Development Assistance: Basic Education Funding

The Global Need

FY13 Committee Approved Funding Senate: $800 million House: $800 million

As of 2010, 61 million primary school and 71 million adolescent students are not in school,1 with 42% of them living in poor, conflict-affected countries. Each year, millions of students who have attended school drop out before the fifth grade, often because of the inferior quality of their education, overcrowding and underresourced classrooms. According to the Global Monitoring Report, current aid levels fall far short of the $16 billion required annually to close the external financing gap in low-income countries needed to fund basic education.2

Significance of Funding Levels

An estimated 57 million children would be assisted by US Government supported education programs if basic education was funded at $800 million.3 On average, every additional year of schooling is estimated to increase workers income by 8.3%. Educational opportunities in countries struggling to overcome poverty are especially important for girls. Greater educational attainment, particularly for girls, leads to overall health improvements as well as to reduction in fertility and infant mortality.4

Importance of Funding
Education and skills development is vital in reducing unemployment, inequality, poverty, and promoting growth. It is also a wise investment for every $1 spent on education, as much as $10 to $15 can be generated in economic growth.5 Basic education programs represent a relatively low-cost way to help alleviate poverty through economic growth, while also building markets for US exports and enhancing stability and security worldwide.6 With funding for FY13, USAID will pursue its educational goals of: Improved reading skills for 100 million children in primary grades by 2015; Improved ability of tertiary and workforce development programs to produce a workforce with relevant skills to support country development goals by 2015; and Increased equitable access to education in crisis and conflict environments for 15 million learners by 2015.7

The Impact of Funding Success is Possible

Since committing to the Education for All goals in 2000, the international community and partner governments have seen: The number of children out of school has dropped by 47 million worldwide; The percentage of girls not in school has declined from 58% to 53%, and the gender gap in primary education is also narrowing in many countries; and The adult literacy rate has increased over the past two decades, from 76% in 1985-1994 to 84% in 20052010.8

1 2

UNESCO (2012) Global Monitoring Report. Pages 4 and 58. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/Pz2VO7 UNESCO. (2010). Global Monitoring Report, Table 2.9; "Estimating the costs of achieving Education for All in Low-Income Countries. Page 5. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001885/188561e.pdf. 3 This figure is based on the average number of primary and secondary age learners enrolled in USG supported education programs through FY09FY11 and the correlating fiscal year appropriations levels to determine average cost per student. 4 USAID. (2011). USAID Education Strategy: Opportunity Through Learning. Pages 2-3. As retrieved from http://1.usa.gov/TeSIUe . 5 UNESCO (2012) Global Monitoring Report. Pgs 18. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/Pz2VO7 6 Basic Education Coalition. (2011). Statement on President Obamas FY12 Budget Request for Basic Education. 7 USAID. (2011). USAID Education Strategy: Opportunity Through Learning. Page 1. As retrieved from http://1.usa.gov/T7Qc1T. 8 UNESCO. (2012). Global Monitoring Report. Pages 58, 355 and 5. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/Pz2VO7

October 31, 2012

Energy and Environment

The Global Need

FY13 Committee Approved Funding Senate: $1.15 billion FY12 Enacted: $1.25 billion

Healthy ecosystems are the foundation of prosperity, security, and health and provide the raw materials for much of the worlds economic activity. People living in poverty, especially in rural areas, feel the most immediate impacts when these systems are at risk, as they often draw their livelihoods directly from forests, fields, rivers, and oceans. Today the world is experiencing more frequent and severe storms, floods, droughts, and temperature changes, presenting serious risks to the livelihoods of millions of poor people and to the natural resources on which they depend. The resulting resource scarcity can lead to conflict, causing instability and disrupting trade and economic growth. Developing countries are estimated to bear 75 to 80 percent of the costs of climate-related damages, and even minimal temperature changes could result in reductions in GDP of 4 to 5 percent for Africa and South Asia. Most developing countries lack sufficient financial and technical capacities to manage increasing climate risk even as development increases their reliance on 1 natural resources.

Significance of Funding Levels

Funding levels approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee would significantly enhance a variety of energy and environment projects that generate vast economic and livelihood benefits. The Senate-passed allocation of $190 million for adaptation could generate returns between $275 million and $575 million for communities. Every $1 invested in adaptation programs generates between $1.45 to $3.03 for poor communities. Investing in community-based adaptation can result in an average increase in per capita incomes to $2.10 a day, while failure to invest can decrease incomes to below $1 a day. 2 The Senate-passed allocation of $200 million for biodiversity could improve natural resource management of about 70 million hectares of biologically significant areas. 3 Conserving just 25 percent of the worlds highest biodiversity areas would secure 56 percent of the value of ecosystem services on which 1.1 billion of the worlds poorest people rely. 4 The Senate-passed allocation of $113 million for sustainable landscapes could prevent over 11 million tons of carbon emissions, the equivalent of taking more than 2 million cars off U.S. roads. 5

Importance of Funding
Global demand for food, water, and energy is expected to double by 2050 as the global population grows from seven billion people to an estimated nine billion. This increase in demand makes the need for conservation and sustainable management of natural resourcesas well as increasing the capacity of the poor to adapt to climatic changesmore than good stewardship. In developing countries, where natural resources are often the very foundation of poor 6 households livelihoods, conservation and adaptation are basic investments in growth.

Impact of Funding Success is Possible

For three decades, USAID has helped boost ecological, economic, and environmental sustainability, with successful results, including: In 2010, helping at least 930,000 people increase their incomes through sustainable natural resource management and conservation activities; In 2011 and 2012, USAID worked with governments in Kenya, Liberia, South Sudan, Tanzania, Kosovo, Ethiopia and Timor-Leste to evaluate and recommend policy reforms in support of stronger land rights and management to give people more secure access to land. By 2016, USAID will have helped 20 partner countries develop and implement strategies for increasing their economic growth with lower emissions. 7
1 2

The World Bank. (2010). World Bank Development Report 2010: Development and Climate Change. Page 15. As retrieved from http://bit.ly/iYyNnD. CARE. (2012). Policy Brief: Climate Change Why Community Based Adaptation Makes Economic Sense. Page 2. As retrieved from http://www.careclimatechange.org/files/adaptation/PolicyBrief_Why_CBA_Makes_Economic_Sense_July12.pdf. 3 U.S. Agency for International Development (2012). Biodiversity Conservation and Forestry Programs 2011 Report. http://1.usa.gov/UiaHbl 4 Turner, W. et al. 2012. Global Biodiversity Conservation and the Alleviation of Poverty. BioScience 62:1( 8592). 5 Assuming a conservative return on investment of 1 ton avoided emissions per $10 dollars. 6 World Wildlife Federation. (2012). International Conservation Budget. As retrieved from http://bit.ly/Smm56Q 7 USAID. (2012). Environment and Global Climate Change. As retrieved from http://www.usaid.gov/what-we-do/environment-and-global-climate-change.

