[Senate Hearing 117-492]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                       S. Hrg. 117-492

                       REVIEW OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2023 
                             USAID BUDGET REQUEST

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                     COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION
                               __________

                              MAY 11, 2022

                               __________

       Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                  Available via http://www.govinfo.gov
                  
                              __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
49-631 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2022                     
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------                     

                 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS        

             ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey, Chairman        
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland         JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire        MARCO RUBIO, Florida
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware       RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut      MITT ROMNEY, Utah
TIM KAINE, Virginia                  ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts      RAND PAUL, Kentucky
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon                 TODD YOUNG, Indiana
CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey           JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii                 TED CRUZ, Texas
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland           MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota
                                     BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
                 Damian Murphy, Staff Director        
        Christopher M. Socha, Republican Staff Director        
                    John Dutton, Chief Clerk        

                              (ii)        

 
                       C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Menendez, Hon. Robert, U.S. Senator From New Jersey..............     1

Risch, Hon. James E., U.S. Senator From Idaho....................     3

Power, Hon. Samantha, Administrator, U.S. Agency for 
  International Development, Washington, DC......................     5
    Prepared Statement...........................................     7

              Additional Material Submitted for the Record

Responses of Ms. Samantha Power to Questions Submitted by Senator 
  Robert Menendez................................................    42

Responses of Ms. Samantha Power to Questions Submitted by Senator 
  James E. Risch.................................................    59

Responses of Ms. Samantha Power to Questions Submitted by Senator 

  Benjamin L. Cardin.............................................    83

Responses of Ms. Samantha Power to Questions Submitted by Senator 
  Jeanne Shaheen.................................................    87

Responses of Ms. Samantha Power to Questions Submitted by Senator 

  Edward J. Markey...............................................    88

Letter From Senators Bill Hagerty and John Boozman to President 
  Biden Regarding High Fertilizer Prices, Dated March 16, 2020...    92

Article From Foreign Policy Magazine Concerning Organic Farming 
  Experiment in Sri Lanka, Dated March 5, 2022...................    95

                                 (iii)

 
                    REVIEW OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2023 
                          USAID BUDGET REQUEST

                              ----------                              

                        WEDNESDAY, MAY 11, 2022

                                       U.S. Senate,
                            Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:34 p.m., in 
room SD-G50, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Robert 
Menendez presiding.
    Present: Senators Menendez [presiding], Cardin, Shaheen, 
Coons, Murphy, Kaine, Markey, Booker, Schatz, Van Hollen, 
Risch, Barrasso, and Hagerty.

          OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT MENENDEZ, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY

    The Chairman. This hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations 
Committee will come to order.
    Administrator Power, thank you for appearing today. I am 
pleased that you have been an engaged partner when it comes to 
the United States' humanitarian aid and international 
development initiatives, and while I may not agree with every 
element of the request, it is refreshing to see a USAID budget 
proposal that demonstrates seriousness and thoughtfulness.
    With the House just passing the Ukraine supplemental 
package, which provides nearly $4.4 billion for USAID, I am 
pleased and hope that we are going to move it quickly in the 
Senate, maybe as early as tomorrow.
    Obviously, this is a lot of money and we need to make sure 
that the executive branch engages in meaningful ongoing 
consultation as the money is being spent and that we are 
conducting appropriate oversight.
    Under the Trump administration, the value of economic 
development and foreign assistance in advancing U.S. foreign 
policy was met with skepticism. They hobbled USAID from 
fulfilling its mission, demoralizing the workforce and risking 
decades of U.S. investment into some of the most vulnerable 
parts of the world.
    The transactional approach the Trump administration took 
through USAID towards providing assistance to countries at the 
start of the pandemic was appalling.
    When it comes to responding to natural or manmade disaster, 
our foreign aid programs should help save the lives of those in 
dire need around the world not on the basis of politics, but 
out of moral obligation.
    This is the standard that has been used for decades and I 
trust you are committed to fulfilling that vision at USAID and 
to elevating the work of USAID's development and assistance 
professionals.
    Obviously, our immediate attention is on the fallout of 
Putin's invasion of Ukraine. Russian forces have bombed 
maternity wards and kindergartens. They have used sexual 
violence as a weapon of war. They have executed civilians, 
hands tied behind their backs.
    In addition to these war crimes, Putin's invasion has 
precipitated a refugee crisis and exacerbated a major global 
food security crisis across Africa and the Middle East.
    As we deliver humanitarian relief in Europe and beyond, the 
United States must elevate the needs of women, girls, and other 
at-risk populations, and supporting neighboring countries 
hosting a huge influx of Ukrainian refugees.
    While addressing this crisis and its fallout, we cannot 
afford to overlook the rest of the world. When commodity prices 
soar, that affects everyone, and I am extremely concerned about 
the risk of famine in the Horn of Africa.
    Additionally, the retreat of democracy in Africa is 
threatening gains made in the Sahel and dashing the aspirations 
for participatory politics of millions across the continent.
    Whether it is conflict in Ethiopia or kleptocracy in the 
Democratic Republic of Congo or a coup in Sudan, USAID is 
America's first responder, supporting democracy, good 
governance, and providing life-saving assistance to those in 
need.
    Health systems across the globe have been strained from the 
last 2 years of the pandemic. COVID hospitalizations or deaths 
are down, but the threat remains. New COVID sub-variants 
continue to emerge and I am not convinced that we are prepared.
    From vaccine distribution to strengthening our 
preparedness, this is an issue that affects the safety of 
everyone on the planet and remains a national security threat 
here in the United States.
    USAID is a critical part of the United States effort to 
prevent, detect, and respond to future pandemic threats. Along 
with Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean were hard hit by 
COVID-19. At the same time, the region is struggling against 
the resurgence of authoritarianism from Cuba to Venezuela, and 
now the consolidation of the region's third dictatorship in 
Nicaragua.
    Violent criminals from El Salvador to Mexico are 
undermining civilian security, exacerbating the forced 
migration and refugee crisis across the region. Our neighbors 
in the hemisphere need our assistance. We need to expand 
inclusive economic opportunity and strengthen democratic 
institutions.
    At a time of such great upheaval and distress, I am 
reassured that we have a USAID administrator who bore witness 
to the siege of Sarajevo and Putin's aggression in Chechnya.
    To successfully provide emergency aid, support democratic 
governance, empower women and vulnerable populations, USAID 
must be a place where all Americans can serve.
    I look forward to hearing your plans for modernizing the 
workforce to meet today's challenges, in particular, how you 
will integrate the chief diversity officer into these efforts, 
and I hope that by partnering with small businesses here at 
home, our aid programs can have positive impacts both in the 
U.S. and abroad.
    In closing, let me reinforce just how critical all of these 
efforts are. When we do not address economic challenges, it 
leads to destabilization. When we do not promote prosperity, it 
leads to human suffering.
    When we do not show up, it gives the bad guys a chance to 
get a foothold.
    Administrator Power, I know you strongly believe in these 
principles and I look forward to your testimony.
    With that, let me turn to the ranking member for his 
opening remarks.

               STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES E. RISCH, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM IDAHO

    Senator Risch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome, 
Administrator Power. Glad to have you here. Certainly, you are 
at the center of one of the most important undertakings that we 
do as America internationally.
    Before we get started, I want to try to reset a little bit 
about what our understandings are here. During your 
confirmation hearing on March 23, 2021, you pledged ``to work 
tirelessly with members on both sides of the aisle,'' and to 
``be transparent and accessible.''
    So you can well imagine I was disappointed by the 9-month 
delay in getting responses to the questions for the record. 
Nine months is way, way, way too long. These were submitted at 
your first budget hearing on July 14, 2021. One member of the 
majority has just received a response this week, and we are 
going to have to do better than that--do a lot better than that 
if we are going to do what we are required to do and that is 
our oversight obligation.
    I have spent all my adult life in either the executive 
branch or the legislative branch, and I know the legislative 
branch is always an irritant to the executive branch. It was 
set up that way because of our important oversight role.
    Turning to the budget, I am concerned by the 
Administration's continued misalignment of priorities in 
resources. For example, even with historic levels of hunger and 
displacement, the President proposes to reduce humanitarian 
assistance by 34 percent while prioritizing massive increases 
for vague climate commitments.
    I suspect--I think, undoubtedly, the President is counting 
on Congress to make the humanitarian accounts whole while he 
focuses on securing funding for the favored projects. This is 
an unlikely outcome.
    If the Administration is going to propose such reductions 
they should at least get serious about spreading humanitarian 
aid dollars farther, including by eliminating the cargo 
preference requirements that have outlived their statutory 
purpose, unnecessarily increased costs, and delayed deliveries 
of life-saving food by months. I am eager to work with you to 
finally put more food into our food aid.
    As you probably know, and I think almost everybody on this 
committee has experienced, virtually everyone we meet with from 
the international community is concerned about the coming food 
scarcity.
    It is going to be a real issue with what is going on in 
Ukraine, what is going on with the drought in the areas that 
are particularly affected by that. Everybody is going to have 
to step up and we are going to have to redouble our efforts.
    I also have concerns about the President's prioritization 
of multilateral commitments for global health over funding for 
proven bilateral programs.
    This includes an unprecedented request for $6.5 billion 
dollars in mandatory spending for an international financing 
mechanism and a health workers initiative that is nowhere fully 
baked yet and not ready.
    It is clear--indeed, I believe, more than clear--that 
carefully planned strategically targeted foreign assistance can 
advance the national security, the economic, and humanitarian 
interests of the United States.
    It is also clear that poorly planned and executed programs 
can have the opposite effect. We need to get it right.
    I am pleased by the emphasis on promoting democracy, 
rights, and good governance. In too many places democracy is in 
retreat, from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe. I am eager to hear how 
this budget specifically will help promote good governance, 
combat corruption, and empower democratic voices.
    Which brings me to Ukraine. The United States has been 
very, very generous in its efforts to get let life-saving 
assistance to the people made vulnerable by Putin's unprovoked, 
brutal, and murderous war in Ukraine.
    As the United States begins to reopen its embassy in Kyiv, 
I hope USAID will also return and resume its in-person efforts 
to ensure aid is actually getting to local networks and that 
are committed to going the last mile.
    In Africa, I remain concerned about how USAID is 
approaching assistance to Sudan and South Sudan. Both countries 
continue to face complex crises and it is clear, quite clear, 
the United States response is not moving the needle.
    I understand the complexity. I understand the difficulties, 
but the needle is not moving. Things have to be done 
differently. These situations are unsustainable, require a 
review by the agency.
    Meanwhile, in Kenya, accountability for the mismanagement 
and theft of U.S. assistance, particularly global health 
assistance, remains elusive. I have requested USAID's office, 
OIG, make more frequent inspections of troubled USAID missions 
such as in Kenya so the agency can better uphold its commitment 
to zero tolerance, which we all know you have, for waste, 
fraud, and abuse.
    Turning to the Indo-Pacific, I want to understand in 
greater detail exactly how USAID will use the Countering PRC 
Malign Influence Fund, especially when it comes to building 
economic resilience among partners.
    Regarding the Pacific Islands, we have stepped up our 
diplomatic and development engagement with the Pacific Islands 
in recent years. There is more to do, including alongside 
Australia and New Zealand. I want to understand what USAID is 
doing in this critical part of the world.
    Regarding the Middle East, I have been very vocal about my 
concerns with this Administration's Syria policy. Caesar 
sanctions have been too few and we are failing to curb Arab 
outreach to the Assad regime.
    International and economic isolation remain the best tools 
to seek accountability for Assad's crimes. We can never return 
to business as usual and Assad has got to be held accountable.
    In the West Bank and Gaza, as we continue discussions on 
assistance to the Palestinians, we must push harder for 
Palestinian reforms. Specifically, we must achieve complete 
elimination of the ``pay to slay'' program and use any and all 
leverage to do so.
    On Afghanistan, I am concerned about the Administration's 
plan to issue a national interest waiver that would allow 
direct financial benefit to the Taliban. Instead of opening the 
door to financial assistance, we should be conditioning it upon 
Taliban first--first--meeting human rights and counterterrorism 
benchmarks.
    The Taliban's recent edict ejecting women and girls from 
school and the reimposition of guardianship laws are 
exceptionally troubling. We should focus on creating real 
leverage if we ever want to see changes in the Taliban conduct.
    I look forward to working with you to address these 
challenges, and they are heavy challenges, including by 
carefully aligning priorities and resources. We look forward to 
your testimony.
    Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Risch.
    We will start with the administrator's testimony. Again, 
welcome. I know how much you love being here with us today and 
so we would ask you to summarize your statement in around 5 
minutes or so, so that we can have a conversation with you.
    Please go ahead. You are recognized.

 STATEMENT OF HON. SAMANTHA POWER, ADMINISTRATOR, U.S. AGENCY 
         FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, WASHINGTON, DC

    Ms. Power. Thank you so much.
    Chairman Menendez, Ranking Member Risch, and distinguished 
members of the committee, Senator Johnson, Senator Cardin, 
Senator Kaine, and others who will join us.
    I do look forward to having the chance to respond to some 
of what you, Mr. Chairman, and you, Ranking Member Risch, have 
said in your opening statements.
    Let me use mine, if I could, just to frame the discussion 
that I hope we can have over the next couple of hours.
    I would like to start just by saying it is no overstatement 
to say that we are gathering, really, at a profound juncture in 
history. For 16 straight years, we have seen the number of 
people living under democratic rule decline.
    The world is now less free and less peaceful than at any 
point since the end of the Cold War, and for several years, as 
we have seen vividly, graphically, and horrifically in recent 
days in Ukraine, autocracies have grown increasingly brazen on 
the world stage, claiming that they can get things done for 
their people with a speed and effectiveness that they say 
democracies cannot match.
    Today, we see just how empty that rhetoric is and just how 
dark the road to autocracy can be, from Vladimir Putin's brutal 
war on a peaceful neighbor in Ukraine to the People's Republic 
of China's campaign of genocide and crimes against humanity in 
Xinjiang.
    Now, with autocracies on their back heel, now is the moment 
for the world's democracies to unite and take a big step 
forward after so many years of losing ground. If the world's 
free nations with the United States in the lead are able to 
unite the efforts of our allies, the private sector, and our 
multilateral institutions and marshal the resources necessary 
to help partner nations, we have a chance to extend the reach 
of peace, prosperity, and human dignity to billions more 
people.
    This has been USAID's mission since its inception six 
decades ago and I am truly grateful to you for your continued 
bipartisan support of our efforts to save lives, strengthen 
economies, prevent fragility and conflict, promote resilience, 
and bolster freedom around the world.
    USAID's work is a testament to the fact that America cares 
about the plight of others, that we can competently accomplish 
mammoth goals that no other country can, and that the work we 
do abroad also matters to Americans here at home.
    It makes us safer, it makes us more prosperous, and it 
engenders goodwill that strengthens alliances and global 
cooperation and creates a better future for generations to 
come.
    Thanks to your past support, the United States has helped 
get more than half a billion COVID-19 vaccines to people in 115 
countries.
    We have led life-saving humanitarian and disaster responses 
in 68 countries including Haiti, Ethiopia, and Ukraine; helped 
enhance pathways for legal migration to the United States while 
working to strengthen worker protections; and we have assisted 
the relocation and resettlement of Afghan colleagues and 
refugees under the most dire of circumstances while pivoting 
our programming in Afghanistan to address ongoing food 
insecurity and public health needs and continuing to push to 
keep women and girls in school.
    We are also making strides to become much more nimble as an 
agency at a time of immense demands, shoring up a depleted 
workforce by welcoming new recruits and operating with greater 
flexibility.
    The Biden-Harris administration's FY 2023 discretionary 
request of $29.4 billion will build on these steps forward, 
giving us the ability to invest in the people and systems to 
meet the world's most significant challenges so the United 
States can seize this moment in history.
    Last night, with bipartisan support, the House took a major 
step in that direction by passing a nearly $40 billion package 
for Ukraine, and we are hopeful for its speedy passage in the 
Senate.
    Yet, the challenges we face are significant. Putin's war 
has displaced more than 13 million people, including two-thirds 
of Ukraine's children. It has led to serious disruptions to 
global food, fuel, and fertilizer supplies around the world, 
further taxing the already overwhelmed international 
humanitarian system.
    Two difficult years of the COVID-19 pandemic have set back 
development gains, and despite the United States' leadership in 
vaccinating the world, that job remains unfinished.
    Multibillion-dollar climate shocks appear each year with 
more frequency, and continued humanitarian crises remain in 
Ethiopia and elsewhere. Yet, as grave as the challenges are, I 
sincerely believe the opportunity before us is even larger.
    By providing the resources necessary to seize this moment, 
the United States can galvanize commitments from our allies and 
our private sector partners and demonstrate to the world that 
democracies can deliver in a way that autocracies cannot.
    These actions are key to reversing years of democratic 
decline and creating a more stable, peaceful, prosperous future 
for people at home and abroad.
    With your support, USAID will move aggressively to grasp 
this opportunity to build that brighter future for all.
    Thank you so much.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Power follows:]

