The Microsoft-commissioned report, Opportunity for Action, brings us a new perspective on a tale already told about the lack of opportunity for today’s youth. Reports on this dilemma have been written already; the International Monetary Fund made it the focus of their March 2012 Finance & Development magazine , and the International Labour Organization issued its report “Global Employment Trends for Youth: 2011 update” in October ’11. But Opportunity for Action stands out for its overall feeling of optimism.  Written by the International Youth Foundation (IYF), the report is a call to action for everyone.

Keeping in mind that the audience will reach beyond policy makers, the report presents the complex problem in an accessible style and structure, centered on six improvements that will help today’s youth move forward:  quality education, marketable technical skills, jobs, decent working conditions, entrepreneurship opportunities, and life skills.

Each section of the report highlights an organization that is successfully bringing about change. These sidebars provide examples of what can be done and add a welcome boost of hope to the findings. It should be noted that the organizations share a common factor: funding from Microsoft and/or IYF.

Scanning the membership list of the Global WA network, we can find a number of organizations whose work to improve the future for the world’s youth could also be highlighted:  Smiles Forever trains young women in Bolivia  as dental hygienists, Rwanda Girls Initiative focuses on bettering education, Kabissa uses ICT to connect African communities, Committee for Children produces life skills training programs for young adults. The list goes on.  A common factor they share is the  job of  securing the funding or building the partnership that would allow their programs to soar to even greater heights.

Microsoft commissioned this report to “[generate] dialogue about how technology and other investments can help bridge the divide for youth around the world and is committed to working with businesses, the NGO community, and governments to help youth succeed in the global economy.”   The report gives each sector ‘Action Items’ to help guide forward progress. Those for NGOs and civil society are

• Identify and implement proven practices at large scale.

• Experiment and innovate with new models that use technology effectively and that reduce costs without sacrificing impact and evaluate results.

• Collaborate with the private sector to create demand driven training.

• Work closely with vulnerable youth to strengthen their competencies in preparation for employment or entrepreneurship opportunities.

There is no doubt this report will generate dialogue and encourage all sectors to take some action.  There still needs to be more robust dialogue about how collaboration between NGOs and the private sector will be facilitated and by whom, and from what sources will NGOs find the funding to ‘experiment and innovate with new models that use technology.’  It’s good to read that Microsoft is committed to work across  sectors. Hopefully, more will follow its lead, and NGOs already engaged in helping today’s youth will have the opportunity to strengthen and broaden the scope of their work.

On March 27, the International Youth Foundation released “Opportunity for Action,” a global snapshot of current state of social and economic opportunities for the world’s young people. That same day, IYF, Microsoft, and The Atlantic marked the report’s release with a worldwide town hall discussion in Charlotte, North Carolina on “The Jobs & Economy of the Future: Educating the Next Generation to Compete.” In the report, Bill Reese, President and CEO of IYF, wrote, “We need concerted, organized action that will lift us beyond today’s array of pilot youth development programs to a place where significant investments are made in proven practices and programs that can then be taken to scale.” The key to achieving this, he says, is partnerships between youth, civil society, and the public and private sectors. Corporate, government, and civic leaders are becoming increasingly aware of this, but if they do not act quickly, entire generation will never recover from the lost opportunities of its youth.

IYF and Microsoft’s programs are empowering some remarkable young people from across the world to meet the challenges they face head-on. An IYF fellowship helped Naadiya Moosaje turn South African Women in Engineering (SAWomEng) into a program where 81 volunteers mentor and guide over 2,000 girls. A Microsoft and IYF-sponsored Youth Empowerment Program (YEP) in Kenya allowed Monica Njau to start a small business that allowed her to attend university, support her destitute family and cancer-stricken mother, land a job as an insurance sales representative, and, most impressively, support her sisters’ higher education as well.

To make the millennial generation’s lives better than those of its parents, we must create millions of new opportunities for people like Naadiya and Monica. Today, there are 1.2 billion people aged 15 to 24. In 2035, there will be 1.5 billion. There is an enormous gap between what education systems give the world’s youth and what the global labor market demands from them. In many rich countries, youth unemployment is the highest in living memory: 18% in America, 22.3% in Britain, 30% in Italy, and almost 50% in Greece and Spain. And yet, as U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan told the audience, “there are no good jobs for high-school dropouts” while “we have over 2 million high-skill jobs that we can’t fill.” In Brazil, 40% of firms have difficulty filling vacancies due to Brazil’s low-quality education outcomes. In the Middle East and North Africa, almost 25% of youth are unemployed in official statistics (the reality is probably even worse). The report estimates that 600 million jobs must be created over the next decade to make up for the jobs lost to the economic crisis.

Education alone cannot provide a comprehensive solution for youth unemployment. While higher education improves young Latin Americans’ employment opportunities, university-educated youth in the Middle East and North Africa are actually more likely to be unemployed than their less-educated peers (especially in Morocco and Tunisia). Across the region, civil service jobs are declining, the private sector is struggling, and rates of female participation in the labor market are stagnating. These problems demand a fundamental re-ordering of the region’s political economy and education system, but there are few signs, even in post-revolution Tunisia and Libya, that such a process is taking place.

“Opportunity for Action” concludes with an action plan that everyone can play a role in. The report calls on policymakers to reduce barriers to youth entrepreneurship, to create new programs and incentives for training, internships, and apprenticeships for disadvantaged youths, and to ensure high-quality secondary and tertiary education that matches the labor market’s demands. It urges NGOs and bilateral and multilateral donors to evaluate program outcomes rigorously, to support demand-driven skills training programs, and to invest in public-private partnerships that turn successful, proven practices into large-scale, sustainable programs. Lastly, it encourages young people to seek career guidance, to be continuous learners, to let go of preconceived notions about livelihood opportunities, and, most importantly, to not give up.

To watch the video of the town hall event, please visit the Atlantic’s website or watch the embedded video below.

Welcome to the March 2012 issue of the Global Washington newsletter. If you would like to contact us directly, please email us.

IN THIS ISSUE

• Note from our Executive Director
• Featured Organization: Committee for Children: Taking Steps to Bring Social and Emotional Health to Children Around the World
• Changemaker: Bill Taylor “All the Good You Can Do” for Children in Southeast Asia
• Welcome New Members
• Announcements
• Upcoming Events

Note from our Executive Director

I hope you are all enjoying the beginning of spring!

The highlight of March for us was an event called “How Girls Can Save the World,” featuring women’s advocate and award-winning actor Geena Davis; Christine Grumm of the Chris Grumm Consulting Group; and Andrea Taylor, Director for North America Community Affairs at Microsoft.  We were thrilled by your response and interest! Investing in women and girls is crucial to the future health of our communities, both globally and locally. Over 800 people signed up for this event, which turned out to be a lively conversation about gender portrayals in the media, feminism, and women’s issues in global development. If you missed the talk, an audio recording is available online.

This event was the first in a new series for us called GlobalWA // Gather, in which we will bring global development thought-leaders to town for lively conversations about some of our world’s most pressing issues. I hope you will be able to join us for more events in this series!

Spring is about new beginnings; we have just launched our annual membership satisfaction survey to help us begin this season well by effectively serving our members and the community. If you are a Global Washington member, you should have received this survey in your email last week—we very much hope you will fill it out! Your satisfaction is important to us and your feedback is invaluable as we plan our work.

And speaking of beginnings—if you have not yet joined Global Washington as a member, now might be the time to do it!  We expect to bring you many high-caliber events this year, and often have discounts or early registration for members. We also offer several newer member resources like our careers in development centerand online giving platform.

Finally, we expect this to be a big year for spotlighting our members’ work through special promotional opportunities! If you would like to find out more about membership or any of these resources, please contact our Office Manager, Megan Boucher at megan@globalwa.org and she will assist you.

Best wishes for enjoying the return of the warmer weather and the sunshine!

In unity,

Bookda Gheisar, Executive Director

Back to Top

Featured Organization

Committee for Children: Taking Steps to Bring Social and Emotional Health to Children Around the World

By Carolyn Hubbard

Second Step being taught in Slovakia

When a country’s president shows up at your conference to praise your program, you know you’re doing something right. Such was the case at Committee for Children’s International Consortium, when Lithuania’s president, Valdas Adamkus, praised the Committee’s violence prevention program for helping Lithuania’s high-risk kids.

Committee for Children (CFC) is a leading provider of curricula and trainings focused on strengthening children’s social and emotional health. Subjects for kids from preschool through middle school range from bullying prevention and personal safety to emotion management and empathy. Once a local volunteer-powered start-up, CFC is now a dynamic social entrepreneurship with partners around the world and the goal to bring their evidence-based programs to more children the world over.

CFC’s origins are the result of research studies conducted by Drs. Jennifer James and Debra Boyer that showed that most youth involved in prostitution had been victims of at-home sexual abuse. With the goal to curb this trend and give children the necessary skills to prevent sexual abuse, the pair founded the group Judicial Advocates for Women, garnered some funding, borrowed some office space and developed the Talking About Touching program to teach children about personal safety and self-assertion. Before they could even think about marketing their product, organizations and schools were calling and asking for more. CFC delivered, and later developed their Second Step and Steps to Respect programs focused on social and emotional health and bullying prevention. Soon, they were getting calls not just from other states but from other countries as well.

There’s a reason for this success: the programs work. Executive Director Joan Cole Duffell explains that since day one they have developed programs from sound pedagogical and psychological research and practice. Not only that, the programs are evaluated and fine-tuned until there is, as Duffell says, “a nexus between rigorous research and simplicity of use. That sweet spot between the two is what brings the success.”

Today, the programs are taught in over seventy countries, including Lithuania, a country burdened with the highest teen suicide rate in the world. CFC’s pilot program there showed that the most at-risk kids made the strongest gains in self-respect and emotional growth through the lessons. President Adamkus sang the program’s praises with good reason.

Committee for Children’s international success has taken the organization into a whole new playing field. At first, they simply licensed the use of the programs to interested parties, an easy step that brought in a bit of revenue for the quickly growing organization. “We had a light touch with international partners,” explains Duffell.  Despite the light touch, the organization still oversaw all translations and cultural adaptations of the materials. Changes could be made to meet cultural needs (change a photo here, a scenario there), but as International Partnership Manager Paige Mac Leod notes, the core lessons required little change across cultures.

Most of the schools and organizations interested in using the programs were in countries with a culture of purchasing classroom curricula, i.e. more developed countries, such as Scandinavian nations, Japan, Australia, Germany. They are also places that can readily access CFC’s online trainings and have the resources to pay for and produce the products. (Note that these programs are a far cry from a typical textbook. Program packages come with puppets, DVDs and large colorful laminated lesson cards, as well as teacher reference binders—plus an online activation key that gives teachers a robust array of digital tools.) Partnering with curriculum providers in these countries became CFC’s main focus as they built their international presence. Taking success a notch higher, the governments of Greenland and the Philippines adopted programs, mandating that they be taught in all of the schools of their respective countries.

