Blog Contributor:
Larry Nowels
Larry Nowels is a consultant to ONE on foreign aid reform and budget issues. Previously, he was a specialist in foreign affairs at the Congressional Research Service.
During his thirty-three year career at CRS, he wrote extensively on U.S. foreign assistance policymaking, including the congressional role in legislating and overseeing American foreign aid programs. Nowels further served on detail assignments to the House Budget Committee and the House Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee.
Upon leaving CRS in mid-2006, he served as a consultant to the Helping to Enhance the Livelihood of People Around the Globe (HELP) Commission. Following the 2008 election, Nowels served on President-elect Obama’s transition team examining U.S. foreign assistance agencies.
Sep 20th, 2010 1:20 PM UTC
By Larry Nowels
|
Late last week, USAID released an updated version of its MDG strategy, which was unveiled at the beginning of August (you can read ONE’s analysis of the original draft here).
What’s new in this version?
Most notably, the updated document says that the US now has an official development policy, which “sets out the strategic objectives and the core approach to development for this administration.” The policy– which would be the first for the US government – is one that many in the development community have been waiting for since the President Obama took office, and especially since his administration launched two reviews of US development policy (through the Presidential Study Directive and the State Department’s Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review), the results of which have been delayed for several months. President Obama offered a preview of the PSD at the G8 in Muskoka, and many are hopeful that he will provide more details in his speech at the UN General Assembly on Thursday.
The new document goes on to say that the US development policy “focuses the U.S. government on achieving sustainable development outcomes by making broad‐based economic growth and democratic governance top priorities, investing in game‐ changing innovations that have the potential to solve long‐standing development challenges, and building effective public sector capacity to provide basic services over the long term. The policy also puts a premium on selectivity, on leveraging the expertise and resources of others, on empowering governments that demonstrate high standards of transparency and accountability, and on driving our investments with evidence of impact.”
The revised strategy also raises attention to multilateral development institutions by calling for links between additional resources and organizational reforms. The new document notes its concern with the long-term relevance, effectiveness, and legitimacy of these institutions, especially the World Bank and IMF. It further calls for strengthening the capabilities of UN development agencies.
In addition to some other smaller changes, the updated document also calls the G20 the “premier forum for international economic cooperation” and, critically, says that the US “will play a leadership to ensure that development is at the heart of the Group’s agenda.”
On aid effectiveness, the document says that the US wants to take the Paris/Accra agenda in a “new direction” that focuses on “development outcomes, not just process,” and says that USAID’s newly launched Implementation and Procurement Reform as consistent with the global principles agreed in Paris and Accra. The revised strategy further expands and elevates the discussion around the Global Climate Change Initiative. Although not adding new commitments, the GCCI is framed much more as co-equal with the President’s other two signature development initiatives on health and food security.
You can read the full document here. Be sure to stay tuned to the ONE Blog for updates from New York and coverage of President Obama’s speech on Thursday.
|
Sep 17th, 2010 4:48 PM UTC
By Larry Nowels
|
In case you weren’t tuned in to the State Department’s “Conversations with America” series yesterday, you missed a great preview of next week’s gathering of world leaders in New York City to accelerate and drive the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). It starred ONE’s own David Lane and USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah.
While listening to the discussion, several themes jumped out at me.
(more…)
|
Jun 30th, 2010 10:26 AM UTC
By Larry Nowels
|
Somewhat buried in the flow of announcements and press releases surrounding the G8/G20 meetings last weekend, the White House issued a statement Friday that President Obama had outlined his vision for a new US policy on global development. This is especially welcome news as it suggests that we’ll soon see the results of a delayed Presidential Study Directive (PSD) on Global Development, an effort the President launched last September. Not surprisingly, the White House release looks strikingly similar to a leaked draft of the PSD posted in April, although omissions in the June 25 statement point to continuing inter-agency disagreements over some portions of the PSD.
While the press release is important for a number of reasons, it puts President Obama squarely on the record of embracing a series of sound global development principles that will significantly advance his campaign promise to bring coherence to US development programs and to “elevate development as a central pillar of our national security strategy”. The President pledged to issue a new policy directive — presumably referring to the PSD — “in the near future”.
