts three years. $1.40 provides artemisinin-based combination therapy treatment for an adult. $0.60 provides rapid diagnostic testing for children and adults.4
21
For more information, contact: Erin Jeffery Advocacy and International Development Coordinator InterAction [email protected]
References
1 Impact of Malaria, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2010). 2 World Malaria Report, World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/malaria/publications/world_malaria_report_2012/en/index.html. 3 World Malaria Report 2011, World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/malaria/publications/atoz/9789241564403/en/index.html. 4 Ibid.
Funding History
Tuberculosis
FY2014 Recommendation:
$400 million
Purpose
Tuberculosis (TB) is a contagious, airborne disease that infects approximately 8.8 million people per year, nearly one-third of whom are also living with HIV, and kills about 1.4 million people annually. TB funding is used to find and treat the disease, prevent the development of drug-resistant strains, and support the research and development of new tools to fight the disease.
Justification
As TB has no borders, strong global TB control is in the national interest of the United States to prevent a costly increase in TB cases, particularly of drug-resistant TB. Drug-resistant TB poses a particular challenge to domestic TB control due to high treatment costs, estimated at $100,000-$300,000 per case.1 It is estimated that in some countries, the loss of productivity attributed to TB is 4-7% of a countrys GDP.2 However, significant progress has been achieved: from 1995-2011, 51 million TB patients were treated successfully through TB control programs saving up to 20 million lives. Globally, deaths due to TB have fallen by more than one-third since 1990.3 With continued and sustained funds, by 2014, the United States will have: Successfully treated at least 85% of TB cases detected in countries with established U.S. government programs; Diagnosed and treated at least 57,200 new multidrug-resistant TB cases; and Contributed to a 50% reduction in TB deaths and disease burden since 1990. Congress authorized $4 billion in funding over five years in 2008, an authorization level that congressional appropriations have never reached. InterAction therefore believes $400 million a number with strong congressional support is a reasonable down payment on that commitment, which will hopefully allow for further deployment of updated diagnostics and drug regimens as well as increased development and introduction of new tools.
For more information, contact: Erin Jeffery Advocacy and International Development Coordinator InterAction [email protected]
23
References
1 US House of Representatives TB Elimination Caucus letter. 2012. 2 R.Laxminarayan, et. al. Economic Benefit of TB Control, Policy Research Working Paper 4295. World Bank. 2007. 3 Global Facts on Tuberculosis, 2012, World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/tb/publications/factsheet_global.pdf.
Funding History
$125 million
Purpose
Justification
Each year, 400,000 people die from NTDs.1 But as little as 50 cents per person per year can provide prevention treatment against the most common NTDs. Over the past five years, the U.S. government has leveraged taxpayer dollars and $3.1 billion in donated medicines to provide 584.6 million safe and effective NTD treatments to approximately 257.9 million people.2 The World Health Organization estimates that in addition to industry contributions such as pharmaceutical drugs it would only cost $2 billion to prevent and treat all individuals at risk of contracting an NTD from 2012 to 2015.3 It is critical that the ongoing NTD control programs be supported and continued in order to reach all those afflicted, in addition to supporting research for new tools to fight NTDs. Currently, NTD research and development (R&D) programs are underfunded. R&D for new tools is essential to ultimately combating NTDs; however, USAID which plays a unique and critical role in product development for new NTD technologies does not fund NTD R&D. Unfortunately, many current NTD medications have severe side effects. Research into these diseases could lead to new vaccines, better drugs and improved diagnostic tools. Strong support for successful control and elimination programs, combined with robust funding for NTD R&D is the key to success against NTDs.
Funding for Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs) helps to prevent, control, eliminate and eradicate 17 diseases that infect 1 billion of the worlds poorest people. One in six people worldwide suffer from NTDs such as dengue, rabies, river blindness, leprosy, trachoma and hookworm. These diseases are deadly, debilitating and can cause blindness, disfigurement, disability, cognitive developmental delays and social stigma.
For more information, contact: Erin Jeffery Advocacy and International Development Coordinator InterAction [email protected]
25
One poster used during the campaign pictures a man with a very swollen leg, one of the symptoms of lymphatic filariasis. A man who was suffering unknowingly, from lymphatic filariasis saw the poster and noticed that his leg looked just like that of the man in the poster. Armed with this new information, he immediately visited his health center and was happy to learn that drugs to alleviate the symptoms of his disease would be distributed to him for free. Thanks to the public awareness campaign, not only did this man seek and receive treatment, but now he also is an active community health educator who travels house-to-house and mobilizes his neighbors to participate in the campaign against lymphatic filariasis and onchocerciasis so that others do not suffer like he has. Due to social mobilization strategies, significant progress has been made in reaching vulnerable populations in Maroua. As a result, 84% of the people at risk of lymphatic filariasis have received essential treatment in 2011. These results would not be possible without crucial funding from USAID.
References
1 U.S. Department of State (2011) Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justification Fiscal Year 2011: Vol. 2. 2 USAIDs Neglected Tropical Diseases Program, USAID. http://www.neglecteddiseases.gov/about/index.html. 3 Accelerating work to overcome the global impact of Neglected Tropical Diseases: A Roadmap for Implementation, World Health Organization. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2012/WHO_HTM_NTD_2012.1_eng.pdf.
HIV/AIDS, PEPFAR and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
FY2014 Recommendation:
for USAIDs HIV/AIDS programs
Funding History
Justification
PEPFAR combats HIV/AIDS through prevention, treatment, care and the strengthening of health systems through bilateral and multilateral programs. As of September 30, 2012, PEPFAR had directly supported antiretroviral treatment to almost 5.1 million people. In FY2012 alone, PEPFAR directly supported HIV testing and counseling for more than 49 million people and provided care and support for nearly 15 million people including more than 4.5 million orphans and vulnerable children. By reaching nearly 750,000 HIV-positive pregnant women in FY2012 with drugs to prevent transmission of HIV from mother to child, PEPFAR helped avert 230,000 HIV infections in newborn children.1 Global Fund: As of December 2012, the Global Fund had provided HIV/AIDS treatment to 4.2 million people, as well as service to 1.7 million pregnant women to prevent transmission of HIV to their children. In addition, the Global Fund has distributed 310 million insecticide-treated bed nets, detected and treated 9.7 million cases of tuberculosis, and treated 290 million cases of malaria. On average, the Global Fund saves 100,000 lives each month.2 The Global Fund works in close partnership with PEPFAR and the Presidents Malaria Initiative to create highly successful collaboration around the world. The U.S. is the Global Funds largest donor; however, by law, the U.S. contribution is capped at one-third of total contributions. This means that for every $1 contributed by the U.S., at least $2 must come from the international community. Funding for the Global Fund is critical to ensuring that we build on the successes of the past decade and that we can provide care to the millions around the globe waiting for access to antiretroviral therapies, tuberculosis treatments and insecticide-treated nets. USAIDs HIV/AIDS programs scale up proven interventions, while promoting newly-developed innovations and best practices.
27
$1.65 billion
for the Global Fund
Purpose
Funding for State and USAID for HIV/AIDS programs supports the Presidents Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and other multicountry initiatives. This funding is used to prevent, treat and care for those infected with HIV/AIDS and to build country-level capacity to transfer operation of HIV/AIDS programs to implementing countries.
For more information, contact: Erin Jeffery Advocacy and International Development Coordinator InterAction [email protected]
Funding for two essential partnerships the Commodity Fund and the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative help increase condom availability and promote the development of an effective HIV vaccine. The global fight against HIV/AIDS is at a critical juncture. The knowledge and innovations acquired over the last 10 years have brought the end of the HIV/AIDS epidemic within reach. The United States must not let current budgetary constraints undo the success of the past few years. If we do not act, we may lose our best chance to end this epidemic.
References
1 World AIDS Day 2012 Update: Latest PEPFAR Results, PEPFAR. http://www.pepfar.gov/funding/results/index.htm. 2 Fighting AIDS, The Global Fund. http://www.theglobalfund.org/en/about/diseases/hivaids/.
