blog logo image

EVENT – The United States and Global Development: An Approach in Transition

February 13th, 2013
Bookmark and Share

The United State and Global Development: An Approach in Transition 

Tuesday, February 19, 2013, 2:00 — 3:30 pm

The Brookings Institution, Saul/Zilkha Rooms, 1775 Massachusetts Ave, NW, Washington, DC

As President Barack Obama begins his second term, the U.S. global development community is taking stock of the reform efforts that began in 2010 to elevate development—joining defense and diplomacy—as a core pillar of U.S. national security and foreign policy, while advancing proposals for what the administration should focus on going forward. In January 2013, the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network (MFAN), a reform-minded coalition that is focused on advancing the effectiveness and impact of U.S. global development efforts, submitted its recommendations to President Obama.

On February 19, the Development Assistance and Governance Initiative at Brookings and MFAN will co-host a discussion on the current status and future of the U.S. global development reform agenda. Panelists will include: Sheila Herrling, vice president in the Department of Policy and Evaluation at the Millennium Challenge Corporation; Steven Radelet, distinguished professor in the practice of development at Georgetown University; Susan Reichle, assistant to the administrator at the Bureau of Policy, Planning and Learning at the U.S. Agency for International Development; and Connie Veillette, former director of the Rethinking U.S. Foreign Assistance Program at the Center for Global Development. Brookings Senior Fellow George Ingram will moderate the discussion.

After the program, the panelists will take audience questions.

Moderator

George Ingram, Senior Fellow

The Brookings Institution

 

Panelists

Sheila Herrling, Vice President

Department of Policy and Evaluation, Millennium Challenge Corporation

 

Steven Radelet, Distinguished Professor in the Practice of Development

School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University

 

Susan Reichle, Assistant to the Administrator

Bureau for Policy, Planning and Learning, U.S. Agency for International Development

 

Connie Veillette, Consultant 

 

To RSVP for this event, please call the Office of Communications at 202.797.6105 or click here.

 

 

USAID Administrator Should be Given Seat on NSC

February 5th, 2013
Bookmark and Share

Last week, Foreign Policy’s “Best Defense” blog had a guest post from Major Jaron Wharton, U.S. Army. In the piece, Maj. Wharton makes a compelling case for the USAID Administrator to be granted a seat on the National Security Council given the increased role development plays in our national security. MFAN has long held the position that the USAID Administrator should hold a seat on the National Security Council, especially with the emphasis on smart power seen during the Obama Administration. Read the full piece here and see key excerpts below:

“Because we are living in times that require a fully integrated national security approach, the USAID administrator should become the president’s principal advisor for development and assistance (akin to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff role and associated linkage to the secretary of defense, but concomitant to the secretary of state) and a permanent member on the National Security Council. This elevated position will provide the president with unfettered development advice, while codifying the position that development is on par with defense and diplomacy. Maintaining USAID’s intimate relationship with State recognizes the inherent ties of development assistance to foreign policy.”

[ ... ]

“USAID should take internal steps to reinforce its relevance and further professionalize its engagement in the national security apparatus. However, as in Goldwater-Nichols, where the ramifications for the professionalization of the Joint Staff were extreme, USAID is already fully-capable of the increased level of responsibility. There is no longer a dichotomy within USAID between those focused on altruistic development and assistance and those who understand the necessity, practicality, and Hill-emphasized need for more targeted work to support national security objectives.

Indeed, the development portfolio is now facing critical challenges and is at significantly increased risk given growing fiscal constraints. Despite being elevated by the Global Development Policy to be on par with defense and diplomacy, elements of any effort by the agency to demonstrate true relevancy in national security must include improved and sustained engagement in the NSS. This inherently makes the case USAID’s activities are considered in the national interest. Elevation of the administrator as a permanent member on the NSC provides an additional forcing function on the broader USG to recognize this point. At a minimum, the USAID administrator should be elevated and maintain his presence at the principals’ committee level beyond an “informal member as appropriate.”