                Prepared Statement of Ms. Samantha Power

    Thank you Chairman Menendez, Ranking Member Risch, and 
distinguished members of the Subcommittee. I am grateful for the 
opportunity to discuss the Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 President's Budget 
Request for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).
    It is no overstatement to say we gather at a profound juncture in 
history.
    For 16 straight years, we've seen the number of people living under 
democratic rule decline--the world is now less free and less peaceful 
than at any point since the Cold War. And for several years, 
autocracies have grown increasingly brazen on the world stage, claiming 
that they can get things done for the people with a speed and 
effectiveness that democracies cannot match.
    Today, we see just how empty that rhetoric is, and just how dark 
the road to autocracy can be. Vladimir Putin's brutal war on a peaceful 
neighbor in Ukraine has shown a callous disregard for human life, 
global stability, and the very idea of truth itself. The courage of the 
people of Ukraine and the stalwart support of the United States and our 
allies and partners has unified and inspired people around the world 
striving for peace, democracy, human rights and freedom. Meanwhile, the 
People's Republic of China continues its campaign of genocide and 
crimes against humanity in Xinjiang, forcibly detaining more than one 
million Uyghurs and members of other ethnic and religious minority 
groups.
    If the world's free nations, with the United States in the lead, 
are able to unite the efforts of our allies, the private sector, and 
our multilateral institutions, and marshal the resources necessary to 
help partner nations stand up to autocracies, manage the aftershocks of 
Putin's war against Ukraine, end the pandemic, fight climate change, 
prevent conflict and promote stability, and safeguard democratic 
reforms, we have a chance extend the reach of peace, prosperity, and 
human dignity to billions.
    This has been USAID's mission since its inception six decades ago, 
and I am immensely grateful to you for your continued bipartisan 
support of our efforts to save lives, strengthen economies, prevent 
fragility, promote resilience, and bolster freedom around the world. 
USAID's work is a demonstration to the world that America cares about 
the plight of others, and that we can competently accomplish mammoth 
goals that no other country can. But the work we do abroad also matters 
to Americans here at home--it makes us safer, more prosperous, 
engenders goodwill that strengthens alliances and global cooperation, 
and creates a better future for the generations to come.
    The Biden-Harris administration's FY 2023 Request of $29.4 billion 
fully funding foreign assistance this is partially implemented by USAID 
is a reflection of the critical importance of development and 
humanitarian assistance in advancing U.S. interests around the world. 
The FY 2023 request also includes vital assistance to respond to the 
growing number of development priorities and global humanitarian 
crises. The Request additionally includes $6.5 billion in mandatory 
funding for the State Department and USAID to make transformative 
investments in pandemic and other biological threat preparedness 
globally, including financing for the new pandemic preparedness and 
global health security fund being established this summer, with 
leadership by the Indonesian G20 presidency and other partners around 
the world.
    We know, though, that the mammoth needs around the world--from the 
COVID-19 pandemic's continued effects to multi-billion dollar climate 
shocks to a spike in global food, energy, and fertilizer prices due to 
the Russian Federation's belligerence--are far larger than any single 
nation's ability to meet them. The request will allow the United States 
to lead, and in leading, allow us to mobilize allies, organizations, 
and private sector partners to contribute more to the causes critical 
to our nation's interests.
    Thanks to your past support, the United States has helped get more 
than half a billion COVID-19 vaccines to people in 115 countries; led 
life-saving humanitarian and disaster responses in 68 countries, 
including Haiti, Ethiopia, and Ukraine; helped enhance pathways for 
legal migration to the U.S. while working to strengthen worker 
protections; and assisted the relocation and resettlement of Afghan 
colleagues and refugees under the most dire of circumstances, while 
pivoting our programming in Afghanistan to address ongoing food 
insecurity and public health needs, and continuing to push to keep 
women and girls in school.
    We are also making strides to become a much more nimble Agency at a 
time of immense demands, shoring up a depleted Agency by welcoming new 
recruits, and operating with greater flexibility. The FY 2023 Request 
will build on these steps forward, giving us the ability to invest in 
the people and systems to meet the world's most significant challenges 
so the United States can seize this moment in history.
 supporting the people of ukraine and managing the global food crisis 
             stemming from the kremlin's war of aggression
    As we enter the third month of the Russian Federation's full-scale 
war of aggression against Ukraine, the humanitarian situation has grown 
dire, especially in the country's east, even as Ukraine continues to 
put up stiff resistance on the battlefield. We are actively programming 
resources passed in the March 15 Ukraine Supplemental Act and seeking 
additional supplemental resources to continue supporting the people of 
Ukraine and address rising global food insecurity as they continue to 
defend their sovereignty and their country. These resources are 
critical to making sure that Russia's war against Ukraine is a 
strategic failure for the Kremlin, while easing the global suffering 
their actions have caused.
    Since the war began, more than 13 million people have been 
displaced--over a quarter of Ukraine's population including two-thirds 
of the country's children. That includes 5.7 million refugees, 90 
percent of whom are women and children. An estimated 7.7 million more 
people are internally displaced inside Ukraine. An estimated 15.7 
million people inside Ukraine will need humanitarian assistance over 
the next 4 months.
    These supplemental resources that Congress provided have been 
instrumental in surging critically-needed assistance to those in need 
in the country, and to mobilizing the humanitarian systems required to 
coordinate a significant response. To date, our implementing partner, 
the World Food Program--which was not present on the ground in Ukraine 
when the conflict broke out--has scaled up its presence, and has now 
provided nearly 3.5 million people with rapid response rations, bread 
distributions, and cash-based transfers, with plans to increase 
distribution to reach 6 million people by June. With support from the 
United States and other donors, UNICEF and its local partners have 
provided critical health supplies to support access to primary health 
care for over 1.5 million children and women and ensured access to safe 
water for nearly 1.3 million people in affected areas as of May 3. 
While much has been accomplished, we recognize that more must be done, 
particularly in securing humanitarian access to reach those in active 
conflict zones with the assistance they urgently need.
    To support the Ukrainian Government's ability to administer 
services and manage its budgetary needs, USAID has contributed $500 
million to the World Bank's Multi-Donor Trust Fund for Ukraine (MDTF), 
and as President Biden announced recently, we plan to transfer an 
additional $500 million from the FY 2022 Ukraine Supplemental 
Appropriations Act, for a total of $1 billion. The supplemental funding 
will also enable us to provide assistance to Ukraine and neighboring 
frontline states like Moldova. This plan focuses on economic 
stabilization, countering disinformation, and promoting energy 
independence.
    Of course, Putin's war has effects beyond Ukraine's borders. The 
Kremlin's invasion of Ukraine has led to serious disruptions to global 
food, fuel, and fertilizer supplies, while also denting crop production 
and household incomes, and causing already high food prices to rise 
further, thereby taxing the international humanitarian system. USAID is 
coordinating with other U.S. Departments and Agencies to respond to 
immediate, medium-, and long-term impacts on global food security and 
nutrition. Estimates suggest that up to 40 million additional people 
could be pushed into poverty and food insecurity over the coming year--
in addition to the over 800 million people around the world who already 
face hunger. These populations are mostly focused in the Middle East, 
and West and East Africa, where higher fertilizer prices today threaten 
crop yields and harvests tomorrow. With the main planting season about 
to begin, countries like Ethiopia and South Sudan face the possibility 
of significant reductions to projected crop yields, food accessibility, 
and household incomes.
    Putin's attack and its devastating effects on global food security 
comes on top of 2 years of record food insecurity as a result of the 
COVID-19 pandemic and climate change. In FY 2022, nearly two-thirds of 
our Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance's programming was to address 
food insecurity and prevent famine through emergency food assistance 
and related programming. This year, a similar proportion of funding 
will go to address growing food insecurity, however, due to the 
skyrocketing costs of food and fuel, the same amount of funding will 
reach 10 million fewer people.
    In light of the food crisis, USAID, together with our partners at 
USDA, have made the exceptional decision to draw down the full balance 
of the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust--$282 million--which will be 
used to procure U.S. food commodities to bolster existing emergency 
food operations in six countries facing severe food insecurity: 
Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, and Yemen. We are 
immensely grateful to USDA, which will provide $388 million in 
additional funding through the Commodity Credit Corporation to cover 
transportation and other associated costs so that food can get to 
places around the globe where it is needed most.
    Yet even as we meet short-term food assistance needs, we must 
continue to invest in long-term food security and build resilient food 
systems so that countries have the ability to feed themselves, lower 
their dependence on Russian wheat and agriculture, and manage future 
food shocks.
    The United States Government has long been a global leader in 
addressing global food insecurity. In the first 7 years since the 
launch of the U.S. Feed the Future Initiative, the program is estimated 
to have lifted 23.4 million people out of poverty, 5.2 million 
households out of hunger, and 3.4 million children from risk of 
stunting. That's in addition to the program's measurable benefits for 
farmers and agribusinesses here in the U.S. and around the world, due 
to increased agricultural productivity, trade, jobs and income, and 
U.S. exports.
    And yet, new disruptions to food security around the world indicate 
that our need for funding will continue to be significant. That's why 
the FY 2023 Request includes over $1 billion in State and USAID 
economic and development funding for global food security. This money 
will go towards bolstering Feed the Future initiatives around the 
world, strengthening food systems, supporting farmers, and building 
community resilience.
    controlling covid-19 and strengthening global health leadership
    Much has changed from the haunting early days in March 2020. Thanks 
to funding from the American Rescue Plan Act and additional 
supplemental appropriations, the United States has been the clear 
leader in the international response to COVID-19, already investing 
over 95 percent of the funding Congress has generously provided to us, 
and we expect to obligate virtually all of the remaining funds by July.
    We have expanded testing, treatment, and surveillance in countries 
around the world. In hotspots in Africa, South Asia, Latin America, and 
the Caribbean, we have provided rapid responses for urgent healthcare 
needs, critical commodities, and technical assistance. And we have 
helped support developing countries in mitigating the transmission and 
morbidity of COVID-19, while also helping those countries prevent and 
mitigate food insecurity, gender-based violence, and other secondary 
effects of COVID-19.
    Our Agency has also helped lead the effort to vaccinate the world. 
In partnership with the Department of Defense, we have procured 1 
billion Pfizer vaccine doses for up to 100 countries around the world, 
free of charge and with no strings attached. We are addressing the most 
urgent vaccine delivery and country readiness needs in more than 100 
countries, including surge support to 11 countries in sub-Saharan 
Africa, under the U.S. Government's Global VAX initiative. We are 
leading Global VAX as a whole-of-government effort in close partnership 
with the Centers for Disease Control--and we are already seeing 
significant vaccination progress in these countries such as Uganda, 
where vaccination coverage increased fivefold between January and May, 
and Nigeria, where vaccination rates increased nearly threefold during 
that same time period.
    And yet, our job remains unfinished. Many countries are still off 
track to hit their vaccination coverage targets this year. Global 
testing, treatment, and health services still lag. Without additional 
resources, many of our programs will begin wrapping up activities and 
closing down this fall. And we risk a significant loss of progress in 
our other global health programs if we cannot secure needed emergency 
funds. That's why President Biden requested $22.5 billion in 
supplemental funding to fight the COVID-19 pandemic, $5 billion of 
which would be dedicated to global efforts.
    Additional supplemental funding would enable a significant 
expansion of our international vaccination drive, provide surge support 
to an additional 20-to-25 undervaccinated countries in significant 
need, countries like Liberia, where 24 percent of the population is 
vaccinated, and Haiti, where less than 2 percent of the population is 
fully vaccinated. It would also support other international COVID-19 
response priorities like providing boosters and pediatric vaccinations, 
testing, treatments--including the newest, high-impact antivirals--as 
well as additional health services that would reach an additional 100 
million people.
    Such funding is essential if we are ever to turn COVID-19 from a 
damaging global pandemic into a manageable respiratory disease.
    Barring additional funding, the United States will have to turn its 
back on the countries that need urgent help to boost their vaccination 
rates and access lifesaving treatments. Failing to help these countries 
get shots into arms and reduce severe disease means we will leave their 
populations unprotected and allow the virus to continue mutating into 
new, potentially more dangerous variants. Scientific research has 
established that new variants are more likely to emerge from a long-
term infection in immuno-compromised individuals who lack access to 
vaccination or treatment. These variants will inevitably make their way 
onto American soil, close down American cities, and infect and cost 
American lives.
    This week, the United States, Belize, Germany, and Senegal will co-
host the second Global COVID-19 Summit. The Summit will redouble our 
collective efforts to end the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic and 
prepare for future health threats. And we have called on our global 
partners--governments, civil society, philanthropies, and businesses--
to bring commitments to the table.
    As we race to end the pandemic, USAID continues to push ahead on 
our broader global health efforts. The FY 2023 Request for USAID 
includes $3.96 billion to advance American leadership in Global Health 
and Global Health Security. These funds will help to prevent child and 
maternal deaths, bolster nutrition, control the HIV/AIDS epidemic, 
expand the global health workforce, and combat infectious diseases. 
Funding in USAID-managed assistance will respond to the ongoing impacts 
of the COVID-19 pandemic on global health programs including 
tuberculosis and malaria, as well as strengthening health systems and 
global health security to better prevent, detect, and respond to future 
infectious disease outbreaks.
    In addition, the FY 2023 Request includes $6.5 billion in mandatory 
funding for the Department of State and USAID for critical pandemic 
preparedness activities. These funds will make transformative 
investments in pandemic and other biological threat preparedness 
globally by strengthening the global health workforce, advancing 
pandemic vaccine development, replenishing emergency response capacity, 
and providing health security financing to prevent, detect, and respond 
to future infectious disease outbreaks.
                  bolstering democracy, human rights, 
                 and governance and fighting corruption
    As the pandemic stretched into a second year, pro-democracy 
movements in many countries faltered, while governments, under guise of 
ending the pandemic, enacted new restrictions on human rights and 
fundamental freedoms. Disinformation ran rampant and sowed division 
within and between free nations. And the Chinese and Russian 
governments have worsened these trends by supporting authoritarian 
actors all over the world.
    At the same time, corruption has increased in scale and scope. 
Today's corrupt actors are highly networked, agile, and resourced--and 
for the most part, they outmatch those who stand against them. USAID's 
Anti-Corruption Task Force found that USAID Missions have extremely 
limited--and in some cases, no--resources to defend against corruption. 
While this is incredibly concerning, it's also a historic window of 
opportunity for reform.
    This opportunity, combined with the increased threats of corruption 
and democratic backsliding, is why the FY 2023 Request includes over 
$2.94 billion to revitalize global democracy. These funds will empower 
local partners, provide transparency in political systems, and address 
authoritarianism and disinformation. Of this foreign assistance request 
for democracy, roughly $2.6 billion is in accounts that USAID will 
fully or partially manage. The request will advance the Presidential 
Initiative for Democratic Renewal introduced at the Summit for 
Democracy, a landmark set of policy and foreign assistance initiatives 
that support free and independent media, empower historically 
marginalized groups and democratic reformers, and help develop open, 
secure, and inclusive digital ecosystems.
    Traditionally, our democracy assistance has emphasized media 
training, election monitoring, and human rights advocacy. But as we've 
seen, countries in the midst of a civilian transition or with a newly 
elected leader who rose to power on the back of a campaign to fight 
corruption or expand the rule of law, need not only traditional 
democracy assistance and investments in civil society to hold 
governments accountable, but resources that can immediately deliver a 
democratic dividend that demonstrate the value of good governance and 
strong institutions and services for citizens. That might include 
support to acquire vaccines, establish a social safety net, or invest 
in a power utility to keep the lights on. This funding will give us the 
flexibility to support countries in the event of a democratic opening--
so-called democratic ``bright spots''--with the resources they need to 
demonstrate that democracies can deliver for their people. This amount 
also includes $100 million to fight transnational corruption by 
empowering anti-corruption champions, strengthening partner countries' 
ability to detect and prevent corruption, and exposing and disrupting 
the flow of illicit money, goods, and natural resources.
    The President's FY 2023 request includes $2.6 billion for USAID and 
the Department of State to promote gender equality and the political, 
economic, and social empowerment of women and girls; prevent and 
respond to gender-based violence; expand access to child, elder, and 
home care services and address gender discrimination and systemic 
inequities blocking the full participation of women and girls, men and 
boys, and individuals of other gender identities--all by integrating 
gender equality across a range of development, humanitarian and 
security assistance. This historic request would more than double our 
commitment to women's empowerment and gender equality.
    Advancing gender equality reduces poverty, promotes economic 
growth, increases access to education, improves health outcomes, 
advances political stability, and fosters democracy. The full 
participation of all people is essential to economic well-being, 
health, and security.
                   restoring u.s. climate leadership
    Recently, USAID launched a new Climate Strategy that will guide our 
efforts to tackle the existential threat of climate change over this 
decade in a way that is truly transformational.
    Our Climate Strategy lays out six ambitious targets to be achieved 
between 2022-2030, which together would represent a dramatic increase 
in our Agency's efforts to stem the climate crisis. These targets 
include preventing 6 billion metric tons of global greenhouse gas 
emissions--the equivalent of taking 100 million cars off the road for a 
decade--and conserving 100 million hectares of critical landscapes, an 
area more than twice the size of California. We would also support 500 
million people to better prepare for and adapt to the impacts of 
climate change that are already wreaking havoc on marginalized 
communities.
    The President's FY 2023 Request includes $2.3 billion in 
international climate financing, and given the substantial gap in 
climate financing globally, USAID's Climate Strategy places a special 
emphasis on catalyzing substantial new private investment for climate 
mitigation and adaptation; our goal is to kickstart $150 billion in new 
public and private climate finance by 2030. We are also focused on the 
conservation, restoration and management of 100 million hectares of 
carbon critical landscapes by 2039--land that captures and stores 
carbon while preserving biodiversity and helping to prevent zoonotic 
transfer of diseases driven by habitat destruction.
    We also continue to work closely with the Government of India 
through the support of their global climate initiative, the Coalition 
for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure. The United States is a founding 
member of the coalition, and we have invested in supporting its 
technical leadership and formalization, with a goal of creating a 
global body that will advocate for the creation of infrastructure that 
can withstand climate and disaster risks and disseminate best 
practices. Since its founding in 2019, the Coalition now has 35 global 
members and over 400 companies, all working to share expertise and 
strengthen resilient infrastructure development across the globe.
          addressing irregular migration from central america
    In the past 6 months alone, USAID programming in Central America 
has created more than 40,000 jobs, provided life-saving humanitarian 
assistance to 1.8 million people, supported distribution of more than 
10 million COVID-19 vaccine doses, and helped mobilize $1.2 billion in 
private investment. Because one of the most effective ways to counter 
irregular migration is to provide legal means for securing seasonal or 
temporary migration, we have helped expand labor migration pathways 
from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras through the H-2B seasonal 
visa program. And we have used policy, development, and diplomatic 
tools to pressure leaders in the region to govern democratically and 
transparently.
    But as demonstrated by the continued arrival of migrants at 
American borders, much more work is needed. Individual migration 
decisions are complex, but they are rarely made on a whim, and we use 
data from multiple sources to understand their root causes and target 
our programs accordingly. As documented by the Government 
Accountability Office, the decision to suspend most assistance to 
Northern Central America in 2019 adversely impacted over 80 percent of 
USAID projects, and we continue to work aggressively to restart, 
optimize and scale our programs. For FY 2023, USAID and the Department 
of State are requesting $986.8 million to support the second year of 
implementation of the U.S. Strategy to Address the Root Causes of 
Migration in Central America.
    Using this money, we will continue working with partners in civil 
society, government, and the private sector to address the drivers of 
migration from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras--drivers like lack 
of economic opportunity, corruption, violence, human rights abuses, 
absence of quality public services, and declining trust in government. 
We will continue building and implementing a robust monitoring, 
evaluation, and learning plan designed to track progress under the 
Strategy. And we will defend democracy, human rights, and civic space 
throughout Central America so that citizens believe they have a voice 
and a future in their countries of origin. Nicaragua is a case in 
point. The Ortega regime's gravely concerning wide-scale crackdown on 
civil society and rejection of democratic norms and processes in 
Nicaragua has coincided with a major rise in out migration of 
Nicaraguans fleeing political repression and economic stagnation under 
Ortega.
     responding to humanitarian crises in places like ethiopia and 
                              afghanistan
    Stopping the threat of famine and addressing atrocities in Ethiopia 
is a top priority for the Biden administration and for USAID. Fighting 
has left as many as 9 million people in northern Ethiopia in desperate 
need of food and forced more than 2 million people to flee their homes. 
Food insecurity projections from February 2022 to May 2022 show that up 
to a million people will face famine-like conditions in northern 
Ethiopia by June--700,000 of those in the Tigray Region. In the Tigray 
Region alone, more than 90 percent of people depend on assistance.
    At the same time, there have been multiple, credible reports of 
gross violations of human rights related to the conflict in northern 
Ethiopia. Since last appearing before this committee, I visited the Um 
Rakuba refugee camp in Sudan, where I met with victims of the conflict 
in Tigray and heard their heartbreaking stories of abuse and violence.
    Recently, the Government of Ethiopia and Tigray regional 
authorities reached a truce in their fighting--the source of so much of 
this human misery. And since the truce on March 24, over 200 trucks 
have arrived in Tigray in April alone, with the number of trucks slowly 
increasing. But to meet the immense humanitarian needs in Tigray, more 
than 500 trucks carrying tons of food and life-saving supplies need to 
arrive each week. The current flow is woefully insufficient.
    We will continue to push for significant, sustained, unconditional, 
and unhindered delivery of much-needed aid to all those in need. We 
will also continue working with interagency partners to address and 
mitigate ongoing human rights violations and credible reports of 
atrocities by countering hate speech and mis- and disinformation, 
strengthening protection of freedom of expression and peaceful protest, 
supporting independent media outlets and watchdog organizations, 
strengthening local conflict mitigation, supporting the rule of law, 
building an enabling environment for national dialogue, and monitoring 
and documenting human rights abuses.
    In Afghanistan, an estimated 22.8 million Afghans face food 
insecurity following the Taliban's seized power in August 2021. 
Currently, the United Nations estimates that 95 percent of the Afghan 
population is in need of assistance. And to truly end the humanitarian 
crisis, we must also address the roots of Afghanistan's economic and 
development crises as well as advocate for the promotion of human 
rights for all Afghans. On March 23, the Taliban abruptly reversed its 
decision to allow girls to attend school past the sixth grade. On May 
7, the Taliban imposed additional restrictions on Afghan women and 
girls freedom of movement, employment, and access to society, all of 
which jeopardize the human rights and agency of Afghan women The 
Taliban have also threatened civil society organizations through media 
crackdowns, intimidation, unjust detentions, and assaults of 
journalists.
    While we continue to work through diplomatic channels and 
likeminded donors to press the Taliban to reverse course and allow all 
girls to go to school, women to work and participate in the economy and 
protect the rights of minorities and civil society; we remain committed 
to supporting the people of Afghanistan. The United States has been the 
single largest donor of humanitarian assistance since the fall of Kabul 
in August 2021. Since then, the U.S. Government has contributed $719 
million. Alongside us, the humanitarian community provided another 
$1.82 billion towards the humanitarian response in 2021. And we are 
working with our partners to support basic needs like health, 
livelihoods, agriculture, and education.
    We will continue programs to enable the direct delivery of 
humanitarian assistance. Our aid helps support rural livelihoods, 
improve food security and develop resistance in food systems in 
Afghanistan, enable women and girls to access quality healthcare, 
education, support for gender-based violence, civil society 
organizations, and training and livelihood programs. And we support 
journalists and media organizations, while also working to counter 
human trafficking.
                  supporting community-led development
    Across all our efforts, it is crucial that we engage more 
frequently and more intensely and sustainably with a broader range of 
partners. That's especially true of the community-led organizations and 
companies based in the countries in which we work. When we partner with 
these local NGOs and businesses, we have an opportunity to double our 
impact--to not just manage a project and deliver results, but to grow 
the local capacity of that business or organization so its impact will 
be sustained long after its relationship with USAID ends.
    Our current approach to community-led development draws upon more 
than a decade of the Agency's prior experience. It aims to devolve more 
power and leadership to local actors, elevate diversity and equity in 
our partnerships, and address some of the systemic and operational 
constraints at USAID. We have to approach localization as a shift in 
not just with whom we work, but also in how we work: creating 
intentional shifts in the way we design and implement our programs so 
that we are putting local communities and stakeholders in the lead. 
This is about deeper, more systemic change.
    Our efforts to advance community-led development have been warmly 
embraced by more than 1,000 local development organizations, as well as 
by many of our implementing partners and some of the largest 
international non-governmental organizations. Thanks to your support, 
the FY 2022 appropriations bill provided an initial $100 million in the 
FY 2022 appropriations bill to support our Centroamerica Local 
initiative, along with the authority, flexibility, and staff resources 
to prioritize working with local organizations in Honduras, Guatemala, 
and El Salvador.
    With more support from Congress, we can deepen this approach across 
our Agency and our Missions. The FY 2023 Request includes $47.6 million 
for the Centroamerica Local initiative--$40 million for direct awards 
to local organizations and $7.6 million to help staff this effort.
        investing in our people and building a stronger culture
    Of course, none of what we set out to achieve would be possible 
without USAID's dedicated team of development professionals serving our 
nation throughout the world. Many of our staff are still reeling from 
the COVID-19 pandemic, having lost loved ones even as they sought to 
protect others in their community from the virus.
    With your support, we are also increasing the size and agility of 
the career workforce to better advance U.S. national security 
priorities. Since last year, we have hired approximately 500 career 
employees and are working to reach our target levels of 1,850 Foreign 
Service and 1,600 Civil Service employees this year.
    The FY 2023 Request includes $1.7 billion to continue these efforts 
to invest in our people and build our institutional capacity, 
increasing the number of U.S. direct-hire positions that advance our 
most critical and effective foreign assistance program. This funding 
covers salaries and benefits of our direct hire Foreign Service and 
Civil Service workforce, overseas and Washington operations, and 
central support, including human capital initiatives, security, and 
information technology. The FY 2023 Request also includes resources for 
the launch of the Global Development Partnership initiative, a 
workforce expansion program, that will focus on democracy and anti-
corruption, global health security, national security, climate change, 
operational management, and a more permanent humanitarian assistance 
workforce.
    But in reconstituting our workforce, we want to recruit and retain 
talent differently than we have before, with an emphasis on hiring and 
nurturing a workforce that truly represents America. Thanks to the 
sustained leadership of our staff, we've taken several steps toward 
these aims. Their work and advocacy over many years enabled one of my 
first acts as Administrator, which was signing the USAID Diversity, 
Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) Strategic Plan--a framework 
document to guide the Agency's efforts to integrate DEIA into every 
aspect of our work.
    Since signing this document, we've taken concrete steps to advance 
our DEIA goals. We have conducted assessments that provided us with 
data and employee experiences to help us decide how to prioritize our 
efforts and resources. We onboarded five DEIA Advisors in Washington 
operating units and are actively recruiting more. And we have 
established the Office of the Chief DEIA Officer and welcomed our 
Agency's first-ever Chief Diversity Officer. We also launched our first 
recruitment conferences for students at both Historically Black 
Colleges and Universities and Hispanic-Serving Institutions, with 
another planned for Arab American students later this year.
    Since appearing before you last year, I have had the chance to 
travel to three HBCUs--Delaware State, Tuskegee University, and Alcorn 
State--as well as Florida International University, the largest 
Hispanic-Serving Institution in the U.S., to sign new agreements that 
will help expand our recruitment and research partnerships.
    Additionally, we are addressing current DEIA data gaps by making 
our data collection process more inclusive. We're expanding our talent 
recruitment pipelines and lowering barriers to entry for development 
partnership opportunities by collaborating with minority-serving 
institutions, increasing engagement and career development 
opportunities for underrepresented students, and establishing hiring 
goals to increase the number of employees who are persons with 
disabilities.
    However, it is not enough just to recruit talent, we must nurture 
and develop it. We will expand access to professional development and 
learning opportunities and equip our managers with the tools to lead 
talented and diverse teams. We are also developing commitments to our 
locally-employed colleagues to codify entitlements, benefits, and 
career advancement and professional development opportunities for our 
Foreign Service Nationals, who constitute 70 percent of our overseas 
workforce.
                               conclusion
    The challenges we have encountered in the past year are grave and 
loom large, but I sincerely believe the opportunity before us is even 
larger. By providing the resources necessary to seize this moment, the 
United States can galvanize commitments from our allies and our private 
sector partners, support the people of Ukraine in their moment of need 
and help manage the impact the Kremlin's war is having on the world's 
food supply, control the COVID-19 pandemic while laying the groundwork 
to detect and prevent future pandemics, strengthening health systems, 
and quickly rollout future vaccines, help countries adapt to the worst 
effects of climate change while embracing new renewable technologies 
and green jobs, and demonstrate to the world that democracies can 
deliver in a way no autocracy can. These actions are the key to 
reversing years of democratic decline and creating a more stable, 
peaceful, prosperous and stable future for people at home and abroad.
    With your support, USAID will move aggressively to grasp this 
opportunity to build a brighter future for us all. Thank you.