November 3, 2012

Global Health:
Family Planning and Reproductive Health Funding
The Global Need

FY13 Committee Approved Funding Senate: $700 million House: $461 million

The need for voluntary family planning is growing, and an estimated 222 million women in the developing world wish to delay, space, or complete childbearing, but do not have access to modern contraceptives.1 Of the 185 million pregnancies which occur yearly in the developing world, 40 percent are unplanned and roughly half of those unplanned pregnancies end in abortion.2 Many of these abortions are clandestine and performed under unsafe conditions.3

Significance of Funding Levels

The additional $239 million approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee for FY13, including $44.5 million for UNFPA would mean approximately: 12,428,000 additional women and couples would receive contraceptive services and supplies; 3,585,000 fewer unintended pregnancies; 1,673,000 fewer abortions would take place; and 9,560 fewer maternal deaths would occur as a result of increased access to contraceptive service and supplies, and 47,800 children would not lose their mothers.4

Importance of Funding
USAID is committed to ensuring that women and couples in developing countries have access to family planning services and are able to make informed, voluntary decisions about their reproductive lives. Funding for international family planning and reproductive health is a proven, cost-effective way to meet a broad range of international development goals. Family planning could prevent up to 40 percent of the more than 287,000 maternal deaths that occur every year, by enabling women to delay their first pregnancy and space later pregnancies at the safest intervals. In addition, with the ability to control birth spacing, the lives of 1.6 million children under the age of five could be saved each year.5

Benefits of Family Planning Assistance Success is Possible

USAID advances and supports voluntary family planning and reproductive health programs in more than 45 countries across the globe. Since the launch of USAIDs family planning program in 1965, parents are better equipped to feed, clothe, educate and provide health care for their children. Successes include: Since USAID started its program, modern contraceptive use in the 27 countries with the largest USAIDsupported programs has increased from under 10 to 37 percent, and the number of children per family has dropped from more than 6 to 4.5; Former recipients of USAID family planning assistance, such as Korea, Thailand, Brazil, and Mexico have graduated from the programs and are now donors; and According to the USAID Office of Population and Reproductive Health, 22 countries have graduated from USAID Family Planning and Reproductive Health assistance and no longer require US government support for family planning programs.
1

Guttmacher Institute. (2012). Adding It Up: Costs and Benefits of Contraceptive ServicesEstimates for 2012. Retrieved from http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/AIU-2012-estimates.pdf 2 Guttmacher Institute. (2012). Are You In The Know? As Retrieved from http://www.guttmacher.org/in-the-know/pregnancy.html. 3 UNFPA. (2012). Reproductive Health: Ensuring that Every Pregnancy is Wanted. Retrieved from http://www.unfpa.org/rh/planning.htm 4 Guttmacher Institute. (May 2012). Just the Numbers: The Impact of U.S. International Family Planning Assistance. Retrieved from http://www.guttmacher.org/media/resources/FB-Family-Planning-Assistance.pdf. 5 USAID.(2012). Family Planning. As retrieved from http://www.usaid.gov/what-we-do/global-health/family-planning.
November 2, 2012

Development Assistance: Feed the Future

The Global Need

FY13 Committee Approved Funding* Senate: $1.2 billion** FY12 Estimate:$1.17 billion

The Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations found that food production will have to rise by 60 percent by 2050 to meet rising demand from growing populations, increased incomes, and the diversion of food crops for energy. However, funding levels for donor investment in agriculture development are well below where they need to be if the world is to avert a major crisis.1

Significance of Funding Levels

Supporting the Senate Committee level of $1.2 billion for Feed the Future would increase impact on food and nutrition security by: Expanding public-private partnerships, such as existing partnerships with WalMart, PepsiCo, and SwissRe; Improving markets and trade, and increasing economic resilience in vulnerable rural communities; Reducing long-term vulnerability to food insecurity, helping to prevent costly crises such as the 2011 famine in the Horn of Africa and the 2012 food crisis in the Sahel; and Accelerating agricultural production, increasing adoption of technology, improving quality and access to market information and infrastructure.

Importance of Funding
Almost 900 million people 1 out of 8 men, women and children in the world are suffering from chronic hunger, while more than 3 million children die each year from malnutrition. Hunger robs the poor of healthy and productive lives and stunts the mental and physical development of young children but there is a solution. Smallholder farmers already provide up to 80 percent of the food supply in Asian and sub-Saharan Africa, but many lack the resources necessary to boost productivity, quality and sustainability of their harvests.2 Feed the Future focuses on the root causes of chronic hunger by improving farmers ability to produce and bring their crops to market in a sustainable way, to grow economies, increase food security and promote longterm stability and resilience. Investments in a gender-sensitive, inclusive, agriculture-led growth include improving agricultural productivity, expanding markets and trade, and increasing the economic resilience of vulnerable rural communities.3

The Impact of Funding Success is Possible 4

Through increased focus on training smallholders to run successful farms, establishing partnerships with agribusinesses, improving financial and agricultural services, and reducing trade barriers, farmers in the 20 Feed the Future target countries are increasing their competitiveness in national and international markets. In FY 2011, US Government agricultural assistance benefited over 4.3 million farmers and succeeded in helping 5.2 million farmers adopt new technologies or management practices. Some of the accomplishments of Feed the Future funding through the Development Assistance account include: Increasing the value of incremental sales at the farm level from $900,000 in FY2010 to $87 million in Feed the Future countries such as Guatemala, Liberia, Haiti, and Nepal in FY2011; Increasing the value of coffee exports in Rwanda by 77% in FY 2011; and Increasing farmer incomes in Haiti in targeted households by 76% through agriculture production and processing activities.

*The House SFOPS passed bill for FY 2012 does not include a specific funding amount for Feed the Future programming. **$1 billion from the Development Assistance Account, and $200 million from multilateral accounts. 1 Food and Agricultural Organization.(2012). How to Feed the World in 2050. As retrieved from http://bit.ly/Wcg4v 2 Food and Agriculture Organization. (2012) Factsheet, Smallholders and Family Farmers. As retrieved from: http://bit.ly/Wcg4v 3 USAID. (2012). Feed the Future. As retrieved from http://www.feedthefuture.gov/about. 4 Statistics and information in this section are from the FY13 Congressional Budget Justification, Foreign Operations, Volume 2, page 446-448. As retrieved from http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/185014.pdf.