Looking Back, Moving Forward: Recommendations on Post-2015 Development

February 4th, 2013
Bookmark and Share

Please see below for a guest post from Jenny Russell, Director of Policy & Advocacy, Post – 2015 at Save the Children. This piece originally appeared on the Gates Foundation blog – Impatient Optimists, and highlights Save the Children’s 2015 MDG proposals from their report, Ending Poverty in Our Generation. Goals 1 – 5 focus on poverty and children, while the remaining 5 speak more directly to aid effectiveness.

The 2015 target date for the United Nations’ Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) is fast approaching. With less than three years remaining, significant strides have been made toward achieving these ambitious goals, including lifting 600 million people out of poverty, helping 56 million more children go to school, and reducing the number of under-five deaths from nearly 12 million in 1990 to fewer than 7 million in 2011.

Clearly, the MDGs have provided a successful framework to direct political and financial commitments as well as practical solutions for children and others mired in poverty. That said, the job is far from done.Despite progress on the MDGs for health, for instance, millions of children still died in 2011 from mostly preventable causes. We can—and should—do better.

This is a critical moment in world history.  We must do everything possible to achieve the current MDGs to address poverty and then create a post-2015 development framework to finish the job.

We have the opportunity now to make a series of momentous breakthroughs in human development. For the first time, it is conceivable that every child has the right to learn, no child will die from preventable causes, and no child will suffer from absolute poverty. That is why Save the Children is working globally to ensure that, collectively, we learn from the current MDGs and contribute to the evolution of an ambitious new global development framework.

Last week, Save the Children released a flagship report, Ending Poverty in Our Generation, which outlines one of the first post-2015 proposals, building on the successes and lessons learned from the MDGs. We believe the core priorities for fostering a new framework should emphasize human development, equity, and accountability with a focus on our future – the children. To this end, the report identifies 10 goals we believe are imperative if the new post-2015 framework is to end extreme poverty in the next 20 years.

Save the Children’s 10 Goals for Post-2015 Development Framework

  • Goal 1: By 2030 we will eradicate extreme poverty and reduce relative poverty through inclusive growth and decent work
  • Goal 2: By 2030 we will eradicate hunger, halve stunting, and ensure universal access to sustainable food, water and sanitation
  • Goal 3: By 2030 we will end preventable child and maternal mortality and provide basic healthcare for all
  • Goal 4: By 2030 we will ensure children everywhere receive quality education and have good learning outcomes
  • Goal 5: By 2030 we will ensure all children live a life free from all forms of violence, are protected in conflict and thrive in a safe family environment
  • Goal 6: By 2030 governance will be more open, accountable and inclusive
  • Goal 7: By 2030 we will establish effective global partnerships for development
  • Goal 8: By 2030 we will build disaster-resilient societies
  • Goal 9: By 2030 we will ensure a sustainable, healthy and resilient environment for all
  • Goal 10: By 2030 we will deliver sustainable energy to all

Our starting point in developing these goals was the great successes in poverty reduction and development that have been made possible thanks to the MDGs. In addition, these goals were identified through extensive consultation across Save the Children’s global network and are informed by expertise accumulated over a century of development programming to improve the lives of children and their families.

We also looked at the gaps in the MDGs, including equity, participation and accountability.

The debate on the MDG successor framework is at an early stage—and as such these aforementioned proposals are offered as a contribution to a participative global conversation, not as a final word. However, the time is ripe to ensure that we remain as ambitious as possible.

Later this month, an influential United Nations’ panel, chaired by the presidents of Liberia and Indonesia and the UK Prime Minister, will meet to begin outlining the new development framework to replace the current MDGs.

The global community must ensure that important objectives are not overlooked or negotiated away at this early stage, and that the discussion moves beyond rhetoric and ensures a practical framework in which all children, wherever they live, can fulfill their potential. It will take more than business as usual if we are to succeed. It will require a resolute focus not on the easy to reach, but on the hardest to help.

Together, we can create a world where everyone has enough food to eat; everyone has enough education to flourish; everyone has clean water to drink; and everyone has access to healthcare when they fall ill.

If we are willing to take up the challenge, then we can be the generation that ends poverty.