    The Chairman. Thank you, Madam Administrator. We will start 
a series of 5-minute questioning. I will recognize myself.
    Can you walk us through how this budget request, referring 
both to the request before us and the supplemental, paired with 
that Ukraine supplemental addresses humanitarian funding needs 
to stabilize conditions in key parts of the world during this 
extraordinary moment?
    Ms. Power. Thank you. To make sure I follow, Mr. Chairman, 
you mean the supplemental request pending before you--the 
second supplemental request, yes?
    The Chairman. Yes, the--well, the budget request has an 
additional 4 percent increase in humanitarian funding for FY23. 
Add to that the supplemental----
    Ms. Power. Correct.
    The Chairman. --that we just talked about, and talk to me 
about how that neither meets or does not meet the challenge of 
addressing humanitarian funding to stabilize conditions across 
the globe.
    Ms. Power. Thank you. First, let me just step back as you 
did a little bit in your opening statement and discuss the 
colossal needs right now, the walloping effects of the 
combination of COVID intensification, of climate-related 
shocks, more conflict than at any time since the end of the 
Cold War, and then compounding all of that, the neutralization, 
at best, of the breadbasket of the world--Ukraine.
    To give a couple examples of countries in which we work, 85 
percent of Egypt's grains come from Ukraine, 81 percent of 
Lebanon's. Lebanon, as you know, was in no great economic shape 
before Putin's invasion.
    World Food Programme prices--the price of doing business, 
the price of securing basic commodities and shipping them--have 
gone way up, 50 percent higher just to operate than it was last 
year and now, of course, a huge new displaced population inside 
Ukraine plus the nearly 6 million refugees who fled outside 
Ukraine.
    We are seeing these cascading effects. I think what the 
supplemental passed last night by the House that will be coming 
to you does significantly is it gives us the ability to meet 
the needs of those brave Ukrainians who have remained inside 
their borders, again, everything from psychosocial, those who 
have suffered sexual violence, to being able to provide 
shelter.
    We have all seen those large residential complexes that 
have been decimated by Putin's aggression. Then, of course, 
just food and cash needs. We want to get markets up and 
running. We do not want nor do the Ukrainians want to be 
dependent on humanitarian assistance for long.
    This is an emergency phase. What is absolutely critical is 
that the Ukrainians themselves be able to feed themselves, 
which is what they have always been able to do.
    Then when you extend, again, the ripple effects and the 
cascading effects to sub-Saharan Africa where one in every two 
or three pieces of bread is made with Ukrainian wheat, you can 
see why, again, the requests that came up here, both in our 
budget requests for 2023, but, more importantly now, this 
immediate request entails such a substantial increase in 
funding.
    The Chairman. Yes. In light of that explanation, as you 
pointed out, many countries, especially in the Middle East, 
heavily depend on the grain and food commodity imports, and the 
Russian invasion has threatened, as you suggested, the 
breadbasket of the world.
    Syria and Yemen rely significantly on food aid provided by 
USAID and, of course, the challenges in Lebanon, Tunisia, and 
Egypt, which can spur widespread public anger and social 
unrest.
    While this is a very significant request, is it fair to say 
this is not going to meet the totality of the challenge before 
us?
    Ms. Power. There are a number of contingencies that come 
into play here. I mean, we are also supplementing this surge in 
humanitarian assistance with interventions by our missions in 
more than 80 countries where these vulnerabilities exist, 
almost by definition, developing countries to try to ensure 
more precision use of fertilizer since less fertilizer is now 
going to be available on the open market and the prices are 
going up, using--building on Feed the Future and other 
initiatives.
    There is a lot that governments can do to mobilize their 
populations and we are hopeful that the World Bank and IMF, the 
fund--the Solidarity and Resilience Fund that they have 
created--will provide access to finance for some of those 
countries.
    There are some contingencies there. In addition, and this 
is really important and I know some members are seized with 
this up here, Ukrainian farmers have been unbelievably brave.
    They are out there sowing their harvest, wearing, in some 
cases, flak jackets with metal detectors next to them to be 
able to detect unexploded ordnances, and it is the Russian 
blockade on Odessa and other southern ports that has made it 
impossible for them to move their crops--their grains--from 
granaries out into the open market.
    Again, if we were able to find a way through rail, through 
road, through potential other port access to get to the Baltic 
ports or if they were able to repel Russia's horrific blockade, 
which, again, is costing lives not only in Ukraine, but will 
cost lives all around the world, that would be something that 
could bring, again, more grains to the open market, bring the 
prices down.
    The Chairman. My own perception is that this will not meet 
the challenge of global food insecurity, which has been 
exacerbated by the war in Ukraine and the resulting 
consequences of that war, and so--and then when you have food 
insecurity and people are going hungry, they are then driven to 
do things they might not otherwise do.
    One is to move in search of food and then you have 
migration. Others is to fight for food and then you have 
conflict. So this is, in my mind, beyond being a good global 
neighbor. It is about do we want to see more migration, do we 
want to see more conflict, where, ultimately, U.S. national 
interests and securities are affected? I would say no.
    So I hope we will get ready for what will be a bigger 
challenge than what you have here before your budget or what 
the supplemental provides, which is very Ukraine focused and 
with its neighboring countries, which I applaud, but this is 
not going to meet the challenge that we have. I have other 
questions about labor and diversity and other things that are 
not related to food insecurity or Ukraine. For now, I will 
yield and turn to the ranking member for his questions.
    Senator Risch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Picking up where the chairman left off, I think his 
assessment is absolutely right and that is that there is real 
doubt whether or not the world's food supply is going to be 
enough for the world's population, and the outline of the 
consequences of that that the chairman just iterated, I think, 
are very real.
    Obviously, you cannot--as USAID, you do not put your arms 
around all of that stuff, but your job is to get as much food 
out there as you possibly can.
    What is our assessment--dire assessment--of the coming 
situation? Is that what you are hearing also from the people 
you deal with worldwide?
    Ms. Power. First, if I may just go meta on the exchange 
that you have had. I mean, this is exactly the bipartisanship 
that has been reflected in your collective efforts to bring 
more food online and to give us the resources we need to meet 
humanitarian needs. Let me just, first, say thank you for the 
spirit of the--of both sets of comments.
    Yes, Senator, this is what we are hearing. I met with the 
Ethiopian Minister of Finance now going on 2 and a half weeks 
ago, 3 weeks ago, and he described already the riots and the 
protests that were occurring in Ethiopia well and apart from 
Tigray and the crisis that we know already exists there in Afar 
and Amhara because of the increase in the price of fertilizer 
and farmers just saying, we cannot afford this--where are the 
subsidies--and then the Ethiopian Government saying, we do not 
have the fiscal space here to provide those subsidies--what are 
we going to do.
    So that is just, again, those kinds of protests. I think we 
see it in the data. Even up to this point on COVID-related food 
insecurity over the last 2 and a half years, if you look at 
some of the intention to migrate surveys of people who are 
crossing borders and--or who are attempting to cross even into 
the United States, you can see a major spike in food insecurity 
as grounds for migration.
    I think an already unstable world that is already 
experiencing more conflict, more political protests in the last 
several years than there have been in any comparable 3-year 
period in the last hundred years, you are going to see those 
effects, those destabilizing effects, getting massively 
exacerbated by what is happening right now.
    Remember, we were in a food crisis before one man decided 
to try to lop off part of another country. We were in was the 
most severe food crisis that any of us had seen and now that is 
being compounded by this horrific aggression.
    Senator Risch. I appreciate that, and I think all of this 
is frightening, to say the least. It is coming and I guess we 
all need to think about it and how we are going to get through 
this.
    Your reference to the Horn--every day I am constantly 
frustrated by what is happening there and the lack of a 
solution or the apparent solution. What is your view there?
    Are we going to just continue to prop up what is going on 
there with food to keep people from starving and it just goes 
on? What is your view of what happens there? What is the end 
game here, if any?
    Ms. Power. Of course, we want to meet the needs, as always, 
of people facing desperate food insecurity. As you noted, with 
food shortages around the world or access to food so limited, 
prices going up, there is going to be evermore demands, as we 
have been discussing, on, for example, USAID's humanitarian aid 
budget.
    The fact that in Ethiopia there are warehouses upon 
warehouses filled with food where the only thing standing in 
the way of feeding starving people and malnourished children is 
a denial of access by government forces. That cannot stand. It 
could not stand before and it cannot stand now.
    I do not think we are propping up. I think we are pressing 
the government. There has been the most modest of progress with 
200 trucks getting in, as you probably know since you have been 
tracking it so closely, since the humanitarian truce was 
declared.
    We need 500 trucks a week to get into Tigray and Amhara and 
Afar, and we are looking at, potentially, a million people 
facing famine conditions by next month if that flow does not 
start to move.
    I do think the Ethiopian authorities are feeling the 
pressure. There is a truce. There is a different kind of vibe, 
for lack of a better word, in our engagements. Again, more is 
getting through, but it is a trickle and it has to be a flood 
to make up for lost time.
    Senator Risch. I appreciate your views on that. My time is 
up. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    The Chairman. Senator Cardin.
    Senator Cardin. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Madam Ambassador, thank you very much for your 
extraordinary service to our country for over so many years.
    The challenges today are extreme. You have already pointed 
out some, but what I find the most alarming is the trend of 
decline of democratic states, as you pointed out during your 
testimony.
    We see every time there is a survey done, more countries 
are less free. We need in our foreign assistance to balance the 
needs that are out there. We have to be engaged in regards to 
health issues, nutrition issues, education issues, gender 
issues, housing issues, economic opportunity. All those are 
critically important and all could use more funding.
    There is a fundamental need to support democratic 
institutions, and the amount of resources that we allocate for 
support of democratic institutions is very limited and the 
needs are very great.
    I am going to just give you one suggestion of where some 
funds could be diverted. As I understand it, the funds that was 
set up after the fall of the Soviet Union for supporting 
democratic institutions and market economies, they are set up 
in the individual countries.
    One was set up in Russia and, obviously, it is my 
understanding it is about $153 million in that account that has 
been frozen because there is no opportunity right now to use 
those funds for that purpose.
    It seems to me those funds could be diverted, and as I was 
questioning the other day the nominee to be Ambassador to 
Ukraine, yes, we have a lot of work to do in Ukraine, but one 
of the issues we have to do is work on strengthening their 
democratic institutions.
    We know before Russia's incursions there was challenges in 
Ukraine. I guess my question to you, would that be a creative 
use to transfer those funds for Ukraine or to use them, 
considering the limited amount of funds you have, in regards to 
democracy being frozen in a country where we cannot use it?
    Ms. Power. Thank you, Senator.
    Let me first just say since I am up here, to talk at least 
in part about the FY 2023 request, that we really have 
attempted to do a soup to nuts review of our democracy and 
anti-corruption programming in order to try to right-size it 
for this moment in history, rather than, I think, what you had 
seen as the kind of relative global complacency that had come 
to pass, certainly, after the fall of the wall and the talk of 
the end of history and all the rest.
    You saw, as you know, over time democracy funding just 
going down, down, down, down, and not being compensated for, 
for example, with additional resources in the anti-corruption 
space and we are trying to remedy that in the 2023 request, 
really, to try to scale the support that we give frontline 
human rights defenders, independent journalists, social 
movements, whether that is labor movements or workers or 
students or young people of the kind who helped bring down the 
Bashir regime in Sudan before that progress was offset over the 
course of the last 6 months.
    I want you to know that when you look at the numbers, you 
will see us really actually trying to resource something we all 
claim we care about, but have not resourced commensurate with 
our national interest in funding democratic institutions and 
those who will bravely stand up for democratic principles 
around the world.
    With regard to the Enterprise Fund, all I can say here, I 
think, is just to assure you that no stone would go unturned if 
there are resources available to be funding anti-corruption and 
democracy work.
    I think there is a range of views that we are trying to 
sort through on whether those resources are accessible. Happy 
to talk to you or have our team talk to your staff about what 
might be available.
    Senator Cardin. I appreciate that. I just think the optics 
of taking money from Russia's account, which is not going to be 
used, and using it for Ukraine is the right optics these days 
as well. I would just point that out to you.
    Let me ask one additional question, if I might. The 
Administration is requesting $400 million for countering 
People's Republic of China--PRC's--Malign Influence Fund. 
Sounds great to me, but explain to me what is that--how are you 
going to use that $400 million?
    Ms. Power. Thank you. What we could do is get you a mapping 
of what we have done with those resources up to this point. 
Suffice it to say that it is one of the loan--maybe loan is too 
strong, but one of the rare funds at USAID that comes 
unearmarked and actually gives us the ability to react quickly 
to a moment of opportunity.
    Whether that is, for example, a group of civil society 
actors who might be exposing some kind of corruption associated 
with some kind of large infrastructure project or whether that 
might be an investment in an alternative source of energy, it 
has, basically, been used to give us flexible funding to try to 
draw on USAID's comparative advantages over the Chinese 
investment that we know is blanketing not only the world, but 
the hemisphere.
    Again, this is only a modest plus-up from a fund that was 
created before my time as administrator. I can tell you it is--
when there is a democratic opening and it is in a place where 
China has sought to swoop in--and, again, there is virtually no 
place now where that is not the case--this ability to fund 
democratic actors on the ground or to fund an economic growth 
program that will draw people towards a free market approach to 
fund an open and inclusive--support for an open and inclusive 
digital ecosystem as distinct from heavy-handed surveillance 
internet infrastructure.
    Those are the kinds of projects and, again, we can give you 
a rundown on how that--those resources have been spent.
    Senator Cardin, I do not want to eat up your time, but I 
have to just say one thing.
    Senator Cardin. My time is----
    Ms. Power. Is your time up?
    The Chairman. You have accomplished that already.
    Ms. Power. Then I am eating someone else's time. I am 
sorry.
    Senator Risch made a point about questions for the record 
because here I am promising these things, and he made a point 
earlier that we had been very slow and I just want to say I 
am--I take personal responsibility for that and whatever the 
process dysfunction that caused such a long lag between you all 
posing questions of this nature and us getting back to you, I 
apologize for that.
    We are fixing the process and that will not happen again. 
So I just did not want to leave that unaddressed as I make more 
promises.
    Senator Cardin. I will look forward to following up on 
those points that you did. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Ms. Power. Okay. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Senator Hagerty.
    Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Chairman Menendez. Ambassador 
Power, good to see you here.
    Chairman Menendez, I would like to start out by submitting 
for the record a letter that I sent to President Biden in March 
of this year raising my concern about high fertilizer prices 
and potential shortages there, if I might. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Without objection.

[Editor's note.--The information referred to above can be found 
in the ``Additional Material Submitted for the Record'' section 
at the end of this hearing.]

    Senator Hagerty. Administrator Power, I would like to turn 
to you. I grew up in a rural area. I was president of my high 
school Future Farmers of America organization. I remember 
studying then the theory of Dr. Thomas Malthus, who predicted 
that the world was going to run out of food if the population 
continued to grow.
    Well, Dr. Malthus was wrong. He is one of the original 
doomsday prognosticators and he turned out to be wrong because 
he forgot about something very important. That is American 
ingenuity, particularly, when it comes to the agribusiness 
arena.
    Thanks to innovation in agribusiness, America has been able 
to dramatically increase yields. We have been able to feed the 
world and that is because modern farming techniques have been 
at the forefront. There are many countries that would like to 
take our modern farming techniques, that would like to take 
that intellectual property.
    Our agricultural innovation, particularly, in nitrogen 
fertilizer, has made a huge difference in terms of our nation's 
ability to support feeding the world's population.
    I would like to turn to some comments you made on ABC News 
recently, and I am just going to read what I understand that 
was said. Talking about fertilizer shortages causing the loss 
of production--caused by the loss of production in Russia and 
Ukraine--did you say that it would hasten the transition to 
natural solutions like manure and compost that ``would have 
been in the interest of farmers to have made eventually 
anyway''?
    Ms. Power. Those comments are accurate. Can I offer some 
clarification?
    Senator Hagerty. I would like to just also ask you this. 
Did you also say in that same interview that you should never 
let a crisis go to waste?
    Ms. Power. So in the interview--and I would definitely 
rephrase my response to the question that was posed if I could 
do it again--but rest assured that chemical fertilizer has been 
a critical part of the agriculture gains that our partners have 
made globally, and there is just no question whether through 
Feed the Future, we have talked previously, I think, in this 
setting about farmer initiatives and the insight and innovation 
the farmers here bring.
    All I was meaning to say--and it was coming out of the 
meeting that I referenced earlier with the Ethiopian Minister 
of Finance, who was saying in this moment of desperation where 
Ethiopian farmers, for example, have been unable to secure 
fertilizer on the open market because the prices have gone up 
so much with Russia's invasion, given that Russia is such a 
large exporter of fertilizer, that they are now scrambling and 
finding these alternative means of trying to fertilize, and--
but in no way did I mean to suggest that there is--that we are 
en route to moving away from programming with our partners 
using fertilizer that has been so effective in increasing 
gains.
    Senator Hagerty. You serve in a very critical leadership 
role, Ambassador. I appreciate that role and the world 
appreciates the role that you serve and you need to be, I 
think, very cognizant of our strengths and, I think, be very 
careful about what is being said.
    I have heard members of this Administration talk about high 
gas prices being good because it forces a transition to 
alternative fuel vehicles, saying that high prices in 
fertilizer are good to force a transition that should happen 
anyway.
    When you are forcing us back into manure or compost and 
that type of thing that is going to precipitate a catastrophe. 
That will precipitate disasters that will be felt on a global--
--
    Ms. Power. That was not the intention, sir. It really is 
this emergency phase. It is not a question of, for many of 
these farmers, synthetic fertilizer, yes or no, or chemical 
fertilizer, yes or no.
    They are just not able to access it now because the price 
is out of reach. So the combination of the humanitarian 
assistance, the additional funding that we are able to do 
through our agricultural programs, that we want to be in a 
position where they are able to access fertilizer in the way 
that they have been able to do in the past.
    Senator Hagerty. I, certainly, want us to be in a position 
to support--with American innovation and innovations like 
modern agriculture to support continuing the increase in yields 
that we have seen and we will need to see.
    I am very concerned that we are going to see food shortages 
come up here on a global basis and I think we need to be very 
careful, A, as we speak about this, and then, B, what we decide 
to do to support it and move it in the proper direction, and 
moving back in time and moving back in history is not the right 
direction.
    I would also like, Mr. Chairman, to submit for the record 
an article here from--an article here from Foreign Affairs 
magazine. It is about what happened in Sri Lanka when they 
mandated going to organic farming and away from modern farming.
    Madam Ambassador, if you have not read this, I would 
commend you read it, but I think it tells a very dire tale of 
what can happen when a move like what was described on ABC News 
is actually taken seriously and delivered a disaster in Sri 
Lanka.
    So thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Madam 
Ambassador.
    Ms. Power. Thank you, sir.
    The Chairman. Without objection, the article will be 
included.

[Editor's note.--The information referred to above can be found 
in the ``Additional Material Submitted for the Record'' section 
at the end of this hearing.]