Laura Gingerich
Funding History
$605.7 million
Purpose
National Institutes of Health (NIH) Global Health funding supports basic and applied scientific research to identify new interventions and more effective ways to improve health and combat disease. These research activities are complemented by programs that train new researchers and scientists in partner countries so they can better undertake future global health research.
Justification
As a premier research institution, NIH conducts and supports a range of biomedical and behavioral research activities, as well as training for young scientists. Continued investments in medical scientific research help lead to new, innovative, and life-saving technologies and medicines that improve health and combat disease both in the United States and around the world. Global health research at NIH spans 27 institutes and centers, including the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which continues to lead in global breakthroughs to combat HIV/ AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis and neglected tropical diseases. NIH funding also supports the Fogarty International Center, which supports approximately 400 research and training projects with more than 100 U.S. universities that partner with other research institutions around the world. NIH-supported research, which led to the codiscovery of HIV, has saved an estimated 14.4 million years of life since 1995 through AIDS therapies alone.1 NIH research has also led to other medical breakthroughs, such as treatments for HIV-associated coinfections, the development of the first microbicide gel effective for preventing HIV/AIDS, strategies to prevent mother-to-child transmission of the HIV/AIDS virus and steps to developing a malaria vaccine.
For more information, contact: Erin Jeffery Advocacy and International Development Coordinator InterAction [email protected]
Sustained funding for NIHs global health research and training activities is critical to identifying new cures, finding more efficient and effective interventions to combat disease, and facilitating the training of new researchers, all while supporting U.S. universities and research jobs.
29
Success Story: NIH Discovery Turning the Tide Against River Blindness
Onchocerciasis, commonly known as river blindness, affects 37 million people with an estimated 180 million people in Africa at risk. Transmitted to humans through bites of blackflies, individuals who become infected experience intense itching, severe skin disfiguration, and with years of repeated exposure permanent blindness. In addition to its health effects, the disease leads to massive economic losses when productive agricultural lands are abandoned for fear of infection. Although a treatment exists, it needs to be taken for up to 20 years by the entire affected community through mass drug administration. Once free from the disease, communities must be closely monitored to prevent reintroduction of the disease and the need for additional mass drug administration. Scientists at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) discovered an antigen to river blindness that could lead to easier testing. However, there was little interest from potential commercial partners in pursuing its production because companies did not see much potential profit in manufacturing a test for a disease rampant in poor countries. Utilizing the discovery of NIH scientists, PATH, a nonprofit global health organization, developed a simple, rapid test that could accurately diagnose river blindness and partnered with the NIH to evaluate the technology. PATH identified Standard Diagnostics, Inc., as a partner for manufacture and distribution, and the two organizations are working to develop a commercially viable test for use in affected countries. Because of a discovery made in NIH labs, people living in remote areas can get tested in their own communities. This will improve their lives and help eliminate river blindness in Africa. Funding for NIHs global health program allows for research that provides valuable innovations in our collective response to river blindness and other diseases. Ultimately, U.S. investment enables communities to overcome tremendous health challenges that limit economic productivity and perpetuate poverty.
References
1 Estimating the impact of antiretroviral therapy: regional and global estimates of life-years gained among adults, NIH, National Center for Biotechnology Information. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3173805/.
PATH/Allison Golden
Funding History
$362.9 million
Purpose
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) global health funding helps track diseases, provides public health leadership, assists foreign ministries of health in strengthening their research and laboratory infrastructure, and trains new health professionals. This type of collaboration draws on the CDCs technical expertise and improves the ability of partner countries to lead in the future.
Justification
As one of the premier public health agencies in the world, the CDC works in partnership with ministries of health, international organizations and other partners to strengthen global health capacity, increase security and support evidence-based global health programs. It makes significant contributions to global health research and development, monitors and tracks infectious diseases worldwide, alerts researchers when new disease strains emerge, and provides critical intelligence for the control and prevention of diseases. With over 60 years of experience, CDC works alongside foreign ministries of health to prevent the spread of disease worldwide. CDC is a key partner in the U.S. Presidents Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) in over 75 countries and provides technical assistance on how to implement the latest science, such as scaling up HIV treatment and preventing mother-to-child transmission. CDC is also a leader in global immunization and disease eradication efforts. For example, CDC programs helped reduce the number of new polio cases globally by more than 99% between 1988 and 2010,1 and the CDC-led global campaign to eradicate Guinea worm disease has helped reduce the disease burden from 3.5 million cases per year in 1986 to near eradication today.2 The CDC also continuously investigates and responds to disease outbreaks, such as the measles outbreak in 2010 in four African countries. The CDCs efforts address critical global issues while also protecting the health of Americans. Continued, sustained funding for CDC programs is crucial.
For more information, contact: Erin Jeffery Advocacy and International Development Coordinator InterAction [email protected]
31
Success Story: Saving Lives Through Cervical Cancer Screenings and Treatments
During her annual exam at a health clinic, Mariam Ciss, a 41-year-old mother of three who is HIV positive, was screened for cervical cancer using a technique called visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA). This technique is a cost-effective alternative to the Pap smear. During a VIA screening, a doctor or nurse swabs the cervix with acetic acid, the main component of vinegar. If there are precancerous cells, the cervix turns white. Cisss cervix showed a large white lesion. She was stunned a screening a year earlier had been negative. But as an HIV positive woman, Ciss was at greater risk to develop aggressive precancerous lesions. Her lesion was too large for the routine treatment. Normally, doctors use a freezing technique known as cryotherapy to destroy abnormal tissue. This would not help Ciss and she was worried. Hope arrived in the form of a phone call. A midwife told Ciss that the University Hospital Centre could treat large cervical lesions using loop electrical excision procedure (LEEP), which uses a thin wire heated by electric current to cut away the cells. Not only was the treatment available, but it was also free. Ciss was successfully treated. Greater access to screening and treatment drastically reduces the number of deaths from cervical cancer. Jhpiego an affiliate of Johns Hopkins University is working with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, the Presidents Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, and National HIV/AIDS Care and Treatment Program to make screening and treatment available to the women in Cte dIvoire. Since 2009, the number of screening and treatment sites has grown to 20. To date, 7,343 HIV-positive women have been screened with VIA. Of these women, 429 women including Ciss have been treated for precancerous lesions. These are important strides in a country where only 5.8% of women are screened for cervical cancer every three years, and where almost 70% of the 1,600 women who are diagnosed annually with cervical cancer die from the disease, according to the World Health Organization. I am a living testimony to the success of this approach, said Ciss. Other women could have the same chance.
References
1 Post-Polio Syndrome Face Sheet, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/post_polio/detail_ post_polio.htm. 2 Guinea Worm Frequently Asked Questions, CDC. http://www.cdc.gov/parasites/guineaworm/gen_info/faqs.html.
Toure Oumar/Jhpiego
Funding History
Development Assistance
FY2014 Recommendation:
$3.175 billion
Purpose
The Development Assistance (DA) account is the bedrock of U.S. investments to help the worlds poorest obtain access to education and clean water, grow nutritious food, protect the environment, promote economic development, support good governance, respond to climate change and create more sustainable, self-sufficient democratic societies.
Justification
Despite the fact that the Development Assistance (DA) account is at the core of U.S. investments in creating sustainable, self-sufficient societies, funding for the account has remained flat since FY2010. This is even more concerning given increasing food prices, threats to development from climate events, expanded engagement by geopolitical competitors and historic opportunities to advance democracy in the Arab world. The recommended $3.175 billion is the minimum level necessary to cover the challenges and opportunities in each major sector (including food security and agriculture, microfinance, basic education, climate change, biodiversity and water), without squeezing out other equally worthwhile programming, such as democracy funding, economic growth, trade capacity-building, technology, innovation and evaluation. The $3.175 billion level reflects the Senate FY2013 funding level plus an increase in $125 million over the Senate FY2013 funding levels for basic education. For more details, see the sectoral justifications on the following pages.
For more information, contact: Katie Lee Advocacy and Policy Coordinator for International Development InterAction [email protected] Erin Jeffery Advocacy and International Development Coordinator InterAction [email protected]
33
Funding History
$1.445 billion
Purpose
The recommended $1.445 billion funding level for Food Security and Agriculture includes support for Feed the Future programs and food security programs in frontline states: $1.2 billion would fund Feed the Future at the Senate FY2013 level, while an additional $245 million, based on the Presidents FY2013 budget request, is needed to ensure food security in frontline states.
