MONDAY

DEVELOPMENTS
The Latest Issues and Trends in International Development and Humanitarian Assistance

$$$$$$$$
FOREIGN AID
Who decides? And for what?
July 2007
Vol. 25, No. 7
InterAction
AROUND THE BEND 4 ON THE HILL 10 NOTES TO FORE 12 ON GHANA 20
In this issue, we explore the current debates around foreign aid reform. Learn what has worked in the past, what has not and where do NGOs see the
future of foreign aid. And most importantly, has foreign aid made a difference?

READ MORE ABOUT INTERACTION’S TESTIMONY ON THE HILL www.interaction.org

FEATURES
Want more information on thESE issueS?
Check out our resource page at www.interaction.org 03 From the President: An Overview
04 Foreign Assistance Reform: Then, Now and Around
Renew your subscription today!
Visit www.interaction.org/monday
the Bend
07 UK Development Assistance
Up next month
Look for the August issue of Monday Developments 08 Does Foreign Aid Really Work?
featuring climate change and development.
10 InterAction Testifies at Senate Foreign Relations
Committee Subcommittee Hearing on Foreign
Assistance Reform
12 Foreign Assistance Reform: Advice to Incoming
MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS Director of U.S. Foreign Assistance and USAID
Managing Editor Monday Developments is published 12
Administrator Henrietta H. Fore
times a year by InterAction, the largest
Julie Montgomery
alliance of U.S.-based international 16 Aid Effectiveness and Absorptive Capacity: Which
Editors
development and humanitarian Way Aid Reform and Accountability?
nongovernmental organizations. With
Robyn Shepherd more than 160 members operating in 18 Filmanthropy: Exploring the Changing Ways
Kathy Ward every developing country, we work
to overcome poverty, exclusion and
Filmmakers and Nonprofits Interact
suffering by advancing social justice and
Copy Editors
basic dignity for all. 20 Can Ghana Do it? On Track to Beat the MDG
Josh Kearns
Deadline to Reduce Poverty
Hilary Nalven InterAction welcomes submissions
of news articles, opinions and 24 Markets for Development
Advertising & Sales announcements. Article submission
Josh Kearns does not guarantee inclusion in Monday 26 USAID and the Strategic Use of Development
Developments. We reserve the right to
reject submission for any reason. It is at
Assistance
Communications Department the discretion of our editorial team as to
Nasserie Carew, Public Relations which articles are published in individual
Josh Kearns, Publications issues. ALSO IN THIS ISSUE
Julie Montgomery, Publications
Robyn Shepherd, Media All statements in articles are the sole 28 Inside Our Community
opinion and responsibility of the authors.
Editorial Committee 30 Position Announcements
Articles may be reprinted with prior
Andrea Barron permission and attribution. Letters to
Evan Elliott the editor are encouraged.
Estrellita Fitzhugh INTERESTED IN WRITING AN ARTICLE ON FAITH
A limited number of subscriptions are
InterAction
made available to InterAction member AND DEVELOPMENT?
agencies as part of their dues. Individual
1400 16th Street, NW subscriptions cost $80 a year (add $15 Email Julie Montgomery, jmontgom@interaction.org by August 3.
Suite 210 for airmail delivery outside the U.S.)
Washington, DC 20036 Samples are $5, including postage.
Tel: 202.667.8227 Additional discounts are available for
publications@interaction.org bulk orders. Please allow 4-6 weeks for Photos: (Cover) courtesy of istockphoto.com; (Above) courtesy of istockphoto.com; Karl Grobl,
delivery. Advertising rates are available
on request.
www.karlgrobl.com; istockphoto.com; Nicky Lewin
ISSN 1043-8157

Foreign Assistance Reform
In January 2007, the InterAction community applauded the
Bush administration’s addition of the words “reduce widespread
poverty” to the top-line goal of its foreign assistance reform
program. We welcomed efforts to the increase in coherence of
U.S. foreign assistance, to build systems for accountability, and to
track how U.S. foreign assistance dollars are spent. We were also
confronted with a rapid reform process fraught with misdirected
efforts; and many within our community expressed serious
reservations about its direction and intent.
It was within this context, that InterAction engaged in a broad,
CEO-level dialogue to help shape our understanding of the
current U.S. foreign assistance reforms and how they fit with
our community’s goals and the needs of the poorest and most
vulnerable people around the world. Our deliberations advanced
NGO thinking about the ever-evolving foreign assistance
environment. The range of views within the InterAction
community is quite broad, with some reflected in this edition of
Monday Developments. I would like to share with you some key
points of our conversation.
InterAction members have a long history of partnering with the
U.S. government’s foreign assistance efforts while also raising
some $5 billion annually in additional private funding from the
American public to support our programs. As good stewards of
American generosity, we are committed to ensuring that U.S.
foreign assistance accurately reflects the lessons we have learned
over decades of implementing effective programs in the field. The
following principles should shape the foundation of any effective
U.S. foreign assistance structure and make up the core language
of any new foreign assistance reauthorization:
a In order to encourage self-sufficiency, foreign assistance
programs must include local ownership of programs and
partnerships with stakeholders.
a Sustainable development is a long-term process and requires
commitments that should not be compromised for the sake
of short or long-term political goals.
a Foreign assistance programs must be coherent, not
fragmented. Elements of the current reforms are a step in
the right direction.
a The goals of the U.S., other donor nations, recipient
countries and multilateral institutions like the UN must as
much as possible be in harmony and reinforce each other.
For example, U.S. goals should support the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs).
a Humanitarian initiatives must be impartial and not be
dictated by the strategic or political significance of any
nation.
a Gender equality must be placed at the heart of program
strategies.
As we address immediate diplomatic and security challenges,
our country continues to make investments that mitigate the
destabilizing effects of the poverty, ignorance and hopelessness
that foster militant ideologies and conflict.
Yet, foreign assistance is more than a tool to achieve our national
security interests. It is also a critical instrument to further our role
as world citizens and to present an accurate picture to the world
of American generosity and support for the people-centered,
democratic values we hold dear. Based on the principles outlined
FROM THE PRESIDENT
AN OVERVIEW
above, InterAction has always argued that sustainable development
and poverty alleviation are laudable goals in and of themselves that
embody the finest principles of our nation. We strongly believe
that an approach to foreign assistance that focuses on enabling the
world’s poorer countries to attain self-sufficiency and on providing
impartial humanitarian assistance accomplishes this, strengthens
our nation’s reputation and advances our best national interests
around the world.
To achieve some degree of complimentarity between the three
pillars of U.S. foreign policy – defense, diplomacy and development
– there must be both parity between them and respect for
development’s need to operate free from undue influence by
diplomatic or security objectives.
All of us recognize that our efforts to improve the well-being
of people occurs in a complex world. The challenges posed by
conflict, elusive peace, injustice, power imbalances, failing states,
human rights abuses, poor governance, militant ideologies, and
the consequences of increasingly scarce resources exacerbated by
global warming all require greater attention in a more coherent
U.S. foreign assistance framework.
Parts of the current reform process do move us towards a more
coherent foreign assistance program. Indeed, the evolution of
transformational diplomacy, or any future strategy for U.S. foreign
assistance, must take advantage of the momentum of current
reforms and take an additional step of including the Millennium
Challenge Corporation, the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS
Relief (PEPFAR), and other elements of foreign assistance in a
coherent framework. In this sense, the current reforms do not go
far enough, and must be more comprehensive.
Coherence across all civilian U.S. foreign assistance programs,
and a focus on improving the well being of the poor with the
space to shape effective, long-term, and impartial programs that
enhance local capacity and work to meet mutually agreed upon
results: these are keys to the success of any reform. Simply put, for
foreign assistance to be effective, the development component of
transformational diplomacy must be more equal to – and certainly
not subsumed under – defense and diplomacy. Ultimately, this
requires the establishment of a Cabinet-level foreign assistance
agency that operates and thrives alongside to the departments of
Defense and State.
As InterAction continues to work to create more effective U.S.
foreign assistance within the current “F Reform” process, there is
no fixed InterAction position. Rather, we will continue to promote
a bold agenda responsive to the inevitably changing environment
in order to focus U.S. development and humanitarian assistance
on how to work with and improve the conditions of the world’s
poor and most vulnerable. We will continue our efforts to advance
effective foreign assistance reform, focused on vulnerable and
poor populations, that truly leverages U.S. NGO attempts to help
create a better, more just and safer world for all.
Sam Worthington
President and CEO, InterAction
JULY 2007 
FOREIGN ASSISTANCE REFORM
Foreign Assistance Reform: Then, Now and Around the
Bend
By Noam Unger, Senior Manager, Foreign Aid Reform Project, The Brookings Institution
S
ixty years ago this month, the
policy planning staff and many
other parts of the Department of
State, not to mention the Ameri-
can population, were busy thinking about
“the European recovery problem.” They
were scrambling to realize the vision
spelled out just weeks before in Secretary
of State George C. Marshall’s speech at
Harvard’s commencement. Policy mak-
ers had to sort out real issues related to
the mechanics of foreign aid – financing,
delivery structures, regulations, require-
ments, the role of the private sector and
coordination with international partners.
The Conference of European Economic
Cooperation (the embryonic form of the
Organization for Economic Co-opera-
tion and Development) met in mid-July
of that year, enabling a number of Euro-
pean countries to join in the program’s
design and the needs assessment. The
Marshall Plan became a legislative act,
launching the United States down a path
of federal institution building and infra-
structural reforms that began with the
creation of the Economic Cooperation
Administration.
Every decade since its inception, the Mar-
shall Plan has witnessed executive and
legislative efforts to reform U.S. foreign
assistance. For the most part, these ini-
tiatives stalled in Congress, lacked Presi-
dential backing, suffered neglect in light
of domestic priorities or met with very
narrow success. Throughout this period,
the most significant and lasting reforms
The History of U.S. Foreign Aid Agencies
1948-1951
Economic Cooperation Agency (ECA)
1951 Congress replaces the ECA with the
Mutual Security Agency.
 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS
to U.S. foreign aid took hold when the
Kennedy administration worked with
Congress to create the Foreign Assistance
Act of 1961 and the Agency for Interna-
tional Development (USAID). Amended
and adjusted over time, both still exist.
The George W. Bush administration has
exercised significant political will on dis-
creet foreign assistance initiatives while
overseeing historic increases in over-
all U.S. foreign assistance levels. Our
government has invested in large new
initiatives, including the Millennium
Challenge Corporation (MCC) and the
President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS
Relief (PEPFAR). However, it deliber-
ately placed these new institutions apart
from USAID for fear that the tangled
bureaucracy and the morass of pre-ex-
isting legislation would encumber their
speed and effectiveness. The adminis-
tration’s tendency to pursue fragmented
and “quick fix” approaches comes at
considerable cost to our overall aid infra-
structure. Even prior to these large-scale
and independent initiatives, U.S. foreign
aid already suffered from disunity. With
U.S. foreign assistance divided between
USAID and the departments of State,
Agriculture, Defense, Commerce, Labor
and the Treasury (just to name several of
many), it would pose no surprise to hear
critics decry our system as “bureaucrati-
cally fragmented, awkward and slow…
diffused over a haphazard and irrational
structure.” Those were the biting words
that President Kennedy used to persuade
(continued on next page)
1951-1953
Mutual Security Agency (MSA)
1953 Congress replaces the MSA with the
Foreign Operations Administration.
our nation’s leaders of the necessity of
fundamental foreign aid reform nearly
half a century ago. The current Bush
administration’s further segmentation of
foreign aid, the weakening of USAID,
and the muddled evolution of the For-
eign Assistance Act of 1961 require a
broad re-assessment of how U.S. foreign
assistance is mandated, funded, and man-
aged.
In 2006, the administration launched a
set of reforms (known to insiders as “the
F process”) by creating a new position at
the State Department – the Director of
U.S. Foreign Assistance – and by “dual-
hatting” the designated director to also
serve as the Administrator of USAID.
Although the Director of Foreign Assis-
tance is charged with “the transformation
of the U.S. government approach to for-
eign assistance,” this new office (known
as “F”) was not created with authority
over the multitude of foreign assistance
organizations within the U.S. govern-
ment outside of the State Department
and USAID. Even within the State De-
partment, the Director only has the man-
date to provide guidance to the Office
of the Global AIDS Coordinator rather
than direct authority over PEPFAR. The
same lack of direct authority also pertains
to F’s relationship to the MCC. Such li-
abilities raise concerns about budgeting
decisions since it would seem that the
Director cannot take the big picture into
account but must rather follow decisions
already made on PEPFAR and MCC
1953-54
Foreign Operations Administration (FOA)
1954 The Mutual Security Act revises and
consolidates all previous foreign assistance
legislation, creating the International
Cooperation Agency in 1954. Placed under the
authority of the State Department, the ICA has
less authority than its predecessors.
FOREIGN ASSISTANCE REFORM
Every decade since its inception, the Marshall Plan has witnessed executive and
legislative efforts to reform U.S. foreign assistance. For the most part, these
initiatives stalled in Congress, lacked Presidential backing, suffered neglect in
light of domestic priorities or met with very narrow success.
programs and build around them. The
historic failure of the International De-
velopment Cooperation Agency should
serve as a lesson about the dangers of
creating a coordination layer that actu-
ally coordinates too little.
An additional fundamental concern
about the F process stems from the fact
that the “dual-hatted” position essentially
transforms the leadership role at USAID.
Designers of the F process claim that
USAID as an agency has been elevated
by raising the Administrator’s clout to a
Deputy Secretary-level job with purview
over State-controlled accounts. The top-
most leader at USAID, however, must
now be an interagency arbiter when dis-
putes arise, and as a result, the agency has
lost a high-level champion. Some mem-
bers of Congress are also nervous about
this executive innovation because senior
decision-makers under F are not Senate-
confirmed.
The administration-chosen path to fur-
ther consolidate development assistance
under the State Department also sparks
apprehension. At a recent Senate For-
eign Relations Subcommittee hearing on
foreign assistance reform, all the experts
on a non-governmental panel, includ-
ing leading thinkers from Brookings, the
Center for Global Development and In-
terAction, openly worried about the sub-
ordination of long-term development in-
vestments to shorter-term foreign policy
objectives.
1954-61
International Cooperation Agency (ICA)
1959 The Draper Committee report recommends a unified economic and technical assistance agency outside the Department of State, long-range planning on
a country-by-country basis, and the decentralization of authority to the field. 1960 The Senate Foreign Relations Committee sponsors a Brookings Institution
report recommending the creation of a foreign aid department with cabinet-level status. The report proposes consolidating the Development Loan Fund, the
Export-Import Bank, the ICA and authority over the Food for Peace program. The Ford Foundation, however, calls for the consolidation of foreign assistance within
the Department of State.
In addition to such deep concerns, the replace Ambassador Randall Tobias at
F process has also raised other criticisms. the helm of F and USAID, a window
Its implementation, for example, has of opportunity currently exists to shape
been marked by a lack of buy-in among the Bush administration’s drive to retool
key stakeholders within the administra- foreign aid under the State Department
tion, Congress and non-governmental and USAID. Essentially, Tobias’ depar-
development partners. ture provided an opportunity to apply
the brakes. Even before her confirma-
However, these reforms have also done
tion hearing, Fore has already stated
some good. The F process has resulted
that she will encourage wider consulta-
in a more unified budgeting process that
tion. Assuming she is confirmed, she can
resolves the old problem of not being
also take steps in the short time left for
able to cross-reference State Department
this administration to improve morale
and USAID accounting due to differing
at USAID, strengthen the level of field
systems. F has developed a basic set of
input into the F process, and augment
management practices and tools, includ-
transparency with regard to F’s decisions.
ing an information management system
Prior to a new administration in 2009, it
with a standardized lexicon. Such im-
is unlikely that State and USAID will un-
provements allow for better awareness in
veil a fundamentally different leadership
Washington of our assistance programs,
structure that also takes into account the
objectives and funding levels in all coun-
broader array of organizations involved
tries and regions. While it is useful for the
in foreign assistance across the executive
USAID Administrator, the Secretary of
branch. The intervening time will also
State and members of Congress to have
present a challenge for Congress to leg-
such elemental knowledge practically at
islatively resolve the conflict between the
their fingertips, it will be particularly in-
sector-based funding streams enshrined
teresting to see the results of forthcom-
within the Foreign Assistance Act and
ing assessments of these reforms from
the country-based budgets designed by
the field perspective, such as the ongoing
the F process. The new Director of U.S.
study by InterAction. Most of all, the ex-
Foreign Assistance and USAID Admin-
ecutive-driven, limited reforms imposed
istrator can and should set a tone for far
by this administration have served as a
more significant reforms over the long-
spur to prompt consideration by Con-
term. As Fore already emphasized to the
gress and other stakeholders of a wider
Senate more than a year and a half after
and deeper campaign that should involve
the administration’s reforms began, “We
statutory reform.
are at the beginning of this important re-
With the selection of Under Secretary form process, not in the middle, and not
for Management Henrietta H. Fore to at the end.”
JULY 2007 
FOREIGN ASSISTANCE REFORM
Thanks to past foreign assistance efforts, tomorrow’s policy makers
are not preoccupied with “the European recovery problem,”
but they are busy thinking about how to improve America’s image in the world.
What lies around the bend is the key. The
Brookings-Center for Strategic and In-
ternational Studies (CSIS) Task Force on
Transforming Foreign Assistance in the
21st Century found that the timing of
fundamental reform proposals is decisive.
The findings of the task force (issued
in Security by Other Means Brookings
Press, 2007) show that for fundamental
reform to meet with success, among oth-
er requirements, it must be rolled out at
the beginning of a new administration in
tune with executive and legislative sched-
ules. The next president, in collaboration
with Congress, may be able to capitalize
on the growing consensus that recognizes
the need for significantly deeper reforms
than those put forward by the current
Bush administration. By rattling Con-
gress, the F process may even be priming
the pump for reforms that ultimately lead
to the realization of an alternate vision
for U.S. foreign assistance.
The bi-partisan Brookings-CSIS task
force, along with InterAction and some
of its member organizations, made sig-
nificant strides toward spelling out a bold
alternate path. That path includes the
creation of a Cabinet-level department
that would consolidate much but not all
U.S. foreign aid and prominently place
development on equal and independent
footing, alongside diplomacy and de-
fense. The best practices, tools and les-
sons learned from innovations such as
the MCC, PEPFAR and the F process
would be incorporated into the new de-
partment. Dating back to the Marshall
Plan, U.S. foreign assistance has always
been a matter of both moral and strategic
imperatives; and that would not change.
Just as defense and diplomacy are part of
our national security strategy, develop-
ment too would remain as such. Addi-
tionally, while the alignment of foreign
aid and foreign policy is important, they
do not need to be housed within the same
agency any more than military operations
and diplomacy need to be controlled by
the same executive department.
Just as structured attempts to reform for-
eign assistance are not new, neither are
the fundamental debates about the ap-
propriate location and authorities of for-
eign assistance within the U.S. bureau-
cracy or about the relationship between
development assistance and military as-
sistance. Two encouraging trends have
coincided, however, that point toward a
significant opportunity to launch major
improvements in how the U.S. manages
its foreign assistance. On the national
security front, the post-9/11 strategic
outlook places greater importance on ef-
fective foreign aid to prevent state fail-
ure and to build stable partners. With
regard to poverty alleviation programs
overseas, there has never been a greater
constituency in this country and around
the world in support of such efforts. In
the run-up to the 2008 presidential elec-
tion, candidates will increasingly build on
such trends as they search for bold plans
to govern. Thanks to past foreign assis-
tance efforts, tomorrow’s policy makers
are not preoccupied with “the European
recovery problem,” but they are busy
thinking about how to improve Ameri-
ca’s image in the world.
To draw inspiration from our past, we
need not look further than USAID’s
own website which highlights the origi-
nal reforms that gave birth to the agency
and notes that it was thought that in or-
der for the President “to renew support
for foreign assistance at existing or high-
er levels, to address the widely-known
shortcomings of the previous assistance
structure, and to achieve a new mandate
for assistance to developing countries,
the entire program had to be ‘new.’”

