blog logo image

Archive for the ‘MCC’ Category

Local Voices and Resources Are the Ultimate Answer in the Fight Against Poverty

Friday, April 18th, 2014
Bookmark and Share

See below for a guest post from Carolyn Miles, President and CEO of Save the Children and MFAN Co-Chair.

***

This week, the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network (MFAN) released a policy paper – The Way Forward: A Reform Agenda for 2014 and Beyond – urging the U.S. Government to work more closely than ever before with our partner countries and their citizens to improve the way in which our aid dollars are planned and spent. The paper highlights MFAN’s new agenda and makes clear why country ownership and accountability are powerful and mutually reinforcing pillars that will make U.S. aid more effective in helping leaders and citizens in developing countries drive decisions about their own development.

U.S. foreign aid to developing countries is vital in the effort to save lives, fight famine, put kids in schools, and respond to disasters. But, our help will be even more impactful and lasting if designed and implemented in true partnership with developing country governments and citizens, in ways that strengthen their own efforts, and that they can build on. A frank conversation between our government and the people we want to help is necessary to address the inefficiencies in our aid system that often delivers aid piecemeal and is not integrated with local efforts.

Save the Children is a leading voice in MFAN, driven by the belief that U.S. foreign assistance needs to focus on fostering local partnerships and creating relationships of mutual accountability. In countries where we operate, Save the Children works in partnership with national and local governments and communities on programs that we know are working for children and that are helping to bring about more of their government’s investment in the long run. In Nepal, we have joined forces with district governments, each providing half of the funding needed to create a Child Endowment Fund that allows caregivers of vulnerable children to receive consistent support.

In addition, we have just launched a pilot program in multiple countries to identify and support local advocates for children in their efforts to secure a fairer share of public resources from their governments for the care, protection and development of their children. Foreign aid is certainly helping achieve these outcomes, but the foundation for continued care for these children lies in our partner countries’ own commitments to the cause. This commitment can be demonstrated in effective, child-focused policies and programs, and growing shares of public funding for childhood care and development.

The U.S. Government is already committed to engaging citizens and governments in developing countries to inform the planning and delivery of our aid programs. It is in America’s own interest to ensure that our aid dollars are integrated with the efforts of these governments and local citizens, and that we’re helping to prepare them for a day when foreign aid is no longer needed. MFAN and its members, including Save the Children, want to see this commitment translated into greater action, and stand ready to help the Obama Administration put local institutions in the driver’s seat and equip them to bring about a permanent end to extreme poverty for children and families across the world.

5 things the US government is doing to make foreign assistance more effective

Wednesday, April 2nd, 2014
Bookmark and Share

See below for a guest post from Jennifer Lentfer, Senior Writer on the Aid Effectiveness Team at Oxfam America. Lentfer highlights the aid effectiveness principles from Oxfam’s newly released third-edition Foreign Aid 101 report.

***

#1 – AFFIRMING AID’S PURPOSE

President Barack Obama issued the US government’s first ever US Global Development Policy in September 2010. The policy clarifies that the primary purpose of US development aid is to pursue broad-based economic growth as the means to fight global poverty.

The US Global Development Policy also offers a clear mandate for country ownership—that is, leadership by citizens and responsible governments in poor countries—is how the US government will support development. The US has been moving in this direction since the George W. Bush administration.

ForeignAID-shareGraphics-quote

#2 – MODERNIZING USAID

USAID Forward is a flagship reform agenda designed to make USAID more transparent, effective, and accountable to US taxpayers and to people overseas.

The issue: USAID Forward addresses outdated procurement policies that perpetuate a cycle of aid dependence, rebuilding staff technical capacity, the reduction of overhead costs associated with contracting by 12–15 percent, the need for rigorous program feedback and evaluation, and finally, the role of innovation, science, and technology throughout USAID’s programs. At the heart of this reform process is acknowledging the leading role that local people and institutions have in transforming their countries.

The results: Since USAID Forward began, USAID has increased the amount of direct support to governments and to citizens and other leaders and problems solvers in host countries by almost 50 percent. In fiscal year 2010, only 9.7 percent of USAID mission funding was awarded directly to host country government agencies, private-sector firms, and local NGOs. In 2013, 14.3 percent of mission funds were awarded directly to these local institutions, which is halfway toward USAID’s goal of 30 percent by fiscal year 2015.

#3 – MAKING US FOREIGN AID MORE TRANSPARENT

The issue: Basic information about where, how much, and for what the US government provides aid has historically been difficult for people to access—both for American taxpayers and for the people in poor countries we are trying to assist. But when the US government shares high-quality, comprehensive, and timely information about our aid investments, it helps:

  • Partners plan better projects;
  • Watchdogs keep an eye on the money; and
  • Citizens both in the US and in partner countries make sure that aid delivers results.