The new development policy will strengthen US efforts to reduce global poverty, promote economic growth, and enhance the impact and results-based approach of American foreign aid, all fundamental principles that ONE has championed for some time. Of particular note, the plan promises to:
- Support sustainable economic development and good governance;
- Meet basic human needs by building public sector capacity to deliver services;
- Hold recipients accountable;
- Be selective in where and on what the US will focus;
- Strengthen multilateral approaches; and
- Install rigorous standards for monitoring and evaluation
While all solid elements, I found one part of the plan a little too vague that hopefully will be explained more fully in the final PSD. The President’s approach stresses country ownership and mutual accountability, critical elements of successful development outcomes. But I would like to see further elaboration of this concept that instead of just focusing on well governed countries, as the White House statement suggests, it broadly includes a direct response to country priorities, whether they flow from national development strategies of the government or those articulated by citizens at the local level.
Much of what we see in the President’s policy statement is not new – many of these ideas have been discussed, and some applied, for a number of years and proven to be successful approaches to more effective development policy. And some are clearly evident in President Obama’s initiatives on food security and global health. But what is different is the effort to codify and consolidate these principles – for the first time ever – into a coherent and comprehensive strategy with clear goals and priorities against which the United States can shape its global development programs, policies, and funding allocations.
As we approach the MDG summit in September, the President has a unique opportunity to lead by example and demonstrate to the rest of the world that the United States is making it a priority to help raise people around the globe out of poverty, giving them opportunity, dignity, and a voice in holding their elected officials accountable to high standards of good governance. Nearly a year ago, President Obama told the United Nations that he would return in September 2010 with a plan to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. With the articulation of a new global development policy, as reflected in a signed and issued PSD, the President will strengthen his call to action in New York with a clear vision of how the United States itself plans to tackle poverty and foster global growth.
|
May 14th, 2010 2:03 PM UTC
By Larry Nowels
|
Cross-posted at the Huffington Post:
Global development advocates have been waiting and waiting for President Obama to signal how he intends to act on his bold and ambitious commitments to fight poverty and to promote growth and stability around the globe. The wait appears to have been worth it. Last week, a preliminary draft of Presidential Study Directive (PSD) – A New Way Forward on Global Development – found its way into the media, perhaps not the preferred means of disclosure, but one that offers enormous promise for a new vision of development as an elevated and core element of US foreign policy.
The draft PSD threads together multiple goals to be pursued by American investments in global development, bringing stability to nations emerging from conflict, attacking poverty, enhancing economic growth and supporting universal values. It brings a refreshing coherence to a policy agenda that has often times been marked by fragmentation, neglect, and contradiction. It recognizes successes from the past – like the provision of life-saving medicines and delivery of humanitarian aid – and proposes to integrate those into new priorities that address the challenges faced today. And it establishes a permanent means to routinely review and adjust policy priorities through a US Global Development Strategy, signed by the President every four years.
This new approach calls for a “deliberate development policy,” moving away from a process of making trade-offs through implicit decision-making, to an explicit identification of policy objectives, an order of prioritization, and resource alignment that will achieve them. The PSD draft envisions a system that maximizes the potential of innovation, differentiates between widely divergent development landscapes — from Afghanistan to Ghana — and holds partner governments and societies accountable for results. Under a new business model, there will be greater emphasis on prioritizing sectors in which the US invests, including health, food security, and governance, and establishes and better defines divisions of labor with other donors. US policy will align with partner country national strategies, will leverage non-public development actors that have become such critical elements in fighting poverty and promoting growth, and will strengthen multilateral approaches to global challenges. All of this will be done utilizing rigorous evaluation procedures, measuring impact, and adjusting strategies when necessary.
Importantly, the New Way Forward commits to a bipartisan approach in partnership with Congress. It implies establishing the “grand bargain” with lawmakers, seeking greater executive flexibility in program and policy management in exchange for a commitment of heightened accountability for results to elected officials and the American people.