    The Chairman. Senator Barrasso.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Madam Ambassador, nice to see you again. I had a couple of 
questions.
    We met with the Ukrainian ambassador to the United States 
yesterday--a number of senators did--with regard to 
humanitarian assistance. In terms of the humanitarian crisis 
created by Russia, Congress understands the importance of 
taking immediate action to quickly get food to those who 
desperately need it.
    In March of 2022, Congress provided about $100 million for 
the Title 2 Food for Peace program for Ukraine. It has been 2 
months. The food aid has still not been delivered to Ukraine.
    In fact, none of the money has even been spent, and since 
we have already committed to this 2 months ago, why has not the 
USAID been able to get the food assistance to the people of 
Ukraine?
    Ms. Power. Senator, I am not sure if that was the 
ambassador's characterization, generally, of food assistance. 
That would surprise me. I can run you through the food 
assistance that had----
    Senator Barrasso. I will clarify. We met with the 
ambassador and a number of senators have raised this issue. 
This was not the ambassador's position.
    Ms. Power. Okay.
    Senator Barrasso. We are asking a number of questions: are 
you getting everything, has it gotten there, where are we now.
    Ms. Power. Got it. Okay. We are, as you know, the largest 
funder, and I want to distinguish international organizations 
from our Ukrainian partners. So maybe if you just give me a 
second to come back to that.
    We are the largest funder of WFP, which, it is true, did 
take some time to establish their warehouses and to scale up. 
They were not present in Ukraine anymore when the war broke 
out, despite our warnings ahead of time that this war was 
coming or this invasion was coming.
    They are now reaching 7 million people inside Ukraine. It 
is not enough. They would be the first to--excuse me, they are 
reaching 3.5 million people in Ukraine with a goal of getting 
to 7 million by the end of June.
    We have provided--we, USAID, have provided, thanks to you, 
$205 million in emergency food assistance. We are also 
providing something that is less visible, Senator, and that is 
cash assistance--more than $109 million of cash assistance, 
again, through partners like World Food Programme and others, 
and that is to try to get markets up and running because, 
again, we want to move away from food assistance as soon as 
possible, given that Ukraine is fully capable of feeding 
itself.
    There is an issue, I think, with our sort of--or not an 
issue so much as a question about whether we have the right 
balance between support for international organizations and 
support for Ukrainian partners.
    I think one of the really important dimensions of the 
recent--of the supp that passed the House last night is that it 
promises, potentially, if it passes the Senate $7.5 billion in 
direct budget support for the Ukrainian Government.
    They have a social service ministry--I talked to the social 
service minister yesterday--that itself provides cash 
assistance to internally-displaced people, to elderly people, 
provides pensions, provides other forms of resources. If that 
can be scaled up, you could imagine a world in which 
international organizations would just be procuring things that 
Ukrainian actors on the ground would themselves not be able to 
procure.
    With regard to actual food commodities from the United 
States itself, I think that is something that usually does cost 
more and take a longer period of time. I will have to get back 
to you on where those commodities are and, to the degree that 
your understanding is accurate, why it would be that those 
would not yet have landed in Ukraine.
    Senator Barrasso. Those are the sort of questions I 
specifically have. I know in March we passed the Ukraine 
supplemental, $2.65 billion for international disaster 
assistance. Again, that funding is just sitting idle is my 
understanding on that. USAID has only donated $50 million to 
the World Food Programme.
    Ms. Power. No. That is not accurate, sir.
    Senator Barrasso. Oh, good.
    Ms. Power. Yes.
    Senator Barrasso. All right. Another issue facing this 
quick delivery of critical food to those in need is shipping. 
U.S. law requires at least half of the vessels carrying 
government authorized food aid on U.S. vessels. There are, I 
understand, only four U.S. flag ships the U.S. Government can 
use to ship the food aid. Not one of the four ships is 
available right now.
    It has been estimated it could take an entire year to get 
the food to the people of Ukraine. In the case of an emergency 
like this, I know the President may waive that requirement. 
Since the Food for Peace program is run by USAID, have you 
requested a presidential waiver in order to address this issue?
    Ms. Power. On this score--on this--if you are asking 
specifically a waiver to get food into Ukraine, the answer is 
no because the food that we provide to Ukraine is provided in a 
different manner. Again, it is not food commodities from here, 
just for reasons of cost and efficiency.
    We have used that waiver, for example, to get food into 
Yemen where U.S. carriers will not travel, and we are grateful 
for some of the initiatives that are occurring up here, as I 
understand it, in a bipartisan way to try to show congressional 
support for greater flexibility, given the urgent needs of the 
moment.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Shaheen.
    Senator Shaheen [presiding]. Thank you. Senator Menendez 
has passed the gavel to me and I get to ask a question.
    Welcome, Administrator Power. We are delighted to have you 
here and really appreciate the effort that you and everyone at 
USAID is making on a daily basis to try and improve the lives 
of people around the world.
    I would like to begin with the global gag rule and the 
impact that that has had over the years, also known as the 
Mexico City Policy, which has prohibited foreign nongovernment 
organizations from receiving U.S. global health assistance if 
they provide legal abortion services or advocacy for abortion 
law reform, even though that is done with their own funds.
    I am particularly concerned about this because what we know 
is that this policy has resulted in an increase, not a 
decrease, in the number of unsafe abortions. The policy causes 
more unintended pregnancies, higher rates of maternal 
mortality, and it leaves countless women at risk.
    Can you speak to the ramifications for USAID and our global 
health policies when that global gag rule is in effect, and 
what we are doing now to help rebuild those partnerships with 
the organizations that are so critical to providing support for 
women and families around the world?
    Ms. Power. Thank you, Senator.
    I think that while there are, of course, divisive issues as 
it relates to reproductive health or as it relates to family 
planning, I think we have endeavored over the life of this 
Administration to restart programs that were suspended, given 
the prior Administration's policy.
    I think we do still hear reports of very conservative 
application of this Administration's policy as sort of a 
hangover from the prior Administration. I think it is extremely 
important.
    You will see in the 2023 budget request a request for a 
historic $2.6 billion for women's and gender empowerment and 
rights, broadly defined. I think that will have ramifications, 
we hope, in this area of programming.
    It is just extremely important that women's rights are 
protected and that women get to enjoy the right to voluntary 
family planning, which has not always been the case, as you 
note.
    Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much for that. Another area 
that is really important as we think about how do we empower 
women around the world is promoting the ability of girls to 
stay in school, particularly secondary school where there is 
persistent gender disparity and, again, how can USAID better 
provide holistic support to ensure that adolescent girls can 
stay enrolled and complete secondary school?
    Ms. Power. I think it is--and, again, I just mentioned the 
gender funding--gender-related funding that is requested here 
in the 2023 request.
    Part of what is key is that all our areas of programming 
filter the programming through the recognition of the unlocking 
potential that the education of women and girls, the rights of 
women and girls, have for the rest of society.
    Our budget request, for example, requests $693 million in 
basic education, $238 million in higher education. There is a 
real emphasis in that programming on the education of girls, 
specifically.
    Of the million people, for example, reached with vocational 
training, half are girls and women. We, again, emphasize that 
this should be the filter through which our programming in a 
whole range of areas, whether it is microfinance in the 
agricultural space or education through which we filter our 
programming.
    I do not know that I can say that that has happened yet, 
but we are having now a gender advisory in every USAID mission 
around the world, so I am hopeful that will accelerate that 
process.
    Senator Shaheen. Can you, again, speak to why that is so 
important? Because I think people looking at it without having 
an understanding of what a difference it makes when girls and 
women are educated to not just their families, their 
communities, but their countries, do not appreciate why this is 
so important in our foreign policy.
    Ms. Power. We have spent a lot of time talking about grave 
humanitarian crises--the grave humanitarian crisis that is 
underway right now.
    What you see is when girls--for every additional year of 
education that girls have that affects their family planning 
choices, that affects the number of mouths that their families 
will be feeding, that affects GDP. You see an incremental 
increase in a country's GDP for every extra year, on average, 
that girls are able to obtain in education.
    I mean, it is just as simple as do you want to unlock your 
country's full potential or do you want to leave half of its 
potential off the field?
    One thing I would draw your attention to, Senator, you are 
probably already tracking, but I find it really quite thrilling 
that President Biden's new infrastructure initiative, sort of 
the--which the Build Back Better World initiative as it was 
launched at the G-7 includes in it a pillar on gender as 
conceived of as infrastructure and the piece of it that is so 
important, I think, is investments in the care economy.
    So we are looking at USAID and across our government about 
what we can do to catalyze investments there and that has not 
been a significant area of focus in the policy space, the 
regulatory space, or the funding space, the program space.
    So it is very exciting to imagine what it would mean also 
for women well and apart--even once they have obtained their 
education, once they begin having children, they feel the need 
to drop out of the workforce in order to raise those children 
in part because they do not have care possibilities that they 
can draw upon.
    We have seen it in our country. You can imagine how much 
more severe the effects are even in developing countries. That 
is something that is a really ambitious new initiative. The 
Gates Foundation and others are squarely behind it and I think 
we could bring a lot of resources to this agenda, which would 
have additional catalytic effects.
    Senator Shaheen. Thank you. It is very exciting.
    I am out of time, but I cannot finish my questioning 
without pointing out how really horrified I have been--and I 
know that this is shared by the women in the Senate as well as 
all of our male colleagues--with the Taliban's reversal of 
their commitment to allow girls into school in Afghanistan.
    I would just urge that we are looking at doing anything 
possible to try and support women and girls in Afghanistan, and 
I know you share that commitment.
    Thank you. Senator Risch, Senator Menendez gave me the 
gavel, but I assume you have already--okay.
    Senator Booker. I appreciate the battlefield promotion, 
sir. I will try not to abuse my power.
    Senator Shaheen. Senator Booker.
    Senator Booker. Thank you very much. Chairman Booker, 
excuse me.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Risch. Chairman Booker.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Booker. Acting Chairman Booker.
    Senator Risch. This is not going to go well.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Booker. Ambassador Power, it is good to see you.
    Ms. Power. Good to see you.
    Senator Booker. Thank you so much. I want to jump right in 
and then get to my colleagues.
    I know that food insecurity has already been talked about 
and I am happy to see Congress moving to include over $4 
billion of emergency funding into the international disaster 
assistance program.
    A report just came out, though, that in Afghanistan about 
10 million children right now--it is a staggering number--that 
they are alone. They are unable to meet their daily food needs, 
which is really incredible, and then you add into that the 
crises in Ethiopia, Yemen, South Sudan.
    I guess if we are able to get this funding approved, which 
I hope we do, as soon as next week, will USAID be able to do 
everything really possible to quickly move this life-funding 
assistance--life-saving assistance out the door to programs 
like the World Food Programme and others? If you can give me 
a--kind of a sign of hope.
    Ms. Power. First, thanks for the question. I mean, again, 
it is important to bear in mind what we talked about a little 
bit earlier, but just as the--we were facing an unprecedented 
food crisis before Putin went and did this, and it just adds a 
whole new layer of recklessness and callousness to what we know 
is already horrific in Afghanistan.
    The appeal that was issued for Afghanistan--now it feels 
like a year ago, but it was probably only 4 or 5 months ago--
was the largest ever humanitarian appeal for any country in the 
U.N.'s history, right, and that is a long--a relatively long 
history at this point.
    I think the infrastructure is in place, Senator. The fall 
of Afghanistan has been devastating to women's rights, girls' 
rights, the economy, the humanitarian welfare of the citizens 
of the country.
    There is more access. The only thing positive one can say 
is there--the aid organizations are able to move around more 
easily because the front lines are not there that had been 
there before. Yes, we will be able to move money to 
Afghanistan.
    We are the largest donor. We have provided very, very 
substantial--I think, half a billion dollars worth of 
humanitarian assistance just since the fall of Kabul at the end 
of August. We need other donors to do more. We need Gulf donors 
and others who have not yet really been enlisted in this cause 
to step up.
    Above all, we need to see a functional Afghan economy. 
Senator Risch raised this indirectly, I think, in his opening 
statement. We can continue to sort of put fingers in the dike 
here, but the real problem is gross mismanagement of the Afghan 
economy, and so there needs to be an independent solvent 
central bank in Afghanistan. Right now, the Taliban is not 
cooperating with the U.N. initiative to create a kind of 
financial humanitarian exchange facility----
    Senator Booker. Ambassador, I know those dynamics.
    Ms. Power. Yes.
    Senator Booker. I really appreciate the thoroughness of 
your answer.
    Ms. Power. Sorry.
    Senator Booker. I am going to try to use my----
    Ms. Power. Please.
    Senator Booker. --remaining time as judiciously as 
possible. To the extent that any of us, because we, obviously, 
talk to a lot of our peers and nations--our partner nations--if 
there are specific folks that are not stepping up or could be 
stepping up----
    Ms. Power. Right. I will follow up. Absolutely. Thank you.
    Senator Booker. Yes, I really would appreciate that. I am 
sort of asking this in terms of a question, but I know that the 
Global Food Security Act is going to be reauthorized next year 
and I guess I just would like to make sure--and I know this is 
a focus of yours so I really do not have too much encouraging 
to do--but that we see some language in there that really adds 
support for women, smallholder farmers, focusing--programs 
focusing on women and girls when it comes to that program. I 
would love to be able to work with you on trying to make sure 
that the language reflects some of those priorities.
    I want to just jump in and give you a chance to help--talk 
about some of the good work that you all are doing in terms of 
modernizing the work you are doing, and I just know we need to 
make sure that money is getting out the door to organizations 
that are best positioned to do the work and I know--I think 
Devex is the name of the group--reported on Monday that USAID 
funding to low and middle income-based organizations actually 
decreased last year and overly complex contracting is a barrier 
that is often cited that really keeps local innovative 
organizations from working with USAID.
    Last year, USAID structured just 1.3 percent of its grants 
as straightforward fixed amount awards, which are even--which 
are easier for smaller, local, and more innovative 
organizations to apply for and manage, and they are among the 
best ways, I think, to incentivize real results and have a 
higher level of accountability.
    I know this is a focus of yours. I just hope that there is 
a plan to increase resources being distributed in that way.
    Ms. Power. It is, and there is a lag between when a new 
administrator comes in and launches a big agenda as we have on 
localization. The goal, Senator, is 25 percent of foreign 
assistance going to local organizations and 50 percent being 
co-designed, co-evaluated, with local organizations.
    We are going to have to find a way to get there. There is a 
disparate impact of the complexity of USAID rules and 
regulations on local organizations, whether it is linguistic 
challenges or just the fact you do not have a world-class 
accounting firm or general counsel in-house.
    So one of the reasons we are grateful for the plus-up in 
operating expenses is so that we have the staff that we need to 
sit down with local organizations to help them jump through 
those hoops.
    We also need to simplify and actually reduce the 
administrative and other reporting burdens while doing so in a 
manner, of course, that is sensitive to the imperative of 
avoiding fraud, waste, and abuse.
    This is the needle we are seeking to thread. I think the 
new partners initiative that--and local works initiative that 
were written into law up here have been helpful, and I have 
launched a $300 million initiative called Central American 
Local, which is a dedicated pool that would only go to local 
organizations. I think we are getting there, but it is going to 
be time, unfortunately, before you start to see the return on 
this agency's commitment in this regard.
    Senator Booker. Great. I will just bookmark this, not as a 
question, just in my closing to say I really hope to talk to 
you a little bit more about that, but also examine how we can 
get double bottom lines for a lot of our investments with a lot 
of sort of innovative strategies, say, for example of climate 
change, more investments in scaling climate-resistant crop 
varieties in places like India. These could help us with 
climate change as well as dealing with a bit of their food 
crisis.
    Senator Menendez has returned. I have lost my very brief 
moment as acting chairman. I felt the power drain away. I am 
going to yield to him. I know Senator Van Hollen is here to go 
up next.
    The Chairman [presiding]. Thank you, Chairman Booker.
    Senator Booker. Thank you very much.
    The Chairman. Senator Van Hollen.
    Senator Van Hollen. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and 
Deputy Chairman Booker.
    Administrator, it is great to see you. Just on Afghanistan, 
as you know what desperate situation that is, I appreciate the 
support AID is providing through nongovernment organizations 
and making sure we do not do anything to support the Taliban. I 
agree with what Senator Shaheen said.
    I would say, at the same time, that the Afghan 
reconstruction fund under the supervision of the World Bank, it 
seems to me, has developed mechanisms to deliver additional 
funding to help hungry people without helping the Taliban, and 
I just urge you to continue to support that effort.
    I am sure that you have all talked about the good news of 
the $40 billion emergency supplemental that passed the House, 
which, importantly, does include $5 billion for food assistance 
and dealing with food insecurity.
    I think we all recognize that, given the needs, it is still 
not enough, but it is a lot better than where we were just a 
short time ago. In terms of the scope of the problem and the 
different causes, we know there are many. We know it ranges 
from COVID supply chain issues to climate change impact on 
agriculture, especially in places like the Horn of Africa.
    The dominant one right now is Putin's war against Ukraine, 
and I just came from a hearing in the SFOPS Appropriations 
Subcommittee with David Beasley of the World Food Programme and 
I asked him about this, and it was pretty clear that the 25 
million tons of grains that are stuck in Ukraine are having a 
direct impact on food insecurity, rising hunger around the 
world, both in terms of supply and increased prices. So that 
while Putin is killing innocent people in Ukraine he is also 
making people around the world go more hungry and leading them 
to the verge of starvation.
    Can you quantify this problem? Because if we do not get 
this grain out of the port of Odessa, millions of people are 
going to go hungry because of what Putin is doing, and I will 
just close this part of the question by saying that people have 
talked about getting the grain out through land routes.
    Everybody I have talked to says that there is no way to get 
a significant amount of grain out as quickly as we need to 
through land routes, that the port--opening the ports is the 
key. Could you elaborate on the impact around the world of what 
is happening there?
    Ms. Power. I can. I mean, let me just say that the 
Ukrainian outflow of grain in steady state pre-invasion was 5 
million tons of grain a month. So that is what we are talking 
about losing--and David Beasley will be more expert on this 
than I--but just taking that off the field globally we are 
seeing it in food shortages, but we are also seeing it in 
skyrocketing food prices.
    So I think you were not there yet, Senator, when I shared, 
I think, an anecdote that really brought this home for me or a 
fact that brings this home for me, which is that one out of 
every two or three pieces of bread in sub-Saharan Africa is 
made with Ukrainian wheat and we have all seen the numbers of 
85 percent of Egyptian grains come from Ukraine, et cetera.
    You asked specifically about the range of solutions, and I 
think the European Union, actually, just before I came here 
today just put out a plan--the European Commission, I should 
say--but it leaves open a lot of the same questions because we 
are all grappling with how much throughput could you get 
through using traditional train routes, through using roads to 
get to other ports within Europe--is there a way to get up to 
the Baltic ports, which seemed like the closest, other ports 
that could take supplies at scale.
    Right now, the biggest challenge and can this--we are 
working with our Ukrainian farmer partners because we have 
big--USAID has big agricultural programs--has long had big 
agriculture programs in Ukraine--what they are grappling with 
is how do you incentivize farmers to plant now or soon, because 
it is not quite that time, if they are not seeing a return on 
what they have harvested, if that is just sort of----
    Senator Van Hollen. Thank you. Madam Administrator, I just 
have a few seconds----
    Ms. Power. Yes.
    Senator Van Hollen. --but I appreciate your emphasizing 
that point. I think the Ukrainian farmers want to plant. They 
do have control of the country and--but they got to be able to 
get it out.
    I just want to thank you for--and the Administration for 
your requests for both UNRWA as well as the support--ESS 
support in the West Bank and Gaza, and I will follow up with 
you on the AID Prosper Africa.
    I want to thank your team for briefing the Africa 
Subcommittee staff recently, and it sounds like we are making 
good progress on Prosper Africa.
    Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    Senator Murphy.
    Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Good to 
see you even from a distance, administrator.
    I want to talk to you about the topic of energy 
independence and the way in which this Administration thinks 
about the utility of using grant dollars or financing to help 
countries break their dependency on neighbors and, of course, I 
am thinking, first and foremost, about Russia's periphery.
    This has always seemed to me to be a bit of a blind spot 
for the U.S. Government. We provide a lot of technical 
assistance on how countries can connect to other energy 
systems, but we have always been, I think, far too reluctant to 
put hard dollars on the table in Russia's neighborhood.
    We leave a lot of that to the Europeans, but the 
bureaucracy in Brussels is sometimes just absolutely 
unovercomeable for many countries that are seeking relatively 
low-cost projects to break away from Russia.
    Right now, there is a crisis in Bulgaria. As you know, 
Russia has cut off energy supplies. There is a whole host of 
ideas on the table to find other avenues for energy import, 
including U.S. LNG, but there is not a lot of creativity in the 
U.S. system beyond advice as to how to help these countries 
find their next energy source.
    So just love a minute or two from you on whether there is 
more to be done at USAID, whether you need additional 
authorizations in order to better use and leverage dollars for 
these kind of projects.
    Ms. Power. Thank you, Senator. I am back not that long ago 
from Moldova, which is probably the country that most 
personifies the challenge, I mean, with the amount of energy 
blackmail going on across Europe.
    There is nothing like visiting a country that is partially 
occupied by Russian forces and vulnerable in the natural gas, 
fuel, and electricity domains to that blackmail to, I think, 
underscore the importance of securing that independence.
    I guess what I would say is it really depends. I would love 
to just have a more detailed discussion, perhaps, with our 
energy envoy, Amos Hochstein, maybe at the table as well to 
hear more about what you have in mind.
    I mean, we were absolutely instrumental--we, USAID, our 
energy team--as part of our USAID mission in Ukraine, for 
example, in Ukraine's decision to and capacity to free itself 
to do the tests that you saw in the electricity sphere to 
connect itself to Europe, which happened just in the early--it 
was either several days before the war or just as the war 
started, and that was years in the making and lots of 
programming.
    It is not hard to infrastructure in the way that you are 
describing and I think where my mind goes is to an entity that 
I have been spending an awful lot of time working with and 
through and that is the Development Finance Corporation, 
because that--and they are looking, for example, in Moldova to 
see what kinds of investments they can make.
    It is not a place they have done large things in the past. 
I mean, it had to transition from OPEC to being a Development 
Finance Corporation. Again, the energy sector, actually, I 
think, is a place that you have made an exception for them to 
work. I think there are real opportunities throughout Eastern 
Europe, in particular.
    The devil is in the details of what you have specifically 
in mind. I would want to make sure that USAID is the best 
bricks and mortar agent for those kinds of investments. Right 
now, what we do is we embed technical advisors and contract out 
those energy independence experts who help guide a country 
toward building the organic capacity.
    Senator Murphy. Right. Let me--and I appreciate that. To 
me, this is--the greatest need that exists to stabilize 
economies right now in Eastern Europe is assistance on the 
future of energy and, thus far, the United States has decided 
to provide that advice and expertise, but not hard dollars.
    I mean, the sort of food distribution economy is a mix of 
private sector and public sector participation. We have made 
the decision in energy to, essentially, leave it all in the 
hands of the private sector and to use the public sector as a 
means of providing advice.
    I just think that is a mistake. I think it is time for the 
United States to put some hard dollars on the table. I think 
that would be a wise expenditure of our dollars, given how much 
we are spending on other projects to secure Europe.
    I look forward to that conversation with you and others in 
the Administration. I appreciate the time, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Senator Schatz.
    Senator Schatz. Thank you, Chairman.
    Administrator, thank you for being here. I want to cover 
three topics.
    First, internet freedom. Freedom House reports that 
internet freedom has declined for the 11th year in a row. State 
Department ought to be taking the lead here, but USAID and the 
U.S. Agency for Global Media play critical roles. I know USAID 
just put out a new digital strategy, which makes some reference 
to internet freedom.
    I am wondering if you can talk about what you are doing in 
this space and how it fits into the other agencies that have 
some responsibility.
    Ms. Power. Thank you. I think that you see out of the 
President's Democracy Summit more attention, of course, to this 
ever so critical issue.
    Our dedicated programmatic money in this space is quite 
modest, as you will see reflected in the President's budget 
request, far more modest than the importance of the tool of an 
open and inclusive digital ecosystem.
    I think our slice of it against the interagency backdrop 
that you described is very much on the regulatory side, again, 
sort of similar to my exchange with Senator Murphy, having 
advisors embedded to make sure that the inner--and working with 
the State Department to apply diplomatic pressure to ensure 
that governments are not going the way of the Chinese approach 
even as they are drawing increasingly on Huawei or other tools 
in developing countries. The diplomacy to reverse that or to 
change that for those countries that have not yet made those 
decisions is underway as well.
    Senator Schatz. Just two final things for follow-up later. 
I would like to get some additional fidelity on how the 
interagency works, and if it has not been fully fleshed out 
that is understandable, but I would like to get some clarity 
there. Then, secondly, what would a more robustly funded 
personnel model look like for this.
    I want to move on to deforestation. Last fall, I introduced 
the FOREST Act, which creates a framework for the Federal 
Government to stop commodity-driven deforestation around the 
planet, which is the main cause of deforestation.
    In Glasgow at the COP, President Biden committed to the 
Declaration on Forest and Land Use that sets the goal of no 
global deforestation by 2030. The Lacey Act is a great tool, 
but, as you know, it deals with forest products, not commodity-
driven deforestation.
    Can you tell me how Biden's commitment is changing and 
shaping USAID's work on the ground to reduce deforestation? 
Specifically, I am interested in commodity-driven 
deforestation.
    Ms. Power. Again, not--continually encouraging follow up 
with our experts on this, but I do think given the energy we 
are now--no pun intended--putting into the deforestation or the 
reduction of deforestation effort it would be worth someone on 
your staff touching base with our climate coordinator.
    Our request in the budget that has gone up recently 
includes $335 million in sustainable landscapes funding, and 
that is a 135 percent increase over the 2021 enacted levels. I 
think that you did see the nature-based solutions emphasis at 
COP to an unprecedented extent and so additional ideas you have 
as to what that should look like.
    Senator Schatz. I think it is just--so I can get to my last 
question----
    Ms. Power. Please.
    Senator Schatz. --I think it is three things. First, let us 
follow up and work with your staff. Second, let us figure out 
what the kind of staffing needs are.
    I also just want to put a fine point on there is a tendency 
to think when we talk about deforestation about Lacey Act 
implementation and enforcement. That is absolutely important. I 
have supported that since I got to the Senate.
    That is not what I am talking about here. I am talking 
about TA and financial assistance to help people to move off of 
the commodities that are actually driving the deforestation 
trend around the planet.
    Then a final question for you. I was pleased to see that 
USAID released a vision statement for digital health in late 
2020. Telehealth works.
    Telehealth is particularly exciting in a lot of the 
countries in which USAID works. Can you tell me how far along 
you are in operationalizing the vision that was released and 
what you need in order to scale telehealth across the planet?
    Ms. Power. Just let me say one last word about your prior 
question on reforestation or reducing deforestation just to say 
I think one of the things that we are trying to do 
organizationally is bring about just much more day-to-day 
synergy between our bureau on food security and resilience and 
our climate environment team.
    I mean, those synergies can exist in any agency, but to 
really create that kind of integration, which I think is--will 
end up creating structures that are more responsive to the way 
you formulated the question previously.
    With regard to telework----
    Senator Schatz. Telehealth.
    Ms. Power. I have got return to work underlined.
    Senator Schatz. I got it. It has been a long day.
    Ms. Power. Everybody is coming back to the office in a week 
or two.
    On telehealth, President Biden actually just today, I think 
you might have seen, launched a new health worker training 
initiative. I think this is going to be--this question of how 
to integrate telehealth training into healthcare worker 
training is going to be one of the foundational questions.
    I think Atul Gawande, our relatively recently confirmed 
Assistant Administrator for Global Health, is very seized with 
bringing these digital tools to bear. What that means 
practically, again, I would want to dig into the details.
    As an agency, we are, as you may know, very weighted in our 
funding toward HIV/AIDS and PEPFAR, malaria, TB--very specific 
disease burdens. We are trying to orient the agency around 
something quite basic, which is this year--this past year saw 
the first reduction in global life expectancy in more than a 
century. It is really, really, really bad news.
    We are trying to think about what does it mean to structure 
USAID around actually reversing that and showing increases in 
global life expectancy, and I actually think telehealth as 
getting health care to more people is going to be a critical 
part of the answer.
    Senator Schatz. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    Senator Markey.
    Senator Markey. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very 
much, and thank you for the great job which you are doing in 
these troubling times that we are in.
    Can we talk a little bit about climate change and the Indo-
Pacific area I have been able to include in the COMPETES Act--
we hope at some moment this year we will have the COMPETES Act 
actually become law--but a requirement that the United States 
Government lead a robust interagency climate resiliency and 
adaptation strategy for the Indo-Pacific?
    Can you talk a little bit about what you might be seeing in 
that region and what impacts climate change is having in terms 
of destabilizing impacts?
    Ms. Power. Senator, I--it is like talking to Michael Jordan 
about basketball here. You know the impacts far better than I 
do. I even saw in my days as U.N. ambassador permanent 
representatives of countries, that they feared would not be 
member states of the United Nations even 20 years into the 
future because of the actual outright disappearance of the 
country into the sea.
    So adaptation is with us. It is here upon us. You will see 
in the 2023 budget request both, as you well know, very 
substantial requests for increases in climate financing and 
very substantial requests--everything is relative--for 
development assistance in the Pacific Islands--I think nearly a 
doubling of assistance requested there.
    On adaptation, as you know, President Biden at COP launched 
the PREPARE Initiative. I think another way to put it for us is 
that there is not one aspect of USAID's programming that is not 
now touched by climate change--touched, by and large, 
negatively by climate change--and everything we do across all 
of our program areas has to be, again, filtered through helping 
countries adapt to what is upon them and, again, it is 
particularly acute for small island developing states like 
those in the Pacific.
    Senator Markey. Yes. A hundred years ago when my 
grandmother and grandfather were getting off the boat from 
Ireland, half of that CO2 is up there and will stay up there 
for another thousand years so it is all cumulative.
    So much of the CO2 is red, white, and blue. We were 
earliest into the Industrial Revolution, and Representative 
Velazquez over in the House and I introduced a bill to create a 
resettlement pathway for climate-displaced persons, and the 
2021 White House climate migration report recommended that the 
executive branch work with Congress to create such a legal 
pathway.
    Can you talk about that threat that we have? It is not just 
prospective, but it is real right now in terms of climate 
refugees and our need to respond.
    Ms. Power. Yes. I mean, the chairman, actually, in some of 
his opening comments was talking--or opening exchange talked 
about the climate shocks, the food shocks, and the incredible 
potential for the escalation of the already really worrying 
migration trends that we are seeing.
    I mean, we see it even at our own southern border and just 
seeing the changing demographics of who is there. We are seeing 
people en masse from countries where we were not seeing 
anywhere near those numbers in the past as well as, of course, 
the traditional outward migration.
    What we do is try to work with countries to build more 
resilient infrastructure to ensure that they are using drought 
resistant or heat resistant seeds, that we are bringing the 
latest innovation and technology from universities here and all 
around the world to bear and to have as small--as compressed a 
feedback loop in terms of what we learn and then what we plant 
and support as possible.
    There is no coincidence that you see the hottest years on 
record correlating with historic migration and historic 
conflicts. I mean, it is linear.
    Senator Markey. Can I also ask you, we are on the front 
line now helping Ukraine to beat back authoritarian incursion 
into their country and to Europe, but we are not still not on 
the front line in terms of providing aid for the vaccination of 
people around the world with the goal of 70 percent of the 
world vaccinated by October of this year.
    Can you talk a little bit about how important that is and 
why Congress should act to provide that funding?
    Ms. Power. It is so important. It is so important. It is 
important for the health and safety of Americans that we 
drastically reduced the risk of new variants and we have done 
an amazing job, we, not USAID, but we, the countries on the 
frontlines of this pandemic who started with very little of the 
infrastructure that we are blessed to have here in this 
country.
    When President Biden held his first COVID summit back in 
September, lower and lower middle income countries were at 12 
percent vaccination rate, Senator. Now they are at 52 percent. 
Sub-Saharan Africa still lags behind.
    In the countries where we last launched Global VAX, which 
is a get shots in arms initiative that we launched in December 
to put those billion doses that we purchased from Pfizer--get 
those shots in arms--we are seeing landmark improvements.
    I mean, a country like Uganda going from 21 percent of 
eligible adults with one shot to 71 percent just in a matter of 
months. We can do this, and it is an investment in our own 
health and safety here in the United States and to not do it--
we have we have expended now 90 percent of the American Rescue 
Plan emergency funds that were given to us.
    We are incredibly grateful for it. So are the countries on 
the frontlines of this pandemic who have not reached the 
thresholds we have reached here in this country.
    We are exhausting those funds. This effort to vaccinate the 
world will grind to a halt if we do not get new resources and 
we will regret it.
    Senator Markey. I agree with you. We have to do Ukraine, 
but we have to do vaccines as well, and I will also say to you 
at this particularly perilous time whatever you can do to 
help--give some additional help to the Red Sox bullpen would be 
greatly appreciated.
    Ms. Power. I think they need you. That is the only solution 
that would be an upgrade.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Markey. Thank you. Thank you for all your great 
work.
    The Chairman. It would be an upgrade for the Red Sox. It 
would be a downgrade for the Senate.
    Senator Coons.
    Ms. Power. True.
    Senator Coons. Thank you, Chairman Menendez. Thank you, 
Administrator Power. It is great to be with you.
    I just finished chairing a hearing of the SFOPS 
Subcommittee at which Dr. Atul Gawande testified, as well as 
Dr. Frieden and Dr. Ryan from--former CDC director and from the 
World Health Organization.
    Dr. Gawande testified in response to a number of our 
questions about how soon global COVID funding will run out both 
for USAID and globally and the consequences, but I think some 
of this bears repeating or further exploration.
    All three testified that it is very difficult to predict 
when a more lethal and transmissive variant may emerge. In 
fact, our ability to detect new variants globally is dropping 
rapidly as the number of tests being performed and the 
monitoring infrastructure in other countries is dropping off.
    I would be interested in hearing from you as our nation's 
development leader how significant has been the loss of 
development gains as a result of the global COVID pandemic.
    My impression is that we have invested billions in PEPFAR, 
in the President's Malaria Initiative, in the work against TB 
and other infectious and transmissive diseases and billions in 
improving access to water and to health and to education, and 
the COVID-19 global pandemic has been a sledgehammer to that 
progress. What is your impression?
    Ms. Power. Thank you, Senator.
    I would just repeat something that I have to believe that 
came up if Assistant Administrator Atul Gawande was testifying, 
which I think is just worth pausing over, and that is that we 
are experiencing globally our first decline in life expectancy 
in more than 100 years.
    I mean, if that does not sort of sum up the shattering 
setbacks that have occurred in development and, again, this 
was--when it comes to education, seeing tens of millions of 
children drop out of school and not come back, but also just 
the learning losses that those of us who are parents may have 
experienced firsthand with all of the luxuries of having 
broadband access and being able to try to supervise that.
    The circumstances in which learners are dropping out of 
school globally, there is no way to compensate for those lost 
years other than, again, to make these investments to get them 
back in school, and seeing the health setbacks on TB, on 
malaria, in areas where otherwise we were on a solid 
trajectory, in part, because of the generosity of the American 
people and you all in making these investments.
    We have to halt the slide and then set really big and 
audacious goals that we used to take for granted, which is that 
life expectancy needs to increase and we need to generate 
resources and make investments against that goal.
    Senator Coons. We have donated hundreds of millions of 
doses of vaccine to dozens and dozens of countries. My 
impression is that without additional funding to help fragile 
public health systems in underdeveloped countries, actually 
deliver them all the way out into the most remote places and to 
overcome vaccine hesitancy, we are at risk of wasting or losing 
that resource in a lot of countries.
    Do you have any rough sense of the scale of that potential 
lost investment?
    Ms. Power. Let me address the question in two ways. I mean, 
first of all, we, the United States, with very strong support--
bipartisan support up here--have purchased a billion Pfizer 
vaccines and we have gotten about 400 million of those vaccines 
into arms and about--more than 500 million vaccines, generally, 
out the door to developing countries where they are so 
desperately needed and where, again, in some sub-Saharan 
African countries you are seeing under 10 percent vaccination 
rates, including among immuno-compromised people, which is 
where the greatest risks are of the most dangerous kinds of 
variants potentially developing over time.
    We need to get those shots in arms. We have purchased those 
vaccines. The vaccines are there after more than a year in 
which supply was a major gating issue. We have gotten past 
that.
    Vaccines just do not dance from the tarmac all the way into 
rural areas. They do not overcome vaccine hesitancy or 
misinformation of the kind that has been propagated, including 
by some of our adversaries globally.
    We need to support that and, again, Senator, we have the 
results. We launched Global VAX in December. The number of 
people in December 2021 that were vaccinated, fully vaccinated, 
in Ghana was 12.4 percent. Now, of those eligible, 25.4 
percent.
    When we make the investment in cold chain storage, in pop-
up vaccine facilities, in data systems strengthening, in 
meeting people where they are, bringing the vaccine to them, we 
are seeing uptake and that is an investment in our health 
security.
    Senator Coons. Last question, briefly. Because our 
vaccines, which are better and stronger and more effective, 
were not available, millions of people in dozens of countries 
were forced to take Russian or Chinese vaccines that have 
proven ineffective against Omicron.
    How significant is this moment? We face three different 
reasons, I think, for us to engage in the next round of 
funding: simple humanitarian concern for the health and welfare 
of others, demonstrating the United States is a reliable public 
health partner, but also there is an element of showing the 
world that we have not just invented and delivered for our own 
people the most effective vaccines, but that we are now 
delivering them into the arms of millions in the developing 
world.
    Is that a significant factor?
    Ms. Power. It certainly is a significant effect. I think 
on--given that we are all stewards of taxpayer resources, I 
think the fact that this is an investment in our health 
security should be reason enough.
    I am seeing it, Senator, in every country I visit the 
desire to have mRNA vaccines, the belief that these are the 
gold standard, the knowledge even in remote communities about 
which vaccines are deemed the most effective, the most enduring 
with their effects, and we are--most of the developing world 
has not been boosted.
    So even those who received vaccines that have not proven 
effective against recent variants are very, very interested in 
getting an mRNA boost, which can actually shore up the 
effectiveness even on the prior vaccine.
    This is a major strategic advantage, and maybe just the 
last thing I would say is I spent some time when I was out of 
government looking at the effects of PEPFAR beyond the public 
health effects, but looking, for example, at the standing of 
George W. Bush and the standing of the United States.
    While in the wake of the invasion of Iraq it was not 
terribly favorable in many parts of the world, but in sub-
Saharan Africa where these programs popped up, where they 
endured, where they saved millions and millions of lives and 
gave people hope where they had lacked it, the standing of the 
United States, the standing of that Administration and all who 
have followed it in providing that support soared.
    I think you see that this is America putting a man on the 
moon again and people are experiencing American science, 
American innovation, and American generosity firsthand, and it 
makes a difference in how they see the United States.
    At a time when we are in a battle for the soul of the world 
as well as a battle between democracy and authoritarianism, 
this matters. This respect for the United States for a model of 
governance that produces vaccines and then gives them away and 
does not sell them, it matters.
    Senator Coons. Thank you, Administrator. Thank you for your 
forbearance, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Madam Administrator, just a final couple of 
questions. The Administration is working to address the drivers 
of migration from Central America. The resources that USAID has 
committed are significant, but are, nonetheless, insufficient 
to address the challenges we face.
    If we really want to address the root causes of migration 
we must recognize the main drivers. Miguel Diaz-Canel, Nicolas 
Maduro, Daniel Ortega--combined, these three despots have 
forcibly displaced several million people from their homelands.
    Worse still, they use migration in the same way that they 
use food and access to basic services, as a political tool to 
manipulate the population and to gain leverage with the 
international community.
    We also have to recognize that the vast majority of the 
displaced people in this hemisphere have not fled, 
notwithstanding public perception, to the U.S. Southwest 
border. They have actually fled to neighboring countries like 
Costa Rica, Colombia, Peru, to places where they have family or 
friends, where they speak the same language and share a 
culture.
    We have not invested the resources necessary to assist with 
the long-term integration of refugees and migrants in a 
systemic way nor have we helped countries gain the full 
economic benefits of migration at the same time they are facing 
the challenges of migration--more children in schools, more 
demand on social services, the consequences of providing 
employment. I could go on and on.
    So is USAID looking at this question of how we assist the 
integration of those fleeing their countries in the region? 
Because at some point, if we do not do that they will certainly 
then make their way to the southern border.
    Ms. Power. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is an incredibly 
important question. I think it is one that the entire 
Administration is grappling with, and I mentioned that that is 
often the case, of course, in many of the challenges we have 
described, but it is particularly the case here because a 
number of the countries in which these migrants are settling 
are not countries where USAID still even has a mission because 
of the development progress that those countries have made 
often in the past with USAID support.
    So I think we are thinking a lot about the incentives and 
support those countries would need. We are doing so also with 
the Inter-American Development Bank, the World Bank, the IMF, 
and others, thinking through what role the multilateral 
development banks can have there in terms of ensuring that 
those countries have the resources to----
    The Chairman. What I would like to get you to commit to me 
is to work with the State Department to think about----
    Ms. Power. Of course.
    The Chairman. --how we, ultimately, find a process which we 
can incentivize to, ultimately, seek this integration, because 
if not it will come to our southern border.
    Ms. Power. I think you are aware, Mr. Chairman, that 
discussions about regional migration agreement, much more 
comprehensive approach than has been taken--this kind of more 
piecemeal approach that has been taken in the past, those 
discussions are very much underway and I am hopeful that at the 
Summit of the Americas----
    The Chairman. I appreciate it. I do not mean interrupt you. 
Here is the point, that, in fact, the reality is that, yes, 
they are having discussions. Basically, the discussion is how 
are you going to keep people away from our border. I get it. I 
understand it.
    Let us be frank here. The question is, if we work to 
integrate these people into the countries in which they first 
come to and can be a catalyst and incentivizer of that, then we 
will have less demand and we will have a better society in 
these countries.
    Otherwise, they will have all of demand, none of the up 
side, and eventually we will have the challenge. So it is not 
about dealing with the question of how do we keep them away 
from our border alone.
    It is how do we find a way to integrate those who have had 
to flee for freedom, just as we are doing for the Ukrainians. 
Maybe the Venezuelans do not look like Ukrainians. Maybe the 
Cubans do not look like Ukrainians. Maybe the Nicaraguans do 
not look like Ukrainians. They are fleeing, nonetheless.
    I have had enough about listening about migration and the 
efforts by those who just are myopic and think that we should 
just put up a wall, put the hands across the border in terms of 
military, and think that that is going to solve the problem.
    It is not. By the same token, I have had enough from the 
Administration about all their engagements is with countries 
how do we stop people from coming. There has to be a better 
thought than that. So and if there is not an agency--if AID is 
not an agency that can help lead the way on that, I do not know 
who can.
    Let me just ask you two other final questions. I am pleased 
to see that one of your first acts as administrator was to 
appoint USAID's first chief diversity officer and to create a 
Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility Office to 
achieve those goals.
    Can you give me a sense of how that office is going to play 
this role in USAID? More precisely, how do you plan to 
institutionalize AID's DEIA's efforts to ensure that they are 
lasting?
    Ms. Power. Thank you, Senator. I do not know how much time 
I have to----
    The Chairman. All right. Since I had to sit through 
everybody's questions, you have unlimited time so----
    [Laughter.]
    Ms. Power. Okay. I would just say that the individual and 
her team--our Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, Accommodation 
coordinator sits within the front office.
    The portfolio involves not only looking at recruitment and 
doing things like doubling the number of paying fellowships, 
going to minority-serving institutions like Tuskegee, Delaware 
State, Florida International University, Morehouse, and others, 
several of which I have visited personally to make this 
recruitment pitch, but also the individual is looking at 
retention and we have done a lot of examination of what the 
barriers for retaining underrepresented communities have been 
at USAID. Now it comes time to thinking about, okay, well, how 
do we apply lessons from that.
    So that is one aspect of what the individual is doing, 
working really closely with our Foreign Service, our Human 
Capital and Talent Management Office, which looks at the direct 
hires, but also really thinking about these questions for 
personal service contractors and people who are hired at USAID 
in other ways.
    We are also bringing this DEIA agenda to the bulk of our 
workforce internationally, which is nationals of the countries 
in which we work. While it is true we do not have a mission 
still in Costa Rica, we have missions in 80 countries and the 
majority--70 percent of our staff in those countries are 
nationals of the countries in which we work.
    Yet, often we are recruiting from the same kind of talent 
pools there as we have for many, many years and that means, 
again, slighting sometimes ethnic or religious minorities or 
people, again, who might come from more rural areas.
    We want to bring that diversity, equity, and inclusion 
agenda there. Also in our contracting and our procurement we 
have tried to make it easier now to lower the barriers of entry 
for small businesses--for small businesses and other 
contractors who are led by women or led by minorities.
    That is a work in progress. Even getting the data on that 
has proven more challenging than I would have expected. We want 
to see real changes as well in the diversity of the 
partnerships that we do because we are expending significant 
resources, and to just do so in the same old places in the same 
old ways, I think, would be falling short.
    The Chairman. I appreciate all that, and I would just say 
that--as I say to different leaders in the business roundtable 
who come to see me, diversity starts at the top in terms of who 
leads your company or in this case who leads the agency, and it 
starts at the top by making it a priority and having those who 
work underneath you understand that part of the judgment as to 
their performance will be how they perform in this regard, and 
then we get true change, at the end of the day.
    So I think you are headed in the right direction. I just 
will urge you when you are having your senior staff levels that 
this is a clear message to them about what you expect 
throughout.
    Lastly, I am concerned that USAID has not prioritized the 
critical work of supporting trade unions and nongovernmental 
organizations devoted to workers' rights. It seems to me that 
U.S. foreign aid and development policies and programs have to 
also prioritize worker rights and freedom of association 
protections in order that we can achieve the equitable economic 
development and strengthen democratic practices abroad.
    So could you describe to me what you have done to build 
USAID's labor capacity and expertise internally to the 
organization and how will you ensure that USAID programs are 
effectively strengthening and promoting labor rights and 
workers' voices internationally?
    Ms. Power. Thank you. I will just touch upon something you 
and I had the chance to talk about by phone so I will not 
belabor.
    As we seek to expand lawful pathways for migration in 
Northern and Central America, we are very excited about that 
effort. We think it provides a wonderful opportunity for 
American businesses and for people seeking economic opportunity 
in the Northern Triangle countries for that matchmaking to 
occur and it can be a win-win situation, but it will not be a 
win-win unless we also are incredibly vigilant on the labor 
rights side of things.
    So we are looking--working with the governments of the 
three countries to think about how to strengthen knowledge and 
awareness of people who come into the United States about where 
they can find protection, where they can find resources.
    Mexico has consulates sprinkled throughout the country. The 
three Northern Triangle countries, of course, do not have quite 
the same presence, but still have resources to draw upon, and 
we are working, particularly, as it relates to the H-2A program 
to make sure, again, that the rights of farm workers, in 
particular, are protected when they come north of the border.
    So just to say sometimes it does not show up as a direct 
line item in a budget, but it is about the integration of 
attention to labor rights in the programming that we do.
    I would also note that the President's 2023 budget request, 
as we have already discussed in this hearing, includes a 
substantial increase for democracy rights in governance 
programming.
    I think central to that is the question of how we enhance 
our support for worker rights, whether in a country like 
Bangladesh where you have done so much work, or globally, 
because one line item in the funding is to try to support 
social movements and it is more often than not workers who are 
at the forefront of democratic movements who try to bring about 
more accountable governance of the kind that has been around.
    The Chairman. I appreciate that and we will see how it 
unfolds, and we look forward to working with you to ensure 
that.
    I should have said this at the beginning of the hearing, 
but we welcome as well your Assistant Administrator for 
Legislative Affairs, Jody Herman, who was the staff director of 
the Foreign Relations Committee. A good choice by you, at the 
end of the day, respected on both sides of the aisle.
    There are no other members seeking questions. So this 
record will remain open to the close of business Friday, May 
the 13th, and I urge members who have a question if they have 
not gotten to ask that it is submitted by that time.
    With the thanks of the committee for your participation, 
Madam Administrator, and your service, this hearing is 
adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 4:42 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
                              ----------                              