Second Step being taught in Japan

Now, as less-developed nations seek out access to the programs, CFC is intentionally looking for partners with whom they can strategize program implementation, in light of production costs, limited online access, and more intricate cultural nuances. They already have fledgling partnerships in Colombia and are forging a partnership with Escuela Nueva, a non-governmental organization dedicated to improving the quality of basic education in developing countries. MacLeod explains that they are looking at both urbanized and rural/marginalized settings in resource-poor countries to determine what each setting needs and how to best fill those needs. Their first pilot project in a rural setting will be with the Anglican Diocese in the Upper Shire region of southern Malawi, an area where Duffell and her family regularly visit and volunteer. Other countries in which they are building a presence include El Salvador, Chile, Singapore, Turkey and the Kurdish region of Iraq.

There’s a hitch to all of this growth and interest: how to fund it. While program sales are robust each year, that revenue just covers CFC’s annual costs. There is little extra revenue to support meeting the demand of countries that simply can’t pay for the programs in their current structure. For the first time since their grassroots days, CFC is building relationships with funders and looking at innovative partnership models to find ways to bring their programs to more of the world’s children.  With social and emotional health part and parcel of a child’s health and development, opportunities are bound to emerge.

“We are thrilled Global Washington exists,” Duffell remarks. “It really is a great benefit. When you bring people together that have similar goals to reach out to people, you are going to make magic happen.” She has met with other Global WA members to look at partnerships and to learn strategies, including PATH, whose approach of using the country’s strengths and unique cultural qualities to introduce programs, rather than assume a U.S cultural model is a great example for Duffell. “PATH has done that so brilliantly, so elegantly,” she notes.

Second Step being taught in the Kurdish region of Iraq

As Mac Leod strengthens CFC’s international presence, work continues throughout the organization to develop more programs to help vulnerable kids in the States. The Raynier Foundation granted the organization over $500,000 for a landmark evaluation study of Steps to Respect, CFC’s bullying prevention program, and the Raikes Foundation awarded the organization a $250,000 three-year grant to develop online training tools for Second Step in collaboration with three Washington State middle schools with at-risk (of substance abuse, bullying, peer pressure) populations.  Recent research from the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) showed that the use of intervention programs such as these increases students’ academic achievement. As the debate about how to improve schools continues to rage across the country, this study is sure to bring more attention to Committee for Children.

In April of 2013, CFC will host its biannual international partner’s conference in Seattle. Accolades are sure to be given, strategies developed, and reports of children’s improved emotional well-being broadcast.  Chances are a few more extra chairs will need to be at the table for people, maybe even heads of state, to stop by and sing Committee for Children’s praises.

Back to Top

Changemaker: Bill Taylor

“All the Good You Can Do” for Children in Southeast Asia

By Megan Boucher

Bill Taylor is quick to point out that his work is all about how ordinary people with ordinary resources can make a difference. The Bill & Pat Bali Fund and the SE Asia Children’s Foundation, two initiatives started by Bill and his wife Pat, connect sponsors to children (especially girls) in Southeast Asia with a mission to break the cycle of poverty by educating children and making sure girls have an opportunity to succeed. Bill’s journey started in an ordinary way: with a vacation and then a simple gift from his wife.

When asked why he began this work, Bill laughed and said “we just showed up! It’s what the universe decided.”  He and Pat went to Bali, Indonesia for a holiday in 2005 and sponsored a few girls at a local orphanage because it seemed like a nice gesture. “We dabbled with it for the first several years,” Bill recalled. They met the girls and fell in love with them. After finding out that many didn’t have sponsors, they took it upon themselves to get their friends involved. The first year they found eight sponsors. The next year, fifteen. Of these humble beginnings, Bill said “we would write checks, we’d go visit, but it was still a holiday.” Then one day Pat gave Bill an oval river rock about 5 inches long for his birthday. Engraved on it were the words, “you cannot do all the good the world needs, but the world needs all the good you can do.” That rock touched Bill and made him realize that he was not doing nearly all the work that could be done! He started asking himself what they could really do with the resources that they had.  The work escalated from there.

The Bill & Pat Bali Fund is a self-directed fund within Give2Asia (a San Francisco-based nonprofit).  Bill and Pat cover the administrative expenses themselves so that every dollar donated goes to the Widhya Asih Foundation, an organization that supports seven children’s homes in Indonesia. Though the word for the children’s home translates as “orphanage,” most of these kids are not orphans—their parent or parents are simply too poor to send them to school. If a family can afford to educate only one child, it is usually the oldest boy, so girls are often left behind. Sponsorship through the Bill & Pat Bali fund helps pay for food, a safe place to live, and school fees for the girls. Bill calls it “an environment of achievement,” giving young women  a chance for a life that they wouldn’t otherwise have.

Bill and the staff are clear on what success for these children means and careful to measure their progress. To be considered a full success a girl stays at the orphanage, finishes and passes high school, passes her national exams, and obtains self-sustaining employment.  “Anything short of that is a failure,” Bill said emphatically.  This work is not simply about helping these girls get by—it is breaking the cycle of poverty so that they and their future families will all have a better life. In order to achieve this, they involve the girls, parents, and sponsors in the process.

“We’re not wealthy,” Bill insisted. “But we have a little money, and talents, and friends.” He puts all of these resources to good use in his work with the fund and the foundation. He has over 40 years of experience as a management consultant, with skills in strategic planning, human resources, and organization development.  Though Bill is obviously in favor of donating to a worthy cause, he believes strongly in augmenting that money with coaching and guidance. Any organization that he funds, he also works with to achieve optimal management and sustainability. This personal involvement helps him assure his donors that the funds for Bali are being used effectively. “I know these people personally,” he said. “I know the leaders. I’ve seen their facilities. I’ve looked at their financial records.”

Unlike some sponsorship organizations, the Bill & Pat Bali Fund facilitates active and strong connections between sponsors and the girls they are sponsoring. Sponsors commit to supporting their girls through high school. And it is not merely about the money. “We believe strongly that it really matters to that girl to know that somebody some place in the world loves her and cares about her and encourages her to study hard and make something of her life,” said Bill. He travels to Indonesia himself 4 times a year and is happy to carry cards, letters, and small amounts of money from the sponsors to the girls, although he knows that this will probably not be scalable as the work expands. The kids have access to technology (facebook and email) and are able to communicate with their sponsors. Feedback from sponsors indicates that this personal relationship is meaningful for them as well.

Bill’s newest project is called the SE Asia Children’s Foundation and will be a big expansion of the work to fund orphanages in Thailand. He has been visiting different organizations to find the best partners. He described a visit to one home in northern Thailand where a picture of one rice bag and a few pumpkins stuck out in his mind. That was all that the children had to eat at the time—they weren’t even receiving 3 meals a day. “We can’t let that happen,” Bill said. “We just can’t.”

Purchasing food is a simple, inexpensive, and effective way to help. Bill is encouraged and encourages donors with the fact that even small changes can make a significant difference. When asked about his biggest accomplishment, Bill said “just the fact that we’re doing it! We’re having a profound impact on the lives of many kids.” They currently have sponsorships for around 140 girls but also support 400 children in the orphanage as a whole through other major projects like a vocational training center, a bus, a new dormitory, a well, water purification, and a new information system.

Bill commented that many things happening in the world are overwhelming to try and change. However, the theme of Bill’s work is that ordinary people can find a way to make a difference if they find the right cause and use their resources effectively.“And these changes will ripple for generations,” he emphasized. “The bottom line is to connect with something where you can actually make a difference in the world.”  And then, as Bill and Pat have done, just go out and do it!

Back to Top

Welcome New Members

Welcome new members!

Please welcome our newest Global Washington members. Take a moment to familiarize yourself with their work and think of opportunities for support and collaboration!

Port Townsend Film Institute: We want to tend the most valuable resource we have, the fertile ground of imagination right here at home. We believe that a shared cinematic experience of creating and viewing film can strengthen our community and expand our shared humanity. www.ptfilmfest.com 

Office of the Superindent of Public Instruction (OSPI) is the primary agency charged with overseeing K-12 public education in Washington State. Led by State School Superintendent Randy Dorn, OSPI works with the state’s 295 school districts to administer basic education programs and implement education reform on behalf of more than one million public school students. http://www.k12.wa.us/

The Village Pig Project: The Village Pig Project supports a free and self-sufficient people in rural Cambodian villages by helping families to create self-sustaining pig farms. http://www.villagepigproject.org/

Back to Top

Announcements

Engineers Without Borders hosts annual fundraising dinner

Engineers Without Borders is hosting “Building Across Borders 2012,” the third annual fundraising event to support their Puget Sound Chapters.  The event—featuring dinner, interactive project demonstrations, and a live auction—will take place on April 23^rd at Seattle University’s Campion Ballroom. The organization is currently seeking auction donations, table captains and volunteers, and sponsors (email fundraising@ewb-pugetsound.org for more details about sponsorship). Early bird tickets to the event are available until March 31^st!

Engineers Without Borders USA (EWB-USA) is a nonprofit humanitarian organization that supports community-driven development programs through partnerships that design and implement sustainable engineering projects around the world.

For more information, visit http://ewb-pugetsound.org/BAB2012

Nonprofit political activities presentation

“Nonprofits in an Election Year: Understanding the lines between advocacy, lobbying and political activities,” a presentation by Riddell Williams and the Alford Group, will help nonprofits learn how to safely lobby or advocate for issues they care about. They will also learn how to navigate some of the rules relating to nonprofit political activity.

This breakfast briefing is free and will start at 7:00am on April 11^th at 1001 4th Avenue, Suite 4500.  Reserve your space by April 4th by calling Kim Tran at 206.389.1710 or emailing ktran@riddellwilliams.com.

World Bicycle Relief’s 100,000th bicycle and new partnership with Theo Chocolate

Since 2005, World Bicycle Relief (WBR) has provided 100,000 bicycles in Asia and Africa. Their bicycles are locally assembled; made for rugged terrain; and utilized by a variety of individuals from students, to healthcare workers, to entrepreneurs.

The organization started as a disaster relief operation in Sri Lanka following the 2004 tsunami and has since expanded to many more countries.  Congratulations to WBR for this milestone and for your continued, innovative work of changing lives through bicycles!

Another exciting new project for WBR is a special partnership with Theo Chocolate, which has announced a new “Theo/World Bicycle Relief Sea Salt 70% Dark Chocolate” chocolate bar. A percentage of the bar’s $4.99 price goes to support WBR’s bicycle programs for students in Africa.

Seattle-based Theo Chocolate is known as a socially responsible company, selling delicious organic, fair trade chocolate. The partnership was a natural fit as both Theo and WBR support sustainable livelihoods for people in developing nations. Buy the new chocolate bar at www.theochocolate.com.

Seattle International Foundation Announces Call for Applications under its 2012 Global Program

The Seattle International Foundation (SIF) is accepting applications under its Global Program beginning April 1^st. The Global Program (small grants for local organizations) supports and fosters local organizations working internationally. SIF is interested in development projects in all regions of the world.

The Global Program is open to 501(c)3 organizations, or those with fiscal sponsorship, with an annual organizational or project budget of less than $2 million (USD). Preference will be given to organizations based in the greater Puget Sound region; organizations based outside of Washington State are not eligible. The program seeks to support organizations launching new projects, or working to establish or expand an international project or program.

For more information on how to apply, please visit www.seaif.org, or contact Michele Frix (Program Officer) at mfrix@seaif.org.