The History of U.S. Foreign Aid Agencies (continued from previous page)

1961-present 1979-95 2009

U.S.Agency for International Development (USAID)
1961 President Kennedy calls for a new program with
flexibility for short-term emergencies; commitment to
long-term development; commitment to education at all
levels; emphasis on recipient nation’s roles through public
administration, taxes and social justice; and orderly planning
for national and regional development. Secretary of State
George Ball creates a task force on the reorganization of
foreign assistance. Senator William Fulbright secures passage
of the Act for International Development, authorizing the
creation of the U.S. Agency for International Development.
1973 The Foreign Assistance Act (FAA) decrees that foreign
assistance should focus on food and nutrition, population
planning and health, and education and human resource
development. 1978 Senator Hubert Humphrey attempts
to overhaul foreign assistance through the International
Development Cooperation Act.
International Development Cooperation Future Cabinet-level Department?
Agency (IDCA)
1979 President Carter establishes the
International Development Cooperation Agency
to oversee USAID. 1981 IDCA loses funding
under the Reagan administration.
1985 The International Security and
Development Cooperation Act is the last
general foreign assistance authorization
enacted. 1995 The Foreign Affairs Reform
and Restructuring Act abolishes IDCA, and
USAID becomes a statutory agency, with the
administrator reporting to and under the direct
authority and foreign policy guidance of the
Secretary of State. The act also abolishes the Source: Adapted from Lael Brainard, Carol
Arms Control and Disarmament Agency and Graham, Nigel Purvis, Steve Radelet, and Gayle
Smith, The Other War: Global Poverty and the
the U.S. Information Agency, consolidating their
Millennium Challenge Account, Brookings Press,
functions into the Department of State. 2003, pp.162-163.

 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS

POINT OF VIEW
Photo: courtesy of Karl Grobl
UK Development
Assistance
By Giorgiana Rosa, Policy Officer, British
Overseas NGOs for Development (BOND)
We invited InterAction’s counterparts
around the world to contribute
to Monday Developments. Last
month, we heard from the French
NGO coalition, Coordination SUD.
This month the UK NGO coalition,
BOND, shares its perspective on
development assistance in the
United Kingdom. Look for more
articles in future issues.
T
he United Kingdom’s cur-
rent priorities in develop-
ment cooperation are out-
lined in the Department
for International Development’s
(DFID) 2006 White Paper entitled
Eliminating World Poverty. Making
governance work for the poor. This
sets out the following key issues
for DFID: supporting good gover-
nance in developing countries and
internationally; tackling conflict
and insecurity; focusing on essen-
tial services for the poor; working
globally to address climate change;
and reforming the international de-
velopment system. DFID, the UK
government department respon-
sible for promoting development
and the reduction of poverty , is
also committed to giving more pri-
ority to promoting gender equality
and women’s empowerment, in all
aspects of its development assis-
tance.
UK aid has steadily increased in
recent years, amounting to £6.85
billion in 2006, or 0.52 percent of
gross national income. The government has pledged to reach the 0.7 percent tar-
get by 2013 and to improve the effectiveness of its official development assistance
(ODA). The focus of its development assistance remains poverty reduction and the
achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), with a commitment
to spending 90 percent of bilateral aid on low-income countries.
The government’s focus on the MDGs and poverty alleviation is welcome, and
NGOs broadly support its commitment to address the issues outlined in the 2006
White Paper. There is widespread backing for DFID’s emphasis on essential services,
and its support to health, education, water and sanitation, and social protection. The
focus on governance is largely welcome, but NGOs emphasize the need for long-
term support for strengthening domestic systems of accountability – including the
roles of parliaments, the media and civil society. There is also support for increasing
the amount of ODA that DFID provides through budget support.
Many UK NGOs want the government to be more ambitious and to aim to reach
the 0.7 percent aid target earlier, by 2010, and without counting debt relief, argu-
ing that poor countries need both aid and debt cancellation. DFID is committed to
implementing and promoting the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (agreed in
2005 to improve the quality and delivery of aid) and fostering further improvements
in the international aid system. UK NGOs are urging DFID to improve its own aid
effectiveness by ensuring that UK aid is more predictable and transparent, and more
accountable to citizens of recipient countries. They also want DFID to continue
to reform its conditionality policy to ensure that policy choices are led by recipient
countries and emphasize that its technical assistance must also be owned and led by
developing countries.
BOND is working with colleagues across Europe to monitor and advocate for prog-
ress on European Union aid commitments and pressing for “more and better aid”
by all European donors. We also continue to participate in ongoing collective cam-
paigning on global poverty eradication, in Europe and as part of the Global Call to
Action against Poverty.
JULY 2007 
MUST-READ
Does Foreign Aid Really Work?
By Roger C. Riddell, Non-Executive Director, Oxford Policy Management and Principal, The Policy Practice
Photo: courtesy of IMC/Sara Terry.
D
oes aid work? For many, this
remains the central question
justifying the provision of aid.
Twenty five years ago, Profes-
sor Robert Cassen from the Institute
of Development Studies in the United
Kingdom led a team of international
scholars that concluded in a book enti-
tled Does Aid Work? that it broadly did.
However, that study did not silence aid’s
critics. The merits of governments pro-
viding development aid to the world’s
poorest countries has continued to be
challenged with a succession of scholarly
studies concluding either that aid – of-
ficial development assistance (ODA) – in
general works, or that it does not.
Does Foreign Aid Really Work? is an at-
tempt to provide an updated analysis of
this fundamental question and looks at
the recent evidence. The newly released
book, written by this author and pub-
lished by Oxford University Press, ex-
amines not only the impact of ODA but
also the impact of humanitarian aid and
the development and emergency aid pro-
vided by nongovernmental organizations
(NGOs) and private voluntary organiza-
tions.
There are at least three important rea-
sons why contemporary discussion about
aid (development assistance) needs to
expand well beyond its traditional focus
on ODA.
a Firstly, today, the combined total of
all aid implemented and adminis-
tered by NGOs and all humanitari-
an aid (and there is overlap between
the two) accounts for some 30 per-
cent of all ODA, and their share of
total aid is continuing to rise.
 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS
a Secondly, in the thirty years to
2005, ODA increased in real terms
two and one-half times, while hu-
manitarian aid increased seventeen-
fold.
a Thirdly, today, the biggest NGOs
have budgets and oversee aid port-
folios larger and more complex than
those managed in the early 1970s by
more than half of the leading official
bilateral donors including major do-
nors such as Denmark, Norway and
Sweden.
However, the focus of Does Foreign Aid
Really Work? extends well beyond ques-
tions of impact. It sketches out the his-
tory of aid and why it is given. All donors
say that they give aid more moral reasons,
but what sort of moral obligations do
they have? This is an important and fast-
changing area of aid relationships, but it
is rarely the focus of attention within the
development aid community. If there is
an obligation to provide aid, then there is
an obligation to provide enough aid and
to ensure it goes to those who need it. Yet
current methods of raising and allocating
aid remain far removed from these basic
principles, and a large shortfall remains
in the provision of both emergency and
development aid.
The book also looks at the different ways
that the short-term political, strategic
and commercial interests of donors con-
tinue to influence a number of crucial
dimensions of the aid relationship: how
much aid is given; who aid is given to,
and for how long; the forms in which it is
given; and the tying of aid. This is impor-
tant because only just over 40 percent of
ODA goes to the poorest 65 countries,
and explicit aid tying reduces the value of
ODA by more than 10 percent, or about
$15 billion per year. When these influ-
ences are combined with the volatility of
aid and distortions in allocations caused
by the short-term political and strategic
interests of the major donors, there is a
huge mismatch between aid needs, and
the overall provision of aid and how it
can be used. This easily reduces the po-
tential developmental and humanitarian
impact of aid by a half and possibly by as
much as two-thirds.
Does aid really work?
The evidence presents a mixed picture
of success and failure, providing plenty
of examples that will bring comfort to
those who believe that aid is beneficial,
as well as some reassurance to those who
do not.
But does most aid work? Certainly, a
clear majority of discrete projects achieve
their immediate objectives, and the suc-
cess rate has progressively increased over
time, though the financial sustainabil-
ity of projects, especially those for poor
people and poor communities, remains a
serious problem.
Does most aid work at the sectoral,
country and cross-country level? One
part of the answer is that the higher the
outcome level – from sector to country-
level – the more reluctant evaluators are
to draw conclusions about the precise
contribution that aid makes. Yet this is
precisely what people want to know and
what the public expects donors to be able
to show.
The relationship between aid and devel-
opment outcomes is complex and differs
across countries and over time. What
many of the best studies do is help to ex-
plain why aid works and why it does not.
Aid effectiveness depends critically on
the commitment and capacity of recipi-
ents to use aid well, and donors need to
understand the context – and especially
the political context – into which aid is
inserted. These studies also suggest that
even major constraints are rarely perma-
nent. What is particularly worrying is that
donors often do not sufficiently under-
stand the political context within which
they insert aid, including the importance
of gender and ethnicity.
Problems of aggregation and finding a
reliable counterfactual against which to
judge aid’s impact continue to beset at-
tempts to make reliable generalizations
about the impact of aid – boring though
non-academics find such musings. Data
problems also remain. In April, the Di-
rector of the UN’s Statistics Division, re-
sponsible for monitoring the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs), acknowl-
edged that only 17 out of 163 develop-
MUST-READ
ing countries currently have adequate
trend data and that even those countries
only have adequate data for fewer than
half the MDG indicators.
A small but growing number of scholars,
including some in the major aid agencies,
have begun to question whether promi-
nence should continue to be given to
such studies as even the best were never
meant to prove aid works in aggregate: an
impossible task given the sheer number
of variables that can influence aggregate
growth and the difficulty of accurately
capturing them quantitatively.
The impact of NGO aid.
What does the evidence tell us about the
contribution that NGOs make to devel-
opment? There are far more data and in-
formation on the impact of their activities
than is commonly believed, though the
gap between what NGOs do and what
we know about the impact of their differ-
ent activities is still wide. With very few
exceptions – such as CARE (US), Oxfam
(UK) and BRAC, the large Bangladesh
NGO – NGOs remain reluctant to share
any information on project failures, and
almost no NGOs place in the public do-
main, or have easily accessible on their
websites, regular information on the im-
pact of their different activities.
Across a growing number of donor
countries, the current gap between what
NGOs do and evidence of its impact on
poverty will require increasing attention.
Some of the available evidence, partial
and patchy though it is, suggests the fol-
lowing:
a Most discrete projects for poor com-
munities run by NGOs successfully
achieve their immediate objectives,
but many are not financially sustain-
able without continuing external
help.
a However, exceptionally few discrete
wealth creating or service delivery
projects provide sufficient benefits
on their own to enable poor people
to escape permanently from pov-
erty, though many have helped to
empower poor communities.
Indeed, one of the main reasons why so
many NGOs have expanded their advo-
cacy, lobbying and campaigning activities
in recent years and have continued to fo-
cus on the empowerment of poor people
and poor communities is that they them-
selves are fully aware that small, discrete
projects are unlikely on their own to
solve the systemic, structural and political
problems that so often create or perpetu-
ate poverty, and limit opportunities for
wealth creation and its more equitable
distribution.
Does humanitarian aid work?
The study of humanitarian aid was tradi-
tionally considered less important for two
reasons: because it seemed more obvious
and clear that emergency aid was needed,
and because it was widely assumed that
of all aid, humanitarian aid seemed to
“work.”
The evidence, incomplete though it is,
certainly confirms that plenty of good
is done by emergency aid. Yet it also re-
veals significant problems: insufficient
amounts provided, a huge mismatch be-
tween need and where emergency aid is
allocated, incomplete needs-assessments,
and a significant failure to protect. As-
sessments of the quality of emergency
evaluations rate too many as “poor” and
there is still a huge reluctance by many
agencies to place evaluations of their ef-
forts in the public domain, especially
those that are more critical.
Aid’s systemic problems.
While more aid is certainly needed, one of
the main messages of the book is that far
greater attention needs to be focused on
the systemic issues that significantly reduce
the overall impact of official aid. Three in
particular should be highlighted:
(1) Aid is still provided in insufficient
quantities to meet the needs of the poor-
est countries, a major cause being that
official aid-giving remains an entirely vol-
untary decision made separately by each
donor government.
(2) The aid provided is not allocated in
any systematic way to ensure it goes to
those who need it most. Indeed, because
aid-giving is still profoundly influenced
by the political, strategic, commercial and
historically rooted interests of the donors,
distortions between aid needs and the ac-
tual aid provided exist and persist.
(3) The humanitarian and development
impact of aid continues to be severely un-
dermined by the fact that recipients must
interact with dozens and often scores of
different donors. In 2005, the number of
aid transactions was estimated at 60,000
– three times the number less than ten
years ago – while the average size of each
transaction has progressively fallen. On
average, there are 54 separate aid proj-
ect implementation units in each recipi-
ent country. In 1990, no aid recipient
country had to interact with more than
40 individual donors. Today, at least 30
recipients must deal with more than 40
donors.
Though not widely known, there have
been repeated calls for these systemic
issues to be addressed. For instance, 60
years ago at what many see as the birth
of official aid, U.S. President Harry Tru-
man called on rich nations not merely to
provide aid but to work together to pool
their aid resources together to make aid
effective. Almost 40 years ago, the Pear-
son Commission on aid and development
said, even then, that there were too many
agencies giving aid, and that aid needed
to be separated from the short-term po-
litical interests of individual donor coun-
tries. Ten years on, the Brandt Commis-
sion judged that the world ought to have
already moved away from voluntary aid-
giving, and that aid funds for the poor-
est countries ought to be raised through
some sort of automatic mechanism and
dispersed without the repeated interven-
tions of donor governments. Five years
ago, the Zedillo Panel argued that stable
and contractual aid resources should be
provided. And in a smaller way just over a
year ago, the new British Prime Minister,
Gordon Brown, made a plea for the sep-
aration of aid activities from short-term
political interests, pleading specifically
for the operational work of the Interna-
tional Monetary Fund to be independent
of political influence in order for its work
to be more credible, authoritative and ef-
fective.
While more aid is needed, the greatest
challenge for the aid community lies in
addressing the systemic issues that con-
tinue to reduce aid’s impact. What is
needed is to create an aid system relevant
to the needs of the 21st century. This de-
bate has scarcely begun.
For details on Does Foreign Aid Really Work?
see http://www.us.oup.com/us/catalog/
general/subject/Economics/Developmental/
?view=usa&ci=9780199295654. From 1999 to
2004, the author was the International Director
of Christian Aid.
JULY 2007 
ADVOCACY
InterAction Testifies at Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Subcommittee Hearing on Foreign Assistance Reform
By Estrellita Fitzhugh, Program Manager, Government Relations, InterAction
O
n June 12, 2007, the Senate
Foreign Relations Commit-
tee’s Subcommittee on In-
ternational Development and
Foreign Assistance, Economic Affairs
and International Environmental Pro-
tection, held a hearing entitled Foreign
Assistance Reform: Successes, Failures
and Next Steps. The hearing was chaired
by Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), and
also attended by ranking Republican Sen.
Chuck Hagel (R-NE), and Sen.Robert
Casey (D-PA), Sen. Russ Feingold (D-
WI) and Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN).
Henrietta Fore, Acting Director for U.S.
Foreign Assistance and Acting Admin-
istrator of the U.S. Agency for Interna-
tional Development (USAID), appeared
for the Bush Administration. Lael Brain-
ard of the Brookings Institution, Steve
Radelet of the Center for Global Devel-
opment and Sam Worthington of Inter-
Action, appeared on the private witness
panel.
The hearing was the subcommittee’s first
under Sen. Menendez’s chairmanship
and its first consideration of the foreign
assistance reform effort, known inside
the administration as the “F process.”
Chairman Menendez stated that for-
eign assistance reform is a priority to the
subcommittee, and that he and ranking
Republican Sen. Hagel would together
explore its current status and future di-
rection.
Sen. Menendez’s opening statement
clearly laid out his concerns about the F
process to date: a perceived lack of trans-
parency and limited consultation; the
failure to focus on poverty alleviation;
the fact that many major U.S. foreign
assistance programs fall outside its ambit
– including the Millennium Challenge
Account, the President’s Emergency
Plan for AIDS Relief, and programs cov-
ered in the budgets of the Department
of Defense and other federal agencies;
the diminished status of USAID as the
government’s flagship foreign assistance
agency; and the lack of real coherence
10 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS
and consolidation across all government
agencies and programs providing assis-
tance.
“Let me be clear,” Sen. Menendez noted.
“USAID is not a perfect agency and I’m
not against reform, but I am against tak-
ing money, power, control and expertise
away from one agency inside the U.S.
government that was designed with de-
velopment and fighting poverty around
the world as its core mission… I believe
that reducing poverty should have been
at the center of any foreign assistance re-
form from the beginning.”
He also clearly laid out his expectations
of Fore’s office and the administration:
“I for one do not intend to preside over
the slow death of USAID… Let me be
clear: I expect the administration to
make significant changes in the reform
process… The administration should ex-
pect significant and detailed oversight of
foreign assistance reform from this sub-
committee and from Congress.”
In his opening statement, Sen. Hagel,
while not as critical, expressed similar
concerns. He noted the need to review
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to
achieve meaningful reform, the lack of
a “comprehensive approach” in the cur-
rent process and inadequate consultation
on all fronts:
“The State Department and USAID do
not control all foreign assistance, particu-
larly with the recent growth in non-mili-
tary assistance projects run by the De-
fense Department that the chairman has
already noted,” Sen. Hagel said. “You
need to have all of the relevant executive
branch agencies involved. You need to
consult closely with the dedicated profes-
sionals in your organizations. You need
to consult and work closely with Con-
gress. You need to reach out and engage
the hundreds of private organizations
that actually implement assistance proj-
ects and are on the ground around the
world.”
Ms. Fore discussed Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice’s goal for a revamped
foreign policy that reflects post-9/11
realities and would replace what some
believe is an unaccountable foreign as-
sistance system. She also spoke of a “new
unity of purpose for foreign aid and a
growing consensus that global develop-
ment is both a moral ideal and a national
interest.” Ms. Fore also referred to “de-
velopment policy” – apparently acknowl-
edging it as a distinct part of U.S. foreign
policy:
During question and answer time, Sen.
Menendez questioned Ms.Fore on sev-
eral details of the F reform process im-
plementation, including plans to close
specific USAID missions; the risks of
shifting funding for some development
activities from traditional Development
Assistance (DA) funds to the Economic
Support Fund (ESF) funds; and the de-
cision-making process for budget allo-
cations, country operational plans and
other issues.
Ms. Fore said many of those issues are
still under discussion. She gave an un-
equivocal “yes” to his final two ques-
tions: (1) Would she honor congressional
directives; and (2) if she did not support
a given directive, would she consult Con-
gress on the matter.
When asked what percentage of foreign
aid she directly controls, she responded
that it is a little less than 80 percent. Wit-
nesses on the nongovernmental panel
later challenged this, asserting it is closer
to 55 percent.
Ms. Fore also made a number of strong
statements indicating a clear shift in ap-
proach from that of her predecessor,
Randall Tobias. She promised more
transparency, more field involvement “in
every stage of the budget process” and
more real consultation with Congress,
the university community, the govern-
ment’s development partners, the donor
community and government agencies.
She also said the F process was still in the
ADVOCACY
beginning stages, suggesting that oppor-
tunities for stakeholder input remain.
InterAction President and CEO Sam
Worthington testified as the first of three
witnesses from the NGO community,
stressing the role of development as-
sistance as an equal and separate “leg”
of the administration’s “three Ds” ap-
proach to foreign policy – defense, de-
velopment and diplomacy. He noted that
while strategic interests are important,
“meeting the needs of people plagued
by chronic instability and lifting people
out of poverty are laudable goals in and
of themselves.” While noting a few posi-
tive aspects of the process – enhanced
accountability, resource tracking and in-
cluding poverty alleviation as a top goal
– he was largely critical of the process to
date. He said that the lack of transpar-
ency and real consultation with imple-
menting organizations has undermined
the process. Poverty alleviation has
not been fully integrated in the strate-
gic framework of the reform process, he
said, and U.S. foreign assistance remains
fragmented. He added that under the
current framework, national strategic
interests threaten to eclipse the poverty-
focused development; and that more
comprehensive reform would require leg-
islation. Mr. Worthington cited examples
of the impact of the reform process on
the government’s 2008 fiscal year budget
recommendations that underscored his
concerns about a shift away from devel-
opment-driven assistance towards “stra-
tegic countries.”
Mr. Worthington also called for the es-
tablishment of a “Cabinet-level agency
for international relief and development
alongside the Secretaries of State and
Defense,” noting this would likely be a
long-term goal. He said that in the short
term, InterAction would work for sub-
stantive reform within the current pro-
cess, and said he looked forward to work-
ing and consulting closely with Acting
Director Fore. He recommended that
the administration abandon its plan to
concentrate resources in nine countries
that have been accorded priority status
based on their strategic value to U.S.
foreign policy interests and reverse the
trend within USAID towards increased
reliance on contracts as an implementing
mechanism and away from cooperative
agreements based on partnerships. He agency to coordinate all U.S. foreign as-
concluded his opening remarks by not- sistance, possibly at the Cabinet level.
ing the importance InterAction and its Sen. Lugar challenged Mr. Worthing-
members place in partnerships, including ton’s suggestion concerning an indepen-
those with the world’s poor, the Ameri- dent Cabinet-level agency by asking how
can public, Congress, the Department of public support for the establishment of
State and USAID. a proposed Department of Development
Lael Brainard of the Brookings Institu- could be created. Mr. Worthington not-
tion and Steve Radelet of the Center ed that the last 10 years have witnessed a
for Global Development offered similar dramatic increase in U.S.-based organiza-
critiques of the current reform process, tions, faith-based and secular, successful-
while also providing some historical con- ly raising awareness and becoming active
text. Dr. Brainard explained how the lack on international issues. He cited the re-
of coherence in U.S. foreign assistance cent launch of the ONE Campaign, with
prior to the Kennedy Administration a membership of 2.4 million, and the ex-
led to the first comprehensive reform in ample of Heifer International, which has
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961. She 500,000 supporters in the U.S.
recommended that in the current reform The other panelists agreed. Dr. Brain-
process, the U.S. should learn from ex- ard noted middle America’s rationale
periences of nations such as the United for supporting foreign assistance is still
Kingdom in reorganizing their own bi- largely moral and humanitarian driven,
lateral assistance. Dr. Radelet argued that as evidenced by the outpouring of dona-
U.S. assistance, if perceived as not influ- tions after the tsunami in Asia. As further
enced by U.S. self-interest, has a greater evidence of this support, Dr. Radelet
public diplomacy dividend than if it is pointed to recent debt relief campaigns
seen as a product of U.S. self-interest. and articles in the popular media, such
In critiquing the current reform process, as those in the recent issue of Vanity Fair
he called for a more effective monitor- devoted to foreign assistance and condi-
ing and evaluation program to better de- tions in Africa.
termine whether and how development
goals are achieved. Drs. Brainard and
For more information on this hearing, visit
Radelet both recommended establishing
www.interaction.org
an independent high-level development
“Let me be clear. USAID is not a perfect
agency and I’m not against reform, but I am
against taking money, power, control and
expertise away from one agency inside the
U.S. government that was designed with
development and fighting poverty around
the world as its core mission… I believe that
reducing poverty should have been at the
center of any foreign assistance reform from
the beginning.”
-Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ)
JULY 2007 11
Foreign Assistance Reform: Advice to Incoming Director of U.S.
Foreign Assistance and USAID Administrator Henrietta H. Fore