October 31, 2012

Agricultural Appropriations: Food for Peace (P.L. 480)

The Global Need

FY13 Committee Approved Funding Senate: $1.466 billion House: $1.15 billion

As of September 2012, 870 million people are estimated to be suffering from malnutrition and hunger. 1 Crop failures, conflicts, natural disasters, and high domestic food prices all contribute to this food crisis. In October 2012, 35 countries were identified to be in crisis, many of which experience recurrent shocks, keeping households in a cycle of hunger and poverty. 2 Hunger remains one of the worlds most pressing challenges, with almost one in seven people worldwide suffering from chronic hunger. Surviving and recovering from these shocks requires resilience, however many families have lost their ability to respond to natural disasters or increased food prices, and resort to damaging practices like selling off their assets for survival, leaving them even more vulnerable to future hardship. A combination of immediate emergency assistance and resilience building activities are needed to enable households that can survive and bounce back quickly from crisis. Significance of Funding Levels The additional $316 million dollars approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee for FY13 for Title II Food for Peace could: Provide food assistance to approximately 9 million more people;3 and Increase resilience and decrease the need for future emergency assistance by helping families acquire the tools they need to improve farming techniques and build self-reliance through Title II NonEmergency/development funding included in this appropriation.

Importance of Funding Food for Peace remains the flagship U.S. food assistance program. During emergencies, Food for Peace provides immediate and lifesaving food to the most vulnerable through food distributions, food-for-work programs, and food vouchers. With multi-year programs, Food for Peace development programs also boost smallholder agricultural output and linkages to markets, improve mother and child nutrition, better manage natural resources, and ultimately help communities reduce future reliance on emergency aid and a host of other interventions. These steps to reduce hunger and increase the economic well-being of people in the developing world create more prosperous and stable markets for US goods and services. In addition, volatile food prices and limited access to affordable food can lead to social unrest, making it critical to both our national and global security that the US and its partners help developing countries better manage destabilizing events like soaring food pricings and natural disasters.4 Impact of Funding Success is Possible Since Food for Peace began in 1954, more than three billion people in 150 countries have benefited directly from US food aid. At present, it provides food and assistance for millions of individuals in 44 countries who are suffering from hunger and malnutrition.5 Examples of success include:

Reducing stunting prevalence among children under five years by 2.4% per year; and Helping several thousand farmers in Nicaragua move out of low-profit local markets into formal high-profit supply chains resulting in a 44% increase in income and sales of $39.8 million in agricultural products to major companies in four years. 6

1 2

FAO. (2012). The State of Food Security. Page 8. As retrieved from http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i3027e/i3027e.pdf. FAO. (2012). Countries Requiring External Assistance for Food. As retrieved from http://www.fao.org/giews/english/hotspots/index.htm. 3 This number is based upon a cost per beneficiary amount of approximately $35, drawn from an analysis of funding from the previous three USAIDs International Food Assistance Annual Reports, dividing total title II costs by total number of beneficiaries served. 4 Roadmap to End Global Hunger. July 2012. As retrieved from http://bit.ly/Wb38d6 5 US Food Aid and Security. (2012). Food for Peace. As retrieved from http://foodaid.org/food-aid-programs/food-for-peace/. 6 Roadmap to End Global Hunger. July 2012. As retrieved from http://bit.ly/Wb38d6

November 1, 2012

International Disaster Assistance

The Global Need

FY13 Committee Approved Funding Senate: $1.25 billion House: $923 million

The International Disaster Assistance (IDA) account is the US Governments frontline fund for responding to major humanitarian emergencies, natural disasters, and the needs of internally displaced persons (IDPs). Global needs are mounting, with crises in Darfur, Congo, Burma, and Syria, among others, driving global IDP numbers to more than 27 million. This is nearly double the size of the world refugee population, yet despite facing similar challenges IDPs receive 1 far less international support per capita. The IDA account also addresses humanitarian needs arising from political instability and food crises, as in Yemen, ongoing droughts in the Sahel and the Horn of Africa, and natural disasters such as earthquakes, hurricanes, and tsunamis. According to UNOCHA, the global cost to adequately support humanitarian 2 needs in 2012 is over $8.8 billion. By robustly funding IDA, US leadership can have a ripple effect as this funding can help leverage increased international resources and pressure other countries to contribute more. IDA also funds disaster risk reduction (DRR) activities, which builds the ability of communities to prepare for, and mitigate, the effects of disasters. While DRR is chronically underfunded, it is invaluable in building resiliency, preventing loss of life and reducing reliance on aid in future emergencies. World Bank research has found that DRR investments can yield 3 a 7 to 1 ratio of savings to investment.

Significance of Funding Levels

The IDA account is severely stretched, responding to multiple major humanitarian crises in the Horn of Africa, the Sahel, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. The additional $327 million approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee for FY13 could provide further support for: Victims of conflict displaced in places like Syria, Darfur, and South Sudan; Women and children facing starvation in Somalia and the Sahel; Resources for preventing and mitigating new emergencies; and Bolstering the USs ability to respond to future natural disasters and humanitarian crises.

Importance of Funding
The disparity between US support for refugees and IDPs reflects the reality that even as refugees struggle to adequately meet basic needs, IDPs receive far less than the global minimum standards for humanitarian support. The funding 4 provided by the Senate could vastly improve basic assistance to approximately 7.8 million IDPs, vastly improving their access to basic services such as water, health care, and shelter. It would also protect other vital humanitarian programs against future funding squeezes as witnessed in the aftermath of the Haiti earthquake when the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) cut 40% of funding for programs in other disaster around the world in order to 5 redirect resources to Haiti.

The Impact - Success is Possible

Americas strong role in supporting the most vulnerable populations in the world demonstrates US leadership in humanitarian assistance. In 2011, OFDA, which implements IDA funding, has successfully:

Provided emergency assistance to tens of millions of people in 54 countries in response to 67 disasters; Addressed conflict and displacement related needs in the Middle East; and Supported the reintegration of returnees to South Sudan and provided livelihood support to help families learn 6 the skills needed to rebuild their community and country.

1 2

Internal Displacement Monitoring Center. (2011). IDPs in Protracted Displacement. As retrieved from http://bit.ly/TUgKCb . UN OCHA. (2012). Humanitarian Funding: 62 Million Need Humanitarian Help Worldwide. As retrieved from http://bit.ly/PnzX0W. 3 US Geological Survey and the World Bank estimated that an investment of $40 billion would have prevented losses of $280 billion in the 1990s. As retrieved from Executive Summary, http://www.unisdr.org/files/1071_disasterriskreductionstudy.pdf 4 The average 5-year per capita disparity between refugee and IDP funding was $42 from 2007-2011. $328 million would erase this disparity for 5 The Cable. (2012). Haiti Causing Steep Funding Cuts, Aid Groups Warn. As retrieved from http://bit.ly/9Sdwft. 6 USAID, Office of US Foreign Disaster Assistance; Annual Report for FY 2011. Pages 9-10 and 111.