New GAPPS Repository will help scientists improve maternal and child health

This month the Global Alliance to Prevent Prematurity and Stillbirth (GAPPS) opened a first-of-its-kind biorepository of pregnancy specimens, which combines biospecimens from pregnancies worldwide (e.g. placenta tissue and blood) with data about the mother (e.g. pregnancy history and nutrition) to provide scientists the comprehensive information they need to learn how women can have healthier pregnancies.

The repository currently has over 8,000 individual specimens from women of all different backgrounds, with more specimens continually added. Scientists can request specimens from www.gapps.org/repository or gappsrepository@seattlechildrens.org.

Imaging the World advances project in Uganda

Imaging the World combines ultrasound technology with training to provide medical imaging to rural populations who previously lacked access this technology. Through innovative data transmission systems, ITW allows local health care providers to make life-saving diagnoses even in the poorest, least accessible regions of the world. ITW recently celebrated “phase 2” their project at the Nawanyago Health Center in Uganda. Local nurse Sister Angela Njeri has completed an 8-week training course in ultrasound technology, an important step for the sustainability and quality of the program in Nawanyago. For the full story, visit http://imagingtheworld.org/2012/03/nawanyago-health-center-advances-to-phase-2/

9th Annual Western Regional International Health Conference focuses on “hidden paths”

UW students have organized a fantastic lineup of speakers and programs for “At a Crossroads: Choosing Hidden Paths in Global Health,” the 9^th Annual Western Regional International Health Conference.  This year’s conference will take place from April 27 to 29 and the keynote speaker will be human rights advocate Kavita Ramdas, Executive Director for a new program on social entrepreneurship at Stanford University.

This weekend-long conference will feature 18 breakout sessions with top leaders, centered around topics like global mental health, marginalized populations, organizing and funding of global health, clinical issues in global health, communications and technology in global health, and the environment and global health.

Registration is $50 for students and $100 for community members. For more information or to register, visit www.wrihc.org.

2012 Challenge Accepted Conference

“The largest youth conference on U.S. foreign policy in 2012” will take place in Washington, D.C. from April 14-15. Challenge Accepted will help young people discuss key problems and issues facing their generation from economics to world hunger.  For more information or to register, visit www.acceptthechallenge2012.org.

PATH announces Steve Davis as new CEO

PATH recently named Steve Davis as its new president and CEO. Davis has extensive industry and leadership experience. He was most recently the global director of social innovation at McKinsey & Company. Prior to that, he served as CEO of Corbis, interim CEO of the Infectious Disease Research institute, and interim Director of PATH’s India program. He has also served as a board member for many prominent organizations including PATH, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, and Global Partnerships.  PATH’s former CEO, Christopher Elias, started a new position in January as president of the Global Development Program at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

NGO Roundtable Meeting with Representative Adam Smith

Don’t miss an upcoming opportunity to meet with congressional representative Adam Smith. Congressman Smith is holding a roundtable for NGOs on Friday, April 13^th at the Burien Communtiy Center.

Date: Friday, April 13, 2012
Time: 12pm-1pm – Networking  | 1pm- 2pm – Meeting
Location: Burien Community Center, Manhattan Room
14700 6^th Ave. SW
Burien, WA 98166
Contact or RSVP to: Linh Thai, linh.thai@mail.house.gov or 253-272-1488

Special Screening of Bonsai People  on April 18th

Lumana, Washington Micro, and Fortunato Vega for a special screening of, Bonsai People, a documentary about the vision of Muhammad Yunus  and his work in microcredit and social business.  This event will take place on April 18^th at 5:30pm at the University of Washington’s Kane Hall and will also include a wine and cheese reception.  For more information or to RSVP, visit http://bonsaipeopleseattle-esearch.eventbrite.com/?srnk=1.

World Affairs Council presents talk on “Diseases Without Borders”

On April 3rd, the World Affairs Council will host a talk with Dr. Nils Daulaire, Director of the Office of Global Affairs at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Dr. King Holmes, Chair of the Department of Global Health at the University of Washington will moderate a talk on “Diseases without Borders: How Global Health Issues Impact Domestic Health Policy.”

It will take place at 6:00pm at The Broadway Performance Hall in Seattle and will cost $10 for students and WAC members and $15 for non-members.

For tickets or more information, visit: http://www.world-affairs.org/events/2012/04/03/global-health-priorities.

GiveBIG training workshop

GiveBIG is a one-day giving event for nonprofit organizations in the area, organized by The Seattle Foundation. TSF will match a percentage of funds donated through their website on May 2nd. TSF is offering a special GiveBIG training workshop to Global Washington members, that will provide technical assistance and help participants develop a fundraising strategy for the campaign. Participating organizations will have a chance to sign up for one-on-one support and all will receive a planning checklist and other resources. Global Washington members, please watch for a separate email with more details!

For more information about GiveBIG, visit TSF’s GiveBIG webpage.

Back to Top

Upcoming Events

Thursday, March 29
How Co-Operative Businesses Build a Better World. Oikocredit, BECU and PCC.

Friday, March 30
Cooperatives and Ethical Finance, a reception for faith and economic justice leaders

Saturday, April 7
The Future of Asia’s Cities lecture series. “Asian Urbanism: Negotiating the Global”

Saturday, April 21 – Sunday April 22
Global Health & Innovation Conference 2012

Monday, April 23
Building Across Borders

Friday, April 27 – Sunday April 29
9th Annual Western Regional International Health Conference

Saturday, April 28
PERSPECTIVES IN ENVIRONMENT & CULTURE: Sustaining Biodiversity

Monday, April 30
PERSPECTIVES IN ENVIRONMENT & CULTURE: Sustaining Biodiversity

Thursday, May 24 – Monday May 28
2012 Basoga Twegaite Convention-Diaspora Ugandans, Friends and Wellwishers Opportunity to Contribute to improving Global Health

Back to Top

Cindy Nofziger, a physical therapist for Seattle Public Schools, is a state winner of the Jefferson Award, the “Nobel Prize” of public service.

It started with a plea from an old friend on the other side of the world, begging for help rebuilding a school that had been destroyed in a brutal civil war.

Seven years later, Schools for Salone has raised money to build 12 schools with a 13th in progress, two libraries and numerous water wells in war-torn villages across Sierra Leone.

This year, organization founder Cindy Nofziger, of Seattle, is being honored as one of five Washington state winners of the Jefferson Award, considered the “Nobel Prize” of public service. Residents can vote this week on their favorite local winner at www.king5.com, with the top vote-getter receiving entry to the national competition in June.

Jefferson Award winner has built 12 schools in war-torn Sierra Leone
The Seattle Times |  Brian M. Rosenthal | March 14, 2012

Actress Geena Davis was in Seattle on Monday for a forum on women and girls organized by Global Washington, a membership group for the state’s global health and development sector.

It was an unusual pairing; the Academy Award-winning actress founded a nonprofit focused on improving the portrayal of women in U.S. media, while Seattle-based Global Washington has an international development focus.

Davis spoke at Seattle’s Town Hall, where an estimated 800 people enthusiastically welcomed the star, who shared the stage with Andrea Taylor, Microsoft’s director of corporate giving for North America, and Chris Grumm, the former CEO of the Women’s Funding Network.

Geena Davis speaks in Seattle on women in the media
Puget Sound Business Journal |  Valerie Bauman | March 13, 2012

Actor and women’s advocate Geena Davis — Thelma in the 1991 hit ‘neo-feminist’ movie Thelma & Louise — was in Seattle Monday evening calling for a renewed women’s movement worldwide.

Women 3.0

“We’re due for a resurgence of the women’s movement,” Davis said to a packed room at Seattle Town Hall. Though the Seattle crowd was by far mostly women and girls, she spoke earlier in the day on the Microsoft campus in Redmond to a packed room of mostly men. The event was sponsored by Global Washington.

Davis, who was in town stumping for her philanthropy, the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media, spent a lot of time fielding questions and criticizing the way women are portrayed — and perceived — in Hollywood and throughout the media. But her concerns are much more global.

Geena Davis in Seattle, calls for the ‘next women’s movement’
humanosphere.kplu.org | Tom Paulson | March 13, 2012

Washington state is big on international trade, the largest exporter per capita in the U.S. with about one in three jobs linked directly or indirectly to international commerce. We are indeed a globalized state.

We constantly hear that our educational system today should be geared toward keeping the U.S. “internationally competitive” in the global economy. Folks attending a Wednesday Seattle Chamber of Commerce event on education and the workforce will likely hear it again.

But what often gets left out of this mantra is that you can’t really compete in the world if you don’t understand it.

“What we need is a new way of thinking,” said Bookda Gheisar, executive director of Global Washington, which as part of its mission to strengthen Washington state’s efforts in global development and international affairs is now targeting education.

Global comprehension is the key to global competition
humanosphere.kplu.org | Tom Paulson | February 27, 2012

Welcome to the February 2012 issue of the Global Washington newsletter. If you would like to contact us directly, please email us.

IN THIS ISSUE

• Note from our Executive Director
• Featured Announcements
• Featured Organization: From local to global: Community development and the YMCA
• Welcome New Members
• Announcements
• Upcoming Events

Note from our Executive Director

In the month of February, we celebrate love on Valentine’s Day. At Global Washington, we want to express how much we love our members and the work that they are doing! Scroll down to the announcements section in this newsletter and you will have a chance to read about some of their wonderful projects, new accomplishments, and exciting events that are coming up this year. If you love global development work too, don’t forget that we have an opportunity for you to support some of our member projects through our online giving platform. If you are a member, you can be featured here! Contact us to find out how.

Last year, we focused a lot of attention on global education—we believe that our young people need good global knowledge and experience to truly thrive in our interconnected economy. Education benefits all of us because this year’s students are next year’s leaders. In 2012, we are continuing this work in support of global education and we very much want your input as a citizen of Washington State. If you haven’t done so already, please take a moment to fill out our global education survey and add your voice to this movement.  The final paper reflecting back our research, interviews of over 400 key stakeholders, and survey findings will be released on April 5th. Look for an announcement about this event soon.

Finally, we are excited about a new partnership with the Alliance FOR Nonprofits Washington. This collaboration will help us offer more and better trainings for our members. This month, they hosted a CEO/Executive Director Forum. Keep an eye out for more opportunities soon!

In unity,

Bookda Gheisar, Executive Director

Back to Top

Featured Announcements

Tell us what you think about global education!

Last year, we brought together diverse global education stakeholders to form the Global Education Initiative, a coalition dedicated to preparing Washington State students to enter the professional world with global knowledge.  We also invited feedback from educators, nonprofit leaders, students, and policymakers at our first annual Summit on Global Education, where they were able to discuss and refine recommendations for improving education in Washington.

Now it is your turn to participate! We want as many Washingtonians as possible to take our Global Education Survey. Over 700 people have already responded, saying things like global education “provides a broader perspective and open mind, which ultimately leads to innovation, creativity and greater success.” What does global education mean to you?

Take the survey and receive a chance to win a $50 gift certificate to $10 iTunes gift certificate or an ExOfficio shirt!  http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/globaledcommunity

Global Washington announces a new partnership with the Alliance FOR Nonprofits Washington

Global Washington and Alliance FOR Nonprofits Washington are partnering this year to provide valuable training opportunities for Global Washington members. AFNW already offers high-quality trainings to strengthen nonprofit leaders and employees. With this new collaboration, Global Washington members will be able to participate in AFNW trainings–such as last week’s Executive Director/CEO forum–at member prices. AFNW’s mission is “to advance a strong and powerful nonprofit sector supporting a vibrant community and economy.” We feel that this fits will with Global Washington’s mission to convene, strengthen, and advocate on behalf of Washington State’s global development community. We hope you will have the opportunity to participate in some of these trainings!