The results: The US government is beginning to disclose basic aid data, as well as make that data more useful to citizens. In 2010, the US unveiled a public website, the Foreign Assistance Dashboard, which provides a view of US aid across agencies and countries. President Obama has mandated publishing machine-readable data on US aid via executive orders and through public, international commitments like the Open Government Partnership. There have also been bipartisan efforts in both houses of Congress to require more transparency from US aid agencies via legislation.

In 2011, the US joined the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI), a global agreement by donors to share information about foreign aid in an easy-to-use manner. Since joining IATI, US rankings in the Aid Transparency Index have risen across the board, with the MCC ranking number one in 2013.

ForeignAID-shareGraphics-Martha

#4 – DEVELOPING NEW MODELS OF PROVIDING AID

The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) is a United States foreign aid agency that is applying a new philosophy towards foreign aid. Introduced by President George W. Bush and established by Congress in 2004, the MCC model requires countries to meet eligibility criteria in three areas: good governance, economic freedom, and investments in people. In return, the MCC provides large, five-year grants (“compacts”) toward development projects that are identified along with representatives from the host country government, private sector, and civil society and that are assessed on the basis of expected economic returns and other technical criteria.

From 2004-2013, the MCC signed compacts with 24 countries and committed over $9.3 billion in aid. Lesotho is an example of a country that took steps to improve economic freedom to become eligible for an MCC partnership by passing a law in 2006 that allowed married women to own property for the first time.

#5 – TACKLING GLOBAL CHALLENGES THROUGH LOCAL INSTITUTIONS

FEED THE FUTURE

The issue: About three-fourths of the world’s poorest people—1.4 billion women, children, and men—live in rural areas, where most of them depend on farming and related activities for their livelihood.

In recent years, increasing food prices around the globe have put pressure on many poor households. In response to these recurring food crises, the Obama administration in 2010 launched the Feed the Future initiative, which aims to help small farmers grow more food and grow their incomes. Feed the Future is designed to deliver aid for agricultural development and food security based on a country’s own assessment of needs and priorities. Feed the Future is also intended to focus on results and leverage US investments in local research and training on farming methods, irrigation, and nutrition for maximum outcomes.

The results: In 2012, almost 9.4 million acres—a land area nearly double that of New Jersey—came under improved cultivation and management practices due to Feed the Future investments, supporting seven million food producers. In Senegal for example, the use of conservation farming techniques resulted in at least a 20 percent increase in yields of maize, millet, and sorghum from 2011 to 2012.

ForeignAID-shareGraphics-Manuel

THE US PRESIDENT’S EMERGENCY PLAN FOR AIDS RELIEF (PEPFAR)

The issue: An estimated 35 million people were living with HIV around the world in 2012. The persistent burden associated with communicable diseases undermines efforts to reduce poverty, prevent hunger, and preserve human potential. Launched in 2003, PEPFAR helps expand access to prevention, care, and treatment by funding programs that are country-owned and country-driven, emphasizing a “whole of government” response to scaling-up proven interventions, which are increasingly financed by partner countries.

The results: PEPFAR has helped contributed to historic declines in AIDS-related deaths and new HIV infections. Going forward, PEPFAR is addressing the continuing challenges of strengthening health systems in developing nations so countries ultimately care for and improve the health of their own people, better protecting the world from global disease outbreaks.

New MCC-PEPFAR Partnership Aims to Boost Ownership

Tuesday, April 1st, 2014
Bookmark and Share

See below for a guest post from Sylvain Browa, Director of Aid Effectiveness at Save the Children. Browa writes about a new partnership between MCC and PEPFAR to promote country ownership.

***

The 2010 QDDR called for the U.S. Government to change the way it does business, particularly, “work smarter to deliver results.” A new memorandum of agreement (MOA) between PEPFAR and MCC announced last week could do just that. Over the next three years, MCC will help PEPFAR increase host-country responsibility and ownership of HIV/AIDS and Tuberculosis (TB) programming in select countries.

This agreement is an important demonstration of PEPFAR’s commitment to doing business differently, and demonstrates how an already successful multi-billion dollar initiative can recognize the need to improve and act on it.

Putting host countries in the driver’s seat in the fight against HIV/AIDS and TB is not just the right thing to do, but has the potential to effectively help sustain the massive gains achieved by PEPFAR over the years. In this new approach, countries will own and (where necessary, learn to) implement PEPFAR priorities. As drivers, these countries will also bring something for the trip – if not the car, at least gas money and a deep knowledge of the road ahead. Greater host country responsibility and ownership of PEPFAR activities puts countries in the position to coordinate investments from other donors to strengthen their national fight against HIV/AIDS and TB.