November 13, 2012

Global Health: Malaria Funding

The Global Need

FY13 Committee Approved Funding Senate: $670 million House: $650 million

Every year, 3.3 billion people are at risk of contracting malaria, leading to approximately 216 million malaria cases and an estimated 655,000 deaths. Thanks in part to President George W. Bushs leadership and the creation of the Presidential Malaria Initiative in 2005, which currently operates in 19 focus countries, international funding to combat malaria has continued to rise. However, funding still falls short of the $5 billion per year needed from 2010 to 2015 to reach malaria control targets.1 Additionally, robust funding for malaria research and development is necessary to sustain the remarkable gains made against the disease in the last decade. Significance of Funding Levels The extra $20 million dollars approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee for FY13 could provide: Bed nets for over 5 million people; Artemisnin-based Combination Therapy (ACT) treatment for more than 14 million people; or Rapid diagnostic testing (RDT) for 33 million people. Cost of Care $4.00 = Long-lasting insecticidal bed net that lasts three years $1.40 = ACT course for an adult $0.60 = Rapid diagnostic testing for children and adults2

Importance of Funding
The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that half of the worlds population is at risk of malaria infection. Malaria is prevalent in 106 countries, referred to as malaria-endemic countries. Malaria imposes significant costs to both individuals and governments. Direct costs such as illness, treatment, or premature death have been estimated to be at least $12 billion per year. Indirect costs, like loss of economic growth, are many times more than that.3

The Impact of Funding - Success is Possible

USAID works closely with national governments to build their capacity to prevent and treat malaria. With the help of US and global funding efforts, significant gains in combating malaria have been made, including: 43 countries have reported a reduction in malaria cases of more than 50 percent; Estimated new cases of malaria have decreased by 17 percent globally; Mortality in children under five has fallen dramatically across Sub-Saharan Africa due to a scale-up of malaria control efforts;4 and The overall annual malaria death toll has declined from 985,000 to 655,000 people, a 26 percent reduction in global malaria mortality.5 By continuing these smart investments, the U.S. can continue to lead the international community in ending malaria deaths globally.
Kendall, Alexandra. (June 2012). Congressional Research Services: U.S Response to the Global Threat of Malaria. Retrieved from http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41644.pdf. 2 World Health Organization. (2011). World Malaria Report 2011: Financing Malaria Control. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/Rrtlg1 3 Center for Disease and Control Prevention. (2010). Impact of Malaria. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/malaria/malaria_worldwide/impact.html. 4 The Presidents Malaria Initiative: Sixth Annual Report to Congress (April 2012). Page 3. As retrieved from: http://1.usa.gov/RvHY3Q 5 The Global Fund. (2012). Fighting Malaria: The Global Malaria Epidemic. Retrieved from http://www.theglobalfund.org/en/about/diseases/malaria/.
1

October 31, 2012

Global Health: Maternal and Child Health

The Global Need

FY13 Committee Approved Funding Senate: $679 million House: $605 million

In June 2012, the U.S., along with 162 other governments, made a bold promise to the world to end preventable child deaths. 1 In fact, U.S. investments have made a major contribution to the 10 percent reduction in infant mortality rates worldwide over the last eight years, and USAID interventions help save the lives of more than 6 million children under 5 every year. 2 Still, there are 6.9 million deaths among children under five each year, largely due to avoidable and treatable causes, including pneumonia, diarrhea, and malaria. Malnutrition is the underlying cause of about one-third of deaths in these young children. 3 Every year in 358,000 women are dying from largely preventable complications related to pregnancy or childbirth. Significance of Funding Levels The extra $73.418 million dollars approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee for FY13 could provide: Over 6.9 million children immunizations against tetanus, pertussis, and hepatitis, or Over 6.3 million children low-cost antibiotics to treat pneumonia-the leading killer of children under five, or Over 11.5 million children oral rehydration salts that could help save many of the 1.1 million who die needlessly from diarrhea. 4 Importance of Funding Funding for preventing illness and promoting good health in mothers and children reduces the cost of curing people when they get sick by up to $700 million globally per year for child survival alone. 5 U.S. investments and the bold child survival call to action have led to country ownership of these important health initiatives, including in India, Nigeria, Malawi and Nepal- which have prioritized and invested their own resources in maternal and child health. Significance of Funding Success is Possible Since the inception of its child survival and maternal health program, the United States, in collaboration with many international partners, has delivered unprecedented successes: Almost a billion episodes of child diarrhea treated each year, reducing child deaths from diarrheal disease by more than 50 percent since 1990; More than 100 million children received basic immunizations each year; More than 75 million infants and children with pneumonia received treatment annually; Malnutrition among children under age 5 has been reduced from one in three to one in four, a 25 percent reduction; and, More than 70 percent of women receive at least some care during pregnancy. 6

1 2

A Promise Renewed. (2012). A Call to Action. As retrieved from http://www.apromiserenewed.org/A_Call_to_Action.html. USAID. (2012). USAID Maternal and Child Health. As retrieved from http://www.usaid.gov/what-we-do/global-health/maternal-and-child-health . 3 UNICEF. (2012). Committing to Child Survival: A Promise Renewed, Progress Report 2012. Forward, As retrieved from http://uni.cf/QQB5wA 4 Costs determined by average treatment costs of interventions and include vaccines, cold chain, syringes & needles, training and salaries. 5 World Health Organization. (2012). Investing in Maternal, Newborn, and Child Health. Page 3. As retrieved from http://bit.ly/VEesIW 6 USAID. (2009). USAIDs Child Survival and Maternal Health Program. Page 2. As retrieved from http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PDACN044.pdf.

October 31, 2012

Agricultural Appropriations: McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program
The Global Need
1

FY13 Committee Approved Funding Senate: $184 million House: $180.32 million

Every year 2.5 million children die from an entirely preventable condition; malnutrition. According to UNICEF, there are an estimated 130 million school-age children in the worlds poorest countries who are undernourished and would be 2 eligible for school feeding programs. Currently, USDA funds 36 active agreements with 17 cooperating sponsors in 28 3 4 countries, assisting more than 4.3 million women and children using programs such as McGovern-Dole.

Significance of Funding Levels

The additional $3.68 million dollars for FY13 approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee could provide meals for over 92,000 children throughout the school year. Since FY08, McGovern-Dole has provided school-aged children in poverty-stricken countries what is often their only full 5 meal of the day at an average cost of $40 per student, per year. McGovern-Dole not only provides beneficial nutritional meals, helping to combat hunger, but also increases literacy and future opportunities that education provides- building the groundwork for long-term sustainable development.

Importance of Funding
The McGovern-Dole program provides technical and financial assistance to carry out pre- and primary-school programs in developing countries in order to improve food security, reduce the incidence of hunger and malnutrition, and improve 6 literacy and primary education. According to WFP, there are 66 million children who go to school hungry every day. By providing school meals, teacher training, and related support, McGovern-Dole projects help boost school enrollment and 7 academic performance. The program also works to help move national governments closer to their goal of fully funding and operating school meals as an important social safety net.

The Impact of Funding- Success is Possible

Since 2000, when USDA established the predecessor to the McGovern-Dole program, it has provided meals to feed more than 22 million children in 41 countries and boosted school attendance by an estimated 14 percent overall 8 and by 17 percent for girls. 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 currently 9 operate two of the largest school meal programs in the world.