This is an impressive and encouraging statement of White House policy. But now for the hard part. First, the President needs to sign the PSD, something we hope will take place this week. And now that we’ve seen a draft, we will be watching closely that the final document fully endorses, or better yet, further strengthens the policy principles set out in the leaked version. As with any policy statement, the test will be in the implementation. The plan is bold but will be meaningless without strong and continuous leadership and monitoring from the White House. The wait is over – we hope – and now the real work begins.
|
Jan 7th, 2010 5:52 PM UTC
By Larry Nowels
|
With an overflow and enthusiastic crowd looking on, Secretary of State Clinton swore-in Dr. Rajiv Shah as the Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development. Actually, it was a bit unclear for a moment as to exactly who was sworn-in, with Dr. Shah’s young daughter squirming next to him in her mother’s arms with her small hand also placed on the Bible as Secretary Clinton read the oath.
As these ceremonial events are apt to be, this was an occasion for celebration and congratulating new leadership at the primary U.S. agency responsible for promoting poverty reduction and economic growth in the poorest nations around the world. In attendance and adding their support were Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, who lost Dr. Shah as one of his top aides, and Senator Richard Lugar, the senior Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and long-time champion of global development and the work of USAID. The audience and agency staff also offered an exceptionally warm and well deserved ovation for Alonzo Fulgham, a career Foreign Service Officer who served as acting Administrator since early 2009.
There was also a sense of relief that swept the room, noted most strongly by Secretary Clinton as she remembered earlier visits to the Agency with a “certain level of anxiety and frustration” that she noted is “all behind us now.” After nearly a year following President Obama’s inauguration, USAID has its leader.
But Administrator Shah faces daunting challenges as he takes over an Agency that by most accounts has been crippled for the past two decades by the loss of skilled, technical expertise, by the proliferation of other U.S. aid agencies and initiatives on which USAID served only at the periphery, and by growing demands and mandates from Congress and the White House without adequate tools and resources. He will immediately confront the a growing role USAID must play as part of the “three-Ds” of national security as the United States shifts its military and civilian strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He also arrives mid-stream of several important policy reviews – the White House Presidential Study Directive on Global Development and the State Department Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review – and two major development initiatives on health and food security. He will immediately need to engage forcefully as final decisions are reached and activities launched.
In his remarks, Dr. Shah spoke of change needed at USAID: to pursue its work with partnership, not patronage; to rebuild agency capacity to “analyze, plan, and invest strategically for the long term;” to change the USAID business model and strengthen in-house development expertise. And in what seemed to be a challenge to his new staff, he noted how Secretary Clinton and President Obama have embraced development as “indispensable to American foreign policy” and that USAID was prepared to “seize this moment” and to “step up and deliver against these ambitious goals.”
Secretary Clinton expressed confidence in Rajiv Shah’s ability to confront the many challenges facing USAID and U.S. global development goals by noting that he once climbed Mt. Rainier and overcame the mountain’s unforgiving glaciers and unpredictable volcanic activity. This, she mused, has helped prepare him for working in Washington. Actually, Dr. Shah may look back on his climb as a leisurely stroll compared to what lies ahead in bringing change to an agency long overdue for major reform and navigating the institutional jungle of Washington.
|
Dec 3rd, 2009 6:31 PM UTC
By Larry Nowels
|
On December 1, Dr. Rajiv Shah appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for his long-awaited confirmation hearing to lead the U.S. Agency for International Development. After nearly 10 months and growing impatience from Congress, the development community, and within the Executive branch, Dr. Shah was warmly received by the Senate Committee, but with a sense of anticipation over the challenges he faces in re-building a widely perceived weakened Agency and strengthening U.S. global development policy. In his opening statement, Committee Chairman John Kerry noted that USAID may be the “last major foreign policy agency to have its leadership named, but its mission – poverty reduction and sustainable development – belongs near the top of our list of priorities.”