Back to Top

Featured Organization

From local to global: Community development and the YMCA

By Megan Boucher

Global Teens in Korea

When people think of the YMCA, likely the first word that comes to mind is “community.”  Affectionately called “The Y” by many, the YMCA is well-known for its community centers, featuring fitness equipment, activities, and youth programs. What most people likely don’t think of but should is the word “global.” The YMCA not only has locations and programs all over the world, but the organization is also actively involved in community development in those countries.  “It’s all about connection” stated Tom Horsley, Senior Vice President – Emeritus for the YMCA.  The Y is building community from the ground up and making connections within and in between those communities —from the local communities that are home to Y locations to the global community of which we are all a part. “Connections are in everything we do,” Horsley emphasized.  Monica Quill Kusakabe, Director -International Development, added that these connections are not just person to person, but are also community to community, especially with the Y’s global development work. “They’re about how we connect our community here to projects that are happening over there,” she explained.

The mission statement for the Y’s global programs is “to support strengthening of the global community at home and abroad, by empowering adults and youth to become global citizens.”  The organization accomplishes this mission through movement strengthening abroad, including a new microfinance program; through international programs, particularly service learning and exchanges for young people; and by local community engagement with immigrant populations.

Y-Micro: Strengthening communities abroad

Ymicro loan recipient in The Gambia

One exciting way the YMCA is accomplishing its global mission is through a new microfinance platform called Y-Micro (housed at www.ymicro.org), launched in the fall of 2011. The idea for the project came during a visit Horsley made to Cali, Colombia. The Y had opened a community center in the poorest area of Cali to get children off the street. “We met with this group of women,” Horsley recalls. “They said to us ‘now we need jobs.’  We met with 18 women and 16 of them had been prostitutes. They no longer wanted that to be their lives. They got their kids off the street and now they wanted real work. So that’s where the germ of the idea began.”

Y-micro is an online giving platform that allows people to donate small amounts to fund microloans for entrepreneurs in the developing world, like the women in Cali. The project uses the funds twice. First, the entrepreneur invests the loan in her business. Second, the loan is repaid and the proceeds fund the local YMCA in that country.  Another key component of the platform is the connection between donor and recipient. Donors can follow reports on the loan that they funded through the online platform.  Recipients can also log in at Y locations and learn about the people funding their loan. Though spearheaded by the Seattle YMCA, the program is supported by other Ys across the country. It is currently operating in Sri Lanka, The Gambia, Colombia, and Liberia, with plans to launch Y-micro in more countries soon.

Connecting local to global

Young adult volunteer with village women in Thailand

Beyond the direct goal of assisting entrepreneurs, the Y-Micro also accomplishes two auxiliary goals. The first is to get the word out that the YMCA has global programs. “Y members in the U.S. don’t realize that we’re a global organization,” said Horsley. “We think there is great benefit to having people know that, particularly in a city like Seattle.” The second goal involves engaging a new generation of philanthropists —young people who expect and respond to a different donation model than their older predecessors. “Our donations to the Y skew older,” explained Horsley. “Young people don’t like giving to the big organization in the sky, thinking their money is going to be lost to overhead.”  Y-micro appeals to younger philanthropists by making it clear that the donation is going specifically to a person and allowing the donor a more personal connection to the gift. Connecting young donors to Y-micro entrepreneurs helps the Y accomplish its goal for 20% of its members to have some kind of international connection.

The Y is actively facilitating these connections in other ways as well, and has been for many years. The Seattle Y has had a partnership with Kobe, Japan for 46 years and has facilitated nearly 1000 youth exchanges.  Through its Global Teens program the YMCA also facilitates home stays, cultural experiences, and service learning programs for teens and young adults to learn and serve in Thailand, Colombia, South Korea, and Senegal.  Additionally, the Youth Ambassadors Program provides an opportunity for local Seattle teens to host visiting teens from YMCAs around the world.  Kusakabe explained that the goal of these programs is to “expose young people to the situation outside in the world and make them more aware and connected. We hope that they’ll grow into young agents of change. We’ll be nurturing them to lead more and more groups abroad and build more and more connections.”

Japan tsunami relief

Global teens feeding displaced labor workers in Japan

A massive tsunami hit Japan in 2011 and because of the longstanding relationship between Seattle and Kobe, sending disaster relief to Japan was a natural response for the Y. The Seattle YMCA was one of three organizations to receive support and funding from Seattle Japan Relief, and the Y quickly began sending volunteers to Japan to help with the relief efforts. More groups are slated to go to Japan this year to continue with rebuilding efforts and potentially launch a microfinance program. Horsley and Kusakabe emphasized the Y’s commitment to continuing work in Japan now that the outpouring of support following the disaster is starting to wane. “Now is the time that it’s even the most critical,” explained Kusakabe.

Youth leadership

Young adult Volunteer group working in Thai Village

The mission of the YMCA is “to build a community where all people, especially the young, are encouraged to develop their fullest potential in spirit, mind and body.” Youth leadership is clearly at the heart of the Y, and the global component is a critical aspect of developing these future leaders. Some of the youth who have participated in Global Teens and other programs have continued to stay engaged with Kobe or the other parts of the world that they visited. Though Y service programs have traditionally focused on young people, Kusakabe explained that many of these teens want to go back as adults. The Y has recently started putting together trips for adults in addition to their teen programs, showing that the YMCA is succeeding in turning service-oriented youth into service-oriented adults. To learn more about the Y’s global programs for youth, visit http://www.seattleymca.org/Locations/Global/Pages/Home.aspx.

“When I went to Colombia the first time,” Horsley recalls, “I was totally blown away by the commitment of their young people.” He suggests that these youth’s passion towards making a difference in their communities can be a model for young people in our own community. And the commitment of the youth of the YMCA both in Seattle and abroad can be an inspiring model for us all.

Back to Top

Welcome New Members

Please welcome our newest Global Washington members. Take a moment to familiarize yourself with their work and think of opportunities for support and collaboration!

Oxfam America
Oxfam America is an international relief and development organization that creates lasting solutions to poverty, hunger, and injustice. Together with individuals and local groups in more than 90 countries, Oxfam saves lives, helps people overcome poverty, and fights for social justice.
www.oxfamamerica.org

Healing the Children Oregon and Western Washington
Healing the Children envisions a world where every child has access to good medical care. We are a non-profit organization passionately committed to securing donated medical services for children in need around the world.
www.htcorwwa.org

Global Family Travels
Global Family Travels offers meaningful vacations by providing heartfelt and mind-opening travel for families. Our tours offer families enriching cultural immersion and bonding experiences through unique cultural activities, homestays and service work with the local community we work with.
http://globalfamilytravels.com/

Back to Top

Announcements

Western Regional International Health Conference held at UW in April. 

The 9^th annual Western Regional International Health Conference will be held at the University of Washington in Seattle, April 27^th through 29^th. Entitled “At A Crossroads: Choosing Hidden Paths in Global Health,” this year’s conference will feature keynote speaker Kavita Nandini Ramdas, Executive Director of Ripples to Waves: Program on Social Entrepreneurship and Development at Stanford University’s Center on Democracy, Development and Rule of Law. For more information or to register, visit http://www.wrihc.org/

Participate in International Humanitarian Fair at Seattle Central Community College

Represent your organization at the International Humanitarian Fair, hosted by Seattle Central Community College of February 28th. Students get to learn about your work and you get to meet potential volunteers, recruit employees, and increase awareness about your mission. About 10,000 students are expected to participate! Global Washington’s Executive Director, Bookda Gheisar, will be speaking during the fair, as well as Nadia Eleza Khajawa of Jolkona and Darren Wade of UW Global Health. To sign up, contact Jeb Wyman at JWyman@sccd.ctc.edu.

Lumana launches new video

On Tuesday, Lumana hosted a happy hour at HUB Seattle to celebrate the launch of their new video. We love this snappy, fun look at the power of microfinance and the work that Lumana is doing in Ghana! “Making a large impact doesn’t take a large commitment,” the video states. “The people of Ghana are naturally resourceful. They can overcome the challenges of poverty with the opportunities Lumana creates.”  You can view the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qX0Vum_LQNc&feature=youtu.be

Burmese human rights advocate Bo Kyi comes to Seattle in March

In 2007, the world watched as never-ending columns of saffron-robed monks streamed through the streets of Burma, calling attention to the government’s overnight spike in fuel prices. Days later, the army cracked down, arresting thousands of peaceful protestors.

January 13, about 300 of Burma’s political prisoners were released. Yet hundreds more remain behind bars. This month, Bo Kyi, a former political prisoner, an award-winning advocate of human rights in Burma, and Joint Secretary of the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners Burma will visit a handful of cities in the U.S., including Seattle.

If you are interested in Burma’s steps toward democratic reform, please review the following line-up of events inspired by Bo Kyi’s upcoming visit…

• Friday, March 16, 7:00-9:30 pm: Bo Kyi will speak briefly after a screening of the newly released documentary “Into the Current: Burma’s Political Prisoners.” For details, visit www.bridgings.org/images/Flyers/IntoTheCurrentV4.pdf
• Saturday, March 17, 2:00-3:00 pm: Bo Kyi will speak at Elliott Bay Book Co. On hand will be copies of two related books: Nowhere to Be Home: Narratives from Survivors of Burma’s Military Regime and Abhaya: Burma’s Fearlessness.
• Saturday, March 17, 4:30-6:00 pm: The World Affairs Council will host an insightful talk by Bo Kyi about the struggle for human rights and democracy in Burma, followed by a Q&A session. For details, visit www.world-affairs.org/events/2012/03/17/burmas-struggle-human-rights-and-democracy

Recent Briefings on USAID and Foreign Affairs

We encourage our members and friends to stay informed on the United States’ budget for and involvement in global development and foreign affairs. Please take some time to review recent statements and briefings related to this subject:

Global Washington has posted the transcript for a February 13^th briefing on the 2013 State Department and USAID budgets to our blog.  For more information, see USAID’s press release.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah gave remarks on the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR) and USAID Forward on February 15th. For a transcript, visit http://www.usaid.gov/press/speeches/2012/sp120215.html

Gardner Center for Asian Arts and Ideas Hosts Saturday Lecture Series

A new winter and spring lecture series, “The Future of Asia’s Cities: Design, Environment, Health,” will address the unprecedented growth of Asia’s cities and what this means for the world. These talks will take place at the Seattle Asian Art Museum in Volunteer Park and are sponsored by the Gardner Center for Asian Arts and Ideas, The University of Washington’s College of Built Environments and Jackson School of International Studies, Asia Society, and The Elliot Bay Book Company.