Country Success Story Republic of Congo

Since 2001, four McGovern-Dole Programs have been implemented in the Republic of Congo. During this time, about 30,000 metric tons of US-donated foods (rice, beans, potato flakes and vegetable oil) have been distributed to nearly 150,000 pre-school and primary school-age Congolese children. The efforts helped increase Congolese school enrollment by nearly 24 percent. The drop-out rate has decreased by more than 50 percent. In 2010, the Congolese government approved a plan that gradually decreases the amount of U.S.-donated food and increases the Congolese governments logistical and administrative support. The Congolese government is expected to take complete 10 responsibility for the school lunch program by the end of 2015.

1 2 3

State of Food Insecurity in the World, 2012, page 4. As retrieved from http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i3027e/i3027e.pdf UNICEF. (2009). Tracking Progress on Child and Maternal Nutrition. Page 5. As retrieved from http://uni.cf/darWEi. USDA Blog. (2012). U.S. Wheat Helps Feed Children in Bangladesh. Retrieved from http://1.usa.gov/RyrhDJ . 4 U.S. International Food Assistance Report 2010, Page 24. As retrieved from http://1.usa.gov/Pq77Pc 5 Determined by dividing beneficiaries and funding levels from FY 2008-2011. Figures taken from annual US International Food Assistance Reports. 6 Two minutes to learn about school meals, page 1. As retrieved from http://bit.ly/OvzqMU 7 U.S. Department of State. (2011). Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justification Fiscal Year 2011: Volume 2. Retrieved from http://1.usa.gov/Q79zv7 3 U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2012). McGovernDole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program Fact Sheet. Retrieved from http://1.usa.gov/YrPdwW . 8 UNICEF. (2009). Tracking Progress on Child and Maternal Nutrition. Page 5. As retrieved from http://uni.cf/darWEi. 9 Roadmap to End Global Hunger. Page 15. (July 2012). As retrieved from http://www.thp.org/files/FINAL_roadmap_layout_web.pdf. 10 USDA Blog. (Sept 2012). FAS Food for Education Program Fuels Food for Thought. As retrieved from http://1.usa.gov/QICEuv.

November 1, 2012

Development Assistance: Microfinance

The Global Need

FY13 Committee Approved Funding Senate: $265 million House: $265 million

An estimated 2.7 billion people around the world have no access to formal financial services, limiting their ability to save, invest, or grow a business. Microfinance brings essential financial services to many poor women and men around the world, but much more needs to be done to reach those who are very poor, living on less than $1.25 a day. While commercial investment has entered the marketplace in some countries, it tends to not reach the very poor. In order to promote greater entrepreneurship and private sector growth, microfinance institutions must be able to access capital to grow and continue to meet demand.1

Significance of Funding Levels

Approved FY 13 funding levels could provide approximately 3 million people with the financial means to start or grow a business and lift themselves out of poverty. Microfinance can often be combined with health services and other non-financial support to further help families escape poverty.2

Importance of Funding
In many developing countries, the self-employed comprise more than 50 percent of the labor force. Access to small amounts of credit at reasonable interest rates allows poor people to improve their lives, send their children to school, pay for health care, and improve their nutrition. Microfinance also improves social capital as clients become more empowered and integrated into markets and their communities. Evidence shows that when poor people have access to financial services, they choose to invest their loans, additional earnings, or savings in activities and assets that benefit their businesses and their families. Thus, access to financial services provides the poor with the means to achieve most of the Millennium Development Goalson their own terms, in a sustainable way.3

Impact of Funding Success is Possible

As of FY11, USAID was providing microenterprise development assistance in 50 countries, with 93 percent of all USAID-assisted microfinance institutions operationally self-sustaining. Of the estimated 4.6 million beneficiaries of USAID microenterprise funding in FY11, nearly 2 million were very poor, living on less than $1.25 a day.4 Examples of the work that USAID has supported by partnering with international NGOs and foundations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation include: Connecting 370,000 smallholder farmers in Kenya with technology and markets, nearly quadrupling maize production and significantly increasing incomes. Extending mobile financial services to 500,000 people living in remote areas in Haiti via their mobile phone.5

Microfinance promotes fiscal responsibility, entrepreneurship, and sustainable economic growth.

1 2

Grameen Foundation. (2012). Microfinance Basis. As retrieved from http://www.grameenfoundation.org/what-we-do/microfinance/microfinance-basics. Based on a cost per beneficiary of $85 as determined from 107 projects which provided information on borrowers, savers, microenterprises or total number of employees from USAIDs Results Reporting in 2011. Page 4. As retrieved from http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PDACT959.pdf . 3 Consultative Group to Assist the Poor. (2002). Microfinance and the Millennium Development Goals. As retrieved from http://bit.ly/VeaECB . 4 USAID. (2012). Microenterprise Results Reporting: Annual Report to Congress. Page 6. As retrieved from http://1.usa.gov/VeaoUo. 5 USAID. (2012). Microenterprise Development. As retrieved from http://1.usa.gov/X3fJ1t

November 1, 2012

Migration and Refugee Assistance

The Global Need

FY13 Committee Approved Funding Senate: $2.3 billion House: $1.683 billion

Armed conflicts are forcing people to flee across borders at a faster rate in 2012 than any other year this century. 1 Since 2000, the number of refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) has increased by nearly two-thirds, from 25.6 million to 43.7 million. Yet, according to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, as of October 30th, the agency has less than half the money it needs for Africans displaced by conflict and may need to start cutting support to refugees. 2 On top of record-high displacement in 2011, as of October 2012, the crisis in Syria has forced 500,000,refugees into neighboring countries. 3 By the end of the year, it is estimated there will be 710,000 Syrian refugees. Robust funding is needed to respond to the highest displacement levels in 15 years, including complex emergencies such as in Syria, South Sudan, the Horn of Africa and the Sahel as well as protracted crisis situations and efforts to support innovative, long-term, sustainable policies that can mitigate future costs of responding to emergencies.

Significance of Funding Levels

The MRA account is badly stretched, responding to huge population movements and conflict. The additional $617 million approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee for FY13 would provide further support for: Syrian refugees who are placing strain on surrounding countries which are already unable to meet the increasing demand for water, housing, schools, and hospitals; Somalis who are taking refuge in Kenyas Dadaab camp and are without adequate housing, water, sanitation, and education; and Schooling for the 25% of refugee children who have no access to primary education and the more than 60% who have no access to secondary school.

Importance of Funding
Refugees supported by the MRA account are heavily dependent on the international assistance for their basic needs. Refugees often cannot safely return home, and 80% of the worlds refugees are hosted in poor, developing countries that have little capacity to support them. As a major new refugee crisis emerges from Syria, robust funding for the MRA account is vital. The Senate level will also allow funding for important gender-based violence prevention and related services, refugee education, livelihoods programs (which reduce long-term dependence on aid), and programs to find permanent solutions for the displaced. Investing in these important activities will lay the groundwork for refugees to become more self-sufficient and less aid dependent in the long run.