Justification
Globally, 870 million people suffer from malnutrition and hunger,1 while some 2.5 million children under 5 die each year from malnutrition.2 Hunger and malnutrition rob poor people of healthy, productive lives and stunt the mental and physical development of future generations. Food price volatility and extreme weather patterns, such as those that caused the droughts in the Horn of Africa and the Sahel, are pushing more and more people into extreme hunger and malnutrition. After decades of declining support for farmers in developing countries, renewed U.S. leadership has sparked a global commitment to helping people feed themselves. Feed the Future takes a comprehensive and sustainable approach to agricultural development. Investments focus on country-owned plans developed through engagement with local government and civil society, and emphasize the importance of gender, nutrition, climate change and natural resource management. Drawing upon resources and expertise of agencies across the U.S. government, this initiative is helping countries, including 19 focus countries, transform their agriculture sectors to sustainablygrow enough food to feed their people. In FY2011, U.S. agricultural assistance helped 1.8 million farmers adopt improved technologies or management practices, and reached nearly 9 million children through nutrition programs such as micronutrient supplementation and food fortification.3 Additionally, with food prices remaining volatile and weather patterns threatening water availability and agricultural productivity, it is critical that we maintain or increase the level of funding for Feed the Future and agricultural development in the frontline states of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq, in order to help promote stability in these areas.
For more information, contact: Katie Lee Advocacy and Policy Coordinator for International Development InterAction [email protected]
35
References
1 The State of Food Insecurity in the World, Food and Agriculture Organization. http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i3027e/i3027e.pdf. 2 Committing to Child Survival: A Promise Renewed Progress Report 2012, UNICEF. 3 Feed the Future Progress Report 2012, Feed the Future. http://feedthefuture.gov/resource/feed-future-progress-report-2012.
Funding History
Microfinance
FY2014 Recommendation:
$265 million
Purpose
Microfinance provides access to financial services like credit or savings for the worlds poor and marginalized people, enabling poor families to start businesses or meet health, education, or emergency needs, thus helping them lift themselves out of poverty.
Justification
An estimated 2.5 billion people have no access to formal financial services.1 Microfinance began as a way to finance self-employment ventures by poor people who had few employment or incomegenerating opportunities or who could not obtain credit. It has since expanded to include poor households management of their finances through savings, credit and insurance for such things as enterprise, education, housing and health care. U.S. microfinance assistance focuses on improving access to these financial services for the very poor (those living on less than $1.25 a day) and the people most marginalized by the societies in which they live. Public funding is critical for reaching these populations because very little private foreign investment capital in microfinance goes to the countries with the greatest need or to the most marginalized populations within these countries. For instance, in sub-Saharan Africa, which has the highest percentage of people living in extreme poverty of any region, 640 of the 800 million of the people in the region have no access to any financial institution microfinance or otherwise.2 USAID microenterprise funding plays a critical role in expanding financial opportunities for the underserved in these highneed countries. Strong congressional support has demonstrated U.S. leadership in microfinance and microenterprise development, recognizing these tools as a cost-effective and successful way to reduce poverty and promote economic growth. In FY2011, U.S. microenterprise development assistance helped provide approximately 3 million people in 50 countries with the financial means to start or grow a business and help lift themselves out of poverty.3
For more information, contact: Jeremy Kadden Senior Legislative Manager InterAction [email protected]
37
References
1 Measuring Financial Inclusion: The Global Findex Database, The World Bank Development Research Group. http://www-wds.worldbank.org/ external/default/WDSContentServer/IW3P/IB/2012/04/19/000158349_20120419083611/Rendered/PDF/WPS6025.pdf. 2 2011 Microfinance in Africa: State of the Sector Report: Closing the Gap, CARE. http://www.care.org/getinvolved/advocacy/access-africa/pdf/ CARE-Access-Africa-Closing-the-Gap-2011.pdf. 3 Based on a cost per beneficiary of $85 as determined from 107 projects that provided information on borrowers, savers, microenterprises or total number of employees from USAID. Microenterprise Results Reporting [in 2011], USAID. http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PDACT959.pdf.
Funding History
Basic Education
FY2014 Recommendation:
across all accounts
$925 million
Purpose
U.S. support for basic education furthers the alleviation of global poverty, strengthens societies, fosters stability and security, spurs domestic economic growth, reinforces gains in global health, and enhances U.S. global leadership and influence. Education is a cost effective and sustainable way to equip millions with the tools they need to better their lives and forge a path to self-sufficiency.
Justification
Today, 61 million children1 and 71 million adolescents2 worldwide are not in school. Roughly half of these out-of-school children live in areas affected by conflict and/or fragility.3 And these numbers continue to grow. Moreover, many millions of children receive an education of such poor quality that they leave school lacking basic literacy and numeracy skills.4 Basic education programs help alleviate poverty through economic growth. No country has achieved rapid economic growth without investing in education.5 Every $1 spent on education generates as much as $10 to $15 in economic growth.6 Educating the worlds poor also is essential for growing the stable trading partners that U.S. export markets require and enhancing security worldwide. Population rates are rising in countries with the highest illiteracy rates.7 Education has a stabilizing effect on youth populations, with each additional year of formal schooling for males reducing their risk of becoming involved in conflict by 20%.8 The recommended funding level is $125 million over the FY2012 level, a modest increase that would extend quality primary school education to approximately 1.25 million more children.9 Over the last 10 years, great strides have been made, with the number of out of school children dropping by 47 million.10 Strong investment in education will help maintain this progress and help achieve the goals of the USAID Education Strategy, which aims to improve reading skills for 100 million learners and increase equitable access for 15 million learners in conflict and crisis areas by 2015.
For more information, contact: Jeremy Kadden Senior Legislative Manager InterAction [email protected]
39
References
1 EFA Global Monitoring Report 2012: Youth and Skills: Putting Education to Work, UNESCO, 2012. (Hereinafter UNESCO GMR 2012.) 2 Ibid. 3 Last in Line, Last in School 2009: Donor Trends in Meeting Education Needs in Countries Affected by Conflict and Emergencies, Save the Children, 2009. 4 EFA Global Monitoring Report 2009: Overcoming Inequality: Why Governance Matters, UNESCO, 2009. 5 Education and the Developing World, Center for Global Development, 2004. 6 UNESCO GMR 2012. 7 Ibid. 8 Doing Well out of War, The World Bank. http://www.uio.no/studier/emner/sv/statsvitenskap/PECOS4010/h12/undervisningsmateriale/war.pdf. 9 EFA Global Monitoring Report 2010: Reaching the Marginalized, UNESCO, 2010. 10 UNESCO GMR 2012.
Funding History
$468 million
Purpose
Through the U.S. Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI), USAID bilateral climate funds target the most vulnerable countries to support adaptation to climate impacts and countries with significant opportunities to mitigate greenhouse gases through clean energy development and sustainable landscape management. USAID integrates its climate work into food security, global health, democracy, and other development priorities, as well as multilateral efforts.
Justification
Bilateral investments concerning climate change and extreme weather are essential to meet the basic needs of poor people and protect critical forest areas and biodiversity. Climate change could reduce agricultural productivity in many developing countries by up to 50% by 2020.2 Every dollar invested in adaptation can generate returns of $1.45-$3.03 for communities.3 Investments in adaptation, clean energy and sustainable landscapes promote global security, minimize instability, reduce the cost of disasters, address global hunger and health, protect long-standing U.S. investments in global development and conservation, and increase economic opportunities for U.S. businesses and workers. In fact, the United States could create 280,000-850,000 new jobs by garnering just 14% of the clean technology market in the developing world.4 Since GCCI started in 2010, examples of USAIDs accomplishments include helping six countries develop and implement strategies for increasing economic growth with lower emissions, and providing 23 countries with early warning systems and other tools to improve water management, agriculture, health and postdisaster recovery.5 Based on FY2013 Senate funding levels, InterAction recommends $468 million for GCCI bilateral assistance, including $190 million for adaptation, $165 million for clean energy and $113 million for sustainable landscapes programs.