 

Women Thrive Welcomes President’s Memo on Empowering Women and Girls Globally

February 1st, 2013
Bookmark and Share

Please see below for a guest post from Ritu Sharma, Co- Founder & President of Women Thrive Worldwide. 

It’s not that often that we get to tell you about a big new thing that will empower women and girls from around the world. But this week, we can!

Yesterday (January 30th), the President signed the memorandum Coordination of Policies and Programs to Promote Gender Equality and Empower Women and Girls Globally and sent it off to all heads of executive departments and agencies. We at Women Thrive Worldwide are excited to see the President issue such a strong statement of support for gender equality, and ask that all of the government take this seriously.

Specifically, the memorandum calls for the Secretary of State to designate an Ambassador at Large to lead the State Department’s Office of Global Women’s Issues. The Ambassador at Large would be responsible for making sure that policies and programs benefit women and girls and that the overall focus of international policy, including partnerships with other countries and working with NGOs and companies around the world, is to empower women and girls worldwide. This position existed under Secretary Clinton, and helped enormously to make gender a core part of our nation’s foreign policy. Women Thrive has been working hard to ensure that this focus on women and girls continues after Sec. Clinton’s departure. Yesterday’s memo helps ensures that it will.

This is good news for women and girls around the world. It’s also just smart policy. When women and girls do well, whole communities do well. We at Women Thrive know this especially from our work with organizations and women around the globe.  Women comprise a majority of the world’s poorest citizens, and any long-term effort to increase global security and prosperity must include women at its core.

While this is just one step of many our government can take to ensure that the policy making process is effective in meeting our global goals, it’s a particularly good one.

You can read the President’s full memorandum online 

The True “Beneficiary” Is The Organization That Listens

January 31st, 2013
Bookmark and Share

Please see below for a guest post from Denise Raquel Dunning, the Program Director of the Adolescent Girls’ Advocacy & Leadership Initiative (AGALI), on the most important and underutilized resource in developing and evaluating our development programs – the knowledge of local community leaders. This piece originally appeared on The Markets for Good blog

We have failed the individuals and communities we seek to serve. Our current thinking and existing approaches in the social sector are inadequate. Overwhelmingly, foundations, non-profits, and governments attempt to solve other people’s problems – poverty, homelessness, hunger, disease, and barriers to information and services both in the US and around the world. Given all the data, program evaluations, and survey results at our fingertips, we think that we have the information we need to develop sustainable social sector solutions. We are wrong. While we may have a glut of information and even the best of intentions, our initiatives will continue to fall short until we recognize that our ‘beneficiaries’ are really the people who have the solutions that both they and we need.

Within even the hardest to reach communities, there are leaders who understand the needs of their families and communities. These community leaders are the best data source we have as we develop, implement, and evaluate programs in the social sector. There is no question that national surveys, field studies, and various forms of quantitative and qualitative data all have a role to play in the conceptualization, development, and implementation of social sector programs. Yet while these sources may be necessary, they are certainly not sufficient. All too often, we miss the most crucial data points, the ones that are directly in front of our faces – the knowledge, expertise, ideas, and experience of community-based leaders.

While project ‘beneficiaries’ may not have all the solutions to the world’s problems – like how to develop new vaccines or improve national GDP – their knowledge of their own cultural and political realities must be paramount in the creation of sustainable social sector programs. Without integrating the expertise of the people and communities we seek to serve, social sector interventions ranging from environmental conservation and HIV prevention to policy advocacy and democratic governance are doomed to fall short of their full potential. We must work in partnership with local leaders, communities, and organizations to create and sustain true social change. Only by listening to the stories of poor communities, hearing and amplifying the voices of marginalized groups, and respecting the inherent capacity and expertise of local leaders will our work in the social sector bear fruit.

This philosophy is the foundation of the Adolescent Girls’ Advocacy & Leadership Initiative, AGALI, a program that partners with leaders and communities around the world to transform adolescent girls’ lives. Recognizing that our data sources alone are inadequate to achieve the scale of change necessary, we collaborate with local experts to develop game-changing solutions that improve laws, policies, and programs for adolescent girls.