The recent announcement of the nomination of Henrietta H. Fore to be the new Director of U.S.
Foreign Assistance and USAID Administrator marks a new chapter in the ongoing process of
foreign assistance reform, first announced by the Bush administration in 2006. We recently
asked our readers: (1) what her first two actions should be; (2) what parts of the restructuring to
keep and what parts to remove; and (3) what part of foreign assistance they would reform. The
following are some of the comments we received. (Note that she is already serving in these two
roles in an acting capacity while awaiting confirmation by the Senate.)

12 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS

READERS WRITE IN
Bill Boteler
I would stop putting so many restrictions on foreign aid that are
based on judgments about ethical sexual behavior. Specifically, I
would allow full funding of family planning.
Marc J. Cohen, Ph.D., Research Fellow, Food
Consumption and Nutrition Division, International Food
Policy Research Institute
Foreign assistance reform must address the question of “stove-
piping” aid into sectoral programs. If aid is to contribute to sus-
tainable poverty reduction, it cannot artificially separate agricul-
ture, infrastructure, health, nutrition, education, microfinance,
empowerment of women and environmental protection. People
experience problems and have needs that overlap sectoral bound-
aries in multiple, complex ways.
In the same vein, reform needs to find practical and effective
methods to link relief and development. Practice in this area has
not matched nearly 20 years of rhetoric, with the result that hu-
manitarian assistance too often does not help people restore and
restart sustainable livelihoods in the aftermath of crisis.
Third, relief and development programs should consistently
treat poor people in developing countries as subjects, not objects
– i.e., as active agents of positive change, rather than as passive
beneficiaries of aid. Research shows that participatory and em-
powering programs are more effective. And in any event, such an
approach is the right thing to do.
Finally, although more aid money does not necessarily mean bet-
ter aid, the United States and other donors must do much more
to meet their pledges to expand overall aid and especially aid to
Africa.
Dr. John Coonrod, Vice President, The Hunger
Project
The first of the two actions would be to focus resources on grass-
roots level strategies that have proven to meet the Millennium
Development Goals on a sustainable basis: namely those that inte-
grate (a) social mobilization to empower the poorest of the poor
to be the key actors in their own development; (b) strengthening
local democracy as the forum through which the poorest of the
poor can mobilize resources and keep government accountable;
and (c) interventions for gender equality to empower women to
be the key change agents. The second action would be to invest
in policy reforms that support those same three goals.
Some elements of the move towards “national ownership” of
development have tended to disempower the poor and reinforce
injustice. Reforms should be structured to ensure the empower-
ment of the most impoverished segments of society, particularly
women.
I would look seriously at restructuring the sustainable develop-
ment programs of USAID along the lines of an NGO-led, funds-
matching program similar to that used in the Netherlands. This
would be more cost-effective, and would enhance the reputation
of USAID worldwide as a humanitarian expression of the Ameri-
can people.
Sarah Newhall, President and CEO, Pact, and Lou
Stamberg, Pact Board Member
The United States of America should have the best global de-
velopment organization in the world, one that operates accord-
ing to clear values, principles and goals. We need to be growing
strong allies not adversaries. The distinction between our foreign
policy agenda and our vision to improve the quality of life for all
citizens must be clearly framed. This is key to achieving both our
long and shorter-term goals.
We must broaden the constituencies contributing to and lever-
aging resources for development partnerships through positive
engagement with host country governments, civil society orga-
nizations and with responsible corporations investing overseas.
This is the most effective way to invest in peace and community
stability. We live in the age of connectivity and building social
capital is more critical than ever for the United States.
Our development methodologies must be evidence-based and
reflect sound and tested methodologies incorporating local
knowledge into our practice. Global mandates should be bol-
stered with unified measures of performance. We need to resist
the “quick fix” and realize that our responses to the global chal-
lenges we face in many areas including health, education, job
creation and global climate change will require building local
capacity if they are to achieve any lasting impact. Ultimately, we
will fail if we assume that externally-driven agendas can sustain
the improvements we seek to achieve.
USAID has a track record of forging partnerships based on mu-
tual respect and trust. In any restructuring effort, this commit-
ment to such partnerships should be the central pillar. People-
to-people community building is central to meeting our national
interests.
Raymond C. Offenheiser, President, Oxfam
America
Externally, I would immediately seek to refocus public debate
on how and why the U.S. does humanitarian and development
work. While recognizing that good development may serve dip-
lomatic and defense goals like the so-called “war on terror,” we
will never fight poverty effectively until we care about that fight
for its own sake. America must strengthen its global standing by
being far-sighted, compassionate, principled and ultimately effec-
tive in helping the world’s poor lift themselves out of poverty.
Internally, I would address the operational constraints under-
mining USAID’s capacity and reputation overseas, particularly
in personnel and procurement. USAID is understaffed across the
board and continues to lose good personnel, while procurement
delays are setting back programs around the globe.
The significant progress made in understanding and organizing
information on U.S. government development expenditures is
an essential first step for program evaluation, garnering addi-
tional support for development and far more strategic allocation
decisions.
The current reform process covers only USAID and the Depart-
ment of State. Until the process includes the Departments of
Agriculture, Defense, Treasury, and others and new entities such
continued on next page
JULY 2007 13
READERS WRITE IN
continued from previous page
as the Millennium Challenge Corporation, it will do little more
than rearrange dwindling resources amongst a compromised set
of institutions.
USAID and the Departments of Defense and State should col-
lectively agree that more U.S. overseas development assistance
(ODA) should be civilian-led and poverty alleviation-focused,
rather than being implemented by the military to achieve short-
term political or security goals. From 2002 to 2005, ODA
through the military went from approximately 6 percent to 25
percent of our overall ODA. Department of Defense funding
requests this year continue this trend. Soldiers do not want to
be responsible for the war against global poverty. Until the U.S.
government refocuses its civilian expertise and energy on creat-
ing real opportunities for poor people to lift themselves out of
poverty, we will neither see lasting development impact nor con-
tribute to making our world safer in the long run.
Yolonda Richardson, President, The Centre for
Development and Population Activities (CEDPA)
Immediate Action: Commit to gender integration throughout
the foreign assistance process, particularly related to procure-
ment requirements.
Reform to Preserve: The effort to rationalize the work of all the
different agencies involved in foreign assistance is extremely im-
portant. This should continue. The multiple reporting require-
ments, standards and agendas of various donors require interna-
tional partners and host-country governments to maintain huge
management structures. The cost of maintaining these systems
means fewer resources actually reach those most in need.
Aspect to Reform: Foster greater coordination at the country
level with other donors in a process driven essentially by the
countries’ priorities.
Erin Tunney, Senior International Policy Analyst,
Bread for the World
The first priority should be to begin rebuilding USAID’s opera-
tional capacity and morale: restoring its ability to plan, imple-
ment and evaluate effective development assistance. This loss of
competence and capacity has led to its diminished role in the cur-
rent U.S. foreign assistance structure as reflected in the “trans-
formational diplomacy” reforms and the second-class citizen
status of poverty-focused development, rhetoric notwithstand-
ing. Along with rebuilding Agency credibility, USAID leader-
ship should move the organization in the direction of operating
a learning organization that employs best practices and the latest
available expertise and information. Such a move would benefit
all partners in the development community.
The focus on USAID institutional capacity must be accompanied
by a renewed emphasis on long-term poverty-focused develop-
ment: building countries’ capacity in health, education and ag-
riculture and stimulating sustainable, pro-poor growth. This re-
newed development emphasis should begin with the recognition
that individual country circumstances are unique and require a
carefully tailored program to fit their needs, rather than a simplis-
tic conceptual framework that dictates what programs, and even
success, should look like. Ms. Fore should start by revisiting the
ill-conceived “Standard Program Structure and Definitions” and
14 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS
accompanying indicators, whose obsessive focus on counting in-
puts and outputs serves to mask rather than illuminate concrete
impact.
George F. Ward, Jr., Senior Vice President for
International Programs, World Vision US
I would submit the following note to her.
Dear Director Fore:
I urge you to start your work as Director of U.S. Foreign Assis-
tance and USAID Administrator with a visit to a nation devastat-
ed by AIDS, such as India or Lesthoto. Spend the hours neces-
sary in meetings with senior government officials, but devote the
most time possible to the people whose lives are centered around
open-pit fires and open sewers. You will witness firsthand the evi-
dence of a troubling trend: the AIDS pandemic is undermining
the progress fostered by decades of U.S. foreign assistance.
During your visit, you will meet some of the more than 15 mil-
lion children orphaned by AIDS. You will see how AIDS destabi-
lizes families, communities and entire societies, leaving children
without the care and support necessary to grow up, survive and
thrive. The AIDS pandemic is the greatest humanitarian disaster
of our time, placing a generation of children in jeopardy.
Once you return to Washington, your second major action should
be to devote substantial time and political capital to ensuring that
Congress directs 10 percent of all global AIDS funding toward
the care of orphans and vulnerable children. As Director, you
will make a difference by helping secure this Administration’s
legacy of compassion for and commitment to those affected by
this tragic disease.
Dr. James M. Wile, Director, International
Development, International Reading Association
Our foreign aid must commit to insuring that all individuals
– children, youth, adults, males and females – achieve high levels
of competency in reading and writing. Neither sustainable eco-
nomic growth nor stable and secure societies can exist without
a broad-based population with the levels of literacy competency
sufficiently capable to participate in the era of information and
technology. Our foreign assistance in education has traditionally
focused on classroom interventions, often generic approaches to
interactive pedagogy. What is painfully missing is a systematic and
focused effort to increase effective, critical reading competencies.
But this cannot be achieved through classroom intervention pro-
grams alone. Classroom teachers have the least control over the
education process. Small wonder then that despite considerable
investment of human and financial resources, our foreign assis-
tance to support teaching has had minimal impact on improving
reading and writing competencies in the developing world.
To achieve this prime objective, our foreign assistance must work
collaboratively with national ministries to remove inefficient or
ill-informed policies presently acting as barriers to developing
high levels of competency in reading and writing. And we must
be willing to sustain our efforts long enough so that impacts on
student reading achievements can be adequately and reliably as-
sessed. Our fiscal and intellectual resources can be a strong scaf-
fold for constructing education infrastructures that will lead to
equitable and effective education for all.
JULY 2007 15
EFFECTIVENESS
Aid Effectiveness and Absorptive Capacity: Which Way Aid
Reform and Accountability?
By Paolo de Renzio, Research Associate, Overseas Development Institute
Two factors have shaped the reluctance to scale up aid:
and a perceived lack of progress on the governance agenda.
T
he aid system is at a crossroads. In
2005, rich countries pledged to
drastically increase development
assistance to help low income
countries fight poverty. The Commis-
sion for Africa recommended a doubling
of aid to the African continent in order
to accelerate income growth and spur
progress towards the Millennium Devel-
opment Goals (MDGs), and its recom-
mendation was taken up by G8 leaders
at Gleneagles. Recent figures, however,
show little sign of aid being scaled up.
In 2006, excluding debt relief for Nige-
ria, aid to Sub-Saharan Africa increased
by only 2 percent. The Africa Progress
Panel, set up by Tony Blair to monitor
G8 commitments, recently called for a
renewed effort to deliver on agreed aid
targets, and for a more responsible and
long-term view of support to African
countries. But at the recent G8 meeting
in Germany, world leaders failed to come
up with significant new commitments.
Many rightly blame donor countries for
not living up to their promises, but there
are some underlying tensions in this de-
bate that deserve to be highlighted. Apart
from the domestic political difficulties
faced by donor governments in justifying
massive increases in foreign aid, two fac-
tors have shaped the reluctance of donors
to stump up large additional amounts of
aid: worries over aid effectiveness and
absorptive capacity, and a perceived lack
of progress on the governance agenda
which was meant to represent Africa’s
side of the Gleneagles deal. The effec-
tiveness of aid in reducing poverty has
recently come under increasing scrutiny,
with numerous critics claiming that aid
can do more harm than good, and that
the aid system needs to be drastically re-
formed. Absorptive capacity relates to the
16 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS
worries over aid effectiveness and absorptive capacity
macro and micro constraints that recipi-
ent countries face in using aid resources
effectively. Large additional flows of ex-
ternal resources can strain government
capacity for macroeconomic manage-
ment, planning and budgeting, and ser-
vice delivery to a point where additional
aid may not be effective in achieving its
intended results. Increasing levels of aid
dependence may also undermine com-
mitment to necessary reforms and local
accountability mechanisms.
Increasing levels
of aid dependence
may also
undermine
commitment to
necessary reforms
and local
accountability mechanisms.
Governance trends in Africa have also
failed to reassure donors that additional
aid will not fuel patronage, corruption
and conflict. In late 2005, Ethiopia and
Uganda, two countries held up as good
examples by the donor community, suf-
fered severe governance crises which
led to reductions in aid levels. The NE-
PAD-led Africa Peer Review Mechanism
is making very slow progress. The cases
of Zimbabwe and Sudan have shown the
limited capacity of regional bodies to in-
tervene and address difficult governance
situations. Yet, few people would disagree
that, at least in the short term, additional
aid is one of the few options available to
assist African countries in improving the
living conditions of their population.
The opinions in this article were written
for a high level policy forum bringing
together senior DFID and NGO staff,
MPs, private sector representatives,
Africanists, development academics
and key journalists for a discussion
on the future of Africa in the run-up to
the G8 meeting in Germany (6-8 June).
The forum was held on May 2, 2007
in London. This article was originally
published in May 2007 by the Overseas
Development Institute.
The key question then is what can be
done to ensure that aid (whether it in-
creases or not) is channeled in ways that
address absorptive capacity constraints,
maximize its effectiveness and promote
better governance. These three issues are
heavily intertwined, as stronger country
institutions will be better able to use aid
effectively, but aid itself can undermine
institutional strengthening, for example
by relying excessively on external exper-
tise or bypassing government systems.
Two accountability tensions are at the
The key question then
is what can be done to
ensure that aid
(whether it increases or not)
is channeled in
ways that
address absorptive
capacity constraints,
maximize its effectiveness
and promote better
governance.
EFFECTIVENESS
Figure 1
The tensions of aid accountability
To domestic audiences in donor countries
For impact on
AID
institution ACCOUNTABILITY
building
To domestic audiences in recipient countries
heart of this contradiction (see Figure 1),
relating to two key questions: ‘account-
ability to whom?’ and ‘accountability for
what?’
Accountability to whom?
There is an inherent tension between the
inevitable accountability of donor agen-
cies to their parliaments and taxpayers
in rich countries and their necessary ac-
countability to domestic institutions and
beneficiaries in recipient countries, who
are directly affected by aid policies and
interventions. This second dimension
has often been overlooked. Under pres-
sure from domestic constituencies, donor
agencies may define priorities and pro-
mote policies that are not suited to local
circumstances. In some countries, for ex-
ample, funding for HIV/AIDS programs
overshadows the financing available for
the health sector as a whole. And given
the need to report at home, donors have
often relied on fragmented projects with
parallel management systems. In order
to address this problem, a new aid ap-
proach has been promoted, underpinned
by the Paris Declaration on Aid Effec-
tiveness. It is based on donor efforts to
provide more predictable support, better
coordinate their activities, align behind
policies defined by the recipient govern-
ments and rely on government systems
For impact on
development
outcomes
Ultimately, aid effectiveness
needs to be
judged
against
the evidence of positive
impact.
wherever possible. Yet, as the results of
a recent survey clearly show, the benefits
of this approach are being very slow to
materialize, given the clear difficulties
that donors face in “shifting aid account-
ability downwards” and placing greater
trust in recipient governments’ policies
and processes.
Accountability for what?
Ultimately, aid effectiveness needs to be
judged against the evidence of positive
impact. In recent years, the focus has
rightly shifted towards results, and global
campaigns on the MDGs have added a
sense of urgency. While such focus on
performance has to be supported, the
tension that the aid system faces relates to
the potential trade-off between focusing
on short-term development impact (e.g.
putting children into school, ensuring
the availability of drugs in health posts)
and building sustainable institutional
capacity for long-term development ef-
forts. This tension can be witnessed in
the recent surge in special purpose aid
delivery channels (e.g. vertical funds for
interventions in specific areas such as im-
munization) that focus on clear impact
indicators, but at the same time often
by-pass the domestic systems, processes
and institutions that are meant to sustain
such impact in the long-term.
Resolving the tensions and contradic-
tions highlighted above will require the
concerted efforts of many players. Some
of the key messages to be taken into con-
sideration are:
a The focus on short-term devel-
opment impact, dictated by the
MDGs, cannot come at the expense
of the long-term institution build-
ing needed to ensure that develop-
ment impact is sustainable.
a The predictability and pace of ad-
ditional aid flows are as important
as their availability in order to avoid
absorptive capacity bottlenecks.
a The aid architecture should be re-
considered in order to reduce ac-
countability tensions. An obvious
solution would be to strengthen
multilateral institutions.
a Aid delivery mechanisms should
take absorptive capacity constraints
into account, putting an emphasis
on strengthening (or at least not
undermining) country systems and
institutions.
a Harmonization and alignment ef-
forts should continue to be em-
phasized, but with a more explicit
recognition of the challenges of
promoting genuine country owner-
ship and better governance.
a The public in donor countries
should be better informed about
the need for and the nature of a
responsible and long-term engage-
ment with African countries.
For further information on the event, including
podcast, video and further downloadable
materials, visit the conference websites at:
ww.ids.ac.uk/ids/aboutids/events/dsa_policy_
forum.html and www.odi.org.uk/events/G8_07/
To comment on this opinion, please contact the
author at p.derenzio@odi.org.uk
JULY 2007 17

M
ore than 70 filmmakers,
nonprofit leaders, distribu-
tors, foundation managers,
network executives and aca-
demics met to explore how to collabo-
rate on social action campaigns that in-
clude “films with a message” – a concept
called “filmanthropy.” Filmanthropy is at
the center of an ongoing, international
discussion of how to engage the public
in civil discourse. In an entertainment-
driven society, how can the media best be
used to encourage audiences to engage in
civic discourse and become more socially
responsible citizens? Profit pressures ren-
der corporate media increasingly unwill-
ing to take the risk of treating difficult is-
sues in a substantive way. Are non-profit
advocacy groups or philanthropists the
new best source for media funding?
Increasingly, social-issue documentaries
involve complex, strategic marketing and
outreach campaigns, which include non-
profit partners, websites featuring stream-
ing media, robust ancillary resource sec-
tions and links to social networking sites,
as well as public events. Amnesty Inter-
national, CARE, the Sierra Club and
WITNESS are all deeply involved in ei-
ther funding documentary films or using
media to get out their message.
The Filmanthropy Workshop, held at
Discovery Communications headquarters
in Silver Spring, Maryland, on June 16,
was the culminating event of SILVER-
DOCS, a documentary festival put on by
the American Film Institute and Discov-
ery Communications, and was hosted by
American University’s School of Com-
munication and the Institute for Strategic
Communication for Nonprofits.
18 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS
Exploring the
Changing Ways
Filmmakers and
Nonprofits Interact
By Kate Schuler, MFA Candidate, Film and Media Arts, American
University, and Jamie Corbett, Master’s Candidate, Public
Communication, American University
The morning’s group session explored Blood of Yingzhao District, said filmmak-
best practices for partnership. The ideal ers and their partners must acknowledge
collaboration yields films that are both that their agendas are distinct and not
true to the filmmakers’ visions and ben- always in harmony. While Lennon was
eficial to a nonprofit’s cause; in practice, exploring the issue of AIDS in China,
partnership presents incredible chal- SARS gripped the nation. A public health
lenges. Moderator Jackie Judd, Vice campaign he developed with the Ministry
President and Senior Advisor for Com- of Health reached more than 350 million
munications at the Kaiser Family Foun- people, but Lennon made clear that the
dation, asked panelists to explore the public health campaign was kept separate
idea of how filmmakers and non-profits from the documentary, and the Chinese
can leverage each other’s strengths to government had no control and did not
make good partnerships for effective so- interfere with the film.
cial action campaigns. Gillian Caldwell,
Participants agreed that the concept of
Executive Director of WITNESS, said
filmanthrophy raises questions that will
the rising cachet of documentary films
be answered only as this type of col-
creates unique opportunities to mobilize
laboration continues. Larry Kirkman,
people around a broad range of issues.
Dean of American University’s School of
WITNESS, which empowers local ac-
Communication, closed the conference
tors to use video in their human rights
by highlighting the important role in-
advocacy campaigns, has created a kind
dependent filmmakers play. At the same
of YouTube for human rights called the
time, he said, nonprofit organizations
HUB. The website enables people to up-
bring valuable networks, knowledgeable
load and connect their own human rights
people and new competencies to the ta-
related video, pictures, music and other
ble. “There are so many opportunities,”
connect to campaigns on the WITNESS
he said.
site.
He also left the group with the thought
“It’s not helpful to divide funders ver-
that in the near future, the two groups
sus artists,” said Center for Social Media
may not be so distinct. “Now everyone’s
Director Pat Aufderheide. “Partnerships
a media maker,” he said. “The 20-year-
work well when you’re meeting each oth-
old at a nonprofit is probably going to
ers’ needs with your core competencies.”
be a documentary maker, and where do
She also highlighted the importance of
they sit at this table?”
managing expectations on both sides,
being clear about your goals, knowing
For more information about the Filmanthropy
your strengths and what you bring to the
Workshop, including a complete rapporteur’s
table and reaching out to organizations
report and other valuable resources, visit soc.
that bring different competencies to the american.edu/nonprofit.
partnership.
Still, Tom Lennon, producer of the Acad-
emy Award winning documentary, The
Program on Forced Migration and Health
HEILBRUNN DEPARTMENT OF POPULATION AND FAMILY HEALTH
MASTER IN PUBLIC HEALTH
The Program on Forced Migration and Health is committed to improving the health and well-being of people affected by conflict and
forced migration. The Program offers a Master in Public Health (MPH) through the Heilbrunn Department of Population and Family
Health at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health. The MPH curriculum is intended to prepare health professionals
for the practice of public health in complex emergencies and post-conflict settings.

The Program’s teaching and research components emphasize pragmatic, inter-disciplinary, and human rights-based problem-solving in
the health and social sectors. Upon completion of the Program, graduates will be able to:

 Lead the field of humanitarian response in the 21st century;

 Define the nature, impact, and determinants of health and social sector problems in complex emergencies;
 Develop effective policies to alleviate problems in the health and social sectors;
 Design, manage, and evaluate health and social sector programs;
 Undertake population-based research to improve humanitarian response policies and practice.

For information about the Program: www.forcedmigration.columbia.edu

For admissions information: www.mailman.hs.columbia.edu/admissions The deadline for fall 2008 is February 1, 2008.