              Additional Material Submitted for the Record


             Responses of Ms. Samantha Power to Questions 
                  Submitted by Senator Robert Menendez

    Question. Ukraine: The Pentagon has said that it expects the 
funding in the Ukraine Supplemental will last 5 months.
    With regard to the humanitarian, economic, and development 
assistance, do you anticipate a similar timeline?
    When might we reasonably expect an additional supplemental? 
(Recognizing this may be a difficult question to answer, to the best 
extent USAID can provide an estimate is critical for Congress in terms 
of planning.)

    Answer. USAID's development programming operates along simultaneous 
and complementary timelines that are immediate, medium, and long-term, 
ultimately aimed at supporting Ukraine's recovery and reconstruction, 
and securing its long-term trajectory toward a democratic, independent, 
and prosperous future. USAID is in the process of notifying and 
obligating funds from both Ukraine supplementals to address priority 
issues, including Direct Budget Support.
    USAID is quickly programming the humanitarian assistance and food 
security funding provided in the Ukraine supplemental, both to scale up 
its response to the crisis in Ukraine and to support other vulnerable 
populations globally. USAID expects to spend the humanitarian funds 
from the first supplemental on a similar timeline as DoD, with the 
majority programmed in the coming months.

    Question. Frontline states: I am glad that the U.S. has supported 
international organizations operating in frontline states like Poland, 
which has taken in over 3 million refugees. However, I am concerned 
that the strength of the international response in supporting other 
frontline states, such as Moldova and Romania, has not been as robust 
despite these countries taking in hundreds of thousands of refugees 
from Ukraine.
    How does this budget in partnership with the Ukraine supplemental 
make sure that all frontline states are supported in doing the 
important work of hosting Ukrainian refugees?

    Answer. USAID coordinates closely with the State Department's 
Bureau for Population, Refugees, and Migration, which leads the U.S. 
Government Ukrainian refugee response.
    State/PRM has provided funding to support humanitarian assistance 
for refugees who have fled Ukraine for Romania. This funding is 
supporting five UN agencies to deliver food, health, livelihoods, 
protection, shelter, and water, sanitation, and hygiene assistance, as 
well as multipurpose cash assistance, to refugees. While USAID does not 
provide direct assistance to Romania, we have been in close contact 
with Romanian Government officials to convey U.S. Government support 
and to facilitate close cooperation among the United States and other 
frontline states. I also saw first hand the refugee situation in Poland 
and Slovakia during my most recent visits and had extensive discussions 
with both the partner-government and civil society organizations which 
assist refugees. In addition, I have regular meetings with our 
counterparts in the European Union to synchronize our assistance 
efforts and ensure that frontline member states are likewise receiving 
appropriate support as they generously welcome and absorb an 
unprecedented number of refugees.
    On April 6, I announced $50 million of additional economic and 
development assistance to bolster Moldova's resilience to the long-term 
economic consequences of Putin's brutal war in Ukraine, and have 
already provided $30 million in humanitarian assistance. These 
resources will support Moldova to welcome refugees with the dignity and 
compassion they have shown for months. The FY23 request will also 
support Moldova's economic recovery and mitigate effects of loss of 
trade due to the conflict, while also advancing long-term goals of 
improving the transparency, efficiency and competitiveness of key 
sectors of Moldova's economy and strengthening market linkages with 
Europe and Western partners.

    Question. Energy crisis: Russia's ruthless invasion of Ukraine has 
revealed the energy insecurities not only of Ukraine, but also of the 
European continent. Promoting EU-Ukrainian-Moldovan grid 
synchronization is central to promoting European energy security and 
USAID has been invaluable in moving this effort along.
    Please provide an update on the status of EU-Ukrainian-Moldovan 
grid synchronization and what USAID has done since February 24 to 
advance this effort.
    It is my understanding that USAID has led United States' 
engagements in providing technical assistance to the Ukrainian 
Government on its efforts to integrate into the EU energy grid. The 
first Ukraine supplemental provided $30 million to the Department of 
Energy for these purposes. Is USAID able to access the $30 million in 
supplemental appropriations allocated to the Department of Energy to 
assist with grid synchronization?
    Or at the very least, is DOE consulting and coordinating with 
USAID's experts with the experience in this effort?
    Would it be helpful for Congress to make a technical correction to 
this portion of the first Ukraine supplemental to ensure USAID can 
appropriately access these resources?

    Answer. Since 2004, USAID has been supporting the development and 
westward integration of Ukrenergo and Moldelectrica--the electric 
transmission system operators (TSOs) of Ukraine and Moldova. USAID 
support to both TSOs has prepared Ukraine and Moldova for integration 
into Europe by incorporating European procedures and standards into 
corporate operations and building organizational capacity to maintain 
power system operations through crisis scenarios, such as unexpected 
outages in winter 2014 and during the current Russian invasion.
    On February 24, Ukraine and Moldova initiated a planned temporary 
disconnection from all neighboring power systems for an ``island mode'' 
test, required as part of the interconnection process to prove that 
Ukraine's and Moldova's power systems could maintain stability under 
extreme conditions. They were expected to conduct several internal 
system stability tests for 3 days and then reconnect with the Russian 
power system on February 27. Instead, the Russian invasion started on 
the 24, requiring Ukraine and Moldova to complete the internal test in 
12 hours. USAID provided support throughout these tests, with technical 
advisors ``virtually embedded'' in Ukrenergo's dispatch center, 
monitoring power system stability and providing advisory services.
    Ukraine and Moldova elected to forgo a reconnection with the 
Russian system, leaving their electric power systems operating in 
island mode. USAID continued to provide advisory support over the 
subsequent weeks until ENTSO-E members agreed to an emergency 
synchronization with the Ukraine/Moldova power system on March 16. This 
emergency connection is intended to provide frequency support to 
Ukraine and Moldova, helping to ensure the continued stability of the 
power system; it is not intended to support large-scale commercial 
power trade.
    USAID is now assisting Ukrenergo and Moldelectrica to meet ENTSO-
E's technical requirements required for ``permanent'' synchronization. 
For example, USAID is providing technical expertise to Ukrenergo to 
calibrate automatic generation controls (AGCs) within certain Ukrainian 
power plants and to assess battery technologies that Ukrenergo could 
install to further improve grid stability. In Moldova, USAID is 
assisting Moldelectrica to adopt ENTSO-E's operational, planning, and 
security requirements. For example, USAID provided Moldelectrica with 
U.S. equipment to ensure Moldova can send encrypted communications and 
sensitive network data with ENTSO-E.
    USAID is also providing support in both countries to enable 
commercial trade and/or sale of power from Ukraine and Moldova to 
Central Europe. A limited amount of electricity trade from Ukrainian 
producers to European markets would provide much needed revenue to 
address an estimated monthly shortfall of $200 million in the Ukrainian 
electricity sector due to lack of demand, bill collections, etc. 
resulting from the invasion. USAID is supporting the Ukrainian energy 
regulator and other relevant institutions in establishing the 
appropriate European practices, such as updating cross-border 
transmission capacity allocation and rules, defining a market-based 
trading system to allow Ukrainian generators to engage with European 
counterparts on cross-border trades, etc. In Moldova, USAID is 
assisting state-run electricity supplier, Energocom, to be able to 
trade on the Ukrainian and more advanced European electricity markets 
and supporting the Ministry of Infrastructure and Regional Development 
and the national regulator (ANRE) to adopt and implement European 
market rules.
    Interagency Coordination and First Supplemental: USAID continues to 
support Ukraine and Moldova in integrating their electric power system 
and energy markets into central Europe. We provide regular briefings to 
and coordinate with the interagency, including the National Security 
Council, State Department, and Department of Energy. USAID does not 
have access to the $30 million in supplemental funding, and we have 
proactively advised the Department of Energy on areas where longer-term 
assistance from the National Laboratories might be able to supplement 
our programming. USAID remains poised to collaborate with the 
Department of Energy and other agencies, given USAID's engagement in 
this sector, our longstanding relationships with key stakeholders, and 
substantive on-the-ground presence of USAID staff and implementing 
partners.

    Question. Ukraine Short Term vs. Long Term Needs: I understand that 
the Office of Transition Initiatives is looking both to meet the urgent 
needs of the Ukrainian people, and think about addressing the needs of 
society after the war is over.
    How is this budget broken down between the immediate concerns of 
Ukrainians, including access to fuel, generators, and food--and the 
long term needs of Ukrainians, including building a lasting peace?

    Answer. Approximately half of USAID/OTI's programming is focused on 
supporting the Ukrainian Government's and civil society's emergency 
response to meet the immediate needs of Ukrainians impacted by the war. 
The remaining program activities support longer-term issues, such as 
advancing positive, truthful narratives about the war and Ukraine, 
strengthening social cohesion in key areas, and contributing to 
national healing by documenting atrocities and providing mental health 
support. Over the next 6 months, USAID/OTI expects the proportion of 
activities focused on immediate/emergency response needs will continue 
to decrease to 25-30 percent of programmatic activities. USAID/OTI's 
activities and programmatic direction are closely coordinated with the 
USAID/Ukraine Mission, the USAID Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance, 
other U.S. Government agencies and other donors active in Ukraine to 
ensure that any initial contributions for reconstruction work 
complement longer-term efforts. Due to USAID/OTI's ability to pivot 
programming in response to emerging field driven needs and dynamics, 
USAID anticipates that the ratio of short-term to long-term needs could 
fluctuate in direct response to the intensity of the crisis.

    Question. Food Security: As many countries, especially those in the 
MENA region, heavily depend on Black Sea grain and other food commodity 
imports, Russia's continued illegal invasion of Ukraine threatens to 
have serious short and long-term ripple effects in the region. In 
countries such as Syria and Yemen, who rely on food aid from the U.N. 
and USAID programs, the surging prices and shortage of essential food 
supplies risks further exacerbating food insecurity, while in other 
countries such as Lebanon, Tunisia and Egypt, increasing prices have 
led to widespread public anger and social unrest.
    Are there mechanisms at USAID that can be used to address this gap?

    Answer. USAID is exploring social safety net programs in the region 
that would allow us to quickly ramp up support to mitigate the effects 
of rising food prices on the most vulnerable households who already 
spend the largest portion of their income on food and are acutely 
affected. Mechanisms that bolster resilient farming and agricultural 
production in places like Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen can support 
livelihoods and domestic food sources at a time of rising prices and 
inflation. USAID has several existing programs that form initial 
efforts to mitigate the acute and disproportionate regional impact of 
Russia's invasion, and could be scaled up should additional funds be 
appropriated by Congress for this purpose.
    In response to rising global food insecurity, the USG announced 
plans in late April to draw down the full balance--$282 million--of the 
Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust (BEHT) to support emergency food 
assistance activities in six countries that are experiencing food 
insecurity, including Yemen. BEHT funds will bolster existing emergency 
food operations supported by USAID/BHA, providing procurements of 
wheat, vegetable oil, and Ready to Use Therapeutic Food (RUTF) for the 
treatment of severe acute malnutrition. USAID plans to direct the 
majority of BEHT funding for Yemen toward the procurement of wheat from 
the U.S. with BEHT-procured wheat projected to reach Yemen by fall of 
2022.
    In Tunisia, USAID is working with small and medium enterprises 
(SMEs) to mitigate the impact of agriculture supply chain disruptions 
and exploring additional support for social safety net programming.
    In Lebanon, since January 2022, USAID has provided nearly $104 
million to the UN World Food Program (WFP), supporting more than 
740,000 people, both refugees and vulnerable Lebanese, affected by the 
country's ongoing economic crisis, whose needs have been exacerbated by 
the impacts of the war in Ukraine. USAID provides technical assistance 
and in-kind grants to Lebanese agribusinesses and farmers to increase 
yields, link growers to markets, and promote export opportunities. 
USAID is also providing non-perishable food parcels to the families of 
public-school students in grades 1 to 6--approximately 145,000 students 
through USAID's basic education project.
    In April 2022, USAID/Egypt asked its ongoing Egypt Rural 
Agribusiness Strengthening (ERAS) activity to begin supporting our 
beneficiary farmers during the wheat growing season. This year's wheat 
harvest has already begun, so for this season, ERAS is helping 5,000 
farmers with post-harvest handling and improving temporary on-farm 
storage.
    In the West Bank and Gaza (WBG), in FY22, USAID provided $4 million 
in emergency multi-purpose cash assistance to support the most 
vulnerable Palestinian households to purchase food and other critical 
goods available in local markets.
    Prior to the Ukraine conflict, USAID/WBG also pivoted $20.2 million 
in FY20 Economic Support Funds to support WFP's e-voucher food program, 
benefitting 180,000 Palestinians. The programmatic change to WFP was a 
result of close consultation with Congress and the intent to serve a 
specific population and address key development challenges at the time.
    With additional resources, USAID stabilization programming, 
including our Supporting Livelihoods in Syria (SLS), Economic 
Management For Stabilization (EMS), and Building Resilient and 
Inclusive Communities in Conflict (BRICC) mechanisms can rehabilitate 
agriculture, related sectors impacted by agriculture, value chains, and 
requisite infrastructure in non-regime held areas of northeast Syria. 
These programs can provide technical training, market connections, and 
inputs (such as seeds and fertilizers); improve water and irrigation 
(with climate-smart technologies); restore infrastructure (such as 
bakeries, mills, and seed sorting facilities) and market systems; 
improve financing and credit; and strengthen local authorities' and 
civil society's ability to meet their communities' needs. USAID could 
make a contribution to the multi-donor Syria Recovery Trust Fund (SRTF) 
to benefit farm families with inputs, allow for the cultivation of more 
hectares of wheat, and leverage additional funds from other donors to 
expand assistance to more farm families.

    Question. COVID-19 Global Recovery: The U.S. is gradually gaining 
control of COVID-19, but the disease continues to surge worldwide. Many 
people on the planet are still waiting for vaccinations.
    How are you adapting your COVID-19 programs, including the Global 
VAX program, given the lapse in funding?

    Answer. Without additional funding, USAID will have to scale back 
efforts to build country readiness and absorptive capacity for COVID-19 
vaccination, which could lead to the expiration of doses provided, 
cause unnecessary death and suffering worldwide, and risk the emergence 
and spread of dangerous variants.
    By early fall, many of USAID's COVID-19 programs will be winding 
down even as the job remains unfinished. Failing to help these 
countries get shots into arms means we will leave their populations 
unprotected with continued risk that the virus will continue to mutate 
into new, potentially more dangerous variants.
    Similarly, this year, USAID is supporting the building of 
dependable, sustainable medical liquid oxygen capacity in dozens of 
hospitals in about 13 countries and is launching plans for 
implementation of ``test and treat'' efforts with new oral antiviral 
drugs against COVID-19 in several countries. Without additional 
resources, USAID will be unable to support oxygen capacity in 
facilities in more countries so they are prepared for pandemic surges, 
with potential benefits for increasing life-saving oxygen for maternal-
neonatal care, child pneumonia and adult pneumonia generally as well; 
the Agency will also be unable to promote expansion of the ``test and 
treat'' efforts beyond the limited implementation this year, 
potentially leading to more missed positive cases and increased rates 
of morbidity and mortality.