Case Study: Liberia

In Liberia, AGALI invested in the vision and aspirations of two women who had the audacity to believe they could successfully advocate for a national law to protect children. During Liberia’s 14-year civil war, up to 75% of women and girls suffered rape and sexual violence, and girls continue to be socially marginalized – prevented from attending school, forced to undergo female genital mutilation, and seen by many in their families and communities as disposable. Given these enormous challenges, AGALI never would have risked investing in the near impossibility of comprehensive legal protection for both girls and boys, had we focused merely on traditional data sources. Instead, we listened and trusted in the expertise of our ‘beneficiaries’ to successfully advocate for passage of the National Children’s Law, landmark legislation that is transforming the future of Liberia’s children for generations to come. A video case study documenting how we did it can be found here.

Challenges In Collecting The Data

Investing in ‘beneficiaries’ and recognizing the value of the knowledge and data they can provide us is risky. In the social sector’s existing view, using data from a randomized survey is unassailable. Using data from a village chief who may not have even completed primary school is not. But if we can acknowledge that our existing data sources are insufficient and that local communities may in fact have exactly the data that we need, we have the potential to transform our impact and the scalability of social sector initiatives.

Nonetheless, even programs that seek to prioritize beneficiary insights have a hard time collecting this data, as a few critical factors hinder our ability to listen to program participants and integrate their wisdom and expertise. First, while the social sector holds out monitoring and evaluation as a big priority, far too few funders are willing to invest the time and resources necessary to make this possible. Without significant support for both formative and summative evaluation, our collective understanding of social sector impact will remain limited. Secondly, a false dichotomy between social sector research and interventions prevents meaningful knowledge sharing. While social scientists collect data that could be invaluable for interventions, program staff rarely incorporates this data into the design and implementation of programs. Lastly, for an organization to effectively integrate data from project participants, there must be an institutional culture of learning, a willingness to recognize that we don’t have all the answers, and a desire to adapt our own models to better address the priorities of the very people who will be most affected by our interventions.

Case Study: Malawi

This was the approach AGALI adopted in Malawi. Rather than merely looking at statistics demonstrating the devastating effects of child marriage on girls’ health, education, and livelihoods, we went to the source – child marriage victims and local leaders who are advocating to increase the national legal age of marriage. AGALI is partnering with village chiefs, community-based organizations, and national advocates to enable young women to raise their voices and create their own solutions to the social and economic problems they face. In this video, Catherine, an adolescent girl from Malawi, shares her story of being kidnapped, escaping a forced marriage, and her own vision for finishing school and her future.

By creating a platform for Catherine and other girls to share their stories, AGALI has catalyzed a national dialogue about the need to end child marriage. AGALI leaders in Malawi are using the video as an advocacy tool to both change national policies and transform girls’ realities at the local level.

In addition to using video technology as an advocacy tool, AGALI builds the capacity of local leaders to do their own media advocacy. Through intensive workshops, AGALI leaders learn to use cutting edge participatory media technology to create digital stories – compelling short videos that capture their own experiences and the realities of adolescent girls in their communities. In this compilation, AGALI leaders highlight the diverse challenges facing adolescent girls at the grassroots level and the need to advocate for change. Beyond integrating media technology into their own advocacy initiatives, AGALI leaders are now teaching adolescent girls how to use this participatory technology to share their stories and advocate for their own needs.

The Takeaway

Seeing project ‘beneficiaries’ as experts turns the social sector on its head. Like it or not, the game has always been one in which we view the governments, foundations, and non-profits as the experts responding to the needs of less fortunate individuals and populations. And when our interventions fail, we invariably attribute these failures to the very communities that we seek to ‘help’ – the villagers who weren’t sufficiently skilled to maintain our overly-engineered pit toilets or the at-risk teenagers who didn’t have the drive necessary to graduate from our well-intentioned mentoring programs.

The time has come for us to upend the social sector’s dominant paradigm and recognize that ‘beneficiaries’ are not the communities in which we implement interventions. In fact, we are the true beneficiaries of the knowledge and expertise that local leaders and communities can generously share with us – if only we would ask.