MPH, Forced Migration & Health Track, Student Practicum Photos, 2005: (L to R) Rachel Goldstein; Daniel Gerstle; Sara Saad El-Dein; & Lindsay Stark

Toll-free: 800-336-1616
admissions@sit.edu CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS
www.sit.edu
Want to write for Monday
Developments?
We are seeking contributions for the October
issue on “State of the World? Progress being
Made in Development.”
graduate and professional programs We are looking for first-hand perspectives
from recipients in the field on how
MA Sustainable Development international development and humanitarian
MA Conflict Transformation aid programming has made a difference in
MA Social Justice in Intercultural Relations their lives.
MA Intercultural Service, Leadership, and Management
MS Management Know someone that would be perfect?
MA International Education
NEW Low-Residency Option Contact Julie Montgomery by August 15, 2007 at
MA Teaching (ESOL, French, Spanish) jmontgom@interaction.org

SIT is the accredited higher education institution of World Learning WANT TO WRITE FOR ANOTHER ISSUE? CHECK OUT
THE EDITORIAL CALENDAR ONLINE AT OUR WEBSITE!
The Experiment in International Living
School for International Training www.interaction.org
SIT Study Abroad
World Learning for International Development
CAN GHANA DO IT?
On Track to Beat the MDG Deadline to Reduce Poverty
By Andrea Barron, Adjunct Professor of History, George Mason University

Taking it easy in the late afternoon sun in a village set deep in heavy forest near Tarkwa, Ghana. Photo: courtesy of Nicky Lewin.

20 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS

The five-year, $547 million MCA Ghana Compact was signed in August 2006, and the first funds were disbursed to Ghana this past March.
W
The Millennium Challenge Corporation awarded Ghana its largest grant to date.
hen President George Bush
launched the $5 billion Mil-
lenium Challenge Account
(MCA) to provide develop-
ment support for poor coun-
tries that “govern justly,
invest in their people and encourage
economic freedom,” Ghana was exact-
ly the type of country he had in mind.
According to the World Bank, Ghana’s
per capita income is only $450 per year
– higher than for poorer African coun-
tries such as Niger ($240) or Tanzania
($340), but lower than for Cameroon
($1,000) or Senegal ($700).
While Ghana’s economy has grown
by more than 5 percent per year since
2001, millions of Ghanaians, especially
the 70 percent who live in rural areas,
still do not have access to safe drinking
water, electricity or adequate health
care. The mortality rate for children un-
der five is 112 per 1,000 births. While
lower than the average regional rate of
163 per 1,000 children for all sub-Saha-
ran Africa, Ghana’s child mortality rate
has remained the same for ten years
despite economic growth.
Ghana has been referred to as an island
of stability in the volatile West Africa
region. It has had four consecutive fair
elections and Secretary of State Con-
doleezza Rice has called its president,
John Kufuor, “one of the best examples
of a new Africa in which responsibility
counts.” This past January, President
Kufuor was elected as chairman of the
African Union.
So it was not surprising when the Mil-
lennium Challenge Corporation (MCC),
the U.S. government entity that runs
the MCA, awarded Ghana its largest
grant to date. The five-year, $547 mil-
lion MCA Ghana Compact was signed
in August 2006 at a ceremony held at
the State Department and attended by
President Kufuor and Secretary Rice,
who chairs the MCC Board of Direc-
tors. The first funds were disbursed to
Ghana this past March.
The MCA is committed to “poverty re-
duction through economic growth,” a
different focus than most international
development aid. The Ghana Compact
prioritizes economic growth by provid-
ing the bulk of the funds for moderniz-
ing the country’s agriculture and trans-
portation system. The funds will be used
to help small farmers in 23 targeted dis-
tricts become more productive, develop
commercial skills and gain more access
to credit. Ghana’s transportation infra-
structure will be improved by upgrad-
ing the national highway and rehabili-
tating smaller roads. There is also $101
million for rural development to mod-
ernize rural banks and provide electric-
ity, education, and water and sanitation
facilities to the rural poor. The MCA
Ghana team expects to see significant
increases in basic food crop production
and in the export of pineapples, papa-
yas, mangoes and Asian vegetables,
mainly to Europe but to other markets
as well.
The MCA Ghana project may indeed
send more pineapples to Europe, but
will this mean reducing poverty and
achieving the United Nations Millen-
nium Development Goals (MDGs) en-
dorsed by the U.S. and the rest of the
world seven years ago? According to
the Center for Global Development’s
MCA Monitor website, “a lot is at stake
in Ghana’s MCA compact. It is a big-
money test of the MCC’s approach to
‘poverty reduction through economic
growth.’ Success will be a boon for
Ghana’s poor, for the MCC’s political
support and for continued faith in US
development assistance more broadly.”
Darius Mans, Managing Director for
Anglophone and Lusophone Africa at
the MCC, acknowledges that the MCC
Ghana Compact “is not aimed specifi-
cally at obtaining the MDGs.” But he
says that is because the Compact is
based on Ghana’s own Poverty Reduc-
tion Strategy, which focuses on agricul-
tural modernization and transport. “We
feel very strongly about country owner-
ship; it is up to the country to determine
its own priorities.”
Sylvain Browa, Senior Manager for
Partnership and Development Impact
at InterAction, says “putting the re-
cipient country in the driver’s seat is
a positive development because the
people receiving the aid are the ones
who know what they need.” But what
about achieving the MDGs that Presi-
dent Bush said he supported at the
UN’s 2002 International Development
Conference in Monterrey, Mexico?
Darius Mans insists that Ghana is on
course to achieve the first MDG, which
calls for reducing extreme poverty by
half by 2015. And he says that the social
JULY 2007 21
Darius Mans says Ghana is right on track with its poverty reduction program, and that it is doing so well that poverty
will be halved before the 2015 deadline set by the Millennium Development Declaration. Let’s hope he is right.
A small girl taking it easy in the shade of her house. Photo: courtesy of Nicky Lewin.
services, including education, that the $547 million grant
provides will help Ghana achieve the second MDG (achieving
universal primary education by 2015). “Social services are on
a fast-track, 35 schools will be rehabilitated even before the
end of this calendar year.”
The United States is not the only country with its eye on Gha-
na. Canada, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom are
among the major bilateral donors, along with the World Bank
and other multilateral donors. But unlike the U.S., these other
donors connect their support explicitly to the MDGs. The UK
Department for International Development (DFID), for ex-
ample, says its aim is “the elimination of poverty, in particu-
lar through the achievement of the MDGs by 2015.” In 2006,
DFID provided over £78 million (approximately $157 million)
in bilateral aid to Ghana, and proudly states that it supported
delivering over two million insecticide-treated bed nets to
Ghanaian children to reduce child mortality, the aim of the
fourth MDG.
The Netherlands considers Ghana a priority country in Africa;
Dutch investors see it as a gateway to West Africa. It plays a
key role in the New Economic Partnership for Africa (NEPAD)
and contributes to UN peace operations in West Africa and
elsewhere. The Netherlands provides around 60 million eu-
ros a year ($80 million) to Ghana. This past March, Minister
22 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS
for Development Cooperation Bert Koenders noted that Dutch
support has helped cut the rate of HIV/AIDS infection in Gha-
na (the focus of the sixth MDG) and contributed to Ghana’s
Home Grown School Feeding Program to improve children’s
health and school attendance, another “important Millennium
Development Goal.”
The Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) has
contributed over $1 billion (about $946 million in current USD)
in development aid to Ghana since it became independent
in 1957, including $55.8 million (around $52 million USD) in
2005-2006. CIDA focuses on “sectors that directly support the
Millennium Development Goals” including gender equality, a
“critical area of Canadian focus.” One CIDA funded project,
for instance, has set up gender desk offices in Northern Ghana
to involve more women in decision making around water and
sanitation issues.
Darius Mans was in Ghana last March to celebrate the coun-
try’s fiftieth anniversary of independence from Britain. He met
with representatives from DFID, the World Bank and other ma-
jor donors, all of whom are as optimistic as he is about Ghana’s
progress. Mans says Ghana is right on track with its poverty
reduction program, and that it is doing so well that poverty
will be halved before the 2015 deadline set by the Millennium
Development Declaration. Let’s hope he is right.
Clements International continues to meet the
unique international insurance needs of
individuals and organizations abroad, now as
it has for more than five decades. Our
programs provide complete international
insurance protection including worldwide
coverage for automobiles, property, liability,
health and life. In addition, we offer critical
insurance protection for projects in high risk
areas including Kidnap & Ransom and War &
Terrorism coverage.

1.800.872.0067 or 1.202.872.0060

JULY 2007 23
CURRENT TRENDS
Markets for Development
By Dennis Whittle, Founder and CEO, GlobalGiving

O
f the ten largest companies
operating in the United States
in 1990, only two remained
among the top ten a decade
later. Why? Fierce competition, not only
among existing companies, but from new
entrants as well. With some exceptions,
a well-functioning marketplace rewards
companies that provide the best products
and services – and punishes those who fail
to deliver. Those who fall in the rankings
must either improve their performance
or languish; thousands of companies go
out of business each year.

By this measure, how does the market

for non-profits and international devel-
opment fare? Of the top ten non-profit
organizations in 1990, eight maintained
or increased their market share. And of
the top ten official aid agencies in 1990,
how many do you think remained on the
list in 2000?
When the World Bank was established
after World War II, so little expertise and
money was dedicated to international de-
velopment that it made sense to concen-
trate most efforts in a single institution.
But as the decades passed, relevant ex-
Photo: courtesy of GlobalGiving/PlanetRead
pertise and funding increased dramatical-
ly. Indeed, there are now about 187,000
returned Peace Corps volunteers, not
to mention tens of thousands of NGO
staff and people who have worked for
USAID, the United Nations, and other
bilateral agencies.
Funding flows to the developing world
have increased steadily. Official aid from
the U.S. now totals about $28 billion per
year, remittances are nearly $61 billion
annually, private capital flows are more
than $69 billion, and some estimate that
private giving is as high as $34 billion per
year. There are even new official agen-
cies, including the President’s Emergen-
cy Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and
the Millennium Challenge Corporation.

But things are changing. China has re-

cently emerged as a major donor to de-
veloping countries, especially in Africa,
where it has committed approximately
$5 billion in new aid over the next three
years. Since aid from China generally
contains few strings or conditions, tradi-
tional aid agencies are facing direct com-
petition for the first time. Western agen-
cies are exploring ways to get China to
agree to aid standards, and in parallel, are
looking at how they can provide better
service to recipient countries – a direct
outcome of competition.

So, while the idea that expertise and

funding should be housed in one place is
long gone, a curious thing has happened
over the years. As new agencies and or-
Photo: courtesy of GlobalGiving/Kashmir Earthquake Relief
ganizations have emerged, a deleteri-

24 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS

CURRENT TRENDS
ous (if well-intentioned) conspiracy has
materialized: that these agencies should
cooperate rather than compete. For the
past decade, “partnership” has been the
rallying call. “If only we partnered better,
we would make more progress.” How-
ever, in practice, partnership has meant,
“You do that, and I will do this, and we
will agree not to compete with or criti-
cize each other.” The result is a lack of
competition – an oligarchic cartel.
As private sector examples have demon-
strated, competition fuels not only effi-
ciency, but also social and technological
innovation. If Microsoft tried to “partner
with” (i.e. collude with) Google, anti-
trust regulators would immediately step
in. So why do regulators not intervene
when the World Bank, UN and large
NGOs agree to partner (collude)?
Until about 1800, per capita income in
the world remained roughly flat. Begin-
ning in 1800, innovation began to drive
rapid per capita income increases in the
industrial world, in marked contrast to
poor countries. But the international
aid industry has not catalyzed the same
increase in productivity – while interna-
tional development spending over the
past 50 years is estimated at $2 trillion,
there has been little to show for it.
The good news is that the groundwork
is in place to have a real market-based
model for development. There are plenty
of actors and money; and the rise of the
Internet creates the information flows
needed to operate. GlobalGiving, an
online marketplace for international giv-
ing that I founded along with another
World Bank colleague, is based on the
idea that anyone, anywhere can connect
to and support good development ideas
generated from any source, including the
community itself. This illustrates how
the Internet is making new approaches
a reality. Indeed, large institutions them-
selves are beginning to recognize the
potential for bottom-up solutions: from
the Omidyar Network to the Develop-
ment Marketplace at the World Bank to
venerable institutions such as the Rock-
efeller Foundation, which is piloting ini-
tiatives to seek and support solutions at
the grassroots.
According to the ePhilanthropy Founda-
tion, estimated online giving in the U.S.
GlobalGiving: A “Bottom-Up” Approach
GlobalGiving is fostering a “bottom-up”
approach to development, enabling people
to discover and support hundreds of worthy
causes and high-impact, grassroots projects
throughout the developing world and close
to home. Founded by two former World Bank
executives frustrated by the limitations of
“top-down” development, GlobalGiving is the
first online marketplace that allows community-
based groups to post projects and gives donors total choice and control in
giving. Borrowing from the concept of the wisdom of crowds, GlobalGiving is
built on the premise that large groups of people are smarter and make better
decisions than an elite few – no matter how brilliant – and that people are
eager for a new, more efficient, effective way to give to development projects
and make a difference.
GlobalGiving connects people with as little as $10 to give – professionals,
students, Girl Scout troops, college fraternities, Fortune 500 corporations,
retirees – to a panoply of great ideas they might not otherwise find:
motorcycles for public health nurses in Zimbabwe, literacy programs for girls
in rural Morocco, business training for women in Guatemala, help for blind
children in Mongolia. All projects go through a rigorous due diligence review,
donors choose the projects they wish to support, donations are disbursed
to projects within 60 days, and project leaders post regular updates letting
donors know how their contributions have been put to work.
Since its founding in 2002, GlobalGiving has directed over $5 million in
funding to more than 900 projects in 89 countries. Currently, over 400
projects representing over 70 countries are posted on the GlobalGiving
website.
-Joan Ochi, GlobalGiving
reached approximately $6.87 billion in advocates of the traditional approach,
2006, a 51 percent increase over 2005 good intentioned but incapable of imple-
estimates (the U.S represents slightly menting “Big Plans” at the local level,
more than 50 percent of total online giv- and “Searchers,” agents for alternative
ing worldwide). All indications are that approaches to change that characterize
the trend toward online giving will con- many of the entrepreneurial project lead-
tinue. ers on GlobalGiving.
The real challenge is directing resources Many institutions and organizations will
to the approaches with the highest im- find it hard to adapt for fear it will gut
pact – letting the institutional chips fall their core way of doing things. But as
where they may. This does not necessar- author Clayton Christensen argues in
ily require new institutions; it is more of Innovator’s Dilemma, the introduction
a mindset. In The White Man’s Burden, of “disruptive technologies” – in this
William Easterly, an New York Univer- case new, more efficient ways of making
sity economics professor and former development happen – will continue to
World Bank economist, describes the redefine the marketplace and drive inno-
continuing debate between “Planners,” vation.
JULY 2007 25
CONFLICT, MANAGEMENT, MITIGATION
USAID and the Strategic Use of Development Assistance
By Megan Sobel, Graduate Student, Security Studies Program, Georgetown University
M
ost of the work of the U.S.
Agency for International
Development (USAID) is
currently in countries that
face a heightened risk of conflict and in-
stability. Continued engagement in such
difficult regions has obliged USAID to
reconsider “development as usual” in
exchange for more targeted assistance.
Manifestations of conflict in the form of
extremism, insurgency and terrorism are
increasingly tied to issues of U.S. nation-
al security, and USAID is aptly poised to
use development assistance as a positive
“soft” tool to address the underlying
causes of conflict in fragile states. The re-
cent work of USAID’s Office of Conflict
Management and Mitigation (CMM) in
the Trans-Sahara region of Africa, the
Middle East and Asia speaks to the grow-
ing trend to use development assistance
more strategically to address the root
causes of conflict. Developing culturally
acceptable and locally endorsed programs
and non-violent alternatives is one of the
major challenges.
The events of September 11, 2001 dem-
onstrated that a failed state thousands of
miles from the United States can drasti-
cally affect U.S. security. Today, USAID
is engaged in many challenging environ-
ments, representing both the reality of
where development is needed most and
the U.S. government’s interest in help-
ing to stabilize potentially volatile situ-
ations. The 2002 U.S. National Secu-
rity Strategy highlighted development
alongside diplomacy and defense. The
2003 National Strategy for Combating
Terrorism then identified 4 “Ds”: de-
feat terrorist networks, deny groups ac-
cess to support and sanctuary, diminish
the underlying conditions that terrorists
seek to exploit and defend the homeland.
USAID has been given responsibility for
the third “D” of diminishing underly-
ing conditions. However, USAID also
helps deny groups access to support and
Want to know what the American public thinks about development assistance?
Check out key findings and critical advice from recent polls and surveys of the American public on hunger, poverty and
development assistance at InterAction’s latest Monday Developments’ online resource page. Visit www.interaction.org.
26 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS
sanctuary by increasing U.S. foreign as-
sistance to remote areas (which provides
tangible evidence of the good will of the
United States) and by boosting the abil-
ity of governments to provide services
to their citizens in otherwise isolated or
unreached areas. USAID continues to
be the humanitarian assistance arm of
the U.S. government, but it is also being
used to proactively mitigate conflict and
promote a more peaceful world.
USAID is adapting its assistance mod-
els in order to work in conflict-affected
or conflict-prone regions and to achieve
both stabilization and development ob-
jectives. Using development assistance
to reduce the causes of conflict usually is
not as simple as promoting more demo-
cratic reforms or reducing poverty. For
example, as poverty alone does not suf-
ficiently explain the emergence of terror-
ism, simple economic development will
not reduce the potential for violence and
extremism. Economic growth or unequal
distribution of benefits that exacerbate
pre-existing divisions and economic gains
that are thwarted by corruption may ac-
tually fuel conflict and instability. The
reality is that underlying conditions that
extremists and insurgents seek to exploit
are present in many countries, but the
actual incidence of conflict is more lim-
ited. These factors necessitate a strategic
and targeted approach by USAID. CMM
provides the agency with guidance on
the intersection of conflict and develop-
ment and is at the forefront of USAID’s
strategic implementation of development
programs worldwide.
USAID is currently engaged in the
Trans-Sahara region of Africa through
the Trans-Sahara Counterterrorism Part-
nership (TSCTP). USAID has been very
clear that while the TSCTP is largely
driven by counterterrorism objectives,
“soft” power plays an equally important
role. CMM, in partnership with the State
Department, the Department of Defense
and other offices at USAID, conducted
a joint assessment of extremism and ter-
rorism in a number of countries in the
Sahel in 2005 and a follow-on assessment
in Mauritania in late 2006. These assess-
ments found that development assistance
can and should play a role in helping
to stabilize these countries by identify-
ing and engaging high-risk populations
and high-risk regions. This large-scale
joint activity has provided the basis for
targeted USAID programming in Chad,
Mali and Niger. This programming in-
cludes youth development, former com-
batant reintegration, education, media
programs, peace-building, conflict man-
agement and infrastructure projects. For
example, in Niger, the USAID-funded
Maradi Youth Development program
aims to foster civil society values among
urban youth and involves Islamic schol-
ars in developing a peace and recon-
ciliation course to be taught in targeted
schools. Reaching out to youth, a group
particularly at-risk for extremist activity,
and working with influential leaders are
both integral components of targeted de-
velopment assistance.
CMM is also working closely with the
USAID Mission in Yemen to promote
development that aims to stabilize con-
flict-affected areas of the country. One
CMM-funded program is designed to
extend the reach of the Government of
Yemen into the northern tribal areas in
order to provide better services to a cur-
rently underserved and isolated popula-
tion. This program also aims to support
peacebuilding and reconciliation be-
tween tribal leaders who have long been
embroiled in conflict, as well as to build
stronger ties between tribal leaders and
the central government. CCM also funds
a peace-building program in the north-
western Sadaa region of Yemen, where
Shiite groups are involved in an insur-
gency against the central government.
CONFLICT, MANAGEMENT, MITIGATION
This program promotes community em-
powerment and provides local infrastruc-
ture. While these two programs differ in
their approaches, both are designed to
mitigate and manage conflicts within the
country and curb extremism.