    Question. Global Health Security: The FY23 budget includes an 
unprecedented $6.5 billion in Global Health Programs mandatory funding.
    Please explain why the Administration is proposing some Global 
Health Programs funding as mandatory, rather than discretionary.

    Answer. The U.S. Government and our partners have benefited 
enormously from the global health security investments Congress has 
funded over the past decade, which have paid off substantially in 
building capacity to prevent, detect, and respond to COVID-19, recent 
outbreaks of Ebola, and dozens of other infectious disease threats.
    The Administration's request is intended to make transformative 
investments to better prevent, detect, and respond to pandemics, and to 
build a world safe and secure from biological threats. It is a strong 
step to build global momentum, secure buy-in and pledges from other 
donors, and to work towards a sustainable future. Requesting these 
funds on the mandatory side provides a longer period of availability 
and ensures funds are programmed for this critical global need without 
the fluctuations and competing pressures on the annual budget cycle. 
President Biden has been clear that the world needs additive 
investments in global health security and pandemic preparedness. This 
request is not meant to replace or displace discretionary funds and 
programs.
    The return-on-investment of preparedness investments is astounding: 
a recent World Bank and World Health Organization (WHO) paper cited a 
1:1100 ROI on pandemic preparedness financing, compared to 1:14 for 
traditional global health investments. These investments can make 
ourselves and the world safer and save trillions in future losses due 
to pandemics.

    Question. Armenia: 90,000 people fled Nagorno Karabakh for Armenia 
as a result of the war in 2020. This population continues to have 
significant humanitarian needs, including maternal and child health and 
access to clean drinking water.
    How does this budget support the needs of this population?

    Answer. Since September 2020, USAID has provided more than $4.5 
million in total assistance to respond to the complex humanitarian 
crisis resulting from the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and associated 
COVID-19 resurgence. USAID provided food, shelter, emergency health 
assistance, and social services to communities displaced from Nagorno-
Karabakh in Armenia. This includes $2.5 million in emergency 
humanitarian assistance, to provide cash assistance to food-insecure 
displaced persons and in-kind assistance to host-family households, 
addressing health, shelter and WASH sectors to mitigate the spread of 
COVID-19 for displaced individuals and collective shelters. The agency 
also continues to seek opportunities to help build constructive cross-
border interaction and cooperation as the basis for peace and stability 
across the South Caucasus.
    Today, only a fraction of the 90,000 originally displaced remain in 
Armenia. Looking to FY23, USAID will implement five separate activities 
that span across sectors of society to support displaced persons. Focus 
areas will include strengthening the delivery of social services for 
vulnerable populations; expanding equal access to water; bolstering 
community preparedness and resilience to disasters; increasing 
opportunities for greater citizen participation in education, labor 
market, and local decision-making; and strengthening local governance.

    Question. U.S. Direct Hires: I recognize the importance of U.S. 
direct hires to USAID's work. However, USAID could not function without 
the support and input of personal services contractors and foreign 
service nationals.
    What other funding are you requesting to meet USAID's workforce 
goals and support those already serving USAID, including personal 
services contractors (or PSCs) and foreign service nationals (FSNs)?

    Answer. The FY 2023 Operating Expense (OE) request supports various 
components of the Agency's workforce. The FY 2023 request includes 
$111.5 million in OE which will fund an additional 200 USDH positions, 
100 FS and 100 CS, in the first year of the Global Development 
Partnership Initiative. The Global Development Partnership Initiative 
(GDPI) is USAID's multi-year effort to address staffing needs by 
revitalizing the USDH workforce in line with the Administration's 
priorities and National Security Memorandum 3. Through GDPI, USAID will 
build a responsive and resilient workforce by increasing the size and 
diversity of the permanent career workforce and providing flexibility 
to hire non-career direct hire staff. Workforce expansion will focus on 
climate change, democracy and anti-corruption expertise, global health 
security, national security, operational management (procurement, human 
resources, financial management, and information technology), and a 
more permanent humanitarian assistance workforce. The request for the 
Global Development Partnership Initiative also includes $3 million to 
expand our FSN workforce by 33 additional positions to support the U.S. 
direct-hire workforce. The request also includes funding to support an 
FSN pay increase of approximately $5.6 million.
    The DEIA funding request in FY 2023 is $20 million, an increase 
from the $9.5 million FY 2022 enacted level. The additional funds would 
expand participation in Civil Service hiring programs and the Payne 
Fellowship Program, increase paid internships, and enhance strategic 
outreach to groups currently underrepresented at the Agency. Funding 
will also increase professional development opportunities to staff from 
underrepresented communities across hiring mechanisms.
    Further, the Agency is committed to prioritizing equity in benefits 
among its workforce. To that end, USAID is implementing paid parental 
leave and relocation expense benefits for our U.S. Personal Services 
Contractors (USPSCs). The paid parental leave benefit will be provided 
to USPSCs at the Agency's policy discretion, in a manner based on the 
provisions of the Federal Employee Paid Leave Act. USPSCs may be 
granted up to 12 weeks of paid parental leave in connection with the 
birth or placement (for adoption or foster care) of a child.
    The new relocation expense benefit will provide eligible USPSCs a 
miscellaneous expense amount and a pre-departure subsistence 
reimbursement to offset relocation transfer costs. The miscellaneous 
expense is a flat amount, calculated based on family size, while the 
per diem pre-departure subsistence reimbursement will be based on the 
U.S. locality from which our staff depart, or normally reside, for 
transfers from the United States to a post abroad.

    Question. What efforts are being made to convert Personal Service 
Contractors to direct hires (particularly those PSCs who have served on 
multiple contracts and are interested in being direct hire employees of 
USAID)?

    Answer. ISCs and PSCs are valued members of USAID's workforce who 
make significant contributions to the Agency's mission. Currently, no 
legal authority enables PSCs to convert to direct hires; they must 
apply to open job announcements on USAJobs. However, the Agency is 
supportive of staff from non-direct hiring mechanisms who are 
interested in direct-hire positions, and provides opportunities to 
learn about the Federal application process if that is the career path 
staff would like to pursue. Because many PSCs have multiple years of 
experience working with USAID, they tend to be competitive candidates 
for open positions. The agency is committed to utilizing a variety of 
non-competitive eligibilities to support PSCs who want to transition to 
civil service direct hire positions such as Schedule A and Disabled 
Veteran authorities, which allow for appointments non-competitively.

    Question. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI): The President's 
budget request includes funding for an additional 100 Civil Service 
(CS) and 100 Foreign Service (FS) positions to revitalize the 
workforce.
    How will diversity recruitment and hiring goals be applied to 
sourcing for these direct hire positions, including increasing racial 
and ethnic diversity, and implementing the 2022-26 Joint State-USAID 
Strategic Plan goal for USAID to increase the number of employees with 
disabilities from 2 percent to 12 percent by September 30, 2023?

    Answer. USAID is committed to increasing diversity, ensuring 
equity, improving inclusion, and expanding accessibility (DEIA) across 
our workplace and operations, in line with major commitments from the 
Biden-Harris administration. USAID's DEIA Strategic Plan includes two 
objectives related to workforce equity, both of which emphasize 
promoting equitable policies and practices across the employment 
lifecycle (e.g., recruitment, hiring, promotions, compensation, and 
professional development) in order to contribute to a more equitable 
workplace free from discrimination, harassment, and retaliation.
    As reflected in the request for additional Civil Service (CS) and 
Foreign Service (FS) positions, USAID's Office of Human Capital and 
Talent Management (HCTM) is currently leading a multi-year effort to 
revitalize USAID's workforce by increasing the size of its career 
workforce and, in line with USAID's DEIA and Equal Employment 
Opportunity (EEO) objectives, investing in building a more diverse and 
inclusive USAID staff worldwide that is properly trained to tackle the 
complex global challenges of our time. HCTM is working closely with the 
Office of the Chief Diversity Officer and Office of Civil Rights (OCR), 
as well as with other Bureaus, Independent Offices, and Missions, to 
conduct comprehensive strategic workforce planning that will be 
informed by DEIA and EEO principles, and by innovative tools for data 
analytics and workforce planning.
    These data-driven efforts are being complemented by additional 
initiatives to recruit and retain talented staff from historically 
underserved and/or under-represented communities. In 2021, we created 
two new divisions within OCR, specifically the Affirmative Employment 
and Disability Employment divisions, to help advance our recruitment 
and hiring goals. USAID continues to engage the Department of Labor's 
Workforce Recruitment Program as a resource for providing candidates 
with disabilities for employment consideration and has also prioritized 
the use of Schedule A and Disabled Veteran non-competitive hiring 
mechanisms. In the last year, we expanded our support for the Donald M. 
Payne International Development Fellowship Program, which recruits 
highly competitive candidates from underrepresented backgrounds to join 
USAID's Foreign Service. We have developed and continue to develop 
groundbreaking memorandums of understanding with Minority Serving 
Institutions (MSIs), such as Historically Black Colleges and 
Universities and Hispanic Serving Institutions, as part of a broader 
push to both recruit from and more closely partner with these important 
institutions, and will be holding several MSI conferences later this 
year to promote our recruitment and partnership efforts. We have also 
launched initiatives to build greater awareness of hiring practices 
that lead to more inclusive and equitable outcomes, including requiring 
Unconscious Bias training for all individuals participating in Foreign 
Service Promotion, Tenure, and Assignment Boards.
    Taken together, we believe these actions will help us achieve our 
ambitious hiring and diversity goals to help USAID better achieve its 
global, lifesaving mission around the world.

    Question. Women and Girls: On International Women's Day this year, 
the President announced a historic request for $2.6 billion dollars to 
support and advance gender equality through foreign assistance in FY23, 
yet the United States remains well behind in its funding commitments to 
targeted gender equality programming and to mainstreaming gender into 
all its foreign assistance.
    How will the Agency ensure that gender is at the heart of U.S. 
foreign aid and does not get siloed or diminished?

    Answer. The advancement of gender equity and equality remains a 
priority for the Agency.
    The integration of gender equality work is captured in the 
requirements of the Women's Entrepreneurship and Economic Empowerment 
Act of 2018 and the USAID Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment 
Policy and it is now reflected in the resources we have requested to 
accomplish our strategic priorities. USAID has well-established 
standards for what constitutes gender analysis and gender assistance, 
including for Gender Equality/Women's Empowerment-Primary (where the 
primary purpose is gender equality outcomes); and Gender Equality/
Women's Empowerment-Secondary (where gender equality is integrated into 
programming as a secondary purpose); Gender-based Violence; and Women, 
Peace, and Security.
    The Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment Hub (GenDev) provides 
technical assistance, coordination, and training to support the 
integration of gender priorities into programming, in collaboration 
with our broader gender architecture of Gender Advisors and POCs 
throughout the Agency. GenDev aims to support missions and bureaus as 
they plan for increasing gender assistance within their portfolios, 
including through a series of workshops on the gender key issues and 
attributions, training, technical assistance, and other programming 
resources related to gender integration.

    Question. Gender-Based Violence: Gender-based violence continues to 
devastate the lives of women and girls around the world and to threaten 
the peace and security of communities and nations. In particular, the 
needs of women and girls in conflict have been an afterthought for too 
long in the international response to conflict and humanitarian 
emergencies, despite the clear systematic use of rape and sexual 
violence as a weapon of war. I am concerned that USAID is not doing 
enough to adequately respond to gender-based violence, including in 
Ukraine where we know the U.S. and international response thus far has 
been wholly insufficient to protect the women and girls who remain at 
grave risk of rape, sexual assault, and trafficking.
    How will the Agency uphold protections against gender-based 
violence as a core pillar of diplomatic efforts, programming, and 
operations?

    Answer. I share your concern on gender based violence and the 
continued, systematic use of rape, sexual assault and violence against 
women in Ukraine and other setting such as Tigray. USAID is 
prioritizing the prevention of and response to gender-based violence 
(GBV) in its Ukraine response, in accordance with the U.S. Government's 
Safe from the Start initiative, which commits the Agency to supporting 
GBV prevention and response from the outset of a crisis, as well as 
throughout the crisis. Recognizing the need to lead advocacy and fill 
response capacity gaps, the USAID Ukraine Crisis Disaster Assistance 
Response Team (DART) activated a Protection Advisor immediately 
following the invasion and deployed the Advisor to guide the scale-up 
of USAID's protection portfolio in Ukraine.
    USAID is currently supporting eight protection partners in Ukraine 
and quickly processing awards for several others. This programming 
includes bolstering social work services (per request from national 
authorities); establishing professionally staffed women and girls' safe 
spaces in areas with high concentrations of displaced populations; 
integrating GBV services alongside sexual and reproductive health 
partners; rolling out in-person, digital, and hotline-based information 
campaigns to mitigate risks of trafficking; and deploying mobile 
response units that provide emergency case management and psychosocial 
support.
    Jointly with U.S. Department of State colleagues, USAID advocates 
with fellow funders and humanitarian response leadership to demonstrate 
sustained commitment among all key stakeholders to proactively address 
GBV in emergencies and support survivors. The USAID DART met with the 
UN Special Representative of the Secretary General on Conflict-Related 
Sexual Violence and continues to liaise with the Gender-Based Violence 
Sub-Cluster (the main humanitarian coordinating body for gender-based 
violence response) to identify and fill priority gaps.
    As you are aware, USAID, with State, is revising the U.S. Strategy 
to Prevent and Respond to Gender-Based Violence Globally per President 
Biden's Executive Order 14020. This revision also highlights the 
interagency need to address women, girls, and other marginalized groups 
impacted by crisis and conflict to remain at forefront of any response. 
The emphasis is not only to highlight the particularities of violence 
during conflict, but tie it to other efforts the USG is doing in the 
area, including the Global Fragility Act, Safe from the Start, and the 
U.S. Strategy for Addressing the Root Causes of Migration in Central 
America.

    Question. We know how important it is to set up preventive measures 
at the onset of conflict and that we need to integrate services into 
other programs. The Safe from the Start program ensures that this work 
happens, and I'm proud to co-lead the effort to codify it into law.
    Will you commit to working with Congress to fund and strengthen 
this program?

    Answer. Yes. USAID appreciates the strong support of the Chairman 
and co-drafters for programming to address gender-based violence in 
emergencies (GBViE). USAID's Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance (BHA) 
has long been a champion for GBViE, demonstrated by the launch of the 
Safe from Start initiative in collaboration with the U.S. Department of 
State Bureau for Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) in 2013. 
Safe from the Start has increased the quality and quantity of the U.S. 
Government's (USG) humanitarian GBV prevention and response activities. 
For instance, BHA's GBV funding has continued to increase by $10 
million or more each year since, reaching $103 million in Fiscal Year 
(FY) 2021. The initiative is leveraged in advocacy with fellow donors; 
global and national coordination bodies; and response agencies to scale 
up GBV activities.
    Safe from the Start propelled the USG and the humanitarian 
community forward, reinforcing humanitarian GBV programming as truly 
life-saving and urgent. Sadly, GBV needs continue to outpace current 
programming. In early 2021, BHA and PRM undertook an ambitious rewrite 
of Safe from the Start, informed by 10 multi-stakeholder consultations 
in three languages. The new Safe from the Start ReVisioned will outline 
new, more ambitious goals to realize a systematic shift in humanitarian 
response that centers on women and girls. It focuses on improving and 
expanding GBV programming, increasing expertise, shifting power to 
disaster-affected women, and recognizing them as experts, providers, 
and leaders.
    USAID welcomes continued Congressional attention and looks forward 
to collaborating with Congress to drive progress on preventing and 
responding to GBV in emergencies.

    Question. Countering Authoritarianism: Vladimir Putin's invasion of 
Ukraine has shown in stark terms what is at stake in the battle between 
autocracies and democracies. In order to be successful in this fight, I 
believe the Administration must redouble its efforts to counter 
authoritarianism and bolster democracies.
    How will this proposed budget strengthen USAID's ability to combat 
authoritarianism and support democracies?
    Following the Summit for Democracy, the Administration announced a 
series of programs through the Presidential Initiative for Democratic 
Renewal, many which will be administered through USAID. How will these 
programs advance the efforts to combat authoritarianism on a global 
scale?

    Answer. Russia's unprovoked war against Ukraine represents a 
fundamental challenge to the security and prosperity of democracies 
worldwide, but Russia's descent into authoritarianism is not an 
aberration. Today, for the first time in decades, more people live 
under authoritarian rule than democratic rule, and backsliding is 
occurring in even the most established democracies. Authoritarian 
leaders are reaching across borders to undermine democracies--from 
targeting journalists and human rights defenders to meddling in 
elections. The first Summit for Democracy, convened by President Biden 
in December 2021, kicked off a bold agenda that brings together 
governments, civil society, and private sector actors to foster 
democratic resilience and to resist and ultimately reverse the global 
spread of authoritarianism.
    During the first Summit for Democracy, the U.S. launched the 
Presidential Initiative for Democratic Renewal (PIDR), a series of 
policy and foreign assistance programs that rally governments, 
activists, non-governmental organizations, companies, and others to 
combat authoritarianism and address core threats to democracy. The PIDR 
seeks to expand and modernize U.S. efforts to bolster democracy and 
defend human rights abroad. PIDR efforts center on five areas of work 
crucial to countering authoritarianism and democratic backsliding, and 
in which we perceive our democracy assistance efforts to need an update 
to meet the present moment: supporting free and independent media, 
fighting corruption, bolstering democratic reformers, advancing 
technology for democracy, and defending free and fair elections and 
political processes.
    USAID's democracy and anti-corruption deliverables under PIDR 
include a number of innovative programs and initiatives, including:

   The Powered by the People initiative, which will use new 
        methods to empower and improve the efficacy of citizen 
        movements to counter authoritarian threats.

   Support for the International Fund for Public Interest Media 
        (IFPIM), which will increase media sustainability--especially 
        in resource-poor and fragile settings--and shed light on the 
        actions of authoritarian actors.

   The Defamation Defense Fund (recently renamed ``Reporters 
        Mutual''), an insurance fund to shield investigative 
        journalists from defamation lawsuits and allow them to continue 
        their critical work.

   The Combating Transnational Corruption Grand Challenge, 
        which will allow USAID to work with global partners to develop 
        innovative tools and technologies and launch joint initiatives 
        to reduce transnational corruption.

   The Defending Democratic Elections Fund, which will help 
        countries and electoral community actors to proactively address 
        the wide range of contemporary threats to elections and 
        political processes posed by authoritarian and other malign 
        actors.

   The Advancing Digital Democracy initiative, which will work 
        with governments, technologists, and civil society to push back 
        against digital authoritarianism across the full digital 
        ecosystem.

   The Partnerships for Democracy initiative, which will surge 
        support to countries experiencing democratic openings, bringing 
        government and non-governmental stakeholders together to pursue 
        inclusive reforms, improve service delivery, and demonstrate 
        that democracy delivers in ways that alternative models cannot.

    USAID's FY 2023 Request includes a combined total of $270 million 
across democracy and anti-corruption to expand and sustain the PIDR 
programs and initiatives we announced at the time of the first Summit.

    Question. Tunisia: Economic support funds (ESF) are dedicated to 
programs that strengthen independent judiciaries, protect human rights 
and freedom of the press, combat corruption, and increase public 
accountability and access to justice. The $45 million dollar ESF 
request for Tunisia is nearly a 50 percent decrease from the requested 
FY22 amount.
    While I am concerned with Tunisia's current democratic trajectory, 
given that Tunisia may be holding elections in December and is 
currently facing increasing economic problems, can you elaborate on the 
reasoning for the proposed cuts to Tunisia's economic support funding, 
which could be used to support rule of law and improved governance?

    Answer. The FY 2023 Budget Request for Tunisia reflects the 
Administration's deep concerns regarding the trajectory of Tunisia's 
democracy. President Saied's consolidation of power coincides with 
serious economic problems affecting Tunisians. The Administration has 
been clear with the Government of Tunisia (GoT) that more progress is 
needed and we continue to urge a swift return to democratic governance. 
The proposed cuts will further limit engagement with the GoT given our 
concerns with the state of Tunisian democracy. While we remain 
concerned, we recognize the need to maintain programming that helps 
Tunisians remain resilient through challenges facing their economy and 
democracy.
    USAID programming in Tunisia continues to directly support the 
Tunisian people through private sector and civil society interventions. 
With the upcoming anticipated elections, we are working with local 
partners to ensure democratic reforms can take place and are credible. 
This includes preparing for civic and voter education campaigns, 
combatting disinformation, promoting civil society advocacy, and 
deploying trained domestic election observers.

    Question. Russian Malign Influence in Africa: As a November 2019 
article in the New York Times detailed, Russia is reviving efforts to 
assert influence in Africa. Over the past several years there has been 
a notable expansion of Russian activity including, as the 
aforementioned article mentions, interfering in the elections in 
Madagascar. The Wagner Group, long understood to have ties to the 
Kremlin, has been active for several years in Central African Republic, 
Mali and is reportedly expanding activities in Sudan in the wake of 
General Hemeti's trip to Moscow on the eve of Russia's invasion of 
Ukraine. I firmly believe that our investments in Africa should be 
because we wish to pursue strong relations for their own sake. However, 
I also believe that we must help our friends and partners on the 
continent counter malign influence.
    What efforts is USAID currently making to counter Russian malign 
influence in Africa, and how do you plan to build on these efforts 
through the budget request?

    Answer. The Kremlin is attempting to exert malign influence in many 
countries in Africa, but environments characterized by weak, sometimes 
illegitimate government, a shaky media environment, and a lack of 
transparency over natural resources are especially vulnerable. USAID 
currently includes programs such as those supporting democracy, human 
rights, and governance (DRG) that address a number of the 
vulnerabilities that Russia can take advantage of in selected contexts.
    In Africa, USAID rule of law and anti-corruption activities 
strengthen independent anti-corruption mechanisms at the national and 
regional levels; strengthen judiciaries; foster open, transparent, and 
competitive markets; encourage clear, stable, and fair enabling 
environments for economic growth; and strengthen investigative 
journalism and civil society oversight. Russian private military 
companies like Wagner often negotiate non-competitive contracts while 
simultaneously providing security to prop up African leaders. USAID's 
programs help to limit Russia's ability to execute non-transparent 
contract terms and pursue corrupt deals; thereby constraining their 
influence.
    In addition, USAID promotes legal, responsible mineral supply 
chains in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), improves 
compliance with the Kimberley Process to reduce the risk that illicit 
trade fuels conflict and corruption in the Central African Republic 
(CAR), and supports transparency and accountability of mining royalties 
in the DRC and Zimbabwe.
    USAID counters the use of digital authoritarianism, in which a 
repressive government controls the internet and uses censorship, 
surveillance, and data/media laws or regulations to restrict or repress 
freedom of expression, association, religion, and peaceful assembly at 
scale, through helping to improve the digital security of implementing 
partners, independent journalists, human rights defenders, and civil 
society activists. USAID also works to ensure that adequate legislation 
exists and is enforced to promote internet freedom that protects human 
rights on and offline. USAID builds African partner country capacity to 
counter disinformation and propaganda that weakens democratic 
institutions and social cohesion by building the capacity of local 
NGOs, media organizations, and technology companies to identify and 
neutralize disinformation before it is amplified. This includes 
capacity strengthening for media organizations to provide professional, 
trusted news and information, while also strengthening financial 
sustainability that ensures editorial independence. USAID also invests 
in targeted media and digital literacy programming.
    An example is USAID's work with local media organizations in CAR to 
promote responsible journalism. The goal of these efforts is to 
increase peaceful democratic participation in a context where social 
and religious divisions, mistrust, and rumors have fueled years of 
conflict. Also in CAR, USAID developed a hate-speech lexicon and 
equipped community leaders with tools to monitor tensions and raised 
awareness about hate speech with national-level policy makers to help 
them promote tolerance and national reconciliation. USAID stabilization 
programming in CAR mitigates key drivers of conflict by strengthening 
community capacity to prevent and respond to violence, expanding licit 
economic opportunities, and promoting social cohesion through tested 
tools such as interreligious dialogue, trauma healing, and support to 
local dispute-resolution mechanisms.
    In DRC, USAID supports the media sector to promote a more open and 
vibrant media sector that contributes to more responsive and 
transparent institutions that develop capacity to provide alternative 
reporting to counter disinformation. USAID provides support to local 
partners in Sudan as they work to increase governmental accountability, 
as well as to civil society and the media.
    In Sudan, in order to reduce the level of influence that Russia has 
gained as a major wheat supplier--which has bolstered its political 
power with Sudan's authoritarian leaders--USAID is working to better 
empower the Sudanese to meet their own food security demands. It is 
critical to develop alternative economic power centers to those 
controlled by the Sudanese military. USAID investment in urban food 
security and rural livelihoods will address the country's extreme 
economic disparities, while providing a bulwark against further 
authoritarian capture of livelihoods and private industry, and malign 
influencers including Russia. However, while the government is still 
controlled by the military, USAID's initial activities will build upon 
humanitarian programs, thereby increasing resilience and generating 
demand for locally produced goods and services. These activities will 
establish the basis upon which the rural economy can be built. If a 
political transition moves forward and the security context improves, 
these activities will set the stage for greater economic expansion and 
connectivity to markets, directly improving food security and job 
creation throughout the country and less reliance on Russia.
    USAID continues to prioritize DRG programming in Africa in out-year 
budgetary requests to continue working with host-country partners on 
the key anti-corruption and DRG goals discussed above. Focusing on 
enhancing the capabilities of journalists and civil society to promote 
transparency and good governance provides sustainability--it ensures 
that local actors will continue to pursue such goals well beyond the 
length of USAID programming.