For more information, contact: Katie Lee Advocacy and Policy Coordinator for International Development InterAction [email protected]
41
References
1 Does not include funding provided through the ESF account for the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF) and Special Climate Change Fund (SCCF). 2 Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation in the Food and Agriculture Sector, United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. ftp://ftp.fao. org/docrep/fao/meeting/013/ai782e.pdf. 3 Policy Brief: Climate Change Why Community Based Adaptation Makes Economic Sense, CARE. http://www.careclimatechange.org/files/ adaptation/PolicyBrief_Why_CBA_Makes_Economic_Sense_July12.pdf. 4 Getting Back in the Game: U.S. Job Growth Potential from Expanding Clean Technology Markets in Developing Countries, World Wildlife Fund, 2010. 5 Global Climate Change, USAID. http://www.usaid.gov/climate/.
Funding History
$455 million
Purpose
USAID multilateral climate investments such as the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF), Strategic Climate Change Fund (SCCF), Climate Investment Funds (CIFs) and Green Climate Fund (GCF) complement and leverage U.S. bilateral investments to address the frequency and intensity of very costly extreme weather events that are likely to worsen with climate change, as temperatures continue to rise and affect weather patterns.
Justification
Extreme weather is raging across the world, with Australia suffering massive forest fires from a record-shattering heat wave, Pakistan enduring unanticipated flooding, and more than 3,500 extreme weather events in the U.S.2,3 Addressing climate change requires U.S. action to help secure strong international response. InterAction recommends $50 million for the LDCF and SCCF. The LDCF helps least-developed countries prepare and implement country-driven National Adaptation Programs of Action that identify and prioritize urgent adaptation needs. The SCCF supports country-driven adaptation and technology transfer programs that are integrated into national development and poverty-reduction strategies, and catalyzes funding from other bilateral and multilateral donors. Based on FY2013 Senate funding levels, InterAction recommends $400 million for the CIFs: $300 million for the Clean Technology Fund (CTF), and $100 million for the Strategic Climate Fund (SCF). The CTF promotes scaled-up financing for transformational lowcarbon technology deployment that demonstrates significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. The STF includes programs that integrate climate risk and resilience, increase energy access through renewable energy use, and support efforts to reduce deforestation and forest degradation.
For more information, contact: Katie Lee Advocacy and Policy Coordinator for International Development InterAction [email protected]
InterAction recommends $5 million to support start-up costs for the Green Climate Fund (GCF). Launched in 2011 with broad international support, the GCF is intended as the primary financial mechanism through which developed countries will support developing country efforts to address climate change.
43
References
1 Does not include multilateral assistance of $13 million in the International Operations and Programs account to support the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Note that funding is provided through the ESF account for the Least Developed Countries Fund and Special Climate Change Fund. 2 Lyall, Sarah. Heat, Flood or Icy Cold, Extreme Weather Rages Worldwide, The New York Times, January 13, 2013. http://www.nytimes. com/2013/01/11/science/earth/extreme-weather-grows-in-frequency-and-intensity-around-world.html?pagewanted=all. 3 For a tally of the extreme weather events in the U.S., see http://www.nrdc.org/health/extremeweather/.
Funding History
Biodiversity
FY2014 Recommendation:
across all accounts
$200 million
Purpose
U.S. biodiversity programs protect some of the most at-risk natural landscapes by improving natural resource management. This conserves species and ecosystems while also ensuring clean water, promoting rural stability, boosting health, securing environmental resources and reducing poverty for millions of people. Funding of $200 million is consistent with the FY2012 enacted level and the Senate FY2013 recommended level.
Justification
Sustainable development depends on healthy ecosystems. Yet according to experts, less than one-fifth of the worlds forests are intact, over half of global fish stocks are overexploited, and by the end of the century up to two-thirds of all species will be on the brink of extinction.1 People living in poverty, especially in rural areas, feel the most immediate impact when these systems are at risk, as they often draw their livelihoods directly from forests, fields, rivers and oceans. For three decades, USAID has helped boost ecological, economic and environmental sustainability. In 2010 alone, USAID helped at least 930,000 people increase their incomes through sustainable natural resource management and conservation activities.2 The recommended funding level would help improve natural resource management of approximately 70 million hectares of biologically significant areas places around the world critical to survival of unique, rare and endemic species.3 Conserving just 25% of the worlds highest biodiversity areas would secure 56% of the value of the benefits provided by ecosystems to humankind (e.g., clean water) on which 1.1 billion of the worlds poorest people rely.4
For more information, contact: Katie Lee Advocacy and Policy Coordinator for International Development InterAction [email protected]
45
The private-public partnerships between international and local groups produced new policies that promote sustainable fishing, new economic opportunities in tourism, and a team of community rangers to protect the rich biodiversity of Lake Niassa. Local people have also received training about wildlife, natural resource management, and sustainable fishing practices, building local capacity for a sustainable future for Jerusa, her children and their lake.
References
1 The Nature of Development, InterAction. http://www.interaction.org/document/nature-development-full-report. 2 Conserving Biodiversity and Forests, USAID. http://www.usaid.gov/what-we-do/environment-and-global-climate-change/conserving-biodiversityand-forests. 3 Biodiversity Conservation and Forestry Programs: 2011 Report, USAID. http://transition.usaid.gov/our_work/environment/biodiversity/pdf/ biodiversity_report_2011.pdf. 4 Global Biodiversity Conservation and the Alleviation of Poverty, Conservation International. http://www.conservation.org/publications/Pages/WillTurner_Global-Biodiversity-Conservation-Alleviation-of-Poverty.aspx.
Helena Telknranta/WWF-Canon
Funding History
Water
FY2014 Recommendation:
across all accounts
$400 million
Purpose
U.S. funding for water programs provides access to safe drinking water and proper sanitation to millions of people in poverty across the world. This funding improves water and sanitation in schools, clinics, hospitals and households; and helps local communities operate and maintain lasting water and sanitation projects.
Justification
Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) affects virtually every aspect of development: education, food security and agriculture, nutrition, health, womens empowerment and environmental protection. Annually, $260 billion in economic losses are associated with inadequate water and sanitation services.1 Each year, children miss 443 million school days due to waterrelated illness.2 In FY2011, U.S. funding improved water access for more than 3.8 million people and sanitation facilities access for 1.9 million. Every dollar spent on WASH generates an estimated $4.30 in increased productivity and decreased health care costs.3 The $400 million request ($85 million above FY2012) would provide 8 million people with access to sustainable water and sanitation services 850,000 more than in FY2012.4 Private sector contributions from NGOs, religious organizations and corporations would multiply the impact of this investment. Ongoing U.S. investment has paid off: 87% of the worlds population now has access to safe drinking water and 61% to improved sanitation.5 However, with 783 million people lacking access to safe drinking water and 2.5 billion lacking access to sanitation,6 much work remains.
For more information, contact: Erin Jeffery Advocacy and International Development Coordinator InterAction [email protected]
47
With support from the Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance, World Concern partners with villagers in hard-hit rural areas of Somalia to build and rehabilitate berkads, supplying life-giving water and much-needed income in this devastated region.
References
1 Global costs and benefits of drinking-water supply and sanitation interventions to reach the MDG target and universal coverage, World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/global_costs/en/index.html. 2 Human Development Report 2006: Beyond scarcity: Power, poverty and the global water crisis, UN Development Programme, 2006. 3 Global costs and benefits of drinking-water supply and sanitation interventions to reach the MDG target and universal coverage, World Health Organization, 2012. 4 Estimate of $100 per person. 5 Progress on Sanitation and Drinking-Water: 2010 Update, World Health Organization. http://www.unicef.org/eapro/JMP-2010Final.pdf. 6 Progress on Drinking Water and Sanitation: Joint Monitoring Programme Report 2012, WHO/UNICEF, 2012.
World Concern
Funding History
$900 million
Purpose
The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) was created by Congress in 2004 with bipartisan support as an innovative international assistance agency charged with reducing global poverty through enhancing economic growth. Using a compactbased model, the MCC forms program-oriented partnerships with developing countries committed to good governance, economic freedom and investing in their citizens.