USAID is also actively involved in devel-

opment programming that targets con-
flict in Mindanao, the southern region of
the Philippines where separatist conflicts
have raged for decades. USAID has been
engaged in projects to support conflict-
affected populations and to reduce con-
flict in Mindanao since the early 1990s.
After the 1996 peace agreement between
the Government of the Philippines
(GRP) and the Moro National Libera-
tion Front (MNLF), USAID broadened
its programming to support the reinte-
gration of over 25,000 former MNLF
combatants, recognizing the importance
of successful reintegration to long-term Photo: courtesy of Karl Grobl.
stability in the country. Over time, the
violence in Mindanao has spread to en- Some may cringe at the more strategic ment rhetoric refers to strengthening de-
compass a complex array of criminal, in- use of foreign aid, but this concept is not mocracy and good governance, the U.S.
surgent and terrorist elements. USAID new. USAID’s longstanding work in the government needs to be realistic about
has assisted the GRP in addressing the Philippines shows how development as- its ability to transform societies into ones
underlying conditions, such as poverty sistance has a history of being used to that meet our expectations versus what
and underdevelopment, that have al- prevent, manage or mitigate conflict. is acceptable in the region or country in
lowed terrorists to exploit local residents The difference is that today, when two- question. USAID must continue to fa-
and allowed violence to thrive in places thirds of the places where USAID does cilitate non-violent outcomes rather than
like Mindanao. To counter this threat, work are fragile states, the strategic use export rigid guidelines. Reaching out to
USAID currently supports a wide array of development is becoming the norm. local actors with the capacity and willing-
of programs that seek to address local The recent trend has been to put conflict ness to bring about change will help en-
grievances and to foster positive relation- prevention and mitigation at the center sure that programs are locally-endorsed
ships between the GRP and its citizens of the development agenda and to explic- and culturally acceptable, which, in turn,
by addressing issues such as economic itly acknowledge that USAID can target makes those programs most likely to
disparities, perceived historical neglect its programming to espouse counterter- curb conflict and extremism. Strategic
and discrimination. Programs include rorism objectives and to further national development necessitates more than a
providing young professionals from con- security. “quick fix” approach, though pressure
flict-affected areas with internships with often exists to elicit results within a short
USAID is heavily engaged in targeted time frame. For strategic development to
the national government, increasing ac-
development, but the agency is moving be most successful, USAID will need to
cess to justice for marginalized groups,
forward with caution, recognizing that embrace a fluid approach and rely on les-
expanding public services delivery, pro-
there are risks and challenges to this type sons learned in the process.
viding better education resources and
of approach. CMM consciously labels
helping local governments to be more
itself as a “learning organization.” The
transparent and accountable. CMM pro- The author is also an intern in the USAID
goal is to provide alternatives so that Office of Conflict Management and Mitigation.
vides the USAID local staff with techni-
people are empowered and do not em- However, the information and views presented
cal assistance on its conflict-focused pro- in this article are solely those of the author and
brace extremism or violence. One chal-
gramming. For example, in 2005, CMM do not necessarily represent the views or the
lenge is to accept that what may work in positions of USAID or the U.S. government.
led a conflict vulnerability assessment to
the Western world may not work in other
help identify and address key sources of
contexts. Though much of the develop-
conflict and tension in Mindanao.

Want to stay informed on foreign assistance?

Get the latest news from www.state.gov/f Participate in the Center for Global Development’s blog at www.cgdev.
org Stay up-to-date on the latest research at www.brookings.edu/global/foreign_assistance.htm