Impact of Funding Success is Possible

Americas strong role in supporting the most vulnerable populations in the world demonstrates US leadership in humanitarian assistance, but also plays an invaluable role in creating a more secure, stable world. Funding to UNHCR and NGOs through the MRA account has achieved important progress, such as:
1 2

Supporting Syrian refugees in Jordan to address basic needs and reduce destabilizing pressure on the Jordanian government; and Providing the largest bloc of funding for the repatriation of approximately two million Sudanese refugees to South Sudan after the end of the civil war. 4

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2012). UNHCR Global Trends 2011. Page 3. As retrieved from http://www.unhcr.org/4fd6f87f9.html. Borger, Julian. (October 30, 2012) UNHCR chief says his agency lacks cash to look after victims of conflict. The Guardian. As retrieved from: http://bit.ly/St2nZK 3 UNHCRs Syria Regional Response, Information Sharing Portal. As retrieved on October 24th, 2012 at: http://bit.ly/HqwSM3 4 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2012). UNHCR Global Trends 2011. Page 7. As retrieved from http://www.unhcr.org/4fd6f87f9.html. November 1, 2012

Global Health: Neglected Tropical Diseases

The Global Need

FY13 Committee Approved Funding Senate: $125 million FY12 Enacted: $89 million*

Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs) impact nearly 1 in 6 people worldwide, including nearly half a billion children. These diseases include schistosomiasis, river blindness, lymphatic filariasis, trachoma, roundworm, whipworm, and hookworm. Every year up to 400,000 people die from NTDs; one billion suffer from one or more tropical diseases, causing severe disability and hindering cognitive development. 1 The general consensus within the development community is it can cost as little as 50 cents per year to treat a person against the most common NTDs. Significance of Funding Levels The additional $36 million dollars approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee for FY13 could provide treatment to 72,000,000 people. 2 Importance of Funding Eliminating NTDs offers one of the clearest links to cutting the cycle of poverty for millions of people. NTDs coexist with poverty because they thrive where access to clean water and sanitation are limited and people live without protection from disease vectors. NTDs are also recognized as a contributor to poverty since they can:

Impair intellectual development in children; Reduce school enrollment; and, Hinder economic productivity by limiting the ability of infected individuals to work. 3

USAID support for NTDs focuses on the scale-up of efficient and sustained preventive chemotherapy in an integrated manner so that control of all and elimination of some of these diseases can be achieved. Impact of Funding Success is Possible Over the past 5 years, the US Government has leveraged $3.1 billion in donated medicines, resulting in the delivery of more than: 584.6 million safe and effective treatment strategies for NTDs to approximately 257.9 million people. 4

*House level of funding for NTDs was not specified in the FY 2013 State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Amount 1 U.S. Department of State. (2011). Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justification Fiscal Year 2011: Volume 2. Retrieved from http://1.usa.gov/Q79zv7. 2 Based on cost per beneficiary amount of $0.50, analysis taking the number of beneficiaries over the total funding allotted over the course of several fiscal years. 3 USAID. (2012). USAID Neglected Tropical Diseases. As retrieved from http://www.usaid.gov/what-we-do/global-health/neglected-tropical-diseases. 4 USAID. (2012). USAIDs Neglected Tropical Diseases Program. As retrieved from http://www.neglecteddiseases.gov/about/index.html.

November 6, 2012

Global Health: Nutrition Funding

The Global Need

FY13 Committee Approved Funding Senate: $122 million House: $95 million

Malnutrition is responsible for the deaths of over one out of every three children under age five each year or more than 2 million children. Virtually all of these deaths are preventable. For the 170 million children 1 who are living with chronic malnutrition throughout their young lives, it can cause serious, often irreversible, damage to their bodies and brains. Malnutrition among young children can severely limit or impair their ability to grow, learn, earn a living, take care of themselves and ultimately help their families rise out of poverty. 2

Significance of Funding
For about $8, a child can be provided with a package of interventions designed to save their lives and help prevent the irreversible damage to their brains and bodies caused by malnutrition. These interventions include Vitamin A supplementation, therapeutic zinc for the management of diarrhea, micronutrient powders, de-worming medication, as well as adequate iron and folic acid for expectant mothers. The extra $27 million dollars approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee for FY13 would support an additional 3,370,000 children and their moms in their fight against malnutrition.3

Importance of Funding
The quality of nutrition during pregnancy and until a childs second birthday the critical 1,000 day window also has enormous, long-term macroeconomic implications. Child malnutrition is also a serious drain on economic productivityin some cases, it costs as much as 11% of a countrys GDPand imposes staggering health costs on countries that are already struggling to meet basic needs. 4 Additionally, it often undermines the investments made in other sectors like health care, agriculture and economic development.

The Impact of Funding - Success is Possible

Evidence has shown that preventing and treating malnutrition during the first years of a childs life offers tremendous return on investment. By investing in improved nutrition during the critical 1,000 day window, the international community can:
1

Save more than 1 million lives each year; 5 Boost a countrys GDP by at least 2-3 percent annually; 6 Build self-sufficiency: well-nourished children are more likely to continue their education, have higher IQs, and earn up to 46% more over their lifetimes; 7 Significantly reduce the human and economic burden of infectious diseases such as malaria and HIV/AIDS, and chronic diseases such as diabetes; and Help end hunger and break the cycle of poverty.

Onis M, Blossne M, and Borghi E, Prevelance of stunting among pre-school children 1999-2020, Growth Assessment and Surveillance Unit, Public Health Nutrition, 2011, Jul 14:1-7. 2 Global Monitoring Report. (2012) World Bank and International Monetary Fund. 3 Based on the costing of five interventions--Vitamin A supplementation, therapeutic zinc for the management of diarrhea, micronutrient powders, deworming, and adequate iron and folic acid for pregnant women--using data provided by the World Bank and accessed at: http://bit.ly/VGOvIJ. 4 The Cost of Hunger: Social and economic impact of child undernutrition in Central America and the Dominican Republic, The United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean and World Food Programme, 2008. 5 Horton, Susan, et al. Scaling Up Nutrition: What will it cost? The World Bank. 6 The World Bank, Repositioning Nutrition as Central to Development, 2006. 7 Hoddinott, J., J. Maluccio, et al., 2008: Effect of a nutrition intervention during early childhood on economic productivity in Guatemalan adults, The Lancet, 371.