Justification
The MCC signs compacts with countries that are competitively selected based on independent and transparent policy indicators. Selected countries then identify their priorities for achieving sustainable economic growth. MCC compacts can include projects in agriculture, water/sanitation, transportation (roads, bridges, etc.), finance, anticorruption, and health and education. For example, a compact in Ghana has helped build a critical section of highway, while a compact in Indonesia is working to prevent childhood growth stunting and malnourishment. With five compacts coming to completion in 2013 and the possibility of new eligible candidates in 2014, the MCC is well positioned to sign several modestly sized agreements in FY2014, as well as to continue building on its existing programs. Allocating $900 million should provide sufficient funding for the MCC to continue to engage in important partnerships that increase economic growth and good governance in developing countries. The MCCs work has produced constructive and sustainable policy changes in countries implementing compacts and in those seeking to qualify for MCC candidacy. It is also a leader in pioneering many best development practices including transparency, gender integration and country ownership.
For more information, contact: Melissa Kaplan Advocacy Manager for Aid Reform and Effectiveness InterAction [email protected]
49
Leigh Hartless/ACDI/VOCA
Funding History
$385 million
Purpose
This account funds U.S. voluntary contributions to various international organizations. This funding allows the United States to work with other countries to address problems that benefit from international coordination and cooperation. Funding these agencies supports global health, democracy and governance, human rights, humanitarian response and other areas of concern to Americans.
Justification
This account supports organizations that reduce poverty across the developing world: UN Childrens Fund UNICEF ensures the survival and wellbeing of children worldwide, focusing on immunization, early childhood development, education, HIV/AIDS and child protection. UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs UN OCHA coordinates the international response to humanitarian crises to better provide assistance to disaster victims. UN Development Program The UNs primary development agency, UNDPs programs combat poverty, promote democracy and rule of law, protect the environment, and support crisis prevention and recovery. UN Women UN Women helps meet the most urgent needs of women and girls by supporting womens full participation in a countrys political, economic and social life. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights OHCHR works to ensure the enforcement of universally recognized human rights norms, including by promoting both the ratification and implementation of major human rights treaties and respect for the rule of law.
For more information, contact: Kari Fuglesten Legislative Coordinator for Humanitarian Affairs InterAction [email protected]
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change/UN Framework Convention on Climate Change Supporting the IPCC generates state-of-the art assessments and technology to better prepare for climate impacts. Investing in the UNFCCC helps generate a global response to climate change. UN Population Fund UNFPA is the largest multilateral provider of reproductive health services in the world. Its programs help reduce maternal and child mortality.
51
Yannick Tylle/UNICEF
Funding History
$1.41 billion
Purpose
Justification
The IDA, known as the World Banks Fund for the Poorest, is one of the largest development financiers in the worlds least developed countries. Since its inception, IDA has distributed $255 billion in grants and interest-free, long-term loans, averaging $15 billion annually in recent years and directing approximately half of those funds to Africa.1 IDA plays a critical role as facilitator and financier of development projects in areas such as infrastructure, institutional development and technical support. Between 2000 and 2010, IDA built or rehabilitated over 73,000 miles of roads, enough to circle the globe nearly three times, and maintained another 84,000 miles.2 IDA financing leverages the efforts of other donors, helping developing countries create the systems and capacity they need to use donors funds. IDA is funded in three-year replenishment cycles. In 2010, 51 countries contributed $49.3 billion for July 2011 through June 2014. By 2015 with these funds, IDA estimates it can:
Funding for the International Development Association (IDA), an international financial institution that is part of the World Bank, leverages U.S. foreign assistance dollars and supports antipoverty programs in the poorest developing countries with long-term, no interest loans.
For more information, contact: Katie Lee Advocacy and Policy Coordinator for International Development InterAction [email protected] Erin Jeffery Advocacy and International Development Coordinator InterAction [email protected]
Immunize 200 million children; Extend health services to over 30 million people; Give 80 million more people access to improved water sources; Help build more than 49,500 miles of roads; and Train and recruit over 2 million teachers.3 Funding IDA at $1.4085 billion would fulfill the second installment of the United States IDA current cycle commitment of $1.3585 billion and cover $50 million to fund the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative, which provides a group of low-income countries with 100% relief oneligible debt from three multilateral institutions.
53
References
1 IDA History, World Bank. http://www.worldbank.org/ida/ida-history.html. 2 The World Banks Fund for the Poorest, World Bank. http://www.worldbank.org/ida/what-is-ida/fund-for-the-poorest.pdf. 3 World Banks Fund for the Poorest Receives Almost $50 Billion in Record Funding, World Bank. http://go.worldbank.org/F5A0QOJ8K0.
Sara Sywulka
Funding History
$158.3 million
Purpose
Funding for the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP), a multidonor trust fund managed by the World Bank, provides predictable, transparent, long-term investments in country and regional strategic agriculture and food security plans to increase agricultural production, link farmers to markets, reduce risk and vulnerability, improve rural livelihoods and provide technical assistance to governments.
Justification
Most of the worlds poor and hungry people live in rural areas and depend on agriculture to support themselves and their families. U.S. investments in GAFSP, a critical part of Feed the Future, are on target to meet the $475 million the U.S. originally pledged through FY2013 and have mobilized funding from eight other government and private sector donors. Last October, the U.S. pledged up to $475 million over the next three years (FY2014-16) with the intention that for each dollar the U.S. contributes, other donors will contribute two. The recommended funding level of $158.3 million is one-third of the new U.S. three-year commitment to the program. GAFSP improves coordination of donor support for strategic, country-led agricultural and food security plans to produce better development results on the ground. Launched in April 2010, so far nine donors have pledged more than $1.2 billion to its operations. The United States should continue its investment in the Public Sector Window, which supports strategic country-led or regional programs and has allocated over $650 million for grants in 18 countries. GAFSP estimates that these 18 projects will help more than 7 million people become more self-sufficient.1
For more information, contact: Katie Lee Advocacy and Policy Coordinator for International Development InterAction [email protected]
55
References
1 GAFSP Fact Sheet, GAFSP. http://www.gafspfund.org/gafsp/sites/gafspfund.org/files/Documents/GAFSP_Combined_2Page1_Sept2012.pdf.
Katie Campbell/ActionAid
Funding History
$32.2 million
Purpose
The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) is dedicated to enabling poor, rural people in developing countries to overcome hunger and poverty. IFAD supports smallholder farmers and poor rural producers, especially women, as well as focusing on food security and agricultural development to help reduce poverty.
Justification
IFAD is the leading multilateral investor in the livelihoods of poor, rural agricultural producers and plays a critical leadership role in positioning small-holder farmers at the center of global efforts to strengthen food security. IFAD has over 35 years of experience in working with small-holder farmers organizations, and has a sharp focus on gender equality and womens empowerment. Food and fuel price volatility, the global economic recession and extreme weather events threaten to increase hunger, poverty and political instability in many developing countries. Recent gains in the fight against hunger and poverty are at risk, and the worlds 500 million small-holder farmers face complex challenges in a rapidly transforming rural economy. IFADs approach to these challenges recognizes that with strategic support and investments, smallholder farmers particularly women have enormous potential to help achieve global food security. Funding of $32.2 million in FY2014 represents the second installment of the U.S.-pledged contribution of $90 million to IFADs ninth replenishment period (2013-15). It also begins to address arrears the United States has accrued in recent years. This funding is critical to increasing global food security, supporting small-holder agriculture, and building the resilience of rural communitiesin developing countries.
For more information, contact: Katie Lee Advocacy and Policy Coordinator for International Development InterAction [email protected]
In recent years, IFADs robust and far-reaching institutional reforms have significantly improved in its overall effectiveness and impact, as confirmed by several recent independent assessments.1 This improved effectiveness and efficiency will support IFADs effort to help 80 million poor people in rural areas pull themselves out of poverty between 2013 and 2015.2
57
References
1 Report on the Consultations on the Ninth Replenishments of IFADs Resources, IFAD. http://www.ifad.org/gbdocs/repl/9/iv/e/REPL-IX-4-R-2Rev-2.pdf. 2 IFADs 2013 Results-Based Programme of Work and Regular Capital Budgets, IFAD. https://webapps.ifad.org/members/eb/107/docs/EB-2012107-R-2-Rev-1.pdf.