JULY 2007 27
INSIDE OUR
COMMUNITY
Habitat for Humanity Launches Online Advocacy Tool
Habitat for Humanity International has launched an online
advocacy tool to allow supporters to voice their opinions to U.S.
policymakers on issues related to affordable housing.
According to the United Nations, nearly 1.6 billion people
worldwide live in substandard housing. In the United Sates
alone, 95 million people, nearly one-third of the nation, have
housing problems including paying a large percentage of their
income on housing, overcrowding, poor-quality shelter and
homelessness, according to the National Low Income Housing
Coalition. The online initiative is part of Habitat for Humanity’s
growing focus on raising awareness of poverty housing issues
in the United States and worldwide. Habitat’s overall advocacy
focus is on raising awareness and developing attitudes that create
additional affordable-housing opportunities by encouraging and
facilitating action to change the systems that lead to poverty
housing.
The online advocacy pages allow visitors to learn about
congressional bills related to affordable housing, identify their
elected officials and send messages encouraging those officials to
vote in favor of policies that support affordable housing. Those
who register on the site will receive e-mail alerts when housing-
related legislation comes up for a vote in the U.S. Congress.
The online advocacy tool is accessible by visiting www.habitat.
org and selecting “Be An Advocate” under the heading of “Get
Involved.” The site can be accessed directly at: http://www.
habitat.org/gov/take_action/default.aspx
ERD Receives Leadership Gift to Support Women’s
Empowerment Programs
Episcopal Relief and Development (ERD) has received a
leadership gift to support its programs working with women
globally to fight disease, hunger and poverty. The gift was given
by the Laura Ellen and Robert Muglia Family Foundation.
Close to 80 percent of ERD’s program beneficiaries are women.
ERD’s integrated community development programs give
women access to resources and tools that promote self-reliance
and support families and communities worldwide. With Anglican
and ecumenical partners, ERD works with local communities to
protect women and their children from preventable diseases such
as HIV/AIDS and malaria, provide opportunities for women to
earn an income through small business development programs
and teach women improved farming techniques.
The Women’s Development Fund, which empowers women
through ERD’s ongoing programs that focus on primary health
and food security, was launched on June 21, at The Edgewater
in Seattle, Washington through the generosity of Laura Ellen
and Bob Muglia.
“I am delighted that ERD’s Women’s Development Fund has
been launched with an extraordinarily generous gift of $1 million
from the Laura Ellen and Robert Muglia Family Foundation,”
stated Robert W. Radtke, ERD’s President. “The Women’s
Development Fund will support women’s empowerment
strategies in all of ERD’s programs: from eradicating malaria, to
fighting hunger to ensuring safe drinking water and basic health
care.”
28 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS
Because of this generous leadership gift from the Laura Ellen and
Robert Muglia Family Foundation and additional contributions,
ERD has set a goal to raise another $1 million from individuals,
parishes, dioceses, and other institutions in the western part of
the United States by the end of 2007.
IRD Announces New Director of Food Security and New
Cambodia Country Director
International Relief and Development (IRD) announced today
that Thoric Cederström has joined its global headquarters staff as
Director of Food Security, bringing total staff for the Arlington-
based NGO to 70 people.
As Director of Food Security, Cederström is responsible for
overseeing successful programs including Better Foods for Better
Lives, which is in its seventh year of facilitating local production
of soy-enriched fortified rice and wheat noodles in two countries.
The program distributes food products to school children and
provides income to adults who work at the facilities. Cederström
will also be working to expand and develop programs in Africa,
with a focus on Chad, Kenya, Niger and Sudan.
“I am ready to roll up my sleeves and start working with some of
the finest professionals in food security,” said Cederström.
Cederström joins IRD from Counterpart International, where
he was Vice President of the Food Security and Sustainable
Agriculture Division and the Global Health and Nutrition
Programs. He has a doctorate in development anthropology and
agricultural/natural resources economics from the University of
Arizona in Tucson and is an adjunct professor at University of
Maryland – College Park in the Department of Anthropology.
Mrs. Laura Bush Visits Zambian WORTH Program
Rural women participating in WORTH, a women’s empowerment
program, hosted Mrs. Laura Bush at a gathering of their village
bank members on June 28, 2007. The women were eager to
show Mrs. Bush not only how they manage the operations of
their bank, but how funds are invested in micro-enterprises that
they also manage themselves. As the owners and members, they
save together, make loans to one another, manage the accounting
and distribute the interest on their loans back to group members,
while also learning basic literacy and entrepreneurial business
skills. The WORTH women told Mrs. Bush about their pride
as successful bankers and business women and the difference the
additional income from their banking and small businesses makes
to their families.
Visiting both the Tufune WORTH group and a local market
where many of the group members are engaged in small business
ventures, Mrs. Bush observed the ingenuity and success of these
“micro-enterprise projects, where women are able to take care
of themselves, support themselves – many of them are widows –
because of loans that they make to each other” as she noted during
an exchange with Zambian First Lady Maureen Mwanawasa.
In Zambia the WORTH program targets HIV-affected
communities and specifically works with caretakers of orphans,
people living with HIV/AIDS and other vulnerable populations.
Mrs. Bush mentioned the benefits of integrating HIV
prevention with WORTH’s multifaceted approach for women by
“empowering them to provide for themselves and their families,”
which is of particular importance in HIV-affected communities.
“We are thrilled that Mrs. Bush was able to see a WORTH
 Email newswire@interaction.org if you would like
to submit an announcement for this section.
group on her brief visit to Zambia. Village banking has become
an important strategy in combating HIV/AIDS, which rapidly
drains the resources that families have when illness strikes” said
Marcia Odell, long-time Director of WORTH, who accompanied
Mrs. Bush on her visit to the Tufune WORTH group.
The WORTH program, which incorporates literacy, business
and banking is being implemented in six countries in Africa and
one country in Asia. Since WORTH began, nearly 100,000
women have started their own village banks. These are fully
self-sustaining, and now WORTH women, on their own, are
teaching other women how to save together and to launch and
manage their own WORTH banks. The WORTH program is
funded under a PEPFAR grant administered by Project Concern
International with technical assistance from Pact.
Letter to the Editor
June 29, 2007
I am writing regarding an anti-corruption article in the
June 2007 issue of Monday Developments. As you know,
that issue explored the role of NGOs in major development
initiatives.
I would like to express my concern regarding the article
entitled: “Civil Society’s Role in Anti-Corruption: An
Iraq Case Study.” The article written by Craig Davis,
Director, Civil Society Division, International Research
and Exchanges Board (IREX) describes the anti-corruption
program activities of a USAID-funded Iraq Civil Society
Program (ICSP) implemented by America’s Development
Foundation (ADF) but does not identify ADF as the U.S.
NGO providing such assistance in Iraq. From the credits
in the article, a reader would think that the anti-corruption
program in Iraq was implemented by IREX, not ADF.
Craig Davis did work from April 2005 until August 2005
as ADF’s Anti-Corruption Director in Iraq before later
leaving ADF to join IREX. However, IREX has had no
involvement in our ICSP anti-corruption program activities
in Iraq.
ADF is very proud of its successful work from September
2004 – June 2007 assisting almost 2000 Iraqi civil soci-
ety organizations. Our civil society development activities
included building civil society resource centers for NGO
capacity building and providing training, technical assis-
tance and grants to NGOs focused on working in anti-cor-
ruption, as the article states, as well as women’s advocacy,
human rights and civic education. We would be pleased to
share some highlights on this program with Monday Devel-
opments in a future issue.
Michael Miller
President
America’s Development Foundation
Note from the Editor: Look for an article on ADF’s work in
Iraq in the August issue!
Alexander, Bediako Join the
InterAction Staff
InterAction is pleased to welcome the following two
new members of its membership and standards team:
Taina Alexander joins InterAction as program manager
for the membership and standards team, with
supervisory responsibility for membership relations,
PVO Standards and special projects.
Taina, originally from Finland, recently returned to the
United States after living and working 20 years in
developing countries in South and Central America,
East Africa, Middle East and Central Asia with
her triplets and her husband who works for CARE
International.
Her last assignment was in Egypt as a Program
Manager for the Community Services Association. Prior
to that, among other things, she worked in a private
microfinance foundation in Uganda, in a FINNIDA-
funded forestry project in Guatemala, in the Finnish and
Norwegian Embassies in Nicaragua and at the United
Nations headquarters in New York.
Having witnessed the meaningful changes in
poor peoples’ lives that can be made through the
international development and humanitarian work of
effective NGOs, she is committed to serving the needs
of InterAction member organizations and supporting
their accountability and impact assessment efforts.
Andrea Bediako joins InterAction’s membership and
standards team as a senior program associate after
volunteering with Promotion et Développement Humain,
a small humanitarian organization in Togo, West Africa.
As a volunteer, she worked with local staff to support
and monitor the health of people living with HIV/AIDS
and other life threatening diseases, assist street
children and address other social service cases.
Prior to volunteering, Andrea worked as a project
manager at Democracy Data and Communications
where she provided financial management for a variety
of political action committees. She holds a degree
in sociology from the University of Michigan and a
master’s in public administration from Michigan State
University. Andrea also serves as an honorary member
of Assistance d’Urgence aux Enfants Vulnérables, a
nonprofit organization for street children based in Togo,
for which she helps identify grants and partnership
opportunities.
JULY 2007 29
Interested in placing a job announcements or advertisement? Email publications@interaction.org
POSITION
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Communication Manager, Global Forest &
Trade Network (GFTN) > Washington, DC
World Wildlife Fund (WWF), the global con-
servation organization, seeks a Communica-
tion Manager to liaise closely with other staff
in the GFTN and offices within the network on
implementing GFTN’s marketing and com-
munications strategies; developing the annual
workplan, leading the marketing and commu-
nications activities, tracking it’s annual prog-
ress. This includes external communications
strategy critical to advancing Forest Program
targets. Position requires a Bachelor’s de-
gree or equivalent experience in marketing
or communications required. At least three
years relevant experience and proven ability
to produce copy for external communications
on demand and under tight deadlines. Thor-
ough understanding of marketing strategy,
desktop publishing software, online market-
ing and communication tools, excellent oral,
written communication skills are essential.
Ability to understand programmatic work,
build, implement marketing and communica-
tions strategies hat will promote program ini-
tiatives. Spanish or French fluency desired.
For information about the GFTN, please visit
http://www.panda.org/gftn. AA/EOE Women
and minorities are encouraged to apply. To
apply, please visit http://www.worldwildlife.
org/about/jobs.cfm Job #27167.
Senior Program Officer, HIV/AIDS Global
Portfolio > Washington, DC
World Vision Washington DC is looking for a
Senior Program Officer (Technical Specialist)
with 7+ yrs experience in international devel-
opment to join our HIV/AIDS public fund-
ing team. Advanced degree: e.g. MA, MPH,
MBA required. Proven experience in grant
management, program design, implementa-
tion and M&E, USAID rules and regulations
required. Excellent writing skills, effective
cross-cultural communication and relation-
ship building with local staff and major do-
nors critical. Previous field experience w
HIV/AIDS programming required. Fluency
in French, Spanish or Portuguese a big+. Up
to 30% travel to the region to support pro-
gram development opportunities and assist
with management issues. Must be in agree-
ment with World Vision’s Statement of Faith
(see www.worldvision.org for more details)
30 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS
and be eligible to legally work in the US. Ap-
ply at www.worldvision.org, Job # 1096.
Senior Program Officer, Eurasia >
Washington, DC
World Vision Washington DC is looking for
a Senior Program Officer (Technical Special-
ist) with 7+ yrs experience in international
development to join our Eurasia public fund-
ing team. Advanced degree: e.g. MA, MPH,
MBA required. Proven experience in grant
management, program design, implementa-
tion and M&E, USAID rules and regulations
required. Excellent writing skills, effective
cross-cultural communication and relation-
ship building with local staff and major do-
nors critical. Up to 30% travel to the region
to support program development opportuni-
ties and assist with management issues. Must
be in agreement with World Vision’s State-
ment of Faith (see www.worldvision.org for
more details) and be eligible to legally work
in the US. Apply at www.worldvision.org,
Job # 1098.
Program Officer, Latin America >
Washington, DC
World Vision Washington DC is looking for
a Program Officer (Technical Specialist) with
5+ yrs experience in international develop-
ment to join our Latin America team. Ad-
vanced degree: MA, MPH, MBA preferred.
Proven experience in grant management, pro-
gram design, implementation and monitoring
and evaluation (M &E) strongly preferred.
Full fluency in Spanish required. Excellent
writing skills, effective cross-cultural com-
munication and relationship building with
local staff and major donors critical. Up to
30% travel to the region to support program
development opportunities and assist with