Dr. Shah, a medical doctor, former Gates Foundation senior official, and currently the Agriculture Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics, emphasized throughout his testimony the theme of “development as a discipline” in which USAID has a strategic leadership responsibility based on five principles set out by President Obama:
- Support for country-led plans and priorities
- Narrow the strategic focus of activities to maximize impact
- Coordinate with a cross-section of stakeholders
- Leverage the resources and activities of multilateral organizations
- Maintain a sustained commitment with a “focus-for decades”
What else did we learn about leadership and priorities of the USAID nominee? Policy planning is a “critical tool of a development agency,” he said, suggesting that he intends to restore policy and strategic capacity that USAID lost in 2006. He also noted the need to reinvest in the monitoring and evaluation capability at USAID and the importance of integrating evaluation into program design. Dr. Shah also stated that development assistance and USAID budgets would be his responsibility, working with other partners and directly engaging OMB. Each of these points address key concerns expressed by former USAID Administrators and other global development experts as key elements necessary for a viable and well-functioning institution, but which had been weakened or lost at USAID in the past two decades. They are also issues raised in S. 1524, the Foreign Assistance Revitalization and Accountability Act, which cleared the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in November.
On the thorny question of reporting relationships, Dr. Shah emphatically emphasized that he would report directly to Secretary Clinton. For the moment, this sets asides concerns voiced by some Senators and many in the development community that the new USAID Administrator would not have a direct line to the Secretary, thereby weakening the stature and elevation of the Agency. His day-to-day working relationship with the State Department, including the status of the Bush Administration-created position of Director of Foreign Assistance, however, was not addressed, but will be closely watched by the development community as an indication of how much influence over development policy Dr. Shah will exert.
For many of the operational issues raised by members of the Foreign Relations Committee, the USAID nominee deferred to the outcome of two Administration reviews – the Presidential Study Directive (PSD) on Global Development and the State Department’s Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR). Given that Dr. Shah will assume his post in the middle of the PSD and QDDR deliberations, this is an understandable response. But in his position as the QDDR co-chair and the USAID PSD representative, he will immediately need to be a key voice for the “discipline of development” in both processes.
Next steps: the Senate Committee plans to vote on the Shah nomination December 8, followed by consideration in the Senate at any time following Committee approval.
|
Jul 15th, 2009 4:04 PM UTC
By Larry Nowels
|
On July 9, the House and Senate took actions on the FY2010 Foreign Aid Appropriations bill, providing a clearer outline of the final shape of the U.S. global development budget for next year and how ONE priority programs are likely to fare. Of particular importance was the House defeat by wide margins of two cutting amendments that combined, would have slashed over $2.6 billion from the bill, including resources for global health, the International Development Association, and the African Development Fund.
The overall size of the bills is nearly identical — $48.8 billion in the House and $48.7 billion in the Senate – roughly a net cut of $1.35 billion, or 2.5%, from President Obama’s request after taking into account money “forward-funded” in FY2009.
On specific programs, there are similarities as well as major differences.
Global Health: The House and Senate provide $7.8 billion, about 2.5% more than the request, but with slightly different points of emphasis:
- Global Fund – The House appropriates $750 million and the Senate $700 million. Each is higher than the $600 million request.
- Bilateral HIV/AIDS – Both bills are at the requested level of $5 billion.
- Malaria – Both bills are at the requested amount of $585 million.
- Tuberculosis – The House provides $252 million compared to the Senate’s $200 million and the Administration’s $173 million request.
- Maternal and Child Health – The Senate supports $555 million while the House provides $538 million; $523 million is the request.
- Reproductive Health – Each bill includes $520 million, 10% above the request.
Millennium Challenge Corporation: Repeating funding decisions in recent years, the House provides $1.4 billion, only slightly less than the request, while the Senate pares spending back for the MCC to $925 million. Each bill endorses new compacts for Jordan, the Philippines, and Malawi, but the Senate recommends using funds that have been frozen under suspended compacts for Nicaragua and Armenia as sources of added MCC revenue in FY2010.
Food Security/Agriculture Development: House and Senate bills both reduce President Obama’s $1.36 billion Food Security initiative promoted at the G-20 and G-8 Summits. The House provides $1 billion, compared to $1.2 billion in the Senate. Because each bill provides most of the requested funds for Afghanistan and Pakistan, it is likely that cuts in Food Security funding will be absorbed largely by Africa and Latin America.
Basic Education: The House and Senate are far apart on education with the House recommending $1 billion, slightly higher than the request, while the Senate proposes $800 million.
International Development Association (IDA): The Senate backs the Administration’s full $1.32 billion request while the House cuts $85 million of arrearage payments owed to IDA.
-Larry Nowels
|
|