These will take place Saturdays, February 18–April 7 from 9:30–11:00am. For more information and a complete list of talks, visit http://www.seattleartmuseum.org/gardnercenter/

UW Annual Global Social Entrepreneurship Competition

Young social entrepreneurs will showcase their projects at An Evening of Innovation, March 1^st, 2012 at the Grand Hyatt in Seattle. Don’t miss this awards ceremony for the 8^th Annual Global Social Entrepreneurship Competition, sponsored by the UW Global Business Center. Ben Packard, Vice President, Global Responsibility of Starbucks Coffee Company will be the keynote speaker.  For more information or to register, visit www.bit.ly/gsecbanquet.

World Water Day is on Thursday, March 22^nd!

In honor of World Water Day, UN Water is hosting a forum and exhibition on March 22^nd, from 10am to 4pm at Seattle City Hall in the Bertha Knight Landes Room. Bookda Gheisar, Global Washington’s Executive Director, will give remarks at noon. Take some time to appreciate clean water and learn about the work going on to ensure that people have access to it across the world. Local organizations that focus on water will be participating, including many Global Washington members!  For more information about World Water Day, visit http://www.unwater.org/worldwaterday/.

Back to Top

Upcoming Events

Thursday, February 23
 2012 International Symposium – Our Thirsty Planet
World Café: Exploring our connections to Vietnam and one another

Friday, February 24
2012 International Symposium – Our Thirsty Planet
World Dance Party!

February 24 – 26
 #SocEnt Weekend

February 27 – 29
9th Annual Western Regional International Health Conference

Wednesday, February 29
 i4 2012 – iLEAP’s annual fundraising event
DOING WELL & DOING GOOD: Boeing Co. Elizabeth J. Warman, Director, Global Corporate Citizenship – NW Region

Thursday, March 1
Global Social Entrepreneurship Competition – Celebration Dinner

Saturday, March 3
The Future of Asia’s Cities lecture series. “Why Asia’s Cities Strangle Rivers”

Friday, March 9
Landesa’s Seed the Change Luncheon

Saturday, March 10
The Future of Asia’s Cities lecture series. “Life in an Asian Slum”

Thursday, March 22
World Water Day Forum & Exposition

Saturday, March 24
Prosthetics Outreach Foundation Auction!

March 25 – March 28
The 2012 National Interagency Community Reinvestment Conference

Back to Top

Please note that Secretary Clinton will speak at 10:45 am tomorrow at a USAID Town Hall addressing the agency’s reform agenda and accomplishments in innovation.  Additional details are available in USAID’s press release.
Briefing on the 2013 State Department and USAID Budget

Special Briefing

Thomas Nides
Deputy Secretary for Management and Resources

Rajiv Shah
USAID Administrator

Washington, DC

February 13, 2012

MR. TONER: Good afternoon, everyone. As all of you know, just a few hours ago, the White House presented President Obama’s budget request for Fiscal Year 2013. And joining us this afternoon, our Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Tom Nides and U.S. Agency for International Development Administrator Rajiv Shah to discuss in more detail Secretary Clinton’s Fiscal Year 2013 budget request for the State Department and USAID.

They’re going to speak briefly, take a few questions. I know Deputy Secretary Nides has to run. He’s traveling to Iraq later today. But following the briefing, we do invite you to join us across the hall where we’re going to have an on-background discussion in greater detail if any of you need to indulge your inner wonk on some of these issues.

But without further ado, Tom.

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: Thank you. Thank you all very much. Good morning. Let me start by welcoming you today to the rollout of the 2013 budget request for the State Department and USAID. I know tomorrow is Valentine’s Day and I was going to actually give some of you flowers, others of you chocolate, but because of the budget constraints, what I’ve done is given you this very, very pretty book and you can take it home with you and enjoy it. It’s just considered a very nice pre-Valentine’s Day present. So with that – I thought that was funnier earlier, but I guess it wasn’t as funny for you guys. (Laughter.) Okay. Steve’s laughing. Okay, and I’m obviously delighted by USAID Administrator Raj Shah, who will discuss in greater detail the development programs for all of you.

This budget follows a year of transformational change in the world, as you all know. New powers are emerging, America is strengthening relationships in the Asia Pacific region, while keeping commitments around the world. In Iraq, we completed the largest military-to-civilian transition since the Marshall Plan, and the budget reflects the beginning of a normalizing of our footprint. And Afghanistan has 33,000 U.S. troops who surged in come home. Our civilians will continue to do their work to secure our hard-won gains. This budget also reflects that.

Meanwhile, the Middle East is reinventing itself before our eyes. And since I presented last year’s budget, there hasn’t been a day when we weren’t managing multiple crises at once. The demands on us have never been higher, and you will see all of that in this budget request. Of course, this is also a time of economic hardship in our country, and we all get that here. And so this budget seeks to stretch every tax dollar as far as possible without compromising our core national security interests.

Now, if my high tech skills serve me correctly, I will show you in graphic detail how our budget fits into the overall federal budget. First, as you know, 58 percent of the federal budget is spent on mandatory programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Second, 22 percent supports discretionary national security programs at the Department of Defense, Homeland Security, and Veterans Affairs. Third, 13 percent goes to discretionary non-security programs run by Transportation, Education, Justice, Commerce, and HUD. And fourth, 6 percent pays the interest on our federal debt. And if you think there isn’t a lot left over, you’re right. State and USAID account for just 1 percent of the federal budget. See that thin, yellow line? That’s us – 1 percent. Today, I want to explain how we use that 1 percent to make the outsized contribution to America’s prosperity, security, and leadership.

From day one, Secretary Clinton has made it a priority to work smarter and more effectively. This is the first budget that reflects reforms outlined in the Quadrennial Diplomacy Development Review, better known as the QDDR, where we have streamlined our efforts, we’ve not shied away from making tradeoffs, and painful but responsible cuts.

Interestingly enough, a recent Gallup poll found that Americans believe we spent a quarter of our budget on foreign assistance. But let me remind you again what the chart shows: State and USAID do all of what I have described – not with 25 percent of the federal budget, but with little less than 1 percent.

So let me take a few minutes to quickly go over some of the numbers. My colleagues will stick around after this to go into more details if you wish. As you know, FY 2013 budget for International Affairs programs, known as the Functional 150 account for all of you budget folks out there, totals $56.4 billion. This includes State and USAID, but the 150 account includes the Treasury’s international programs, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the Peace Corps, among others. So within the 150 account, you will find the State Department and USAID’s requests, which totals $51.6 billion. And that is what I’m going to focus on today, the $51.6 billion.

We have limited our requests to what is absolutely necessary to achieve our mission. Even as our needs and responsibilities grow, our budget increases by less than the rate of inflation. This money goes to four principal areas. Let me you show you the basic breakdown of the budget by the percentages.

Twenty-three percent of the budget is spent on the frontline states – Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Twenty-eight percent of our budget goes to preventing conflicts, supporting our allies and partners through direct assistance and multilateral contributions, among other things. Another 28 percent is also spent on human and economic security. And the remaining 20 percent – or 21 percent supports our people, embassies, and global presence.

Now, the specific numbers. First, the 23 percent or one – or $11.9 billion of requests goes in defending our now security interests in the frontline states of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Our Civilian Overseas Contingency Operations budget, better known for OCO, funds the temporary extraordinary cost associated with these missions. Using the same methodology from the last year’s request, we’ve asked for $8.2 billion in OCO, and $3.7 billion in our base budget for a total of $11.9 billion for the frontline states. And let me now just break it down to you specifically.

In Iraq, we’re requesting $4.8 billion for next year, which is about 10 percent less than last year. The transition is already saving American taxpayers a great deal of money. With now – with State in the lead, and with the troops no longer on the ground, the government is spending $40 billion less this year than last. And as discussed during last week’s press briefing, we’re continuing to be thoughtful about the rightsizing of our presence in Iraq, hiring more local staff, procuring more goods locally, which should further reduce our spending.

In Afghanistan, we’re requesting $4.6 billion. Civilians are vital to our efforts and they are securing our gains against the Taliban. They’re helping us take Afghans lead responsibility for their own security and they’re laying the groundwork for what comes next: sustainable economic growth, national reconciliation, and the long-term civilian partnership, all of which helps us ensure that Afghanistan never again becomes the safe haven for terrorists.

And then Pakistan, our 2013 request is $2.4 billion. Our relationship with Pakistan is challenging, but make no mistake, effective cooperation with Pakistan is critical to Afghanistan’s future and to America’s national security. Our request includes funds to strengthen democratic institutions, countering extremism, supporting joint counterterrorism efforts, and protecting our civilians on the ground.

Second, we devote 28 percent or $14.6 billion, preventing conflicts and supporting key allies and partners. This year, our request includes a new $770 million Middle East and North Africa incentive fund to support political and economic reforms in the region. Our investment in supporting our allies and partners includes everything from police training in Latin America, to efforts to promote stability in places like Haiti, in the South Sudan, to more than 70 military-to-military partnerships, which are managed by the State Department. It funds peacekeeping missions around the world and our presence in international institutions and it matches last year’s record high of $3.1 billion for the State of Israel, which continuing – and continuing our efforts to support our Arab partners.

Third, we devote another 28 percent of our budget, $14. 7 billion, to our investment in human and economic security, specifically global health, food security, and climate change, poverty reduction, and cross-cutting efforts to empower women and girls in our humanitarian budget. For all these programs, we’re focused on achieving measurable outcomes that have real impact on improving people’s lives. Even with the financial constraints we face, this budget fully supports the President’s goal of treating more than six million people infected with HIV/AIDS by the end of 2013. This is a $2 million – two million more than our goal, continuing our strong support of PEPFAR, that puts us on the path to an AIDS-free generation. The money we spend on human and economic security also funds humanitarian responses in the care for refugees. I will leave it to Ambassador – Administrator Shah to speak in more detail about the innovation programs implemented by USAID.

And fourth, 21 percent or $10.4 billion of this budget supports the men the women of the State Department and USAID, who make the work I have described possible. This budget pays for all of our operations in 274 missions around the world. It funds political officers who advance our interests and defends democracy and human rights. It funds development officers, who spread opportunity to make the world a safer place. It funds consular officers who help bring businesses to the U.S. and help America’s emergencies around the world. And it funds economic officers who help American business compete in new markets and put America back to work, and as I like to say, not a bad return on our investment.

This is a moment of historic change around the world. They are also tight times for our government and for our people, the two truths that have guided us from day one. And so – as I like to remind you once again, which is 1 percent of the federal budget, the State Department USAID will maintain our country’s leadership in a changing world, would help promote our values, jumpstart our economy, and above all, keep America safe in 2013 and beyond. And let me now turn the floor over to my friend, Raj Shah.

ADMINISTRATOR SHAH: Thank you. Thank you, Tom. And I want to start just by reiterating Tom’s both opening and closing point that the entire budget and the activities all described live within the 1 percent of the federal budget that Tom highlighted. I intend to go into a little bit more detail in the core development priorities of the FY13 budget proposal, and starting with the point that the President and the Secretary have focused on elevating development as part of our foreign policy, because the lives we save around the world, the results-oriented investments we make in health, education, clean water, and fighting hunger, are part of our national security strategy to keep us safe and our part of our economic security strategy to ensure that we’re expanding the number of countries and communities with whom we can trade and, as a result, create jobs here at home.

The budget accounts are familiar to you, things like development assistance, global health and child survival, the international disaster relief and Millennium Challenge accounts. In all of these areas, we’re taking a more business-like approach to delivering results. The FY13 request demonstrates a willingness to focus and concentrate investments in those areas where they’ll deliver maximum results and more value for U.S. taxpayers.