management issues. Must be in agreement
with World Vision’s Statement of Faith (see
www.worldvision.org for more details) and
be eligible to legally work in the US. Apply
at www.worldvision.org, Job # 1363.
Senior Technical/Program Specialist, OFDA
Expert > Washington, DC
Will bring and maintain expertise in OFDA
programming, guidelines and regulations,
maintain OFDA grant proposal and tracking
system, represent World Vision’s US office
to OFDA and participate in regular OFDA
meetings and forums. Will also advise World
Vision staff on OFDA grant acquisition, men-
tor, and build capacity to improve World
Vision’s OFDA programming. Must be able
to travel internationally, often on short notice,
up to 33%. Previous experience coordinat-
ing CHE response a huge plus. Advanced de-
gree (e.g., Masters degree, Doctorate, or other
professional degree) or equivalent experience
(7+ in international relief and development
field). Strong knowledge of SPHERE stan-
dards required.. Previous field leadership
and program design experience required.
Send resumes to: cbowers@worldvision.org.
World Vision, founded in 1950, is the largest
non-profit Christian humanitarian organi-
zation serving the world’s poorest children
and families in nearly 100 countries. We are
dedicated to helping children and their com-
munities worldwide reach their full potential
by tackling the causes of poverty. Our work
extends assistance to all people, regardless of
their religious beliefs, gender, race, or ethnic-
ity.
Director, New Business Services Unit >
Arlington, VA
Winrock International is seeking a seasoned
professional with a minimum of ten years ex-
perience in new business development for an
international development organization with
a proven successful track record of awards
with various donors. The ideal candidate will
have a MBA or master’s degree in relevant
field. Extensive experience with USAID so-
licitations is required. Qualified applicants
may email resume and cover letter to jobs@
winrock.org with HRM/NBS as the subject.
Application deadline is July 9, 2007. EEOE/
AA.
Director of Communications >
Washington, DC
The National Cooperative Business Asso-
ciation promotes and enhances all aspects
of cooperative businesses domestically and
internationally. Our membership includes
organizations in all sectors including: Agri-
culture, Housing, Utilities, Credit Unions,
Food, Worker, Healthcare, Childcare and
Purchasing. Yet there is still a great opportu-
nity for enormous growth. Director of Com-
munications is responsible for enhancing the
positive image of NCBA and its related or-
ganizations: CLUSA - our international pro-
gram with projects in 13 developing nations.
CDF - our 501(c) (3) sister organization and
dotCooperation - our subsidiary that owns
the .Coop domain name. Responsible for all
communications including (but not limited
to) Cooperative Business Journal (6 times per
year), Co-op eNews - electronic newsletter
(11 times per year), and CF & TC Updates (4
times per year). Resume, cover letter and sal-
ary history to: NCBA -Attn: HR, 1401 New
York Ave, NW, Ste 1100, Washington, DC,
20005. jobs@ncba.coop Full ad on our web
site: www.ncba.org/serv_jobbankNCBA.cfm
Interested in placing a job announcements or advertisement? Email publications@interaction.org
Council and Web Associate > Los Angeles,
CA
Reporting to the Director of the Human Rights
Watch Council in HRW’s Los Angeles office,
the Council and Web Associate will provide
administrative and clerical assistance, includ-
ing maintaining the website for the Develop-
ment and Outreach department and provid-
ing administrative support with regard to the
HRW Council. The associate will be based
in either our New York headquarters or Los
Angeles office. Please see full description
and application guidelines on our website at
www.hrw.org/jobs.
Associate Director, Advocacy Training >
Washington, DC
Habitat for Humanity, an international non-
profit Christian ministry dedicated to elimi-
nating substandard housing and homelessness
worldwide, is seeking an Associate Director
to be based in the Washington D.C. area. This
person will direct advocacy training initia-
tives for Habitat for Humanity International’s
staff, volunteers, partners and other support-
ers as needed. The successful candidate will
possess at least 6 years of training experience.
Advocacy experience required. A BA/BS is
strongly preferred. For complete details and
to express interest in this position please visit
our website, www.habitat.org. HFH is an
equal opportunity employer.
Senior Technical Advisor, Health Programs
> East Africa
The Senior Technical Advisor (STA) for
Health Programs provides technical assis-
tance, technical and strategic oversight and
staff development opportunities for IRC’s
health teams. The STA is also responsible
for promoting the quality, sustainability and
cost-effectiveness of a wide gamut of health
services. We are looking for a candidate with
a min. 7 years progressive PH related work
experience, with min. 5 years mid to senior
level program management and some super-
visory experience (at least three in an inter-
national development setting). To apply sub-
mit resume and salary requirements online at
www.ircjobs.org.
Program Officer, East and Southeast Asia >
Washington, DC
The Global Fund for Children (GFC) seeks
Program Officer to manage portfolio of ap-
proximately $350K and 24 grantee partners,
including tsunami partners, field contacts,
evaluators and other key partner organizations
in East and Southeast Asia. PO will evalu-
ate, develop and implement program strat-
egy, operations and budget. Candidates must
have Masters degree(s), 4+ years’ profes-
sional experience, excellent communications
skills, fluency in English and proficiency in
Mandarin, demonstrated experience overseas
and with CBO’s. Permanent authorization to
work fulltime in US required. For complete
job description and application procedures go
to www.globalfundforchildren.org.
Program Assistant > Washington, DC
Position available with the Riecken Founda-
tion in its Washington, DC office. Duties:
maintain project files and databases; coor-
dinate information flow with field offices;
schedule meetings; prepare presentations and
project documentation; facilitate financial
transactions; support program directors; co-
ordinate logistics; conduct research; coordi-
nate communication inside and outside Foun-
dation. Qualifications: Bachelor’s degree and
two years experience in administrative sup-
port; spanish fluency; strong organizational
and administrative skills; attention to detail.
Some travel to Central America. Great first
job in international development field! For
more information visit www.riecken.org.
Email cover letter and resume to jobsdc@
riecken.org.
Technical Advisor, Health Communication
> New York, NY
The Technical Advisor, Health Communi-
cation at ORBIS develops, articulates, and
implements the philosophy and methodol-
ogy of ORBIS’s strategies for Information,
Education, and Communication and Behav-
ior Change Communication (IEC/BCC).
QUALIFICATIONS: MA in public health or
international development; 3 5 years experi-
ence in health communication design and de-
velopment in international health programs,
including liaising with other NGOs, PVOs,
government health officials, medical estab-
lishments, and university officials. Demon-
strated expertise in social marketing, health
communication, and outcome evaluation. For
more information about ORBIS and this em-
ployment opportunity, please visit our web-
site: www.orbis.org. To apply, email resume
and cover letter to HR@orbis.org.
Director of Food Security > Washington, DC
Food for the Hungry works in more than 45
developing countries. We provide disaster and
emergency relief, and implement sustainable
development programs to transform commu-
nities physically and spiritually. The Direc-
tor of Food Security is located within Food
for the Hungry’s Government Resources and
Programs (GRP) Department in Washington,
DC. The person who fills the position will
continued on page 36
JULY 2007 31
Interested in placing a job announcements or advertisement? Email publications@interaction.org

Public Relations Manager

Washington, DC

InterAction, the largest alliance of U.S. based international relief and humanitarian nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs), is seeking candidates for the position of Public Relations Manager. Reporting to the
Director of Public Relations, this position will help oversee day-to-day media and PR activities, as well as be
instrumental in the creation and execution of all communication initiatives. This person will interact with senior
management to drive awareness of global poverty alleviation, and shape the reputation of InterAction and its
members. Salary commensurate with experience.

Application Deadline: July 18, 2007.

Responsibilities:
Assist in implementing strategic plans and programs for InterAction communication initiatives to support
organization’s vision, strategy and goals
Contribute to an integrated communication function that successfully positions InterAction with internal and
external stakeholders
Partner with InterAction’s leadership team and members to manage strategic communications, public policy
outreach, media relations and crisis/issues management
Support the Director of Public Relations in the coordination of functions within our Public Policy and Outreach
team to enhance the reputation of InterAction
Provide rapid response media support to InterAction member organizations
Field media requests-sometimes on very tight deadlines-maintaining contact databases, organizing resources
and assisting reporters
Plan, write, edit and proof written materials including releases, alerts, e-mails and letters to media
professionals
Provide content and copy editing for InterAction’s flagship publication, Monday Developments
Supervise Communication interns to monitor assigned media outlets on a daily basis and track news on
international relief and development issues

Qualifications:
Required: Strong verbal and written communication skills required, including copy editing
Required: Demonstrated success in public relations, the media or communications
Required: Minimum of 5-8 years experience in a similar media/public relations capacity
Required: Bachelor’s degree or higher
Demonstrated project management skills and ability to work under pressure
Excellent relationship-building skills required
Must demonstrate strong organizational skills and the ability to manage multiple tasks to meet deadlines
Demonstrated commitment to team work
Knowledge of international relief and development issues preferred
Excellent knowledge of word processing, database and spreadsheet programs
Knowledge of media research vehicles (e.g. Lexis Nexis and Bacons)

Physical Requirements:
There are no extraordinary physical requirements for the performance of the essential functions of this position.
Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform essential functions.

Contact:
Please e-mail your resume and interest letter, including salary expectations to:
Nasserie Carew at ncarew@interaction.org

32 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS

Interested in placing a job announcements or advertisement? Email publications@interaction.org

New Media Manager

Washington, DC

InterAction, the largest alliance of U.S. based international relief and humanitarian nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), is seeking
candidates for the position of New Media Manager. This position is responsible for all aspects of InterAction’s website, intranet and
all online activities. This position will report to the Director of Public Relations and supports a number of critical organizational
functions such communications, media, marketing, member relations, community outreach and advocacy. Salary commensurate with
experience.

Application Deadline: July 18, 2007.

Responsibilities
Website Development and Management
Work with staff to populate website with new content
Manage InterAction website and Intranet
Identify new web technologies, features and functionalities to increase its appeal and ability to impact target audiences
Work with various InterAction teams to create new program pages
Provide analysis of website traffic and use this information to suggest modifications to site structure and/or content
Create e-newsletter templates for teams
Manage web contractors e.g. hosting company
Work with staff on online strategies, including website design, brand and publication marketing
Broadly promote IA website and update search engines
Member Relations
Regularly upload member press releases to InterAction’s website
Promote member activities and highlight key international events
Collaborate with member web managers
Monday Developments
Create online marketing and promotional strategy for InterAction’s flagship publication Monday Developments
Prepare resource page and teaser for latest Monday Developments issue, and update as necessary
Create and design Monday Developments homepage and job marketplace
Planning and Strategy
Work with Director of Public Relations to develop and implement online outreach strategies
Stay current with emerging communication technologies while developing and implementing techniques that enhance
InterAction’s public relations strategies
Write web content independently and with input from other staff
Promote the site using online advertising and viral marketing
Position InterAction website as a critical tool to enhance the InterAction brand and achieve InterAction’s goals
Develop and implement online outreach strategy to achieve InterAction goals and objectives

Qualifications:
The qualified candidate will have a Bachelors degree; minimum of 5–7 years work experience in website design, implementation, and
project and database management. Knowledge of web technologies including portals, web development, collaboration tools and
knowledge of web design standards and principles, including HTML, RSS, PHP and ASP. Experience with web design tools such as
Macromedia Dreamweaver, Photoshop, Illustrator and Flash. Familiarity with emerging technologies and the ability to integrate these
new technologies to benefit InterAction’s web outreach efforts. Experience in providing user support, and comfortable working with
users with a wide range of technology sophistication. Experience in online organizing and implementing online campaigns is strongly
desired. This position requires the ability to interact and perform in a fast-paced team based environment and may occasionally
require after hours and weekend activities. The person selected will need to possess excellent written and oral communication skills;
a demonstrated ability to multi-task and work with internal teams, vendors and budgets; be well organized and detail oriented; be
able to work well both individually and as a team; and be able to prioritize job duties. This person should also be open to exploring
innovative and creative strategies, as well as willing to take a lead role in developing InterAction’s online presence.

Physical Requirements:
There are no extraordinary physical requirements for the performance of the essential functions of this position. Reasonable
accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform essential functions.