November 1, 2012

Global Health: Polio Funding

The Global Need

FY13 Committee Approved Funding Senate: $40 million* House: N/A

Polio eradication is at a tipping point between success and failure, according to the Director General of the World Health Organization.1 Less than a quarter century ago, polio was permanently disabling 350,000 children every year in 125 countries. By 2011, polio cases had declined to only 650 cases, primarily in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Chad. In 2012 (through October) only 170 people in the world had been diagnosed with polio. Complete eradication of polio is achievable in the near future. However, as long as polio remains in one country all countries are at risk.2 Significance of Funding Levels The approved FY 2013 funding level by the Senate Appropriations Committee enables USAID to continue to support rapid response to outbreaks, surveillance in endemic and polio-free countries at risk of importations of the virus, community mobilization and other critical activities on behalf of the global eradication effort. USAIDs polio activities are particularly concerned with protecting children in under-served communities and countries in conflict.3 Importance of Funding As long as a single child remains infected, children everywhere are at risk of contracting polio. Due to cross-border transmission, polio cases broke out in 23 previously polio-free countries between 2000 and 2010. Success hinges on continued financing of the global eradication initiative including support for vaccinations, rapid response to outbreaks, and surveillance for cases, as well as further analysis provided by the Global Laboratory Network of 145 laboratories.4 Polio eradication benefits every society, regardless of where families live. If polio were eradicated in the next five years, it would save developing countries at least $40-$50 billion, mostly in low-income countries.5 Impact of Funding Success is Possible Since 1988, when the Global Polio Eradication Initiative began and polio was paralyzing a thousand children worldwide every day, 8 million people are walking paralysis-free as a result of the effort to eradicate polio. More than 2.5 billion children have been immunized against polio since 1988, thanks to the cooperation of more than 200 countries and 20 million volunteers. The United States took the lead in this historic Initiative, providing $2 billion of the $9 billion spent on polio eradication between 1988 and 2012. The Rotary Foundation and the Gates Foundation have each provided over $1 billion.6
*This appropriation for polio is part of the FY13 Maternal Child Health account. In addition, Congress supports global polio eradication efforts through the Department of Health and Human Services appropriations for the Centers for Disease Control. In 2011 CDC received $107 million for its work with polio. 1 Polio Global Eradication Initiative. (May 24, 2012.) Polio eradication shifts into emergency mode. As retrieved at: http://bit.ly/MLbEK8 2 Global Polio Eradication Initiative.(2012). Data and Monitoring Polio This Week. As retrieved from http://bit.ly/9BJAP4. 3 Based on a cost per dose of $0.14 and three doses per person. Global Polio Eradication Initiative.(2012). Oral Polio Vaccination. As retrieved from http://www.polioeradication.org/Polioandprevention/Thevaccines/OralpoliovaccineOPV.aspx. 4 World Health Organization.(2012). Poliomyelitis. As retrieved from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs114/en/. 5 World Health Organization.(2012). Poliomyelitis. As retrieved from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs114/en/. 6 Global Polio Eradication Initiative.(2012). History of Polio. As retrieved from http://www.polioeradication.org/Polioandprevention/Historyofpolio.aspx.

October 31, 2012

Global Health: Tuberculosis Funding

The Global Need

FY13 Committee Approved Funding Senate: $285 million House: $236 million

Globally, Tuberculosis (TB) is the second leading cause of death from an infectious disease. It is one of the top three killers of women globally: in 2010 it killed an estimated 580,000 women, leaving many children and families vulnerable. The World Health Organization also estimates 9.7 million children have been orphaned as a result of losing at least one of their parents to TB. 1 In 2010 there were 8.8 million new cases of TB and 1.1 million deaths, including 350,000 deaths from TB among people with HIV. The vast majority of deaths from TB are in the developing world. 2

Significance of Funding Levels \ The additional $49 million dollars approved by3 the Senate Appropriations Committee for FY13 could provide comprehensive treatment regimens to 252,577 people. 3 Importance of Funding
As TB knows no borders, strong global TB control is in the national interest of the United States. Drug resistant TB poses a particular challenge to domestic TB control due to high treatment costs, estimated at $100,000 to $300,000 per case. 4 TB has a significant economic impact on both families and societies. It is estimated that in some countries the loss of productivity attributable to TB is 4 to 7 percent of countries GDP. TB is a major economic stressor for poor families worldwide, as individuals may need to stop working in order to get treatment or to care for relatives. The economic costs of seeking treatment are also high research shows that mean household spending on TB care for items such as transport to the health facilities as well as fees for medications for private sector care can be as much as 20 percent of total annual household income. 5
6

Impact of Funding Success is Possible 6

Between 1995 and 2010, 41 million TB patients were treated successfully through TB control programs, saving up to 6 million lives. Globally, deaths due to TB have fallen by more than one-third since 1990.7 Currently, USAID is working with 28 countries to improve TB services. These efforts save lives and prevent the spread of TB. Additionally, with continued funding, the international community can reduce the potential of drug resistant TB in the future. With continued and consistent funding, by 2014 USAID will:

Contribute to a 50 percent reduction in TB deaths and disease burden from the 1990 baseline; Sustain or exceed the detection of at least 70 percent of sputum smear-positive cases of TB and successfully treating at least 85 percent of cases detected in countries with established U.S. Government tuberculosis programs; Successfully treat 2.6 million new sputum smear-positive TB patients under DOTS programs by 2014 primarily through support for needed services, commodities, health workers, and training, and additional treatment through coordinated multilateral efforts; and Diagnose and initiate treatment of at least 57,200 new multidrug-resistant (MDR) TB cases by 2014, and provide additional treatment through coordinated multilateral efforts.

USAID. (2012). U.S. Government Report on International Foreign Assistance in TB FY 2010: Leading and Leveraging. As retrieved from http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PDACT268.pdf. 2 The Global Fund. (2012). Fighting Tuberculosis: The Global Tuberculosis Epidemic. As retrieved from http://bit.ly/uTkCG7. 3 Based on cost per beneficiary amount of $194, as provided by analysis run by The Global Fund of median costs for Directly Observed Treatment Short (DOTS) from 2007-2009. 4 US House of Representatives TB Elimination Caucus letter. (2012). Led by Representatives Eliot Engel, Gene Green, and Don Young. 5 USAID. (2012). U.S. Government Report on International Foreign Assistance in TB FY 2010: Leading and Leveraging. As retrieved from http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PDACT268.pdf. 6 USAID. (2012). Stopping Tuberculosis. As retrieved from http://www.usaid.gov/what-we-do/global-health/tuberculosis. 7 The Global Fund. (2012). Fighting Tuberculosis: The Global Tuberculosis Epidemic. As retrieved from http://bit.ly/uTkCG7