I’ll begin by describing global health. At $7.9 billion, this is a budget request that focuses on cost-effectiveness and saving lives. It allows us, as Tom mentioned, to meet the President’s goal of putting six million patients on treatment for HIV/AIDS, building on the progress we’ve already seen under this Administration of going from 1.7 to 3.9 million under coverage today. This is in part possible because of a more than 50 percent reduction in the cost of doing treatment, thanks to the leadership of Ambassador Goosby and the PEPFAR program. This will also allow us to invest in HIV prevention, including the elimination of pediatric AIDS by treating pregnant women.

This allows us to meet our global commitments in immunization, where by getting together with the global community we’ve made investments to help save more than four million lives over a five-year period by expanding access to new vaccines to poor children around the world. And it allows us to extend our investments in malaria and maternal and child health, where we’ve seen concrete and specific results. Since 2008, child mortality has been reduced by 16 percent, maternal mortality has been reduced by 13 percent, and very clear studies just coming out in the past few weeks have shown the effectiveness of U.S. investments in global health in places like Rwanda and Tanzania.

Second, our Feed the Future program, the President and Secretary’s signature effort to advance food security around the world, is based – is funded at $1 billion and is predicated on the point that it’s cheaper and smarter to help countries feed themselves than to address famine, food riots, and failed states that result from food insecurity. Again, this is an area where we’ve changed the way we work to focus on delivering results, measured as the number of people that move out of a condition of hunger through their own sustainable efforts, where we focus our investments on those countries that are taking on reforms to ensure they can be successful, and where we work more actively in partnership with the private sector to stretch taxpayer dollars even further.

We’ve seen important results in places like Bangladesh and Tanzania, where food production is up and the number of people and the number of children who are chronically hungry have gone down. We’ve implemented new partnerships, such as with Pepsi in Ethiopia and Wal-Mart in Central America, that are reaching tens of thousands of families and stretching U.S. taxpayer dollars even further in delivering these results.

Third, we have a priority in our humanitarian accounts. Across State and USAID, these accounts help us deal with food emergencies, address water when water is not available to needing communities, address refugee flows around the world, and support internally displaced populations in conflict and other countries everywhere around the world. In these areas as well, we’ve taken a reform approach and prioritized efficiencies, investing in early warning systems that highlight faster where disasters are likely to occur, pre-positioning food and supplies to reduce the cost and improve the time to delivery, and expanding both local procurement and initiatives like the Secretary’s 1,000 Days Initiative that targets food assistance to pregnant women and children so that it achieves better results in terms of nutrition, learning, and outcomes.

These types of strategies allowed us to reach more than 4.6 million people who are at risk in the Horn of Africa during the past several months and the drought and famine that ensued. Despite the fact that that’s now been downgraded in part due to effective humanitarian support, the U.S. will continue to make investments in humanitarian crises in the Horn, in the Sahel, and in other parts of the world where it’s necessary. And we’ll continue to use our leadership and our ability to make those investments to diversify the burden and ensure that the whole world is living up to its shared responsibilities at times of need and crises.

And finally, Tom mentioned that $10.4 billion of the overall budget is for investing in our staff and our reform initiatives across State and AID, including 1.5 billion for USAID’s operating expenses and a set of reforms we call USAID Forward. These reforms came out of the Secretary’s QDDR initiative and are allowing us to use new technologies, like mobile banking in Haiti and Afghanistan, to fight corruption and expand access to banking services and financial services. They’re allowing us to invest in scientific and technical partnerships, like the Grand Challenges program, which – where we’ve launched programs like Saving Lives at Birth and efforts to use technology to help all children improve their literacy outcomes at grade levels.

In each of these efforts, every investment of one U.S. taxpayer dollar leverages three or four dollars from other donors and other partners before we go forward. And perhaps most importantly, these investments allow us to build a staff model that allows us to oversee contracts and programs in a way that’s designed to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse, cut down on contractor costs, and save taxpayers’ money.

So I would end just by recalling Tom’s opening point, that this entire portfolio of investment takes place within 1 percent of the federal budget and is part – a critical part of keeping us safe and secure and improving our economic prospects around the world. Thank you.

MR. TONER: We have time for a few questions. Go ahead, Elise.

QUESTION: I’d like to ask maybe Secretary Nides about some of the areas where you’re expected a cut in funding, for instance aid to Egypt, which although the 1.3 billion is in there, I mean, it doesn’t – if things aren’t resolved with the Egyptians it looks as if it was cut. Also I might refer to the UNESCO funding. Although this year you don’t have an estimate, for next year you have close to $79 million.

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: That’s right. 79 million. Right.

QUESTION: Yeah. So I’m just wondering, are these in anticipation of resolving these issues? Are you kind of reserving the money? What – if you could explain that a little.

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: Sure. Well, let’s do UNESCO first. As you know, the Congress has prohibited us for funding UNESCO this year. And as you know, the President has also articulated quite clearly that he would like a waiver to allow us to participate in UNESCO. We have put the money in the budget, realizing that we’re not going to be able to spend the money unless we get the waiver, and we have made it clear to the Congress we’d like a waiver. So we will work with them and work with our friends and colleagues on Capitol Hill in hopes that we can work an agreement out for us to fund. UNESCO does an enormously – a lot of enormously good work, and we’d like to make sure that we have a contribution commensurate with their work.

As it relates to Egypt, our goal is, is to provide the money which includes about $1.3 billion of FMF, which is the foreign military funding financing, and then the $250 million of direct assistance which is put into 2013. Our goal is, is to provide them those funds. I mean, it’s obviously clear to all of us that we have issues that we need to work through, and we are working very aggressively to do so. But this budget reflects our commitment and our desire to make – to fully fund those initiatives.

MR. TONER: Go ahead, Andy.

QUESTION: I’m just curious – one follow-up on Egypt and then to the broader Middle East and North Africa Incentive Fund. Okay, this is – you’re saying on the Egyptian side this is your hope that you’ll be able to give them the money that you’ve outlined here. How much pushback are you expecting from Congress on these particular numbers? Do you have an argument for the people in Congress who are going to say that they shouldn’t be getting this money? And secondly, on the $770 million for the broader incentive fund, how much of that is going to be actually new money and how much of that is sort of moved from other places?

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: First on Egypt, we’re going to have a – I think the desire from the Hill and certainly from the Administration is to resolve the issues that are currently occurring in Egypt. And I think there’s bipartisan support once we can get these issues resolved is to support Egypt. I don’t think that’s – I think there would be no argument on that, at least from where we sit. And we have, obviously, issues we’ll need to deal with and which we’re actively engaged in. So our hope is and desire, as we proceed this year and have discussions around the budget, would be clearer to all of us as the situation gets clearer for us in Egypt, and that we’ll be able to provide the assistance that we hope to provide.

As relates to the $770 million of the Middle East Transition Fund, this is something that Secretary Clinton has really – and with the President – has focused principally on. The notion is we’re in a new world. The Arab Spring has come; we need to make sure we have the tools and the flexibility in which to fund these initiatives. I cannot tell you today where that money will be spent because we’ll be, obviously, in consultation with the Hill. We’ll be coming up with initiatives that we’ll then be discussing with the Hill.

But this is something we coordinated and talked a lot about with our friends on the Hill, with – the idea is to have some flexibility to support everything from Tunisia, to support areas like potentially in Egypt and in areas where things are changing every day in Syria, things where changing – we have no idea – the world is evolving as we see it, and we felt it was important to have a pool of money. Some of it is money that we have taken from other areas. Some of it is new money. But it’s obviously all capped in the overall budget request which, as I pointed out at the beginning, is basically up about 1.5 percent from last year. So as you can see, we’re doing lots of trade-offs to come up with those monies.

Yeah.

QUESTION: Just a quick – one quick follow-up. Would that include the 250 million in non-military aid for Egypt?

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: This is – that 770 is – that’s a different pot of money.

QUESTION: Different pot of money, okay.

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: It does not include – yeah, you have the Egypt money which is a billion five, of which is – the numbers here – I think doing it from memory – but a billion three is FMF, 250 million or 250-some million is for direct assistance. And – am I screwing this up? Okay, good. And then – I just saw him looking at me like with their hands on their face, so I just want to make sure I didn’t get – I’m doing it from memory.

So the 770 is new money, yes.

MR. TONER: Go ahead, Josh.

QUESTION: Thanks. I’m looking here at –

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: Don’t stump me, Josh. Don’t do that to me. (Laughter.) I was doing so well, okay? Okay.

QUESTION: No, no, no. Okay. So the core – the enduring budget, the core budget –

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: Yes, sir.

QUESTION: — was funded at 43.7 billion and the request this year is 48 billion. That’s a 4.3 or 10 percent increase.

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: Yes – but you’re good at math so you’ll understand this – there’s two ways they did this. The budget – they switched around between OCO and core budget, so the Hill last year in our budget request made a decision to move some items into the OCO account out of the base account. And we’ve had a lot of dialogue back and forth with them in – as relates to 2012.

We are making – we are shifting some of those things back into our base budget. The overall budget, especially in the frontline states, is basically up just a little bit as reflects to Afghanistan. So even though it looks like the base budget is up, in fact, the base and OCO together is basically flat, is up 1 percent.

QUESTION: Right, right. So my question is, since there are discretionary spending caps going into effect –

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: Sure.

QUESTION: — for the first time based on the Debt Control Relief Act – Budget Act, do you expect these – that to be funded in the regular budget, or do you expect Congress to just shift it back? And how does this fit into your long-term –

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: We’ll – listen – you’re – you’ve watched the Congress for a long time, as well as I. This is the beginning of a process. I mean, obviously, the benefit of the OCO account in general allows for all of you who report on this and for the Hill to look at the costs of our frontline states, to look at the costs of Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and that’s important because you better see those costs come down over time. And that’s why the – I think the idea of putting the OCO part of the State Department as relates to the frontline states was critically important. So that’s the benefit of the OCO, and I think the Congress will look at that in ’13 and I think my assumption is – strong assumption – they will continue to fund the OCO in a way that they feel reflects those costs.

QUESTION: One quick – very quick follow-up. So one specific thing is 626 million for assistance to Europe, Central Asia, and Eurasia, totally zeroed out in democracy assistance.

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: 18 percent.

QUESTION: Out of 626 million down to —

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: Yeah, Europe – these guys will get it. But Europe and Eurasia went down 18 percent.

QUESTION: No, but I’m saying that 18 percent is the democracy promotion funding?

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: Yes, yes.

QUESTION: And that went from 626 million to zero, right?

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: Is that –

STAFF: We’ll follow up on that.

QUESTION: Well, what’s the –

STAFF: We didn’t zero out the democracy program (inaudible). The entire assistance to the region is down, but it’s spread across lots of different sectors.

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: You’ll get —

QUESTION: So generally, why are we cutting all of our assistance to those three regions by whatever it is that we’re –

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: Well, again, I mean, I think we’ll have – again, as the document will show, Europe and Eurasia is down about 18 percent. As the Secretary and the President has discussed many times, we have a limited amount of money, we have a huge amount of new activities occurring, and we need to shift resources based upon the activities that are occurring.