Contact:
Please e-mail your resume and interest letter, including salary expectations to Nasserie Carew at ncarew@interaction.org

JULY 2007 33
Interested in placing a job announcements or advertisement? Email publications@interaction.org
Finance and Grant
Administrator
The Asia Foundation seeks a
Finance and Grant Administrator
in its Washington, D.C. office. The
Finance and Grant Administrator
is accountable for managing and
maintaining budgets; monitoring
and processing accounting
documents; providing staff with
training and guidance in area of
grant administration and financial
management; and serving as a primary
liaison between San Francisco and
Washington office on financial related
issues.
Requirements:
College degree or equivalent work
experience. At least three years
accounting or financial experience,
preferably with a non-profit or grant-
making organization. Grant-reporting
experience preferred. Previous
management of budgets and financial
records helpful. Experience should
include USAID, OMB circular and
sub-grant account maintenance along
with knowledge of GAAP. Ability to
take initiative and work independently
is essential. Strong written, oral
and interpersonal skills. Excellent
organizational skills. Strong analytical
and problem solving skills. Proficiency
in Word, Excel and Quick Books
preferred. Experience with Cost Point
software and interest in international
Asian affairs helpful.
We offer excellent benefits and salary
commensurate with experience.
Please submit your application
directly by visiting our website: www.
asiafoundation.org and selecting
“Employment Opportunities”.
Application deadline is Friday, July
20, 2007. The Asia Foundation is an
equal opportunity employer. EOE/M/
F/D/V. No phone calls please.
34 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS
Operations Manager
The Asia Foundation seeks an Op-
erations Manager for its Books for
Asia (BFA) warehouse located in San
Leandro, California. The Operations
Manager is accountable for supporting
management and administration of all
facets of Books for Asia; contributing to
the strategic planning of the program;
participating in the development of in-
kind and cash funding; and preparation
and monitoring of the BFA program and
operating budgets.
Requirements:
Master’s Degree in relevant field, such
as International Development or Public
Administration desired. Bachelor’s de-
gree and relevant experience accepted.
Minimum Four years work experi-
ence in program management and
administration. Experience in budget
preparation, analysis, and monitoring.
Knowledge of office procedures and
equipment. Experience in shipping,
receiving, or logistics preferable. Ex-
perience in donor research, cultivation,
proposal and report writing desired.
Ability to make daily operational deci-
sions independent of supervision, as the
primary internal and external point of
contact during Director’s absence. Ex-
cellent written and verbal skills. Strong
analytical, organizational development
and problem-solving skills. Good
interpersonal and communication skills.
Competence in office procedures and
personal computer applications (i.e.,
word processing, spreadsheets, email,
search engines, and databases).
We offer excellent benefits and salary
commensurate with experience. Please
submit your application directly by
visiting our website: www.asiafounda-
tion.org and selecting “Employment
Opportunities”. Application deadline is
Friday, July 20, 2007. The Asia Founda-
tion is an equal opportunity employer.
EOE/M/F/D/V. No phone calls please.
VP of International
Programs -
Washington, DC
Plan USA, an international child-
centered development organization
working in 49 countries in Africa,
Asia and Latin America, seeks a VP
of International Programs to lead the
organization’s activities to raise and
utilize revenues from multiple sources,
including institutional and foundation
giving sources to fund Plan programs
and assist with improvements to program
quality.
Key Job Objectives include providing
strategic direction to the organization,
taking a leadership role in networking
with the relief and development
community in the US, the US
government, US corporations, and all
levels of Plan management worldwide,
leading the Program Team members in
the achievement of established goals and
objectives.
Minimum Requirements include a
Master’s degree in a relevant field,
minimum of 10 years of relevant
program experience at a leadership
level – in the field, regions, and/or
headquarters; ability to lead by example
and be a strong team player in an
aggressive but collaborative growth
environment; outstanding strategic
planning, problem solving, project
management skills, interpersonal,
networking and diplomacy skills. Must
be able to travel internationally for 25%
of time.
Cover letter and resume to: hr@planusa.
org FAX 401-738-5608; mail: HR, Plan
USA, 155 Plan Way, Warwick, RI 02886.
Visit our website: www.planusa.org.
Interested in placing a job announcements or advertisement? Email publications@interaction.org

“The mission of Medical Teams International Peace Corps

is to demonstrate the love of Christ to people affected by
disaster, conflict and poverty.” Country Directors
French and Portuguese Speakers
US-based Positions:
Community Health/Behavior Change Specialist Recruiting Country Directors. Require senior
Senior Advisor Health/Child Survival level exec. experience with extensive mgt.
Church Relations Director
Senior Development Officer skills, int’l exp, admin. expertise, cross-cul-
tural facility. Demonstrated experience men-
International Position: toring staff or volunteers. Int’l dev. experience
Community Health Program Manager - Indonesia desirable. Non French and Portuguese speak-
ers may apply. US citizens only.
Visit our website at www.medicalteams.org for further EOE.
information.
Medical Teams International, 14150 S.W. Milton Ct. www.peacecorps.gov/cd Questions: 800-424-
Portland, OR 97224 8580 x2114. Please apply by: 8/15/07.

Technical Director – Malaria

The Technical Director for the Malaria Task Order under the USAID | DELIVER IQC will provide the technical leadership required to improve
access to high quality, effective malaria prevention and treatment commodities, including overseeing the field programs funded under this Task
Order.

Responsibilities:
q Provide thought leadership on key commodity and supply chain issues
q Provide assistance in the development and application of strategies and tools for periodic evaluation of the impact of project
activities
q Determine strategies and priorities for the project’s field programs
q Ensure that technical expertise is appropriately utilized in specific country situations, and state of the art malaria knowledge is
reflected in our work
q Liaise with PMI and USAID and other organizations working in malaria

Qualifications:
q Master’s degree in public health or related field or equivalent experience;
q Minimum of 10 years of experience, including management experience in large complex international development projects with
extensive field operations;
q Minimum of 5 years of experience in malaria programming and/or malaria commodities, preferably in Africa; previous experience
working in partnership on malaria with international organizations such as the GFATM, WHO, UNICEF, World Bank, Bill and
Melinda Gates Foundation a definite plus
q Demonstrated program management and communication skills in working with clients, partners, and other public health
professionals;
q Excellent verbal communication and presentation skills in English; proficiency in French or Portuguese a plus.

Apply via email, post or fax to: Recruiter, John Snow, Inc, 1616 N Fort Myer Drive, 11th Fl, Arlington, VA 22209; recruiting@jsi.com; fax 703-
528-7474. EOE

JULY 2007 35
Interested in placing a job announcements or advertisement? Email publications@interaction.org
continued from page 31
be expected to provide leadership to a food
security team consisting of three or four staff
and several consultants in achieving the ob-
jectives and activities related to the areas of
food security technical backstopping, new
program development and support. Addi-
tional support will be provided in the area of
strategic planning and budgeting and US gov-
ernment advocacy.
Senior Director > Lookout Mountain, GA
The Chalmers Center for Economic Develop-
ment (www.chalmers.org) equips churches
and missionaries to bring economic develop-
ment and spiritual transformation in the con-
text of poor communities around the globe.
Responsibilities: The Senior Director reports
to the Executive Director and is the primary
person responsible for managing the Chalm-
ers Center’s human and financial resources.
Requirements: Master’s degree in manage-
ment, international development, or related
field; minimum five years experience in man-
agement in international relief and develop-
ment work. Application deadline is August
15, 2007. Complete job description and ap-
plication details available at: http://scots.cov-
enant.edu/employment/all/jobs/expanded.
asp?ID=215.
Director of Public Affairs > Washington, DC
Mercy Corps is actively recruiting for a
Director of Public Affairs to lead the devel-
opment and implementation of policy, ad-
vocacy and government relations strategies
to advance the mission and programmatic
objectives of Mercy Corps. The Director
will manage the efforts of the Public Af-
fairs team to track and analyze key policy
initiatives, coordinate advocacy strategies,
and work with partner agencies in joint ad-
vocacy and campaign initiatives. The Direc-
tor will coordinate with all parts of Mercy
Corps to ensure positions are well grounded
in the priorities of the communities where
we work, with the objective of increasing our
ability to influence key audiences, including
governments, peer groups, and the general
public. Knowledge and Experience: Master’s
degree in International Relations, Public Pol-
icy, or Public or Business Administration or
equivalent preferred. Substantial experience
in legislative advocacy, governmental affairs,
policy analysis, communications or public
relations, preferably in an international relief
and development context required. Demon-
strated success in managing relationships in
a complex inter-agency context. Excellent
verbal and written communication skills. A
track record of accomplishment in policy,
advocacy and/or political communications,
36 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS
preferably in international relief and devel-
opment. Strong knowledge of, and relation-
ships with, key networks in the Washington,
DC area on issues related to international
relief and development. Team management
and development experience. This position
is based in our Washington, DC office and
may require regular travel to capital cities
and Mercy Corps program sites globally.
Travel may occasionally be on short notice
and require visits to unstable or difficult ar-
eas. To read a full position description and
apply go to: www.mercycorps.org/aboutus/
jobs. Mercy Corps is an Equal Opportunity
Employer. Qualified women, minorities,
veterans and individuals with disabilities are
encouraged to apply.
Senior Advisor Sexual and Reproductive
Health > Atlanta, GA
The Senior Advisor for Sexual and Repro-
ductive Health (SRH) is a member of the
SRH team and serves as the technical leader
for family planning approaches and meth-
odologies as well as the point person on the
Reproductive Health Access, Information and
Services in Emergencies Initiative (RAISE).
S/he sets the SRH Team’s agenda in family
planning; identifies CARE’s best practices
in family planning and selects the best meth-
ods to document these best practices. Also,
s/he documents and disseminates CARE’s
family planning experiences to the global
health community. Another key function of
the Senior Advisor is to develop proposals
and donor relationships that bring additional
funding for new SRH initiatives and further
the SRH Team’s technical global leadership
priorities. The Senior Advisor has RAISE Ini-
tiative and staff management responsibility as
well. These include: designing and imple-
menting CARE’s activities under RAISE; en-
gaging with CARE emergency department to
incorporate family planning and comprehen-
sive SRH into CARE’s emergency response;
and liaising with Colombia Mailman School
of Health. S/he supports and strengthens
Country Offices capacity in family planning.
The Senior Advisor is committed to foster-
ing organizational learning and uses creative
approaches to facilitate learning in his/her
technical area at all levels of the organiza-
tion. Requirements: Masters Degree in Public
Health or other relevant health specializat.
Minimum 10 years experience in reproduc-
tive health programming. Solid knowledge
of family planning programs and methods
and strong experience in program design,
implementation and evaluation. Knowledge
of USAID SRH programs, including good
understanding of USAID’s regulations and
budgeting processes. In addition, overseas
working experience; a demonstrated ability
to work in teams and to establish/maintain ef-
fective partnerships; and excellent verbal and
written communication skills in English are
required. Apply online at www.care.org.
Internship, Executive Office > Washington,
DC
InterAction’s Executive Office has an intern-
ship available for the Summer and possibly
the Fall of 2007. The intern will assist the
Executive Assistant with a variety of admin-
istrative projects related to the administra-
tion of the Executive Office and other duties
as necessary. This position would afford the
candidate direct contact with the CEO, a birds
eye view of the entire landscape of activity
taking place throughout the organization and
an inside view of the Executive administra-
tion of our organization. The ideal candidate
has a strong attention to detail and highly or-
ganized, has an interest in international relief
and development and nonprofit management.
Strong MS Office and writing skills required.
To Apply: Send a cover letter and resume to
cosorio-florez@interaction.org. All appli-
cants must be able to provide documentation
that they are legally eligible to work in the
United States for an extended period of time.
The positions will remain open until filled.
No phone calls please.
Internship, Office of Membership and
Standards > Washington, DC
InterAction’s Office of Membership and
Standards has an internship available for
Summer 2007. The intern will assist the staff
with research on a variety of issues related
to nonprofit governance, accountability and
program effectiveness, as well as assist with
membership recruitment and retention ef-
forts. Some administrative tasks as well as
assistance with conference planning may also
be required, and other duties as necessary.
The ideal candidate has an interest in inter-
national relief and development, nonprofit
management, and NGO accountability and
effectiveness. Strong MS Office and writing
skills preferred. To Apply: Send a cover let-
ter and resume to bwallace@interaction.org.
If local the internship can extend into Fall. All
applicants must be able to provide documen-
tation that they are legally eligible to work
in the United States for an extended period
of time. The positions will remain open until
filled. No phone calls please.
LOOKING FOR A JOB?
Subscribe to our weekly job
listing at www.interaction.org
Interested in placing a job announcements or advertisement? Email publications@interaction.org

Consultant Opportunities

The International Rescue Committee (IRC) provides support to conflict-

affected communities in over 25 countries. The IRC is experiencing
tremendous growth in its large scale, post-conflict programming and
seeks qualified professionals for long and short- term consultancies in
the following sectors: education, health, economic development and
governance (community-based governance, civil society development, and
access to justice). The IRC is committed to a culture of bold leadership,
innovation, creative partnerships and results-based management.

Skill sets needed:

q Experience with USAID, DOL, World Bank, DFID, and EU projects
of scale.

q Experience with strengthening institutions (civil society and

governmental).

q Experience with performance-based management systems.

q Experience with designing and managing policy change and social

sector reform.

q Experience designing/implementing programs to address financial

barriers to the provision of social services.

Please go to http://www.theirc.org/jobs/how_to_apply.html for further

details and application instructions.

JULY 2007 37
Interested in placing a job announcements or advertisement? Email publications@interaction.org

Senior Development Officer, Development Division

Washington, DC

IREX is an international nonprofit organization providing leadership and innovative programs to improve the quality of education,
strengthen independent media, and foster pluralistic civil society development. Founded in 1968, IREX has an annual portfolio of $50
million and a staff of over 400 professionals worldwide. IREX and its partner IREX Europe deliver cross-cutting programs and consult-
ing expertise in more than 50 countries.

The Senior Development Officer works with the Civil Society Division Director to set and achieve funding goals and implements the
organization’s development strategies. Reports To: Director of Development and Strategic Planning.

Principle responsibilities include: Analysis of potential funding opportunities and trends in order to assist senior staff to set and achieve
overall funding goals; Identification and development of new program ideas; Fundraising and partnering efforts and projects; Creation
and coordination of proposal teams’ activity; Coordination of proposal development and preparation, with program staff and partners;
Supervision of a development officers. Key activities include: Researches and analyzes grant and emerging business opportunities;
Writes proposals and concept papers; Prepares proposal budgets; Maintains grant cycles.

Qualifications: Bachelor’s degree; Management experience; Demonstrated organizational and budgeting skills; Excellent writing and
editing skills; contract and grant proposal writing experience for USG solicitations (specifically USAID); Experience living/working
overseas; Demonstrated experience/familiarity with Europe, Eurasia, Middle East, Asia, Africa; Ability to work and lead in a team
environment.

IREX offers a competitive salary and benefits package.

APPLY TO: Send cover letter and resume to IREX/DEV/DC/PA via fax at (202) 628-8189 or send an e-mail message with the subject
IREX/DEV/DC/PA to resumes@irex.org. NO PHONE CALLS. EOE.

Program Officer – Africa, Sustainable Livelihoods

EPISCOPAL RELIEF AND DEVELOPMENT

The Program Officer works with the Program Department of Episcopal Relief and Development (ERD) to implement the programming
objectives for food security in Africa, as set by the Board of Directors, and ERD Administration. At present ERD’s Africa program is
predominantly serving rural populations. Although all contexts differ in terms of opportunities and constraints offered by the land and
access to markets, the overall strategies ensure that additional income streams are identified and exploited. This can involve, among other
things, adopting improved agricultural techniques, crop processing, new or improved livestock management, employing micro credit to
develop off farm income. ERD supports strengthening the role of women to improve their economic and social situation. The program
officer will offer partners technical support in these areas. The program officer will work with partners to develop a rational and participa-
tory monitoring and evaluation framework to ensure that programs are effective. The program officer will work with ERD’s Research and
Evaluations Officer to ensure that such field data can be incorporated in ERD’s global monitoring and evaluation framework.

Requirements include but are not limited to; Masters degree in international development, rural development or agronomy and/or equiva-
lent experience, Minimum 5 years experience working on sustainable livelihood programs in developing countries (Africa experience
highly preferred). Must have a proven success in conducting and coordinating asset-based participatory capacity building trainings for
grassroots partners. Ability and willingness to travel internationally up to 40% of the time. Strong writing skills and organizational skills
and attention to detail a must. Other languages (French, Swahili, Portuguese) a plus experience working with a wide diversity of people
with different work styles. Must demonstrate flexibility to adapt to changing requirements.

Please fax your resume and a cover letter which must contain salary requirements to SR HR Generalist at 212-716-6037 or e-mail to
erdjobs@er-d.org Also please see our website for additional information about both this position and our work at er-d.org.

38 InterAction MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS

Interested in placing a job announcements or advertisement? Email publications@interaction.org

JULY 2007 39
1400 16th Street, NW, Suite 210
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 667-8227
Fax: (202) 667-8236
publications@interaction.org
www.interaction.org

FIRST CLASS MAIL

InterAction is the largest alliance of U.S.-based
international development and humanitarian
nongovernmental organizations. With more than 160
members operating in every developing country, we
work to overcome poverty, exclusion and suffering by
advancing social justice and basic dignity for all.

Today and always . . . As the world faces uncertainties, our

firm stands as a beacon of integrity in
look to your CPA for guidance the business community. Independence
and ethical accounting practices are
important to us.
Our firm is built
on lasting values . . .
Honesty
Independence
Trust
Serving the Washington nonprofit community for more than 25 years.
Auditing, A-133 compliance • Worldwide on-site field office audits • Internal control review • Grant proposal assistance
Subrecipient activity review • Expat and inpat tax preparation • Outsourced accounting
Contact our PVO Specialists:
Robert W. Albrecht, CPA Andreas Alexandrou, CPA
ralbrecht@grfcpa.com aalexandrou@grfcpa.com

4550 Montgomery Avenue, Suite 650N

Bethesda, Maryland 20814
301-951-9090
www.grfcpa.com

Member of CPAmerica International – a worldwide network of independent CPA firms dedicated to the integrity of the profession.