USAID
Operating Expenses (OE)
Importance of Funding

FY13 Committee Approved Funding Senate: $1.39 billion House: $1.274 billion

The last two Presidents have elevated development as a pillar of US National Security policy, critical to promoting and protecting US interests. Reforms to the USs development infrastructure, initiated during the Bush Administration, have been reinforced and expanded under President Obama. In recent years, Congress has pushed USAID to be more responsive, transparent, and accountable. In response, USAID launched an aggressive reform agenda USAID Forward which focuses on significantly strengthening monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of development outcomes; maintaining a more transparent platform for showing where foreign aid resources are spent; improving sustainability and strengthening local partners; fostering innovation through science, technology, and the private sector, minimizing non-competitive funding; and reducing reliance on mega-grants and mega-contracts. The military has strongly supported bolstering US civilian capacity, as exemplified by former Secretary Gates, who noted: There is a need for a dramatic increase in spending on the civilian instruments of national security diplomacy, strategic communications, foreign assistance, civic action, and economic reconstruction and development We must focus our energies beyond the guns and steel of the military having robust civilian capabilities available could make it less likely that military force will have to be used in the first place... 1 Development assistance that can reform and modernize while meeting these national security demands requires strong management, staffing, and accountability. The Operating Expenses (OE) Account is the backbone of USAID, providing funding for these very functions: paying the salaries of core USAID staff both foreign and civil service; providing equipment, technology, and training to enable them to perform their jobs effectively; and financing the tools to monitor progress and ensure accountability through USAID Forward. Yet for at least the past decade, growth in the program budget has outpaced growth in OE. 2 This imbalance between program increases and operations funding hampers USAIDs ability to execute its mission effectively. Instead of internal experts extending its reach and making important programming and policy decisions, USAID has been forced to rely on outside contractors for a significant portion of its core mission. This reliance weakens strategic planning and accountability.

Significance of Funding Levels

Funding USAIDs operating budget will make U.S. foreign assistance more effective, accountable, and transparent. Providing the Senate committee level of $1.39 billion for USAID Operating Expenses would allow: USAID to more effectively oversee program implementation and monitor accountability and results; Important reform under USAID Forward to continue, including aggressive efforts to cut waste and streamline bureaucracy, reform procurement, bolster accountability, and drive innovation. Continued growth in staff and training opportunities under the Development Leadership Initiative (DLI) started by the Bush Administration.

The Impact - Success is Possible

Investments in OE in recent years have made tangible progress in increasing USAIDs organizational effectiveness: After more than two decades of declining capacity within USAID, the DLI has made headway in filling gaps in critical technical skills lost, such as on engineering and agriculture, as well as rebuilding USAID core of contracting staff. Cuts to OE would threaten to roll back the gains of the last five years. USAID has re-established its policy and budget office; this office has improved budget management and rapidly increased USAIDs focus on core strategic challenges, producing new policies on Countering Violent Extremism, Youth Issues, and Resiliency. USAID will have posted 250 performance and impact evaluations by the end of the year providing staff to understand better what works and what doesnt and to adjust program planning accordingly. All 73 USAID missions will have established five-year country strategies by 2013 that will guide focused and coherent investments that are better aligned with host partner countries needs and development priorities.
1

Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, Landon Lecture (Kansas State University) Remarks as Delivered by Secretary of Defense Rob ert M. Gates, Manhattan, Kansas, Monday, November 26, 2007. Retrieved at: http://www.defense.gov/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1199 2 Bensahel, Dr Nora and Cronin, Dr. Patrick. Americas Civilian Operations Abroad: Understanding Past and Future Requirements. Center for New American Security. January 2011. Retrieved at http://www.cnas.org/files/documents/publications/CNAS_AmericasCivilianOperationsAbroad_BensahelCronin_0.pdf , pages 9-10. November 1, 2012

Development Assistance: Water and Sanitation Funding

The Global Need

FY13 Committee Approved Funding Senate: $400 million House: $315 million

Despite the ongoing successes of water and sanitation programs, about 900 million people mostly in Africa, Asia and Latin America still lack access to safe drinking water and 2.6 billion people lack access to basic sanitation services. 1 Diseases caused by lack of safe drinking water and sanitation remain the worlds single largest cause of illness and kill 3,000 children a day, according to UNICEF. 2

Significance of Funding Levels

The additional $85 million for water and sanitation programs approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee for FY13 could provide sustainable water and sanitation services to an additional 850,000 people. 3 These funds would enhance the US ability to strengthen local capacity, provide support to schools, HIV clinics, and hospitals in communities with the greatest need for water and sanitation and multiply US taxpayer dollars through partnerships between USAID and civic organizations, religious communities, universities, corporations and philanthropic foundations.

Importance of Funding
Recognizing the lifesaving impact of the Senator Paul Simon Water for the Poor Act of 2005, Congress has increased funding since 2008 to its current level of $315 million to support water supply and sanitation, water productivity, and water resources management. This funding has improved health, economic development and security concerns in communities throughout the developing world. Water and sanitation programs implemented by USAID and its partners provide safe drinking water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH), as well as strengthen the capacity of indigenous non-governmental organizations and developing country governments to solve their own water and sanitation challenges. This will create lasting, sustainable change and lead toward aid independence. 4 The World Health Organization estimates that every dollar of funding for water and sanitation programs brings a return of $4 in increased productivity and decreased health care costs. 5

Impact of Funding Success is Possible

In Fiscal Year 2011 alone USAID provided: More than 3.8 million people with improved access to drinking water supply; Over 1.9 million people with improved access to sanitation facilities; 6 and In 2010 nearly 12 billion liters of drinking water were disinfected through point-of-use treatment activities in 15 country programs and USAIDs central global health program. 7

USAID. (2012). Safeguarding the Worlds Water: 2011 Report on USAID Fiscal Year 2010 Water Sector Activities. Page 1. As retrieved from http://transition.usaid.gov/our_work/cross-cutting_programs/water/WaterReport_2011.pdf . 2 UNICEF. (2012) Clean Water Campaign. As retrieved from: http://www.unicefusa.org/work/water/ 2 Estimate of $100 average per capita cost for water and sanitation based on field data collected from WASHCost-IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre, WASH Advocates, Millennium Water Alliance, CARE, WaterAid America, Water.org, Wine to Water, Water For People, World Vision, Plan USA, Catholic Relief Services, USAID, The World Bank, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and other organizations, reflecting major variations in geography, hydrology, climate, and accessibility that affect program design and delivery in target populations. 4 Commitments in 2012 for new sanitation facilities and water services, made by 35 countries through the Sanitation and Water for All Partnershipof which the U.S. government is a key member and funderwill be funded primarily by developing countries own treasuries. http://bit.ly/Q6rvGo 5 World Health Organization. WHO/HSE/WSH/12.01. Available at: http://bit.ly/SBIPCw. 6 Department of State. (2012). Annual Report to Congress: Senator Paul Simon Water for the Poor Act. Page 2. As retrieved from http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/197708.pdf 7 USAID. (2012). Safeguarding the Worlds Water: 2011 Report on USAID Fiscal Year 2010 Water Sector Activities. Page 5. As retrieved from http://transition.usaid.gov/our_work/cross-cutting_programs/water/WaterReport_2011.pdf.