Joseph Luna
Funding History
$209.5 million
Purpose
Funding for the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program provides donations of U.S. agricultural products, as well as financial and technical assistance, for school feeding and maternal and child nutrition projects in low income, food-deficit countries that are committed to universal education. InterAction recommends $209.5 million for FY2014, consistent with the FY2010 enacted level.
Justification
Every year, some 2.5 million children die from an entirely preventable condition: malnutrition.1 According to the World Food Programme, 66 million children go to school hungry every day.2 UNICEF reports an estimated 130 million school-age children in the worlds poorest countries are undernourished and would be eligible for school feeding programs.3 The McGovern-Dole program provides school-age children in poverty-stricken countries with what is often their only full meal of the day at an average cost of $40 per student per year and is a cost-effective means of supporting education, child development and food security.4 Currently, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) funds 36 active agreements with 17 cooperating sponsors in 28 countries, assisting more than 4.3 million women and children through programs such as McGovern-Dole.5 Since 2000, when the predecessor to the McGovern-Dole food program was established, USDA has provided nutritious meals to more than 22 million children in 41 countries and boosted school attendance by an estimated 14% overall and by 17% for girls.6 Additionally, over the last 45 years, more than 37 national governments have successfully taken over school meal programs launched by donor countries, NGOs and international organizations, including Brazil and India, which now operate two of the largest school meal programs in the world.7
For more information, contact: Katie Lee Advocacy and Policy Coordinator for International Development InterAction [email protected]
59
By engaging with USDA/FFE, Hur was not only able to ensure that her daughter would not be sold off in marriage, but also that her children could return to school. In 2004 she was identified as a very poor but respected woman by the village elders, and was subsequently hired as a cleaner at a USDA/FFE target school. This provided her and her family with desperately needed income. But this was just the beginning. Hur also enrolled in the adult literacy classes provided through the program. She continued to night school, graduating in 2010 with a high score, and then became a rural teacher for the local girls school. This position allowed her to earn enough money to properly feed her children and send them back to the school. For Hur and the many others involved in the program the positive impact of McGovern-Dole cannot be overstated. My life has experienced a remarkable change for the better, Hur said.
References
1 Committing to Child Survival: A Promise Renewed Progress Report 2012, UNICEF, 2012. 2 Two Minutes to Learn About: School Meals, World Food Programme. http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/ communications/wfp249632.pdf. 3 Tracking Progress on Child and Maternal Nutrition, UNICEF. http://www.unicef.org/publications/files/Tracking_Progress_on_Child_and_Maternal_ Nutrition_EN_110309.pdf. 4 Determined by dividing beneficiaries and funding levels from FY2008-2011. Figures taken from annual U.S. International Food Assistance Reports. 5 U.S. International Food Assistance Report 2010, USDA and USAID. http://transition.usaid.gov/our_work/humanitarian_assistance/ffp/fy2010. ifarreport.pdf. 6 UNICEF, Tracking Progress supra. 7 Roadmap to End Hunger, The Roadmap Group, including 1,000 Days, Alliance to End Hunger, Bread for the World, CARE, Catholic Relief Services, Congressional Hunger Center, Mercy Corps, Oxfam America, Save the Children, Women Thrive Worldwide, and World Food Program USA. http://usa.wfp.org/sites/default/files/u-6876/FINAL-roadmap_layout_web.pdf.
World Vision
Funding History
$1.6 billion
Purpose
Justification
Robust funding for the International Disaster Assistance (IDA) account helps OFDA provide life-saving assistance following natural and man-made disasters, including conflicts, floods, earthquakes and droughts. This funding must be provided at the start of the fiscal year so the United States can respond quickly and effectively to unpredictable disasters, such as the humanitarian emergency in Syria, without reducing U.S. assistance to ongoing crises such as those in South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Global needs are mounting, with crises around the world driving global IDP numbers to over 27 million nearly double the world refugee population. Despite facing similar challenges, IDPs receive far less international support than refugees. U.S. assistance for someone forced from their home should not hinge on whether he or she has crossed a national border. IDA also funds disaster risk reduction (DRR) activities, which build the ability of communities to prepare for and recover from disasters. DRR is chronically underfunded, yet it is invaluable. World Bank research has found that DRR investments can yield a 7-to-1 ratio of savings to investment.1 The recommended funding level includes $366 million for cash-based emergency food assistance for critical voucher programs, local and regional purchase of food, and related cash-based emergency assistance efforts that enable rapid delivery of assistance. The remaining $1.234 billion is the recommended base for IDA.
These funds enable USAIDs Office for U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) to respond to international emergencies. It meets the needs of conflict- and disaster-affected people; addresses protracted emergencies; and supports disaster risk reduction activities (programs that help people prepare for and mitigate the impacts of disasters). This is also the primary account for addressing the needs of internally displaced persons (IDPs).
For more information, contact: Kari Fuglesten Legislative Coordinator for Humanitarian Affairs InterAction [email protected]
61
Concern and APAD secured a minimum of two acres of land each for 500 vulnerable families living in the area. With support from the Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance, Concern gave the farmers quality-assured seeds. With one acre of land each family can grow eight or nine sacks of sorghum (198 pounds each), Piol noted. This is enough to feed their family all year and also gives them seeds to plant for next years harvest. Another woman farmer, Adut Atak Atak, believes that 2013 will be different than any other before it. Until now we have been surviving only with the help of others, she predicted. This year we will be able to feed ourselves. I know it.
References
1 U.S. Geological Survey and the World Bank estimated that an investment of $40 billion would have prevented losses of $280 billion in the 1990s. Natural Disaster and Disaster Risk Reduction Measures: A Desk Review of Costs and Benefits, U.K. Department for International Development. http://www.unisdr.org/files/1071_disasterriskreductionstudy.pdf.
Concern Worldwide
Funding History
$2.8 billion
Purpose
Justification
Armed conflicts in countries like Syria, Mali, Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan forced people to flee across borders at a faster rate in 2012 than in any other year this century.1 This account helps meet the needs of these refugees, whose survival depends heavily on the international humanitarian system. Robust funding for this account is also critical to assist the growing number of displaced people in protracted crisis situations and to support innovative, long-term, sustainable policies that can reduce the costs of responding to emergencies. Most refugees live in precarious conditions; reductions in assistance mean they will lack access to the most basic elements of survival: health care, safe shelter, clean water and education. Refugees often cannot safely return home, and 80% of the worlds refugees are hosted in developing countries with little capacity to support them. U.S. investment shows host nations that we support their efforts to shelter and provide for the most vulnerable. The recommended funding level would advance the protection of women and girls, internally displaced persons, victims of sexual and gender-based violence, and stateless persons. It would also support more effective implementation of the U.S. governments urban refugee principles and its protracted refugee initiative; and improve access to traditionally underfunded solutions-oriented programs such as education and livelihoods for these vulnerable groups. Investing in these important activities lays the groundwork for refugees to become more self-sufficient and less aid-dependent in the long run.
This account enables the State Departments Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) to provide basic lifesaving assistance for refugees and to maintain the U.S. commitment to a strong refugee resettlement program. This funding supports the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and other international humanitarian agencies and nongovernmental organizations.
For more information, contact: Kari Fuglesten Legislative Coordinator for Humanitarian Affairs InterAction [email protected]
63
References
1 UNHCR Global Trends 2011, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. http://www.unhcr.org/4fd6f87f9.html.
Tupungato/Shutterstock.com
Funding History
$100 million
Purpose
Justification
This emergency account provides a critical source of funding during unanticipated crises, and therefore should be fully funded in FY2014 up to its authorized ceiling of $100 million. In 2012, these funds were used to support PRMs response to the needs of refugees who fled the crisis in Sudans South Kordofan and Blue Niles states, as well as to provide protection and support for the hundreds of thousands of Malian refugees in the Sahel. To enhance our countrys capacity to respond quickly and effectively to unanticipated crises, two structural changes to this account should be undertaken. First, the funding ceiling should be doubled to $200 million, as this ceiling has remained stagnant over the last decade and recent years have put significant stress on regular funding. Second, the Secretary of State, rather than the President, should be given the power to authorize the use of funds from the ERMA fund to speed up the response to emergencies. The current requirement of a presidential certification is cumbersome and too often results in unnecessary and costly delays in delivering critical assistance.
The Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance fund is a drawdown account designed to ensure that the U.S. government has sufficient resources for refugee assistance in unanticipated and urgent humanitarian crises. The Department of States Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) uses this funding to meet unexpected and urgent refugee and migration needs.
For more information, contact: Kari Fuglesten Legislative Coordinator for Humanitarian Affairs InterAction [email protected]
65
Funding History
$1.84 billion
Purpose
Justification
A core source for funding humanitarian assistance, each year Food for Peace Title II (FFP) uses donated agricultural commodities to meet the emergency food needs of up to 100 million people facing acute hunger due to conflicts or natural disasters.1 Through the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) appropriations, FFP also provides multiyear funding for development programs that increase resilience of communities and reduce the need for emergency assistance. Since FFP began in 1954, more than 3 billion people in 150 countries have benefited from U.S. food aid,2 and the prevalence of stunting among children under 5 has been reduced by an average of 2.4% per year.3 Yet 870 million people still suffer from malnutrition and hunger,4 while some 2.5 million children die each year from malnutrition.5 Over the past two years, according to the World Food Programme, the annual global food assistance need has been roughly $6.5 billion; it will likely remain similar in 2014. Due to global food price volatility, increasingly frequent weather-related food security crises, and continuing conflict in many parts of the world, these needs are not expected to decline. Despite these issues, the FFP appropriation has declined steadily: from a total (including supplemental) appropriation of $2.32 billion in FY2009 to $1.47 billion in FY2012. Supporting FFP at $1.84 billion would maintain U.S. leadership in providing emergency food assistance, while also acknowledging increased U.S. contributions to food security in other accounts.
Food for Peace Title II programs provide emergency food assistance to people affected by natural disasters, food security crises and conflict. Its programs also promote resilience and long-term food security through multiyear investments in nutrition, agricultural productivity and diversifying household incomes of smallholder farmers and vulnerable populations. The recommended $1.84 billion matches the FY2010 enacted level.
For more information, contact: Katie Lee Advocacy and Policy Coordinator for International Development InterAction [email protected] Kari Fuglesten Legislative Coordinator for Humanitarian Affairs InterAction [email protected]
67
References
1 A Roadmap for Continued U.S. Leadership to End Global Hunger. http://womenthrive.org/sites/default/files/docs/resources/final-roadmap_ layout_web.pdf. (hereinafter Roadmap) 2 What is Food for Peace? USAID. http://transition.usaid.gov/our_work/humanitarian_assistance/ffp/ . 3 Roadmap, supra. 4 The State of Food Insecurity in the World, Food and Agriculture Organization. http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i3027e/i3027e.pdf. 5 Committing to Child Survival: A Promise Renewed Progress Report 2012, UNICEF. http://www.unicef.org/videoaudio/PDFs/APR_Progress_ Report_2012_final.pdf.
Funding History
$2.179 billion
Purpose
This account funds the United States assessed obligations to UN peacekeeping missions. These peacekeeping missions support and implement the terms of ceasefires and peace agreements; enhance the protection of civilian populations during armed conflict; protect and promote human rights; support the organization of elections; assist in restoring the rule of law; and build government capacity.
Justification
Roughly 120,000 UN peacekeepers are deployed in 15 missions on four continents, a nearly three-fold increase over the last 10 years. These operations all originate with the UN Security Council and are managed by the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations. UN peacekeeping missions advance U.S. interests by resolving conflicts, restoring peace and enhancing regional stability. Strong U.S. financial support plays a critical role in ensuring these missions are successful and have the resources needed to address complex conflict situations and advance peace around the world. Overall, peacekeeping has proven to be a successful, cost-efficient way to promote international peace and security. A RAND study found multinational UN forces far better suited than unilateral U.S. forces to perform peacekeeping responsibilities.1 The Government Accountability Office concluded UN peacekeeping is eight times less expensive than funding a U.S. force2 and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) gave the CIPA account its highest grade under its Program Assessment Rating Tool, a diagnostic tool that measures the effectiveness of federal programs. Another study found that in the first three years after a conflict, UN peacekeeping missions have a substantial effect on economic growth. National economies in post-conflict countries with peacekeeping missions grow at nearly a 2.5% faster rate than the economies of postconflict countries without UN missions.3
For more information, contact: Kari Fuglesten Legislative Coordinator for Humanitarian Affairs InterAction [email protected]
69
References
1 The UNs Role in Nation-Building, RAND Corporation. http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2005/RAND_MG304.sum.pdf. 2 Peacekeeping: Cost Comparison of Actual UN and Hypothetical U.S. Operations in Haiti, U.S. House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Committee on International Relations. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06331.pdf. 3 World Development Report 2011 Background Paper: Post-Conflict Recovery and Peacebuilding, World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank. org/bitstream/handle/10986/9184/WDR2011_0010.pdf?sequence=1.
Funding History
Peacekeeping Operations
FY2014 Recommendation:
$257 million
Purpose
This account funds multilateral UN and regional peacekeeping and security forces, as well as training programs that increase the capacity of relevant countries to participate in such forces.
Justification
U.S.-funded programs that train, equip and support the deployment of foreign security forces for international peacekeeping operations are essential to improving international security, sustaining and consolidating peace settlements, promoting institutions that preserve the rule of law, and enhancing the protection of civilians in conflict areas. Professional, well-equipped international peacekeepers reduce the burden on the United States by mitigating protracted armed conflict and consolidating peace at a fraction of the cost of U.S. intervention a mere 12 cents to the dollar according to the Government Accountability Office.1 Funding at this level will ensure continued U.S. investments for these critical programs, which enable the United States to enhance the capabilities of our partner nations, expand the pool of properly trained peacekeepers and promote international security.
For more information, contact: Kari Fuglesten Legislative Coordinator for Humanitarian Affairs InterAction [email protected]
71
References
1 Peacekeeping: Cost Comparison of Actual UN and Hypothetical U.S. Operations in Haiti, U.S. House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Committee on International Relations. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06331.pdf.
pavalena/Shutterstock.com
Funding History
$1.4 billion
Purpose
Justification
U.S. foreign policy objectives both short- and long-term require USAID engagement around the world. Cuts to the USAID operating budget do not reduce those requirements; they stretch the agency ever thinner, leading to reduced efficiency, effectiveness and oversight. After years of counterproductive cuts in staffing, the Development Leadership Initiative, initiated by the Bush administration and continued by the Obama administration, has allowed USAID to hire additional staff. These recent staffing increases have given USAID the capacity to implement programs and capitalize on technological innovations that foster solutions to complex development problems. Staffing levels must be sustained for USAID to carry out humanitarian and development assistance programs effectively and to have the technical capacity to assess what is working and what is not. They are also needed to uphold USAIDs part of the three-legged national security stool: defense, diplomacy and development. Full operational funding for USAID also supports USAID Forward, a package of reforms designed to strengthen, streamline and optimize the way USAID does business. Fully funding USAIDs Capital Investment Fund enables USAID to modernize and improve information technology (IT) systems. Importantly, this fund also allows USAID to work with the State Department to construct facilities that will keep our civilian representatives serving their country abroad safe. As USAID strives to increase accountability, transparency and efficiency, up-to-date information management systems are vital. This funding will support continued modernization of such systems, as well as consolidation of USAID and State Department IT platforms as prescribed by the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR).
USAID Operating Expenses improve efficiency and ensure U.S. taxpayer dollars are spent properly and in a manner ensuring the greatest maximum benefit for our nations investment while meeting the needs of the worlds most vulnerable populations.