This new agreement tells us that, in order to reap the full benefit of this mid-course correction, PEPFAR understands the need to get the partnership with host countries right. And they have reached out to a sister agency (MCC) with the comparative advantage and experience to help frame, structure, and set up these partnerships. MCC remains the guru among U.S. aid agencies on how to structure trustworthy partnerships where partner countries are accountable (and rewarded) for formulating their own priorities, implementing them, and delivering results for their people.

From my perspective, this agreement with MCC will work if PEPFAR can objectively commit to:

  • Amending its country operational plan (COP) process to allow partner countries to bring their own priorities forward for meaningful negotiation.
  • Aligning PEPFAR’s often uncoordinated multi-agency interventions in country behind a single entry point of engagement with partner countries like in MCC’s partner government-led MCA teams.
  • Being transparent with partner countries about all PEPFAR programs related information, including budgets, and even policy constraints at home.

In addition to being paid for its services, MCC could learn from PEPFAR’s increasing efforts to value and integrate domestic resources with U.S. funding at the country level and position our financial support (direct support to the public and private sector) as a fundamental element of the country’s available domestic and external resources to fight HIV/AIDS and TB.

This is an interagency collaboration worth following closely. And we will.

PEPFAR and MCC Partner to Promote Country Ownership

Wednesday, March 26th, 2014
Bookmark and Share

See below for a guest post from Jenny Ottenhoff, Policy Outreach Associate at the Center for Global Development. Ottenhoff writes about a new agreement between MCC and PEPFAR to promote country ownership. The original post can be found on CGD’s blog.

***

Last week, PEPFAR signed a three-year agreement with the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) to support efforts to promote greater host-country responsibility and ownership in the US global AIDS program.  Country ownership has been at the core of MCC’s mission (and structure and governance) since its creation, so it’s exciting to see a formalized agreement that will help facilitate lesson sharing and technical support between the two US development efforts.

Transitioning to a sustainable response is an ongoing challenge facing PEPFAR, and no easy feat considering the program was originally designed as an emergency response.  But as we highlighted in arecent report, the MCC model includes three features that could be extremely useful in moving PEPFAR toward a more country-owned approach:

1. First, MCC creates incentives for government commitment as expressed through policy and programmatic performance, where only countries that pass a threshold are eligible for assistance.  Similar indicators and thresholds related to HIV/AIDS and TB performance could be established under PEPFAR to incentivize greater country investment and reward progress towards greater coverage.

2. Second, MCC sets up a compact and account in-country, usually with a government-owned project implementation unit that can compete, contract, and supervise programs directly.  Such a facility could serve as PEPFAR’s country counterpart, channel Global Fund and other donor funding, and evolve toward a single payer or fund as modeled in countries like Rwanda and Liberia.

3.  Finally, MCC is one of the most transparent aid agencies in the world.  The agency posts its planning, obligation and spending data as well as procurement activity and reporting online in aggregated and country-based sites that are easy to access and understand.  These tools help facilitates better understanding, oversight and collaboration among all stakeholders — including partner governments — and would go a long way in helping manage expectations for country-ownership as PEPFAR moves forward.

While specific details of the agreement are not yet public, we do know that PEPFAR funds will be made available to facilitate technical assistance from MCC to help advance country ownership in a yet-to-be-decided set of countries.  But we’ll be watching to see if any of these “MCC features” are reflected in PEPFAR’s program in the coming years.

FY15 Budget Request Puts Heavy Emphasis on Initiatives

Friday, March 7th, 2014
Bookmark and Share

See below for a guest post from Casey Dunning, Senior Policy Analyst at the Center for Global Development. Dunning writes about the President’s 2015 budget request. The original post appeared on CGD’s blog.

***

President Obama launched the opening salvo in the FY2015 budget process with his recently released request, and while some of his foreign assistance proposals seem destined to go the way of the cutting room floor, you certainly can’t fault the request for having a specific point of view.

The FY2015 international affairs budget request is edgy (a word I’ve never used to describe a budget request) in what it chooses to prioritize and push for, given basically flat funding. Indeed the $50 billion request is actually 1 percent below enacted FY2014 levels due to a downsized Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) account. The base International Affairs FY2015 request stands at $44.1 billion with an additional $5.9 billion for the OCO account.

Here are the priorities, highlights, and surprising reversals that stand out the most. There are quite a few, hence the longer post.