    Question. Global Energy Security Disruptions: U.S. energy security 
is impacted by global energy disruptions abroad--as demonstrated right 
now by the impact of the Ukraine crisis on domestic oil and gas prices. 
Bolstering energy infrastructure abroad to strengthen our allies' 
energy security, in turn, supports U.S. energy security at home.
    What happens to U.S. energy security and U.S. leadership when we 
underfund U.S. foreign assistance for energy and resilience programs?

    Answer. Foreign assistance programming helps our partner countries 
achieve their energy sector development objectives through a wide 
number of activities, and a critical aspect of this is diversification 
of their energy mix. Diversification of fuels and electricity 
generation sources and liberalizing energy trade is important to 
reducing susceptibility to political and financial coercion by malign 
states and building resilience to supply shocks and sharp price 
increases. This diversification and liberalization will also soften 
rising inflation of most goods and services, all of which require 
energy to produce. Energy and resilience programs foreign assistance 
programs allow us to improve energy security and energy sector 
resilience before a crisis strikes, softening the impact of the crisis 
and reducing the likelihood that countries will seek fuel and fiscal 
relief from strategic adversaries of the U.S. We expect that greater 
energy security and resilience in global markets will also keep overall 
prices more stable for U.S. consumers and businesses.

    Question. Climate Change: Climate change serves as a threat 
multiplier, which exacerbates pre-existing conflict and insecurities. 
Given a lack of resources and capacity building to adapt, people in 
developing and fragile countries often bear the worst impacts of 
climate change, especially marginalized groups and women and girls.
    How do you see USAID advancing U.S. leadership on climate change in 
conflict-affected and fragile states like Ukraine where climate change 
is a threat multiplier?

    Answer. USAID is working closely with the interagency, and 
specifically the Departments of Defense and State, to better prepare 
for and address the nexus of climate change and conflict in 
international settings. USAID's new Climate Strategy includes a focus 
on embedding conflict-sensitivity across all of our climate efforts. 
USAID also supports working in conflict-vulnerable geographies with 
complex contexts to address conflict, insecurity, and structural 
governance challenges related to climate change. The new Climate 
Strategy includes a focus on utilizing principles of environmental 
peacebuilding and the inclusion of marginalized populations to advance 
equitable resource sharing and management that both mitigate conflict 
risk and increase climate resilience.
    USAID is co-leading on two important whole-of-government efforts: 
the Global Fragility Act (GFA) and the President's Emergency Plan for 
Adaptation and Resilience (PREPARE). These initiatives are designed to 
bring together the diplomatic, development, and technical expertise of 
the United States to decrease fragility and support resilience by 
building capacity in developing countries to better prepare for and 
respond to the causes of food, water, and economic insecurity. The GFA 
will consider the secondary effects of climate change that include 
displacement, loss of livelihoods, weakened governments, and in some 
cases political instability and conflict. PREPARE focuses explicitly on 
helping developing countries adapt to the current and future impacts of 
climate change.
    USAID's Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance (BHA) emergency and 
disaster risk reduction activities support the active engagement and 
leadership of women and girls, youth, people with disabilities, LGBTQI+ 
and Indigenous Peoples to help communities recover from and build 
resilience to crises. USAID recognizes that engaging these groups is an 
essential part of the solution to the climate crisis and that these 
populations have valuable knowledge and skills that make them powerful 
change agents in designing and implementing climate solutions that 
benefit all people.
    USAID's Bureau of Democracy, Development, and Innovation (DDI), 
Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment Hub (GenDev) commissioned 
research on the nexus between gender inequality, state fragility, and 
climate vulnerability. The report demonstrates the positive correlation 
for these indicators and concludes that work to combat the climate-
conflict nexus must adopt a gender transformative approach to ensure 
sustainable results.
    DDI/GenDev is leveraging the GEEA Fund to support gender 
integration into activities in countries that rank high for the triple 
nexus of gender inequality, state fragility, and climate vulnerability. 
Importantly, this work recognizes a need for interventions at the 
systemic and interpersonal level in order to reduce gender inequality 
and gender-based violence, while also ensuring the meaningful 
participation of women and girls in peacebuilding and climate action.

    Question. Yemen: Yemen has been described as one of the worst 
humanitarian crises in the world. Seven years of conflict have 
displaced more than 4 million people and the U.N. World Food Program 
has assessed that 17.4 million people are facing food insecurity.
    To what extent is U.S. or international aid able to reach those who 
need it? Given difficulties accessing many parts of the country, how 
does the USAID measure the impact of assistance?
    Many have argued that the recent U.N.-led truce will present aid 
agencies with a significant opportunity to scale up life-saving 
humanitarian assistance. How was this truce impacted USAID's 
operations, what challenges remain to providing aid, and how can the 
U.S. Government use this window of peace to help support U.N.-led 
efforts to promote increased recovery and growth?

    Answer. To date, the United States remains one of the single 
largest donors to the humanitarian response in Yemen jointly through 
USAID and State, providing over $4.5 billion since the conflict began, 
and over $584 million in Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 alone. U.S. humanitarian 
assistance is channeled through non-governmental organizations (NGO) 
and United Nations (UN) partners who operate across both southern and 
northern Yemen, and has been ongoing since the start of the conflict in 
2015. This assistance responds to urgent needs throughout the country, 
providing health, nutrition, water and sanitation, protection, shelter, 
humanitarian coordination, and emergency food assistance to Yemen's 
most vulnerable populations, 70 percent of whom require some form of 
humanitarian assistance, amidst ongoing conflict and the country's 
economic deterioration. Despite the many challenges faced in Yemen, 
USAID provides up to 8 million people per month with emergency food 
assistance and other basic services. Additionally, State/PRM-supported 
programming reached over 51,000 refugees and displaced persons with 
cash assistance to assist with basic household needs as of April 2022.
    The direct provision of humanitarian assistance by USAID partners 
on the ground is assessed and measured through routine monitoring by an 
independent monitoring agency, contracted by USAID, who reviews the 
impact of USAID's assistance and ensures that assistance reaches its 
intended beneficiaries. Furthermore, USAID remotely monitors all 
programming in Yemen through monthly and quarterly programmatic and 
financial reporting, frequent meetings with partners, remote 
monitoring, and close coordination and consultation with other donors 
who are able to visit Yemen in-person. Additionally, in the south, 
USAID partners are able to provide effective monitoring and oversight 
of activities to ensure that U.S. taxpayer-funded aid reaches those in 
need for whom it is intended. In the north, all USAID partners have 
secured the necessary agreements to enable them to implement without 
undue interference.
    Recognizing the unique challenges that come with delivering 
humanitarian assistance in Yemen, USAID, along with our humanitarian 
partners and other donors, continues to advocate for the Houthis and 
the authorities in the south to enable unimpeded and sustained access 
to people in need across the entire country.
    The 2-month truce that began on April 2 has had a positive impact 
on the humanitarian response in Yemen, including USAID's operations. 
Since the truce started, reduced fighting has started to improve access 
to people in need, and the increased flow of fuel and goods is 
supporting humanitarian operations, particularly in northern Yemen. 
USAID partners have reported a slight easing of bureaucratic 
restrictions on access, enabling one partner to conduct needs 
assessments in an area previously inaccessible due to conflict and 
identifying additional internally displaced persons (IDP) in need. 
Other impacts include increased food distributions in previously 
militarized areas and increased access by protection teams to areas 
previously inaccessible. USAID partner the United Nations World Food 
Program (WFP) reported that more fuel is being received in the Hudaydah 
ports, and while fuel shortages continue in the north, WFP is seeing 
shorter queues at petrol stations. While some positive outcomes have 
occurred, challenges remain with the ability of USAID partner 
organizations to access and provide services in IDP camps as well as in 
informal sites that house displaced persons, particularly in northern 
Yemen. USAID recognizes that this stage of the truce is fragile, and 
gains are easily reversible. While the humanitarian situation in Yemen 
remains dire, this reprieve makes clear that real, sustained change can 
only be achieved with a political solution to the crisis, including a 
permanent truce.

    Question. Syria: Eleven years on, the conflict in Syria still has 
no clear end in sight. The U.N. estimates that 12 million people 
countrywide are experiencing acute food insecurity, while an additional 
1.9 million people are at risk of becoming food insecure.
    What are the priorities for the $125 million request for Economic 
Support Funds for Syria?

    Answer. U.S. stabilization activities are vital to preventing the 
resurgence of terrorist groups, expanding humanitarian access, keeping 
violence levels low, promoting accountability for the Assad regime's 
atrocities, and supporting an inclusive political solution to the 
conflict consistent with UN Security Council Resolution 2254.
    With these funds, USAID will contribute to the enduring defeat of 
ISIS by restoring essential services such as refurbishing electrical 
grids and addressing growing food insecurity through targeted 
agricultural interventions; reviving local economies by attracting 
private sector investment, creating an enabling environment for growth, 
and facilitating livelihoods; strengthening local governance so that 
local authorities can better respond to community needs, including 
those of returnees and internally displaced persons' (IDP) needs; and 
responding to the COVID-19 pandemic and its secondary and tertiary 
effects on local communities.

    Question. How has USAID programming changed to meet the 
increasingly acute food insecurity needs in Syria, particularly in 
light of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the resulting impact on 
global food security?

    Answer. Even before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, food 
insecurity in Syria was rising, and the effects of the Ukraine conflict 
have only worsened the situation given Syria's heavy reliance on food 
imports, including wheat from Russia and Ukraine and the impact 
Russia's war has had on global food markets and energy trade. USAID's 
humanitarian programming in Syria has been negatively affected by 
rising food and fuel prices.
    The UN's World Food Program (WFP) commodity price monitoring in 75 
markets across Syria's 14 governorates indicates that food prices in 
Syria have already increased as a result of the Ukraine conflict. In 
March, the national average price of WFP's standard reference food 
basket--the cost for a group of essential food commodities, including 
bread, lentils, rice, sugar, and oil--was 24 percent higher than in 
February and 59 percent higher than in March 2021, representing the 
highest prices since WFP began commodity monitoring in Syria in 2013.
    USAID's humanitarian partners are working to diversify procurement 
source and origin countries for critical food commodities and wheat due 
to these impacts, particularly on regional markets such as Turkey, the 
primary regional humanitarian food procurement hub. Turkey's wheat 
market is dependent on imports from Russia and Ukraine, importing 78 
percent of its wheat from these countries.
    Due to the increasing food prices in Syria, USAID's NGO partners' 
cash and voucher assistance is covering a reduced percentage of monthly 
food needs. WFP, USAID's largest partner in Syria, has also reduced 
food rations across Syria as a result of funding constraints amid 
increasing global food prices and supply-chain disruptions resulting 
from Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Starting in May, the kilocalorie 
(kCal) content of WFP food rations is now only 1,177 kcal per person in 
northwest Syria and 995 kCal per person in other parts of the country, 
except in camps, where food rations will be maintained at the full 
2,018 kCal per person. The kCal reduction is due in part to the removal 
of chickpeas and sugar from the ration amid limited supply and high 
prices of these commodities on the global market. WFP warns of 
potential beneficiary roll cuts and that an additional nearly 2 million 
Syrians may become food-insecure in coming months absent mitigation 
measures and additional funding; already, 12 million Syrians are 
acutely food-insecure.
    Growing food insecurity in northeast Syria undermines gains made in 
the fight against ISIS, and is a security concern in addition to a 
humanitarian one. Through stabilization assistance, USAID supports 
agricultural production and other related sectors impacted by it in 
non-regime held areas of northeast Syria, including areas with 
vulnerable populations. USAID also works to improve essential services; 
to restore infrastructure and local markets, such as bakeries, mills, 
and seed sorting facilities; and strengthen local authorities' and 
civil society's ability to meet their communities' needs.

    Question. Tigray/Ethiopia: As you know, the Ethiopian Government 
recently declared a unilateral ceasefire in Tigray region, but the 
government has also closed airspace, and bridges on two of the four 
main overland routes have been bombed. The government has set up 
bureaucratic obstacles to the use of the other routes; just last week, 
two UN convoys were prevented from entering Tigray. In effect, the 
unilateral ceasefire has reinforced conditions under which the 
government can effectively turn humanitarian access to Tigray on and 
off like a spigot.
    What efforts are underway to prevent a humanitarian disaster in 
Tigray?

    Answer. The crisis in northern Ethiopia remains one of the worst 
humanitarian crises in the world. Across the Afar, Amhara, and Tigray 
regions, continued fighting and lack of humanitarian access has left as 
many as 9 million people facing severe food insecurity and has forced 
more than 2.4 million people to flee their homes. In Tigray alone, more 
than 90 percent of people need aid, while across all three northern 
regions as many as 1 million people are projected to face famine-like 
conditions by June.
    The United States is the largest donor of humanitarian aid to the 
northern Ethiopia response efforts and remains committed to helping all 
people in need across Ethiopia. The United States has provided more 
than $976 million in humanitarian assistance to northern Ethiopia since 
the crisis began in November 2020, including more than $885 million 
through USAID.
    Unhindered access to those in need of assistance is critical to 
addressing the crisis. USAID is engaging with leadership across the 
U.S. Government to press the Government of Ethiopia and the Tigray 
People's Liberation Front (TPLF) for unhindered humanitarian access, 
including not just road access into Tigray, but also movement of cash, 
facilitation of flights, access into new displacement sites, 
restoration of basic services, and other critical issues across the 
response. Recently, USAID has worked on the ground in Afar to engage 
regional and local authorities and open road access into Tigray. We 
have seen incremental progress in humanitarian access, and the 
operation in northern Ethiopia as a whole since the March 24 
humanitarian truce. Following nearly 4 months of road access blockages 
into Tigray, several humanitarian convoys--comprising more than 250 
trucks and fuel tankers--had arrived in Tigray by road as of early May. 
Despite these improvements, the amount of assistance moving into Tigray 
is still not sufficient to meet humanitarian needs, and access must 
continue to improve.

    Question. During the last week of June, three Doctors Without 
Borders aid workers were killed in Tigray and other NGOs on the ground 
report being deliberately targeted for harassment and violence.
    What measures is USAID taking to protect its partners and personnel 
operating in Tigray?

    Answer. The northern Ethiopia conflict is among the most dangerous 
in the world for humanitarian workers; 25 humanitarians have been 
killed since the start of the conflict in November 2020.
    Humanitarians face attacks, vilification, harassment, and 
intimidation by various parties to the conflict, and yet they remain 
dedicated to helping others. In Tigray, some are doing this without 
receiving pay because of the cash shortages, and all are working with 
dwindling resources that are needed for safe aid operations and their 
personal well-being and safety, including fuel, telecommunications, and 
banking services. USAID continues to advocate for the restoration of 
basic services and movement of cash and other essential supplies needed 
to enable humanitarian actors to operate effectively and safely.
    The safety of aid workers is paramount. USAID and its partners have 
continued to reiterate the call to respect the neutrality and 
independence of aid workers and humanitarian operations in northern 
Ethiopia so that life-saving aid can be delivered to those in dire 
need.
    USAID requires every NGO partner to submit a comprehensive safety 
and security plan with each proposal. These plans must demonstrate an 
in-depth analysis of the range of threats they may face, identify their 
organization's specific vulnerabilities, and outline a mitigation 
strategy and contingency plans that will keep their staff as safe as 
possible. In addition to the physical well-being of partner staff, 
USAID continues to stress the importance of ensuring the provision of 
psychosocial support services to first responders--recognizing that 
many have themselves been displaced or otherwise subject to attacks and 
other stressful conditions.

    Question. Children with Disabilities: Millions of children with 
disabilities across the globe are placed in residential institutions, 
often due to prejudice, stigma, and lack of support for families with 
children with disabilities. In Ukraine, more than 100,000 children were 
living in institutions before the war. A recent report by Disability 
Rights International (DRI), shows that children with disabilities are 
now being left behind in crowded, unsafe conditions in residential 
institutions in Ukraine and are often not included in national or 
international humanitarian response plans.
    How will this budget enable USAID to provide support children with 
disabilities around the world as well as their families? Specifically, 
how will USAID use this budget, in partnership with the Ukraine 
supplemental, to help ensure that children with disabilities in 
institutions are being identified, evacuated, and being fully included 
in relief efforts in Ukraine?
    When the time comes to rebuild Ukraine, how will USAID work to 
strengthen families of children with disabilities and create 
opportunities for children to stay with their families rather than 
focusing on rebuilding Ukraine's extensive residential institution and 
orphanage system for children, whenever possible?

    Answer. Since the start of the war in Ukraine, the U.S. Government 
has provided substantial humanitarian assistance, which has helped to 
identify and address the different needs of women, children, persons 
with disabilities and older persons, and provide them with suitable and 
accessible health services.
    When the time comes to rebuild Ukraine, USAID's work will be guided 
by the U.S. Government Strategy, Advancing Protection and Care for 
Children in Adversity (APCCA) (https://www.childreninadversity.gov/). 
The second of its three objectives is to ``Put Family First'' by 
enabling children with disabilities and all children to remain in or 
return to nurturing, loving, protective, and permanent family care. 
APCCA aims to support the most vulnerable children who are, or are at 
risk of, living outside of family care by promoting, funding, and 
supporting systems for prevention of family separation, family 
reintegration, support, and strengthening. APCCA calls for evidence-
based action to develop national systems to enable all children to live 
in family care. For children with disabilities, this would require 
developing a range of support and rehabilitation services to enable 
them not only to live with their families, but to develop their full 
potential, to be in and part of their communities, and to attend 
mainstream schools.
    In keeping with APCCA, USAID will focus on family strengthening 
measures to prevent children's separation from their families and 
support family reintegration or placement in other family based care. 
This may include developing services to support kinship care and foster 
care. Such a future is possible, but it would take firm and long-term 
commitment on the part of the Ukrainian Government and its development 
partners to reform its care system to support family care for all 
children.

    Question. Overseas Equity Strategies: The 2022-26 Joint State-USAID 
Strategic Plan states: ``The Department of State and USAID will further 
equity, inclusion, accessibility, support for human rights, and 
resilience of marginalized peoples, including individuals from 
marginalized racial, ethnic, indigenous, and religious communities, 
persons with disabilities, LGBTQI+ individuals, women, and older 
persons, by improving and adapting policy, public diplomacy, foreign 
assistance, and humanitarian aid.''
    What efforts and resources are being planned to implement and 
institutionalize this strategic objective? Should we be expecting 
additional staffing, multi-year funding, and other budget proposals to 
support these efforts?
    How will USAID funding be coordinated and equitably distributed to 
ensure sufficient staffing and resources, and to prevent competition 
between different regions and marginalized populations in the 
implementation of equity work?

    Answer. USAID has identified several staffing needs to address 
these priorities, including a need to fill important management roles 
and technical leadership on racial and ethnic equity. USAID continues 
to fill staffing gaps in areas where dedicated resources are available 
through institutional support contractors.
    USAID budget proposals seek to expand support for programming that 
will elevate the rights and inclusion of marginalized people. USAID 
intends to launch two new ``support mechanisms'' for Missions and DC-
based Operating Units to assess the needs of, engage with, and support 
the priorities of marginalized groups. The two mechanisms will: 1) 
provide technical assistance to Missions to improve programs to be more 
inclusive of and equitable toward marginalized groups, including 
racial, ethnic and religious minorities, and 2) provide direct support 
to civil society organizations that are run for and by marginalized 
groups. At least one mechanism will be awarded by the end of the 
current fiscal year.
    USAID is working to increase the size and scope of inclusive 
development training to build capacity of its own staff, and to make 
relevant materials available to organizations implementing USAID 
programming. USAID has developed an expansive ``inclusive development 
training suite'' with both in-person and virtual options. Several 
trainings centered on specific marginalized groups (e.g., LGBTQI+ 
people, persons with disabilities, Indigenous Peoples, non-dominant 
racial and ethnic groups) are also either already available for staff 
or are in development.
    USAID is working to update several of its policy documents to 
reflect administration priorities on inclusion and equity, often 
providing public comment periods and always doing consultations with 
Congress during their development. The 2022 Youth In Development policy 
was released in early May. Efforts are ongoing to update the Agency's 
Disability Policy, the 2014 LGBT Vision for Action, and the 2020 Gender 
Equality And Women's Empowerment Policy. Additionally, USAID is 
updating its guidance framework on engaging with marginalized and/or 
underrepresented groups in programs and activities, ``Suggested 
Approaches for Integrating Inclusive Development Across the Program 
Cycle and in Mission Operations.''

    Question. Inclusive Development Advisor: USAID has announced a goal 
of designating an inclusive development advisor in every overseas 
mission by 2023.
    What resources are available or has USAID requested to fund this 
goal?

    Answer. In the FY 2022 Operating Expense Appropriation, USAID 
received an additional $128 million to fund the hiring of 130 new 
Foreign Service Officers and 120 Civil Service officers. These funds 
will be used to address a number of Agency priorities, but an 
especially critical use will be to deepen the pool of available human 
resources with the capacity to advance gender equality and inclusive 
development.
    While, to date, USAID has not requested funds specifically 
dedicated to meet this goal, we have made several important strides 
using existing resources. USAID is currently exploring ways to expand 
Mission and Regional/Pillar Bureau staff levels of effort dedicated to 
advancing gender equality and inclusive development, including a 
possible sub-specialty in Foreign Service backstops. USAID is expanding 
competencies required for Foreign Service Officers and Foreign Service 
Nationals who serve as Program Officers to include specific gender and 
inclusive development skills and abilities, and widening the number of 
people in the Agency with gender and inclusive development expertise. 
Additionally, a pool of Foreign Service Nationals with extensive gender 
and inclusive development experience are already working in USAID 
Missions. USAID hopes to expand the number of Foreign Service Nationals 
and Foreign Service Officers that can serve as gender advisors, 
inclusive development advisors, or gender and inclusive development 
champions, depending on their level of expertise.

    Question. Democracy Dividend in Africa: While democratic 
backsliding has become an alarming trend around the world--particularly 
in Africa, which has seen multiple coups in the past 2 years--several 
countries have made laudable progress towards strengthening democracy. 
Zambia and Niger are two notable examples of this, both having held 
successful elections that defied the trend toward authoritarianism seen 
elsewhere. However, both countries still face serious challenges. The 
United States should make every effort to reward and support countries 
that take meaningful steps toward democracy, in the form of a democracy 
dividend that surges assistance and engagement to new democracies.
    Do you agree with the idea of a democracy dividend?
    What has USAID done to surge support to countries like Zambia, 
Niger, Malawi, and the Gambia, and how does the budget propose continue 
such support in the coming fiscal year?

    Answer. We do agree that democracy, on balance, brings outsized 
material and economic benefits to populations. Democracies are more 
likely to respect human rights, invest in public goods, and limit 
corruption (particularly when there is a freer press and as democracy 
deepens). Their economic growth rates are on par with those of 
dictatorships, but the growth they produce is of higher quality, with 
steadier patterns and with gains more likely to benefit citizens, as 
reflected in education, health, and life expectancy. The gains of 
democracy increase as levels of democracy increase. According to V-Dem, 
often considered the gold standard for democracy research: \1\

   Transition to democracy increases life expectancy by 3 
        percent within 10 years of regime change.

   A high level of democracy leads to 94 percent lower infant 
        mortality compared to dictatorships.

   Democracies with vibrant vertical accountability provide 23 
        percent more safe water access, 35 percent more immunization to 
        young children, and up to 40 percent more electricity access, 
        than autocracies.

   Democracies provides citizens 300 percent more internet 
        connectivity, on average, than autocracies.

   Democracy with strong vertical accountability mechanisms 
        diminishes corruption.

    USAID works under the assumption that democracies do deliver better 
services, protect human rights, reduce corruption, and foster healthy 
political competition, and economic growth. Democracy underpins and 
supports USAID development objectives.
    When presented with democratic openings it is important that the 
U.S. Government works quickly to marshal available resources to not 
only help consolidate democratic progress, but also support partner 
governments as they work to demonstrate to citizens that democracy 
delivers in concrete ways for their lives by providing security, 
accountability for past and ongoing wrongs, and improving livelihoods 
through development programming. In countries like Zambia, Niger, 
Malawi, The Gambia, and others, USAID works with governments on their 
priority reform agendas in areas such as anti-corruption, health, 
education, and economic growth in an effort to help demonstrate a 
democratic dividend that delivers in visible ways for citizens. USAID 
does likewise in other regions when democratic openings occur, as we 
have seen recently in countries like Moldova, Armenia, Ecuador, Nepal, 
and the Dominican Republic.
    When such openings exist, USAID has mobilized both technical and 
financial support through flexible funds at both the regional and the 
central levels, including rapid response and centralized resources that 
can cover a wide range of development sectors. Crucially, USAID's 
single largest program announced at the Summit for Democracy focuses 
specifically on surging flexible support to countries experiencing 
democratic openings, in return for commitments by the relevant 
government to take forward key reforms inclusively and democratically. 
The program is called Partnerships for Democratic Development, and as 
it comes online, it will be a cornerstone of the Presidential 
Initiative for Democratic Renewal.
    More generally, USAID continues to prioritize Democracy, Human 
Rights and Governance (DRG) programming in out-year budget requests, 
including FY 2023. Further, sustainability and the training of local 
partners is a key aspect of USAID DRG programming, ensuring that 
programmatic gains are maintained beyond the length of the program 
through skilled and well-trained, in-country organizations and 
individuals. Additionally, USAID actively coordinates with other donors 
in the DRG space, avoiding duplication and overlap and maximizing value 
of finite DRG funds.

