blog logo image

Broad Coalition Urges President to Nominate a Permanent USAID Administrator

April 16th, 2015
Bookmark and Share

April 16, 2015 (WASHINGTON) – This statement is delivered on behalf of the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network by Co-Chairs George Ingram, Carolyn Miles, and Connie Veillette:

Today MFAN, as part of a broad coalition of international development advocates and stakeholders, including four former USAID Administrators, is urging President Obama to expeditiously nominate a permanent Administrator to the United States Agency for International Development. Under the leadership of Administrator Rajiv Shah, USAID has made dramatic steps to strengthen its capacity to deliver results for the American people and for people in developing countries around the world.

Having a Senate-confirmed appointee at the helm of USAID is essential to advancing U.S. development goals and the aid effectiveness agenda. We are calling on the President to nominate a new Administrator as soon as possible to sustain strong U.S. leadership on the development programs that play a vital role in support of our foreign policy goals and are crucial to the lives and well-being of men and women around the globe.

MFAN Thanks SFRC for Highlighting Importance of Reforming Food Aid

April 16th, 2015
Bookmark and Share

April 16, 2015 (WASHINGTON) – This statement is delivered on behalf of the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network by Co-Chairs George Ingram, Carolyn Miles, and Connie Veillette:

MFAN wishes to thank the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, especially Chairman Bob Corker (R-TN) and Ranking Member Ben Cardin (D-MD), for convening this week’s landmark hearing on the importance of reforming U.S. food assistance. U.S. food aid programs are instrumental in providing life-saving support to the world’s poorest and most vulnerable, but the current system needs to be improved to deliver more for both hungry people abroad and U.S. tax dollars.

Current laws requiring that food be shipped from the U.S. on U.S. flagged vessels results in time lags and increased transportation and administrative costs that put lives at risk. In addition, delivering U.S. food rather than purchasing locally or regionally sourced food, when available, can inhibit building self-sustaining agricultural systems. Common-sense reforms should be enacted to allow our food aid programs to deliver results faster, more effectively, and more efficiently – at no additional cost to American taxpayers.

We have already seen the positive impact of the small increases in flexibility that were included in the 2014 Farm Bill and the FY2014 appropriations bills. With an estimated one in nine people in the world being food insecure, this is a critical time to ensure that U.S. food aid programs have all the necessary tools at their disposal to respond quickly and effectively to those in need.

We are encouraged by the bipartisan efforts of Congressional champions like Senators Bob Corker (R-TN) and Chris Coons (D-DE) to fix our food aid system, such as the Food for Peace Reform Act (S. 525). We look forward to continuing to work with Congress to ensure our food aid dollars have the maximum impact.

Broad Coalition Calls for Urgent Food Aid Reforms for Efficiency, Effectiveness

April 13th, 2015
Bookmark and Share

As a diverse coalition from the nonprofit sector, we are strongly in favor of U.S. food assistance that delivers results faster, more effectively, and more efficiently. We applaud the leadership of the Chair and Ranking members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senators Bob Corker and Ben Cardin, for elevating the importance of the life-saving Food for Peace program and the need to maximize its reach and efficiencies.

For more than five decades, U.S. food aid programs have been assisting the poorest, most vulnerable people in the wake of disasters and other crises. We urge Congress to pursue common-sense reforms that increase the ability to reach more vulnerable people with both emergency and non-emergency assistance.

These common-sense reforms would come at no additional cost: In fact, increasing the flexibility of existing funding and delivery mechanisms can significantly increase the reach of our current programs to millions more people at no additional cost. The United States should be empowered to better utilize the tools necessary to respond to hunger and to match the type of assistance with the reality of any situation – including utilizing cash transfers, local and regional procurement, vouchers, and the delivery of U.S. commodities.

Small increases in flexibility in the 2014 Farm Bill and the FY2014 appropriations bills have already benefitted vulnerable people around the world. In the past year alone, these reforms have reduced costs, allowed a wider range of programming options to improve program outcomes, helped achieve more sustainable results, and reached 800,000 additional people, more quickly.

Flexibility in food aid has helped feed millions of refugees and internally displaced persons affected by the crisis in and around Syria. This includes a wide range of programs such as a U.S.-funded food voucher program for Syrian refugees in Turkey as well as distributing life-sustaining food bars purchased in the U.S. to Syrian refugees in Erbil, Iraq.

This is an important opportunity to expand the impact of one of our most vital international programs. We stand ready to work with Congress to ensure these gains can be realized.

ActionAid USA
Action Against Hunger
Alliance to End Hunger
American Jewish World Service
Bread for the World
CARE USA
Church World Service
Convoy of Hope
Edesia
The Episcopal Church
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Feed the Children
Friends Committee on National Legislation
Global Poverty Project
Helen Keller International
InterAction
Maryknoll Office For Global Concerns
Mennonite Central Committee U.S. Washington Office
Mercy Corps
Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network
ONE
Oxfam
Save the Children
The Borgen Project
The Hunger Project
United Church of Christ, Justice and Witness Ministries
United Methodist Church, General Board of Church and Society
USAID Alumni Association (UAA)

Statement: MFAN Applauds Important Reform Elements in the Global Food Security Act of 2015

March 25th, 2015
Bookmark and Share

March 25, 2015 (WASHINGTON) – This statement is delivered on behalf of the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network by Co-Chairs George Ingram, Carolyn Miles, and Connie Veillette:

MFAN is pleased to see that the Global Food Security Act of 2015 (H.R. 1567), recently reintroduced by Reps. Chris Smith (R-NJ) and Betty McCollum (D-MN), includes important reform elements that would help strengthen accountability mechanisms and promote greater country ownership of U.S. foreign assistance programs related to food security and global agricultural development.