  • Power Africa powers up. This is the first budget request since the launch of the Power Africa Initiative last June.  President Obama wastes no time in seeking to advance this signature initiative, both rhetorically and monetarily. The only actual line item at this point is a $77 million USAID allocation for technical assistance, risk mitigation, and regulatory reforms. But the budget request draws on the resources of the MCC (see more on MCC’s budget request here), OPIC, Export-Import Bank, and USTDA – all of which see increased budgets. If the bipartisan support around theElectrify Africa Act is any indication, funding for expanded energy access in Africa stands a good chance of making it into a final FY2015 appropriations bill.
  • OCO decreased in $ and expanded in scope. The OCO request sees a $600 million decrease compared to FY2014 enacted levels. The President’s request also puts forth a big substantive shift by expanding its country scope. In the past, OCO was almost exclusively reserved for Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq. However, the FY2015 request devotes $1.5 billion for Syria and to support transitions throughout the Middle East and North Africa. This shift away from a singular focus on the “Frontline States” represents a recognition that these three countries can no longer dominate US foreign policy interests.
  • Feed the Future lives on. With its contemporary cohorts dead (Global Health Initiative) or under-resourced (Global Climate Change Initiative), the Feed the Future Initiative stands out in the FY2015 budget request with a $1 billion allocation, roughly 5 percent higher than in FY2013. The multi-year Feed the Future effort is due to wrap up in 2015 (at least for the first phase), and the budget request aims to ensure the initiative finishes strong.
  • Aid for humanitarian efforts in Syria is up; aid for efforts everywhere else down. The FY2015 budget request singles out humanitarian efforts in and around Syria to the tune of $1.1 billion. (And this doesn’t include additional aid for opposition groups and transition funding in Syria).  At the same time, other humanitarian assistance accounts get slashed by over $1.5 billion, with the Migration and Refugee Assistance account getting hit the hardest (a 33 percent cut). Due to large carryover funds, this cut shouldn’t mean a direct hit for humanitarian assistance, but expect some scrambling if any new crises strike.
  • Global Health is no longer a sacred cow. For the first time since 2000, the funding request for global health programs has decreased. This year’s global health request still stands at a mighty $8.1 billion (a full 18 percent of the base budget request). But, this level represents a 4.6 percent drop compared to enacted levels last year.
  • The aid spotlight swings to Afghanistan, leaving Pakistan in the dark. Aid to Afghanistan grew in this year’s budget request as compared to FY2014 appropriations, increasing 4 percent to $1.4 billion. This increase stands in stark contrast to the 44 percent reduction in aid to Pakistan. This near halving comes as a result of the conclusion of the Kerry-Lugar-Berman aid bill and the availability of sizeable carry-over funds. Yet, the reduction sends a worrying signal at a time when the US and Pakistani governments are in the midst of a successful Strategic Dialogue process.
  • USAID operating expenses, ever the unsexy line item, get a needed boost. The FY2015 budget request proposes a 21.4 percent increase to USAID OE after a painful FY2014 cut. OE funds are necessary in providing adequate levels of personnel to implement, manage, and monitor programs around the world while giving USAID the ability to lead Feed the Future, robustly contribute to Power Africa, and institutionalize its USAID Forward reforms.
  • USAID’s Global Development Lab given funding to experiment. Meant to be a legacy of Administrator Raj Shah, the newly founded Global Development Lab is funded at $146.3 million in the budget request. The Lab is born out of a merger of two offices (and their resources): the IDEA office and the Office of Science and Technology. Administrator Shah is due to officially launch the Lab in late March so details are still sparse, but the new entity aligns with the budget request’s emphasis on innovation, technology, and the modernization of development.
  • Multilateral institutions get much-need attention. FY 2015 looks to be a catch-up and consolidation year as funding requests are up slightly for the regional development banks, multilateral debt relief programs, and most of the environmental trust funds. The request also offers the first official announcement of the US pledge to IDA-17 and includes funding for the long-delayed IMF quota reform package, which the administration is separately seeking to move more quickly in an emergency Ukraine assistance package.
  • Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative makes a big splash, and will most certainly drown. This new initiative – clocking in at $56 billion, with half for defense and half for non-defense programs – is a veritable grab bag of funding allocations. Less than $1 billion is meant for international affairs programs, but these allocations are directed to multiple programs including the MCC, GAFSP, the Global Fund, Feed the Future, USAID’s Global Development Lab, maternal and child health, and the Broadcasting Board of Governors. While the extra allocations would no doubt be welcome additions to these entities, the chances of this initiative making its way through Congress are slim to none.

The budget request does an admirable job of honing in on key initiatives and programs that President Obama sees as transformative in power and scope. It also includes a scaled-back but important development-related reform – a proposal to make food aid more flexible, allowing this assistance to reach an additional two million people each year. Stay tuned to the Rethink blog for updates on how each of these initiatives fare as the FY2015 appropriations process gets underway on the Hill.

For a detailed breakdown of the FY2015 budget request including specific line-item changes, see USGLC’s excellent analysis here.