For more information, contact: Jeremy Kadden Senior Legislative Manager InterAction [email protected]
73
Other Key Long-term Development Accounts Inter-American Foundation African Development Foundation Enterprise for the Americas Multilateral Investment Fund Asian Development Fund African Development Fund Debt Restructuring Global Environment Facility Economic Support Fund Poverty-focused Project Funding Other Key Humanitarian Accounts Refugee Resettlement Complex Crises Fund Other Key Transition Accounts Conflict Stabilization Operations Transition Initiatives Economic Support Fund Transition Funding Other Key USAID Operating Accounts USAID Capital Investment Fund USAID Inspector General Operating Expenses Other Key Development-Enabling Accounts Contributions to International Organizations Economic Support Fund Democracy and Governance Middle East and North Africa Incentive Fund Democracy Fund National Endowment for Democracy Peace Corps Development Credit Authority Overseas Private Investment Corporation Treasury Technical Assistance Inter-American Development Bank/Investment Corporation Asian Development Bank African Development Bank European Bank for Reconstruction and Development
75
InterAction FY2014 Recommendations for International Development and Humanitarian Assistance Accounts InterAction FY2014 Recommendations for International Development and Humanitarian Assistance Accounts
($ in thousands)
FY10 Total Enacted (including supp) 58,593,103 56,605,700 8,315,000 2,645,000 680,000 534,000 95,000 13,000 330,000 50,196,872 48,203,400 54,939,307 53,343,000 53,167,000 50,455,483 51,958,966 9,410,860 3,268,000 750,000 750,000 200,000 23,000 350,000
FY11 Final Enacted (w/ 0.2% across-theboard cut) FY14 InterAction Recommendation
FY13 FY13 CR Continuing FY12 Enacted PostResolution (including Sequestration including OCO OCO) including OCO (Estimated)* (Estimated)* FY 14 Presidential Request Total (Enduring + OCO)
77
1,169,833 265,000 925,000 507,200 205,000 315,000 1,105,000 394,000 1,334,500 90,000 209,500 50,000 75,000 300,000 1,305,000 1,850,000 45,000 1,840,000 2,221,500 331,500 1,388,800 898,200 354,290 1,232,530 99,800 29,440 199,101 35,000 49,900 184,630 863,270 1,686,620 49,900 1,497,000 1,883,931 304,390 1,347,300 898,200 348,705 1,325,000 135,000 30,000 184,000 35,000 49,900 184,630 975,000 1,875,100 27,200 1,466,000 1,828,182 383,818 1,347,300 1,167,493 264,470 923,150 522,900 204,590 314,370 1,170,000 265,000 800,000 481,500 200,000 315,000 1,287,815 291,685 880,557 529,985 220,139 346,719 898,200 348,700 1,358,500 135,000 30,000 184,000 35,000 49,900 184,630 1,599,661 2,798,950 27,200 1,435,000 2,006,000 383,000 1,347,045
Global Health Initiative (GHP - USAID & State) Global Health Programs - USAID Maternal and Child Health Family Planning in all accounts Nutrition Vulnerable Children HIV/AIDS Other Infectious Diseases, total Malaria TB Neglected Tropical Diseases Global Health - State (PEPFAR Only) Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB & Malaria NIH Global Health CDC Global Health Development Assistance 670,000 191,000 85,000 4,020,000 1,650,000 625,264 393,024 2,837,812 (FtF only) 1,060,000 1,222,136 276,809 835,649 502,956 208,912 329,037 852,392 327,000 1,289,217 128,115 28,470 174,616 33,215 47,355 175,214 1,518,078 2,656,204 25,813 1,361,815 1,886,000 366,000 1,278,346 68,000 215,700 2,045,000 1,760,960 250,000 0 2,094,661 347,000 1,399,200 468,000
7,874,000 2,515,000 549,000 648,500 75,000 15,000 350,000 981,000 585,000 225,000 65,000 4,609,000 750,000 587,610 354,403 2,520,000
7,829,310 2,495,000 548,900 613,770 90,000 15,000 349,300 968,100 618,800 224,600 76,800 4,585,810 748,500 619,300 340,265 2,518,950
8,167,860 2,625,000 605,550 610,000 95,000 17,500 350,000 1,033,000 650,000 236,000 89,000 4,242,860 1,300,000 581,000 347,600 2,519,950
8,470,000 2,750,000 626,085 630,686 98,222 18,093 361,869 1,068,031 672,043 244,003 92,018 4,070,000 1,650,000 581,000 347,600 2,845,350
8,038,030 2,609,750 594,155 598,521 93,212 17,171 343,414 1,013,561 637,768 231,559 87,325 3,862,430 1,565,850 551,369 329,872 2,700,237
1,445,000 265,000 925,000 468,000 200,000 400,000 1,650,000 900,000 385,000 1,408,500 158,330 32,243 209,500 50,000 5,000 100,000 300,000 1,600,000 2,800,000 100,000 1,840,000 2,179,000 257,000 1,400,000
Food Security & Agriculture in all bilateral accounts Microfinance in all accounts Basic Education in all accounts Climate Change in all Bilateral accounts Biodiversity in all accounts Water in all accounts Gender in all accounts Millennium Challenge Corporation International Organizations and Programs International Development Association Global Agriculture and Food Security Program International Fund for Agricultural Development McGovern-Dole International Food For Education & Child Nutrition Least Developed Countries Fund & Special Climate Change Fund Green Climate Fund Strategic Climate Fund Clean Technology Fund
International Disaster Assistance Migration and Refugee Assistance Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Food for Peace Title II Contributions to International Peacekeeping Activities Peacekeeping Operations
*The FY13 CR did not specify exact funding levels for some accounts. For the Global Health (USAID) and Development Assistance (DA) subaccounts, FY13 funding levels are estimated based on a proportional distribution of the additional funding for FY13 for Global Health (USAID) ($125 million) and DA ($325.4 million) overall. First, each subaccounts proportion of the total Global Health (USAID) or DA funding level in FY12 was calculated. This proportion was multiplied by the additional funding provided and added to FY12 subaccount level of funding to create the estimate.
InterAction Also Supports Strong Funding for These Key Accounts in FY2013 InterAction Also Supports Strong Funding for These Key Accounts in FY2014
($ in thousands)
FY13 FY13 CR Continuing FY12 Enacted PostResolution (including Sequestration including OCO OCO) including OCO (Estimated)* (Estimated)* FY 14 Presidential Request Total (Enduring + OCO)
Other Key Poverty Accounts Inter-American Foundation African Development Foundation Enterprise for the Americas Multilateral Investment Fund Asian Development Fund African Development Fund Debt Restructuring Global Environment Facility (GEF) ESF - Poverty-focused Project Funding 23,000 30,000 25,000 105,000 155,000 60,000 86,500 22,454 29,441 24,950 0 109,780 49,900 89,820 22,500 30,000 25,000 100,000 172,500 12,000 89,820 22,500 30,000 15,000 100,000 172,500 12,000 129,400 21,353 28,470 14,235 94,900 163,703 11,388 122,801
Other Key Humanitarian Accounts Refugee Resettlement - HHS Complex Crises Fund 50,000 150,000 55,000 39,920 43,500 56,695 39,920 769,789 40,000
78
185,000 54,400 1,682,500 120,000 138,000 400,000 25,000 29,000 32,100 74,670 0 0 1,578,651 114,770 117,764 374,250 29,940 18,079 25,448 20,958 106,373 0 129,740 44,910
Other Key Transition Accounts Conflict Stabilization Operations (State and AID) Transition Intitiatives ESF - Transition Project Funding
Other Key USAID Operating Accounts USAID Capital Investment Fund USAID IG Operating Expenses
129,700 51,000 1,551,000 114,770 117,764 375,000 40,000 25,000 27,000 79,670 106,586 32,418
129,700 51,000 1,560,000 114,770 117,764 375,000 40,000 25,000 27,000 111,153 106,586 32,418
123,085 48,399 1,480,440 108,917 111,758 355,875 37,960 23,725 25,623 105,484 101,150 30,765
117,940 54,200 1,573,454 580,000 103,450 378,800 40,000 23,500 102,020 106,586 32,418
Other Key Development-Enabling Accounts Contributions to International Organizations ESF - Democracy and Governance Project Funding Middle East and North Africa Incentive Fund Democracy Fund National Endowment for Democracy (NED) Peace Corps Development Credit Authority (Program Account only) [By transfer, not direct appropriations] OPIC (Credit Subsidy only) Treasury Technical Assistance Inter-American Development Bank/Investment Corporation Asian Development Bank African Development Bank