MR. TONER: Just – all right.

STAFF: It’s on page 11.

MR. TONER: So let’s save this for – let’s save this for the backgrounder. Okay. Last question, anyone? Yeah.

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR. TONER: Yeah. In the back.

QUESTION: Go ahead.

QUESTION: I’m just wondering, the 2.4 billion for Pakistan with 1.5 billion the core money, is the core money what comes because – due to the Kerry-Lugar bill?

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: Yeah. The Kerry-Lugar-Berman number went from one five to one one, I think, is the numbers.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: And the security assistance – has it come down, or is it staying the same level?

DEPUTY SECRETARY NIDES: The security assistance for Pakistan is staying the same, is that right – staying the same, staying the same.

QUESTION: Thanks.

MR. TONER: All right. Thanks, everyone. Appreciate it.

QUESTION: Quickly for Ambassador – for Administrator Shah?

ADMINISTRATOR SHAH: Sure, I can take one. Sure, sure. Yeah. Go ahead.

MR. TONER: If he has a chance to take – sure, go ahead. One quick question, but let’s keep it lights out.

QUESTION: All right. We got a $313 million cut for global health programs. Could you please explain?

ADMINISTRATOR SHAH: Well, the global health budget was keyed against the results we’ve committed to. So the President made a commitment to put 6 million people on AIDS treatment. Given the cost structure of that, we have a budget that reflects an ability to do that. We’ve made a commitment to eliminating the transmission of HIV/AIDS from mothers to children with a budget that supports that effort. The President’s made a commitment to support the Global Fund, and this reflects that as well. And this reflects areas like malaria, maternal and child health, where we’ve essentially been seeing very, very good and very cost-effective results in terms of the cost of saving lives. So at $7.9 billion, we’re maintaining a very strong commitment to global health on the behalf of the President and Secretary.

MR. TONER: Great. Thanks, everyone.

Background Briefing on 2013 State Department-USAID Budget

Special Briefing

State Department and USAID Officials

Washington, DC
Link to More on Budget

February 13, 2012

MR. VENTRELL: Our briefers have to get up to the Hill in about 40-45 minutes (inaudible). This session is on background. We have State and AID officials, so since there’s a mix, let’s just call this Administration officials. (Inaudible). I’ll let the three of them introduce themselves very briefly, and then I’ll moderate the questions. So let’s go ahead. You want to start?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Sure. I’m [Senior Administration Official One]. I’m [position withheld].

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL TWO: [Senior Administration Official Two], [position withheld].

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL THREE: [Senior Administration Official Three], [position withheld].

MR. VENTRELL: Okay. Do any of you have any remarks you want to say before we go for questions, or we just want to go?

Okay, Josh, you look like you’re ready to begin. Dig in.

QUESTION: Okay. Can we talk about the fact that Europe, Eurasia, South Central Asia – I’m looking at page 11 in the briefing book, where it says assistance to those countries will be zeroed out.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Well, right.

QUESTION: Let me finish. And democracy funding, 115 million zeroed out. And migration and refugee assistance, minus 250 million, which is all in the OCO, which is —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: So let me explain the – Europe – and this is Europe and Central Asia money and the democracy. Those are – we’ve traditionally funded assistance in Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia in a separate account. This year, we are taking those funds and we are funding those programs in our normal assistance accounts – economic support funds, the INL programs, and global health programs. So if you look at the tables in the back, you’ll see those countries funded. We’re discontinuing that account.

That account was set up – it had morphed over time but it originally – 20 years ago when the Berlin Wall fell, it was a separate set of accounts that were set up for that region. Twenty years have gone by, several countries have graduated into market democracy, into the international institutions – the EU, NATO – and we felt it was time to sort of normalize the assistance for those countries in the regular budget so that we no longer have a separate carve-out. So there is money in the budget for those reasons.

The same thing with Democracy Fund. The Democracy Fund is something that Congress always provides us as a distinct account. We have put the democracy money into the Economic Support Fund account. We do this every year. So it looks like it’s a zeroing out, but it really isn’t a zeroing out. You have to kind of go into the depth of the budget to sort of get that.

On humanitarian assistance, you’re right. Most of that reduction from 2012 is in the refugee assistance account. We feel the $4 billion, roughly, that we have in total for humanitarian assistance in the food aid account, the refugee accounts, and the disaster assistance accounts are sufficient to allow us to do what we have to do. Plus I would just say two other things: One, a portion of the Middle East Incentive Fund is – we anticipate it could be used to deal with humanitarian emergencies in that region owing from the transition. We’ve already spent about $150 million over the last year in humanitarian assistance to Libya and in other places. So that’s a place we can sort of stretch the main accounts. And we also have some money in the Feed the Future program that goes for more traditional development food aid programs. That will also help us stretch the account. So I think we’re in pretty good shape on those accounts.

QUESTION: Thanks. A very quick follow-up. So the 250 from the migration and refugee assistance, that was all in the OCO, right? And then —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Well, in 2012, it was split between the base budget and there was a few hundred million dollars that was put in the OCO.

QUESTION: Yeah.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: As the Deputy Secretary said, we’re – our OCO proposal for 2013 is very much like it was last year. It’s purely Afghanistan and Pakistan and Iraq. It doesn’t have any of the humanitarian assistance in the OCO. So the – for all of you to get an apples to apples comparison from 2013 to 2012, you’ve got to look totals to totals, because we’re – our methodology is different.

QUESTION: So practically, is there going to be a scale-down of migration and refugee assistance in those three countries?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: No. I think we have the flexibility to use the existing set of accounts to deal with humanitarian issues in those countries.

QUESTION: I’ll let someone else.

MR. VENTRELL: Other questions? Go ahead.

QUESTION: Can I ask you something about the Kerry-Lugar number going down to about 10 – from 1.5 to 1.1? I’m just trying to understand now – wasn’t it supposed to be 1.5 (inaudible)?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Sure. The authorization bill, the Kerry-Lugar-Berman bill you refer to, authorized up to $1.5 billion over five years. This was the bill that was enacted in 2010. For the first couple of years, we have requested $1.5 billion. The Congress – and through the negotiation over the budget, we never got that high. And so given the budget constraints, given the fact that we’re under caps, and the fact that we really had to look very hard at our spending, we have since decided to request something a little bit lower than the 1.5. We did the same thing last year.

So we’re at about 1.1 billion for Kerry-Lugar – for the non-military assistance program. It just means that to get to the $7.5 billion of what we refer to as Kerry-Lugar-Berman funding, it’s just going to take us a little bit longer. But we still have a very, very robust commitment to Pakistan.

In addition to the 1.1, there is money in military assistance, the traditional foreign military assistance, which is part of a multiyear agreement. And as the Deputy Secretary said, even though we have our challenges with the government right now, we wanted to make sure that the budget reflected the nature of the program, its importance to our security, importance to our efforts in that region. So a $2.5 billion Pakistan budget, which includes those two things plus the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund, is a – is really, I think, a strong statement of support for what we’re doing there.

QUESTION: So just to follow up, you’re saying that the Kerry-Lugar, the 7.5 billion, is now going to take longer than five years?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Well, it’s going to. That’s an authorization bill. That wasn’t an appropriation. So we’re – if we’re not requesting nor are we receiving from the Congress the full 1.5, it’s going to take us a little bit longer. But an assistance program at over a billion dollars is still – it’s still one of the largest recipients of assistance in our budget. And so —

QUESTION: I’m sorry. How much did you get last year? I’m looking for it.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: We had about $1 billion in non-military assistance for Pakistan in 2012.

QUESTION: So if you’re asking for the 1.1, do you anticipate that it’s going to be a lot less than that, or you think you’ll get —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: We’ve been having – the Pakistan levels have been hovering around that level for the last few years, so I’m pretty confident that that’s sort of the sustained level that we’re going to get if the Congress, although, as the Deputy Secretary said, this is a proposal. We’re going to have a – we have a lot of negotiation to do, so we’re going to make the best argument we can and we’ll have to work out with the Congress ultimately what the final appropriation’s going to be.

MR. VENTRELL: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Hi. Lisa Friedman with ClimateWire. Thanks. The climate change funding that Administrator Shah mentioned – the priorities seem very broad. Can you talk about what this is going to fund, and is this new money?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Well, it’s a sustaining – it’s a sustained commitment we have to climate change programs in the developing world. I’ll saying something, and I’ll ask [Senior Administration Three] to amplify. When we began the Global Climate Change Initiative, we were doing so around the Copenhagen commitments we made a few years ago. And we’ve largely met those, the $6 billion in climate financing – this is over a period of years. So now we’re into a sort of sustained level of effort on climate dealing from – everything from clean energy to resiliency to forest – sustainable forestry and other things.

So this is a continuation of programs that we funded, and whether – I don’t know what your definition of new money is, but it is an allocation we have as part of our overall budget that’s part of our overall tax that’s going to go for the programs – I don’t know, [Senior Administration Official Three], if you want to say anything about —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL THREE: Well, it’s just – [Senior Administration Official One] is exactly right. This is not – these are not new programs. They’re continuations of the same strategies that we’ve had, focusing in three areas: adaptation, clean energy, and sustainable landscapes. We’re still focusing on things like the RED commitment, although as I think one of the things that will become clear when you go into the details is that commitment is probably going to have to stretch another year to meet that billion dollars, given the envelope we’re working under. And – but it’s the same commitments in the same three categories. And obviously, the State and AID piece is just one piece of the total. There are also the contributions through Treasury to the – to climate-related World Bank funds.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: So if you add the Treasury direct funding and you add our direct funding, we’re at – almost at $769 million worth of climate funding in the total U.S. Government budget.

MR. VENTRELL: Go ahead, Elise.

QUESTION: I have a couple of things. So Burma – this is like the – when was the last time you gave kind of non-emergency —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: We’ve been doing – Burma. We’ve been doing programs in Burma for the last few years. This is – we’re trying this year in the 2013 budget to keep the levels at sustained and a higher sustained level, given the fact that there’s an opening there now. And I imagine assistance from humanitarian accounts in other parts of the budget over – when we’re in actual 2013, the numbers will grow a little bit. So we’re really trying – as late as those breaking developments were in our budget process, we’re trying to make sure to keep the number as high as (inaudible).

QUESTION: Okay. And then on the Middle East and North African Incentive Fund, so you just arrived at the 770 kind of, not randomly, but it doesn’t look like you have any kind of ideas on any —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Right. So let me explain a little bit more about this fund, because it’s an important part of the budget. First of all, the 770 million – I forget who asked the Deputy Secretary whether it was new versus moving around. There is 70 – 70 million of it is programs that are the – it’s the Middle East Partnership Initiative and a small USAID program called OMEP – Office of Middle East —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL THREE: Office of Middle East Partnerships.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: — Partnerships. Those have been funded previously in the past. That’s 70 million. Seven hundred million is, I would say, quote, new money. It’s money that we have, through the various tradeoffs in the budget – have identified to allow us to help with the democratic transitions in the Middle East.

A little bit of background is helpful here. We came to the Middle East change without any resources dedicated to this in the budget. So over the last year, since last January, we have reprogrammed, carved out, made available almost $800 million for the response. That includes some of the Egypt money from their reprogramming out of their pipeline, the new Middle East response fund in 2011, a similar fund in 2012. All the humanitarian assistance is a – there’s a – our effort to respond to the transitions over the past year have been robust. We needed a way in 2013 to sustain – have a sustainable way to fund these things.