MFAN believes that accountability is best achieved through transparency, evaluation and learning, which is why it is encouraging to see the Global Food Security Act of 2015 incorporate components of all three areas. The legislation promotes transparency by requiring that indicators and benchmarks be established to measure progress, and that results and spending information be reported publicly in a transparent and timely manner. It also calls for a whole-of-government approach to establishing coherent and coordinated monitoring and evaluation systems; and it states that strategies, partnerships, and programs be regularly reviewed and updated and that lessons learned be shared with a wide range of stakeholders.

The legislation also demonstrates a commitment to principles of country ownership. It requires that U.S. government agriculture, nutrition, and food security strategies align with country-owned strategies, and that plans be developed with input from relevant stakeholders in partner countries. It also calls for a USG strategy on building local capacity in order to support the long-term success of programs.

We applaud the bill sponsors for the inclusion of these elements as they are crucial to ensuring greater effectiveness and sustainability of U.S. global food security and agriculture programs. However, we believe the legislation could be made even stronger in several ways. First, the coordinating function within the U.S. government should lie with the United States Agency of International Development (USAID), our principal development agency, rather than the White House. USAID has been leading the development programming for the Obama Administration’s Feed the Future initiative since its inception and has the requisite expertise and experience to lead coordination across U.S. agencies. Second, reporting on spending and project data should be done in accordance with the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI), which the U.S. has already committed to implementing, and measures should be included to ensure that this data is accessible by all development stakeholders, especially the beneficiaries. Third, the legislation should specify that local, developing country institutions be the first option for implementing programs where appropriate capacity and conditions exist.

We look forward to working with Congress to ensure the reform elements in the bill are strengthened.

Lessons From The Road To Transparency: Four Tips For Publishing To IATI

March 19th, 2015
Bookmark and Share

See below for a guest post from Laia Grino, Senior Manager, Transparency, Accountability and Results at InterAction. This piece originally appeared on InterAction’s blog on March 19.

***

In honor of Sunshine Week – a weeklong celebration of open government – we’d like to share four lessons InterAction has learned in our own journey towards openness. Today, we join the more than 300 organizations that have published data on their activities according to the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI) standard (view our data on the IATI Registry or a visualization of our data on NGO Aid Map). This includes our counterparts in the U.K., Ireland, Netherlands and Nepal, and several InterAction members, including CDA, ChildFund International, GlobalGiving, Pact, and Plan International USA. In doing so, we have taken another important step in making our organization more open and accountable, in line with the open information policy InterAction adopted last October.

In the blog post announcing that policy’s launch, we explained our rationale for making a commitment to greater openness and transparency. Our reasons for publishing to IATI are much the same, so I won’t repeat those here. Instead, I’d like to share four tips:

  • Adopting an open information policy first can be helpful. Not every organization publishing to IATI has adopted an open information policy. For InterAction, however, I believe this was a critical first step for two reasons. First, in adopting the policy, InterAction’s senior management signaled their commitment – both internally and externally – to improving the organization’s transparency. Having this public commitment to point to is useful in ensuring we are continuously making progress on implementation. Second, the development of the policy prompted us to have important discussions about why transparency matters specifically for InterAction, and to come to an agreement about what type of information we would and would not make public (a list of exclusions is available in our open information policy). This laid the groundwork for identifying what data we would be publishing to IATI.
  • Identify/cultivate internal champions. The commitment to publish to IATI or to be more transparent in general should not lie within one person alone. Those responsible for leading an organization’s transparency efforts should do whatever they can to identify or cultivate other internal champions. Some people will become champions for normative reasons – because they believe in the value of transparency in and of itself. Others will do so for practical reasons – because they realize how publishing to IATI either helps the organization or helps make their own work easier. At InterAction, it has been important to have both types of champions.
  • Integrate IATI publication into existing (or needed) business processes. Just as the commitment to publish to IATI should not lie only within one person, neither should the responsibility for actually publishing. It would have taken just one or two days for one person to simply publish information on our existing grants to IATI. Instead, it took us five months. Why? To try to ensure that our publication to IATI will not be a one-off effort, we began by figuring out: (1) what information IATI calls for and what we could realistically publish based on our current systems; (2) when and where that information should be captured; and (3) who within the organization should provide that information. Based on this analysis, we’ve made changes to our grants management process to integrate the data we need for IATI publication, rather than set up an entirely separate process. An important lesson here is that, depending on how it is approached, IATI can be a very useful tool for improving an organization’s data management practices.
  • Be patient. Publishing to IATI will almost inevitably take more time than expected (especially since – at least at first –it is usually not part of anyone’s job description). But while improving an organization’s transparency does require consistent pressure, it is important to avoid turning IATI into just another reporting requirement or making the processes of openness seem like a burden. As one of my colleagues emphasized, ultimately this is about shifting organizational culture – something that takes time in any context.

InterAction is committed to publishing high-quality information on its grant-funded activities on a quarterly basis. As we work out the kinks in publishing what we’ve currently committed to, we will be thinking about how we can make the process easier and further improve the quality of our published information. As all IATI publishers should, we will also be looking at how InterAction itself can realize the full benefits of publishing. Hopefully these lessons help clear the path to transparency for other leaders (like you?!), too.