You’re right. There’s nothing magic about 700 million. It’s not allocated way in advance. I wouldn’t know how to allocate that right now. But there’s a few key points that I would make. One is we’re trying to recast the relationship with these new governments in a way that we haven’t done before. We want to focus more on economic growth; we want to focus more on democratic transitions. And the budget for the Middle East region historically has not been focused on those things. It has been largely security assistance related. And we needed to expand the envelope, if you will, of funding to that region to allow us to do those things which were not being done in the past.

And two is —

QUESTION: So you’re not doing it within the individual country?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: No. This is over and above the bilateral programs to places like West Bank-Gaza and Lebanon and Tunisia and Egypt. This is additional money that we would then allocate as we work with those new governments to secure public commitments, commitments on reform, to allow us to do – and help them achieve the goals that we’ve – that’s in all of our interests. So this is a new account, it’s a new fund, it’s an addition to everything else we’re doing in the region. It doesn’t come at the expense of any of the preexisting agreements we have with Israel and Jordan. So —

QUESTION: Well, far be it from us to get ahead of ourselves, but I mean, if you look at the money that, like, ended up being spent in Libya, for instance, when – once the international community stepped up its action against Libya, I mean, if something were to happen in another one of these countries – say Syria for instance – would the money come from this account or would that be – I mean, your 700 million can go to Syria, like in a (finger snap).

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Correct. It could – we could use this fund for places like Syria, and we actually are worried about what our response is going to be when Syria breaks one way or the other. And that’s going to be dependent on timing. If we need to do something in Syria this fiscal year, we’re going to have to use the resources we have in 2012. However, the resources we have in 2013 through this fund, if we have it appropriated by Congress, can be – finance part of the response. And it – and – but more importantly, it’s available to us to be more proactive and add more sustainable bilateral relationship.

So you’re right. Syria could be a big draw. I would hope it’s not 700 million big, and I would hope that our response to whatever happens in Syria is coordinated with the international community, much like our response was to Libya. And – but that’s what this fund is there for, for Libya, for Syria, for Yemen, for Tunisia, for Morocco. I mean, if there are transitions going on around the region, we want to have the ability to affect this proactively and in a more sustained way than reprogramming money, which is what we had to over the last year.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Just on the West Bank that you mentioned, the numbers are slightly lower this year. I’m just wondering, first of all, why that is and if there would be any change based on the makeup of the government of Hamas (inaudible).

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: The two primary reasons why West Bank is down is, one, we had a very robust police training program in the West Bank. Most of that was equipment, heavy training. That is sort of tailing off, and now we’re into more sustainment and rule of law, which is more – which is cheaper than the equipment. So a large chunk of the reduction is just to reflect programmatic reality to the West Bank. And there is a reduction in the amount of cash transfer that we are proposing for 2013. This year, we’re – we were planning on doing $200 million. Next year, the proposal is $150 million. We think the economic situation is slightly better, so it means we can give a little bit less. But obviously, when we get to 2013 and we have to work with the Congress on the allocations, we’ll have to assess where that is a year from now.

QUESTION: And the makeup of the government?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Even the makeup of the government.

QUESTION: And so, I’m sorry – just in terms of the numbers, so looking here at the FF money, and that’s –

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: That’s the cash transfer, and the —

QUESTION: So then – so we’re talking about the training with stuff, right?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: That’s the – in the (inaudible) – the INL portion of the budget. So if you – there’s an account table for the INL in that, too, and you’ll see similar reductions.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: Can I ask you a little bit more about INL? So we have old money and we have a overall $500 million increase. And then on this page, on 164, we have 350 million more for Iraq and about that same amount reduced for Afghanistan and Pakistan. So what’s going on here? Is the calculation that we don’t – that drug –

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: No.

QUESTION: — (inaudible) is not as important in Afghanistan?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: No. No, well – okay. So not to overly technicalize this, but to put the Afghanistan and Pakistan budgets in context, you’ve got to look at the base and the OCO together.

QUESTION: So it was switched to the base?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Right. So there’s INL money and counterdrug money in OCO for Afghanistan, for example, and you’ll see it goes up. For Iraq, the police program is part of this transition near our – starting with the program in 2012, that’s about $500 million. We are planning to strengthen that program in 2013. It’ll be a bigger program, more advisors. That accounts for the big – for the increase from 2012 to 2013. But to do an accurate apples to apples comparison in Afghanistan and Pakistan, you’ve got to glue the two things together. I know it gets complicated.

QUESTION: You’re saying that it’s going up overall?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Yeah. The drug programs, rule of law programs in Afghanistan, and particularly in Afghanistan because a lot of that is transition-related programs that DOD is not going to do any more work starting today. So you’ll see when you do an apples to apples – and we can help you with it offline, if you like – you’ll see those numbers grow. So the – looking at the one chart in the one part of the book doesn’t really tell the whole story. So I know it’s confusing, but that’s the way the budget is constructed. We’ll have to help you glue the pieces together.

MR. VENTRELL: (Inaudible.)

QUESTION: Yes. Can you just follow up on Kerry-Lugar? You said last year, you guys asked for and received $1 billion. How much have you guys received and spent, year to date?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: I will have to get back to you on the actual expenditures. The money has not moved as quickly as we would want, owing to various difficulties on the ground and with the government, but we’ll have to get back to you with the status of those funds.

QUESTION: And if I can just ask about these numbers, 1.1 was Kerry-Lugar, and 800 million is the (inaudible) fund.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Right.

QUESTION: And what’s another 300 million –

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: That’s the foreign military financing portion. So those are the three main components of our assistance programs – the ESF, the – I’m sorry, the nonmilitary assistance piece, the foreign military finance piece, and the PCCF are the three components of our assistance to Pakistan.

MR. VENTRELL: A couple more. Andy?

QUESTION: Just a quick one on the numbers for Sudan and South Sudan on economic support. South Sudan obviously still has a lot more, but it seems to be trending down against last year, while Sudan itself is trending slightly up. What’s the rationale there?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: We spiked in 2012 funding for South Sudan, given the fact that this is a big year of transition, it’s a new government. And in the – all the tradeoffs we had to do, given the caps, we felt we could come down a little bit and still maintain very, very high levels to South Sudan. I don’t have the number right in front of me, but I know it’s multiple hundreds of millions of dollars.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL THREE: Two hundred million —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Right, and then that’s augmented with funding from other accounts. And on the regular part of Sudan, we’re trying to build – we’re in a different world now in Sudan. We’ve got two separate countries. We have issues in Darfur and other things we still have to do, so we felt we had to sort of strike the balance between the two countries. And so that’s the main part of the difference.

QUESTION: Will there be any component – and this is my ignorance here, but is debt relief part of that equation or not?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: I’ll address –

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL THREE: It’s funded. There is a – I don’t know the exact number, but there is a significant number in Treasury. The department actually has an account for debt relief. And you’ll notice, I think that spikes this year, like, from low double digits to 300 or – 200-300 million, and that is mostly if not all for Sudan debt relief.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: So you – the Treasury Department can give you more details on that.

QUESTION: Just a minor detail. The Israel aid is just a teeny bit higher. Is that just in keeping with the agreement under the MOU?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: That’s the 10 – yes, that’s the 10-year agreement.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: Is it correct – and I think it is, isn’t it, that the only country that received IMET funds last year but is not this year is Guinea?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: There were a handful of IMET countries. Again, not very – these are not very big programs. There were a handful of IMET countries, right. Let me look.

QUESTION: I think it’s the only one.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Yeah, Guinea-Bissau is the one – the only one that we zeroed out.

QUESTION: And then every year it comes up and every year (inaudible). Why does the East-West Center keep getting money?

QUESTION: Why does the International Coffee Organization —

QUESTION: Well, that actually makes sense, but the East-West Center – every year, you guys come out and want to cut its funding, and every year it goes up to the Hill and it ends up getting more money than they – than anyone had ever asked for.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL TWO: East-West Center funding level for 2013 is consistent with the funding level that was in the President’s request for 2012, and —

QUESTION: Yeah. It was also jacked up by the Hill.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL TWO: It was increased in the appropriations process by the Hill. We continue to believe that it does offer good programs. They’re – at this funding level, it’s likely that we will see greater focus to their programs in Hawaii, and that they will probably be closing down their headquarters operations here in Virginia. But they will continue to provide the educational programs that we’ve been —

QUESTION: Is that something that – really? That’s something that they’re going to do? They’re going to shut down their office?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL TWO: That’s why there are considerations for the lower level of funding.

QUESTION: Okay. All right.

QUESTION: One last one. I’ve got a quick one on the PEPFAR funding, if I could, for USAID. Could you just talk us through what this increase (inaudible) for what it is relative to last year, and how that’s going to break down for medication versus prevention?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL THREE: I actually don’t think I can.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Right. I think —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL THREE: To do that —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: I know that Dr. Goosby was going to do a more detailed set of briefings on the PEPFAR program. They can get into some of that detail. The one thing I would add to what the Deputy Secretary and to what Raj said at the press briefing earlier is, yes, while the global health number is down below 2012, these are really cases of programs that are outcome-driven in terms of how we arrived at the number, and sort of taking advantage of their successes. Unit costs are coming down, they’re becoming a lot more efficient, they were able to treat more people at lower cost, and so we are able for – it’s rare in the budget world to have a program or set of programs that have measurable efficiencies where we can actually do a lot more with a little bit less money.

So I think it’s important to note, as you get into this, that the budget, even though it’s slightly down from 2012, still maintains the commitment on the 6 million treatment goal, still maintains our Global Fund commitment, still maintains our commitment to the —

PARTICIPANT: To GAVI.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: — to GAVI, the vaccine institution, still maintains robust funding for malaria and maternal child. So it’s – so the numbers don’t tell the whole story. I think Dr. – Ambassador Goosby can give you chapter and verse on the bilateral and country splits and kind of what their considerations were.

MR. VENTRELL: Shortly — one last question, then we’ve got to get our briefing —

QUESTION: The Administration’s pivot to Asia Pacific, are there ways we can quantitatively see this in the budget?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: The budget – again, it’s one of those things where I think the story is better told on the diplomatic side, where we have a number of – we’re reengaging with Asia on – in several regional and multilateral institutions. The numbers are slightly below 2012 for the region, but I have to say most regions are slightly down, maybe with the exception of the Middle East, because the budget was that tight. So there are lots of other things that we’re doing in that region with respect to Indonesia, with respect to multilateral institutions that complement the priority that you’ll see out of the DOD strategy.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL THREE: I also – just to add to that, I think what you’re going to see increasingly in that region is, for certain countries like India, moving from assistance to trilateral cooperation. So our strategy with India is going to increasingly be looking at working with the Indians on mutual development goals which may not all be in India; may be in third countries. And I know our Feed the Future Initiative has already started working with India on such a program similar to one we have with Brazil and Mozambique. So I think – and there are other countries, like Indonesia is starting up its own aid agency now. So I think you’re going to start seeing more of that in – and Asia is going to be probably leading the way along with the two summits on Latin America on that effort.

MR. VENTRELL: Okay. Thank you all.