----------------
Note

    \1\ V-Dem: The Case for Democracy (https://www.v-dem.net/
casefordemocracy.html)
                                 ______
                                 

             Responses of Ms. Samantha Power to Questions 
                  Submitted by Senator James E. Risch

    Question. Presence and Risk Management: Effective diplomacy and 
development cannot be conducted from behind the walls of a compound. 
The agency needs to take a more forward leaning approach towards risk 
management and prioritize getting staff out from behind desks in home 
offices, returned to the field, fully engaged with local partners and 
beneficiaries, and conducting direct oversight of its programs and 
operations.
    Do you believe that the Agency's current risk tolerance in medium-
to-high-threat posts is appropriately tailored? Do you believe that it 
should be improved, and if so, how? What will you do to bring about 
that improvement?
    What is the status of overseas staff in light of the COVID-19 
pandemic?
    Have all overseas staff returned to the office and to the field?
    What is the status of headquarters staff? Has everyone returned to 
the office?

    Answer. We agree that staff's ability to be in the field and 
engaged with partners and communities is optimal and support that 
objective whenever security and safety conditions permit. We also 
prioritize the safety of our staff first in all contexts and work with 
our Regional Security Officers and Diplomatic Security at post to 
facilitate engagement with development actors, host governments, local 
partners, and beneficiaries through regular meetings and site visits.
    The status of overseas staff depends upon the security and health 
conditions in the countries where they are posted. Many posts report 
being fully back in the office. A smaller number of posts, where COVID-
19 is currently surging, are on some amount of regular or full-time 
telework. USAID's Foreign Service Officers (FSOs) and other personnel 
have been reporting to their assigned posts ever since Global 
Authorized Departure (GAD) ended on September 9, 2020.
    At USAID Headquarters in Washington, DC, pandemic-ordered telework 
ends on May 21, 2022. According to the Agency's Future of Work (FoW) 
Framework, there will be two workplace categories: telework and remote 
work. Telework-eligible positions include job duties that can be 
conducted outside of the worksite without affecting service quality, 
adding additional costs, or negatively affecting team productivity. 
Telework-eligible positions are also subdivided by the number of 
telework days that position can utilize per pay period based on its job 
duties. Remote work-eligible positions do not require frequent in-
office presence, close supervision or training, consistent in-person 
customer service, and/or recurring access to special facilities or 
classified materials. Employees whose position is designated as 
telework-eligible will be expected to return to the office in 
accordance with their agreed upon work schedule beginning on May 23, 
2022.
    On May 13, 2022, the Agency issued an Executive Message on New 
Telework and Remote Work Agreement and Updated Mandatory Telework 
Training Requirement for Domestic USDH Employees and Domestic USPSCs, 
indicating that all domestic USDH employees must have a telework, 
remote work, or opt-out agreement approved by their supervisor prior to 
June 3, 2022, before authorized to telework or remote work for any 
reason.

    Question. Anomalous Health Incidents (AHIs): After years of being 
the interagency laggard in providing care for victims of AHIs, the 
State Department has finally caught up to the other departments and 
agencies whose employees have been affected by AHIs. Unfortunately, 
USAID personnel also have suffered from AHIs, yet they do not have the 
access to care that their State Department colleagues have.
    What is the Agency currently doing to provide care for AHI victims?
    What more could the Agency do to provide care for AHI victims?
    Has the State Department followed through on commitments to assist 
USAID personnel in getting access to care that they need and deserve?

    Answer. The issue of Anomalous Health Incidents (AHI) continues to 
be a priority for our Agency, in particular, the efforts to protect and 
care for our personnel and uncover the cause of these incidents. I met 
with a group of USAID staff affected by AHI several months ago, and we 
continue to urge all staff potentially affected to report their 
experience and we assist them with care.
    To ensure care for our staff, USAID designated the Deputy 
Administrator for Management and Resources to oversee efforts across 
USAID to support staff reporting AHIs and to coordinate requirements 
across the interagency. USAID established a process for staff to report 
potential AHI experiences, and provides AHI awareness training to all 
new staff.
    USAID is providing support through our newly created position of 
the Chief Medical Officer as well as our outstanding Staff Care unit. 
We have enabled access to clinical evaluation of neurological symptoms 
of unknown origin for all who have requested them, initially through 
the State Department agreements with local hospitals, and currently 
through the Department of Defense as mandated in the National Defense 
Authorization Act.
    We continue to work with the State Department's Health Incident 
Response Task Force (HIRTF) to align our approaches for support and 
compensation where warranted by the HAVANA Act as well as Workers 
Compensation. In addition to assisting USAID with the care coordination 
for staff, USAID leverages State Department's voluntary baseline 
screening program available for all personnel and eligible family 
members 18 years of age or older who will be traveling for temporary 
duty (TDY) or posted at an overseas assignment.

    Question. Staffing: As I stated last year, USAID's most valuable 
asset is its people. Unfortunately, with at least 22 different hiring 
mechanisms and outdated assumptions about how specific missions, 
bureaus, and offices should be supported, the agency is in desperate 
need of a modernized strategic staffing plan that is flexible and 
adaptive to today's challenges. The budget request includes an increase 
for USAID's operating expenses and proposes to increase the number of 
program-funded positions, including for global health and humanitarian 
assistance.
    When will we see a comprehensive strategic staffing plan that 
aligns positions, skills, and resources across the agency, 
transparently and effectively streamlines hiring mechanisms, and 
reduces reliance upon costly institutional contracts and Participating 
Agency Service Agreements (PASAs)?
    Will the proposed increase in direct-hire positions be paired with 
a decrease in contractors?

    Answer. The Global Development Partnership Initiative (GDPI) is 
USAID's multi-year effort to address staffing needs by revitalizing the 
USDH workforce in line with the Administration's priorities and 
National Security Memorandum 3. Through GDPI, USAID will build a 
responsive and resilient workforce by increasing the size and diversity 
of the permanent career workforce and providing flexibility to hire 
non-career direct hire staff. Workforce expansion will focus on climate 
change, democracy and anti-corruption expertise, global health 
security, national security, operational management (procurement, human 
resources, financial management, and information technology), and a 
more permanent humanitarian assistance workforce.
    Over the multi-year trajectory, USAID will create an additional 
1,230 positions to reach a permanent workforce level of 4,750 USDHs. 
This represents increases of 620 Foreign Service (FS) and 610 Civil 
Service (CS) positions for permanent workforce levels of 2,500 FS and 
2,250 CS.
    At the end of FY 2021, USAID completed a successful hiring surge to 
reach prior appropriated staffing levels of 1,850 Foreign Service (FS) 
and 1,600 Civil Service (CS) positions. With FY 2022 Operating Expense 
funding, the Agency was able to jumpstart GDPI, with the goal of 
creating 100 new FS and 80 new CS positions in FY 2022. If Congress 
provides USAID with the Operating Expenses funding required to reach 
these staffing levels of 2,500 FS and 2,250 CS, use of other hiring 
mechanisms would decrease, but would not be eliminated.
    USAID is currently evaluating its overseas workforce planning 
efforts that have been used as a starting point for decisions on the 
allocation of Foreign Service Officers (FSOs) overseas. The Agency has 
also developed models for CS and FS staffing in Washington and is about 
to begin the final round of consultations within the Agency to finalize 
these two models. While all three of the models allocate FS and CS, the 
overseas model also considers local staff capacity including Foreign 
Service Nationals (FSNs). When creating these models, the Agency 
analyzed how other hiring mechanisms could be considered in future 
iterations. USAID is also making improvements in its data analytics and 
tools for the entire Agency, which will help Bureaus, Independent 
Offices (B/IOs) and Missions improve their ability to undertake 
workforce planning.
    USAID has already decreased the number of Participating Agency 
Service Agreements (PASAs) from over 300 to under 100 over a 2-year 
timeframe.
    Some of the increase in direct-hire positions would be off-set by a 
decrease in contractors, particularly in bureaus such as the Bureau for 
Humanitarian Assistance (BHA) where the Agency has long had to rely on 
contracted positions to fulfill long-term institutional roles that 
should be carried out by Direct Hires. However, in other areas, USAID 
is not appropriately staffed to meet requirements, regardless of 
mechanism. In these cases additional direct-hire positions would come 
in addition to other staffing mechanisms currently performing the work.

    Question. Partners: Through the New Partners Initiative, USAID aims 
to direct 25 percent of the foreign assistance it administers toward 
local organizations by 2025. Given the size, scope and complexity of 
USAID's largest programs, including the NextGen Health Supply Chain 
program, hitting that target while maintaining appropriate transparency 
and accountability will prove difficult.
    What is the status of the New Partners Initiative?
    Are you on track to hit the 25 percent target by 2025?
    When you set out your vision for ``localization'' in November 2021, 
you indicated that you might need new or amended authorities to achieve 
your goal. Is this still the case and, if so, what new or amended 
authorities have you requested?

    Answer. The New Partnerships Initiative (NPI) was re-launched in 
2019 and institutionalized under the Development, Democracy, and 
Innovation Bureau (DDI) in late 2020, where it has continued to provide 
technical assistance in support of the Agency's efforts to partner with 
new, nontraditional, and local partners. NPI currently supports 
Missions in 30 countries. Missions have made NPI awards representing 
more than $400 million to approximately 60 partners since 2019. NPI is 
part of USAID's broader commitment to ensuring greater levels of 
locally-led development across all of its programming, but it is not 
wholly localization-focused (i.e. a new partner may be a US-based 
entity).
    The 25 percent target is an Agency-wide goal. USAID envisions that 
each Mission or Operating Unit (OU) will assess their unique operating 
environment, recognizing that the approach to locally-directed funding 
may be different based on country context and a program's sectoral 
focus (e.g., education, health, housing, etc.). Many Missions already 
direct more than 25 percent of their funding to local partners, but the 
majority of our Missions and OUs will need to increase funding to local 
entities for USAID to reach the global 25 percent level. Missions 
across the Agency are now taking steps to increase their portfolios of 
local partnerships. Added funding flexibility for Missions to invest in 
local capacity strengthening is key to accomplishing the 25 percent 
local funding goal.
    Expanding USAID's local partnerships will require Missions to issue 
and manage a larger number of lower dollar value awards, to local 
partners who often do not have previous experience working with the 
Agency. This will require a higher level of USAID staff time and 
support. USAID is working to increase staff capacity, in particular 
Acquisition and Assistance professionals, to manage the larger number 
of awards and anticipates significant progress toward achieving the 25 
percent target.
    USAID is exploring whether additional legal authorities are 
required to advance our localization goals.

    Question. The Small Business Administration has set an annual 
target (for several departments and agencies) that 3 percent of all 
agency funds should go to service disabled veteran-owned small 
businesses (SDVOSBs). USAID has consistently missed that target by a 
very wide margin, averaging around 0.5 percent over the past several 
years.
    Are you aware of this issue?
    What is preventing USAID from reaching the 3 percent target?
    How, if at all, does the 3 percent SDVOSB target relate to the New 
Partners Initiative, which seeks to diversify USAID's partner base by 
lowering barriers to entry for ``non-traditional'' implementing 
partners, including local actors, small businesses, faith-based and 
civil society organizations, cooperatives, and diaspora groups?

    Answer. USAID is aware that we have not met the SDVOSB goals in 
many years and the Agency continues to look for ways to improve. We 
have considerably increased our efforts to partner with SDVOSB in 
fiscal year 2022 and have expanded our reach to SDVOSB resource 
partners. The intended result is to turn this trend around and begin to 
see greater increases in our SDVOSB achievements. Despite missing our 
SDVOSB goal, we have increased our annual contract obligations in the 
last three fiscal years, increasing from $21 million (FY 2019) to $30 
million (FY 2020) to $33 million (FY 2021). USAID currently has 11 
SDVOSB contract awards totaling $147,242,195. We fully intend to 
continue on this upward trajectory and surpass our prior years' 
results.
    USAID is seeking to improve upon acquisition planning practices to 
ensure SDVOSB are both targeted and invited to compete for USAID 
contracting opportunities based on their capabilities. This includes 
identifying more work that aligns with SDVOSB predominant contracting 
capabilities.
    Meeting the 3 percent SDVOSB target is part of a broader Agency 
effort to expand and improve our partnerships. One key component of 
this effort is the Agency's New Partnerships Initiative (NPI), which 
seeks to diversify USAID's partner base by lowering barriers to entry 
for new and nontraditional implementing partners, including local 
actors, U.S. small businesses, faith-based and civil society 
organizations, cooperatives, and diaspora groups. While USAID is 
committed to lowering barriers for all partner groups, we recognize 
that we must address the specific barriers faced by U.S. small 
businesses, local partners, and private sector partners. These groups 
are underrepresented in USAID's partner base, despite efforts over the 
past several years to expand USAID's partnerships with new, local, and 
small business partners through initiatives such as NPI. Another way we 
are working to address the need to diversify the partner base is by 
refreshing the Agency's Acquisition and Assistance Strategy and 
implementation plan. Additionally, NPI supported the creation of the 
WorkwithUSAID.org resource hub, where current and prospective partners 
are encouraged to register their organizations in a Partner Directory, 
boost their visibility to the Agency, and enable them to identify 
potential partners to collaborate with who may be operating in related 
sectors or regions. Significantly, the Partner Directory can be 
filtered by type of organization, allowing visitors to the site (as 
well as USAID staff) to sort a list of all self-identified service 
disabled veteran-owned businesses that operate in a particular region. 
WorkwithUSAID.org also includes a Pre-Engagement Assessment for 
partners to understand their ability to pursue USAID funding, and 
received a customized report to learn what steps they can take to 
enhance their readiness.
    The Agency's Industry Liaison serves as the front door for all 
organizations seeking partnership with the Agency. This team promotes 
WorkwithUSAID.org and other opportunities for current and prospective 
partners to engage with USAID through a variety of social media 
channels, including LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. 
Additionally, the Agency hosts virtual events for partners to learn 
about USAID and ask questions. Finally, the Industry Liaison team 
coordinates the Agency's Business Forecast, which provides an advanced 
look at all USAID funding opportunities around the world. The Forecast 
is updated daily at usaid.gov/business-forecast, pulling from our 
internal planning systems. The Forecast helps to create a level playing 
field by actively communicating all of USAID's upcoming funding 
opportunities before any proposals or applications are due.
    USAID seeks to increase its collaboration with new SDVOSB resource 
partners and extend our reach to the SDVOSB community. Presently, we 
are collaborating with Vet Force, a 5,000 members association of 
veteran-owned small businesses, the American Legion with 1.6 million 
members chartered and incorporated by the U.S. Congress, and the 
Veterans Institute of Procurement (VIP) to attempt to reach new 
partners. Each of these partners have a rigorous tiered membership 
program to assist veteran owned small businesses in preparing to do 
business with the Government.
    USAID also participated in outreach events to increase our new 
partner base, including with the American Legion (May 2022), Veterans 
Institute of Procurement (June 2022), the Federal Business Council, 
Inc's sponsored annual Government Procurement Conference (June 2022), 
and the National 8(a) Association's Regional Conference (June 2022). 
Each of these events were targeted to reach SDBs which include SDVOSBs.
    OSDBU is also sponsored roundtable discussions with current and 
prospective SDVOSBs and industry days in June and July aimed at 
increasing our SDB reach which includes SDVOSB. In May 2022 OSDBU 
launched a live virtual overseas training pilot program that extended 
and expanded our Agency's procurement knowledge on Government 
contracting assistance programs that assist SDVOSB. Also, OSDBU is both 
leading and participating in outreach activities such as additional 
regional and Washington based live virtual trainings, webinars, 
industry days and procurement conferences that will reach more veteran 
organizations and educate them on our business opportunities and how to 
do business with USAID. Through these efforts USAID will attract more 
veteran owned firms and increase its workforce knowledge on how to 
support America's veterans through federal procurement.

    Question. Global Health: Global Health Security: This committee has 
approved bipartisan legislation--the International Pandemic 
Preparedness and COVID-19 Response Act--that would establish a 
structure for more effective leadership and coordination of U.S. 
Government efforts to advance the U.S. global health security overseas, 
built upon PEPFAR's proven model. The State Department, USAID, and the 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) repeatedly were 
consulted on the bill, and relevant technical assistance has been 
incorporated.
    Given your background as U.S. Permanent Representative to the 
United Nations, you surely appreciate the importance of diplomacy. Do 
you therefore agree that the U.S. Department of State is best suited to 
lead diplomatic efforts to advance U.S. global health security 
overseas, including at the country-level?

    Answer. USAID agrees on the need to institutionalize global health 
security (GHS) as a national security priority and on the importance of 
durable structures and coordination processes to advance GHS. The State 
Department has an important role to play in the U.S. Government's GHS 
efforts, particularly leading diplomatic outreach and coordinating 
relationships with foreign and domestic nongovernmental stakeholders. 
But the vast majority of the U.S. Government's GHS efforts are managed 
principally by USAID and the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention.
    USAID continues to support the framework laid out in the November 
4, 2016 Executive Order on Advancing the Global Health Security Agenda 
to Achieve a World Safe and Secure from Infectious Disease Threats. 
This framework relies on the National Security Council (NSC) for 
overall global health security coordination and delineates roles and 
responsibilities for departments and agencies, while recognizing that 
there is more that can be done to strengthen the framework and 
institutional capabilities of the implementing agencies. Additionally, 
the 2021 National Security Memorandum (NSM) 1, released by the Biden-
Harris administration designated the Assistant to the President on 
National Security Affairs to (i) coordinate the Federal Government's 
efforts to prepare for, prevent, detect, respond to, and recover from 
biological events, and to advance global health security, international 
pandemic preparedness, and global health resilience; and (ii) 
coordinate the development of priorities for, and elevate United States 
leadership and assistance in support of, the Global Health Security 
Agenda. Both the 2016 Executive order and the 2021 NSM empower and 
recognize the unique role and responsibility of the NSC to provide 
policy guidance and strategic coordination to Departments and Agencies 
with GHS equities, without interfering in their ability to manage or 
coordinate their own budgets.

    Question. The bill also provides a roadmap for establishing an 
accountable international financing mechanism for pandemic 
preparedness. Press reports indicate that planning is advancing 
quickly, despite a glaring lack of consultation with Congress. The 
President's budget request includes $6.5 billion in mandatory spending, 
reportedly to enable a multi-year commitment to this yet-to-be-
consulted-or-established financing mechanism. This is a major departure 
from past practice, and it certainly wasn't envisioned in the bill 
approved by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
    What is the status of efforts to establish an international 
financing mechanism for international pandemic preparedness?

    Answer. The Department of State is working with USAID to lead the 
effort for the U.S. Government to establish the pandemic prevention, 
preparedness and response financial intermediary fund (FIF). This is 
now moving ahead, with international momentum from allies and 
multilateral organizations behind it. On April 20, the G20 reached 
consensus on the establishment of a financing mechanism with Indonesia 
and committed to finalizing the FIF in June as a key deliverable of 
their G20 presidency. On June 30, the World Bank's Board of Executive 
Directors approved the establishment of a financial intermediary fund 
(FIF) to strengthen pandemic preparedness.. Critically, in addition to 
the U.S. pledge of $450 million, additional donors including the 
European Commission, Indonesia, Germany, the United Kingdom, Singapore, 
the Wellcome Trust pledged funds to support the FIF, with more expected 
to be announced in the coming months.

    Question. Why would the President request $6.5 billion in mandatory 
spending, reportedly to support the establishment of an international 
financing mechanism for pandemic preparedness, before knowing how it 
will be governed, how and where resources will be targeted, how 
progress will be measured, and how implementers will be held 
accountable for results?

    Answer. The governance structure, resource allocation, and 
reporting requirements are in the process of being developed and agreed 
upon, and we will be happy to brief you, along with our State 
Department and other Administration colleagues.

    Question. The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria: 
The budget request also includes $2 billion (+$440 million) to support 
the first year of an anticipated $6 billion commitment to the Global 
Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria (the Global Fund) while 
reducing funds available for bilateral tuberculosis programs (^$21.5 
million) and the bipartisan, Congressionally-authorized President's 
Emergency Program for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) program (^$20 million).
    Is it your view that the Global Fund is more efficient and 
effective than PEPFAR, the President's Malaria Initiative (PMI), and 
USAID's tuberculosis (TB) program, thereby justifying a major shift in 
funding, or is it the intent of the Administration that the Global Fund 
would take on greater responsibility for procuring related global 
health commodities, thereby enabling PEPFAR, PMI, and USAID's TB 
programs to focus their shrinking resources on service delivery?

    Answer. The $2 billion request is intended to support the Global 
Fund's seventh replenishment and will complement, rather than supplant, 
our bilateral HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria commitments. 
Increasing investments to combat the three diseases is particularly 
critical given the detrimental impacts that COVID has had on progress 
made against the three diseases. This investment will help spur other 
contributions needed to sustain the Global Fund's fight against HIV/
AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria and global health systems strengthening 
work. U.S. bilateral funding will continue to deliver impact through 
PEPFAR, PMI, and TB programs, leveraging Global Fund resources and 
accelerating progress towards our shared goals. USAID appreciates the 
increases Congress provided in FY 2022 funding for these three 
bilateral programs over the FY 2021 enacted levels.

    Question. President's Malaria Initiative (PMI): What is the status 
of efforts to appoint a permanent Malaria Coordinator?

    Answer. When the U.S. Global Malaria Coordinator position became 
vacant on February 7, 2022, the White House, in collaboration with 
USAID, initiated the process to identify candidates to be considered 
for the next Coordinator. The process is in the final stages, and we 
hope to select and announce a candidate as soon as is practical.

    Question. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR): 
USAID is a leading implementer of U.S. foreign assistance to combat 
HIV/AIDS globally, including under the PEPFAR program. Unfortunately, 
several USAID missions have struggled to maintain focus on PEPFAR's 
core mission and have taken opportunities to divert PEPFAR resources 
toward other priority projects with little-to-no connection to 
combatting HIV/AIDS.
    How are you holding USAID missions accountable for results under 
PEPFAR Country Operating Plans (COPs)?
    From your perspective, how can the COP process be improved to 
ensure robust participation and adherence by USAID field missions?
    How are you ensuring that USAID is appropriately leveraging, rather 
than duplicating or undercutting, PEPFAR platforms under the Global Vax 
Initiative in priority countries, including South Africa?

    Answer. Accountability for Results under PEPFAR Operational Plans: 
USAID, both at the Washington headquarters and Mission level, 
rigorously measures and monitors progress toward Country and Regional 
Operational Plan targets. In addition to PEPFAR requirements for 
quarterly reporting of performance, quality and financial data, USAID 
requires more frequent reporting by implementing partners for priority 
indicators to ensure programming is on track to achieve anticipated 
results. USAID participates in interagency performance consultations 
for each PEPFAR operating unit on a quarterly basis, with USAID Mission 
staff preparing and presenting comprehensive analyses, identifying 
challenges, and developing action plans for areas in need of 
improvement. In Washington, USAID conducts continuous review of 
performance and financial data and holds routine discussions with USAID 
Missions to offer analyses, strategic planning and technical and 
operational support to improve performance where needed.
    USAID HIV program performance remains strong. As of the end of the 
first quarter of FY22, USAID is on track to achieve care and treatment 
program targets globally, supporting nearly 7 million people with life-
saving HIV treatment--94 percent of these beneficiaries who received a 
viral load test are virally suppressed, allowing people living with HIV 
to live longer, healthier lives, and reducing further transmission of 
the virus. These are key benchmarks in reaching HIV epidemic control. 
Additionally, USAID has drastically expanded provision of HIV 
prevention medication (PrEP) in recent years, with PrEP programs now 
implemented in 32 countries. This expansion allowed USAID to initiate 
over 500,000 clients on PrEP in FY21 and USAID is currently on track to 
meet or exceed this result in FY22. Finally, an estimated 248,000 HIV-
related deaths and 950,000 HIV infections have been averted in 
countries since 2016 where USAID supports HIV commodity procurement, 
supply, and system strengthening through the USAID Global health Supply 
Chain Program-Procurement and Supply Management Project.
    Improving the COP Process: USAID Missions are actively engaged in 
the annual PEPFAR Country/Regional Operational Plan (COP/ROP) 
development process. USAID is supportive of improvements to the COP/ROP 
process that would further support planning for program sustainability, 
improve collaboration with non-USG stakeholders, and maximize time for 
strategic dialogue and we look forward to working with Dr. John 
Nkengasong to improve the process. Suggested adjustments could include 
supporting multi-year operational plans, streamlining COP/ROP 
deliverables, and adjusting format of COP planning meetings.
    Leveraging PEPFAR platforms for the Global VAX Initiative: USAID 
has maximized efficiencies by leveraging existing PEPFAR investments 
and resources for COVID-19 programming while preventing diversion of 
PEPFAR resources or focus. USAID partners who implement PEPFAR 
programming are already on the ground in communities and facilities, 
understand local contexts, and have established relationships with host 
country governments and local organizations. In many countries, USAID 
has also strengthened health system infrastructure, including human 
resources, laboratory capacity and the supply chain, to support PEPFAR 
implementation. USAID has leveraged these platforms for the COVID-19 
response, but used supplemental funding, such as from the American 
Rescue Plan Act, to increase human resources in facilities and 
communities; procure personal protective equipment and COVID-19 
testing, treatment and vaccine administration supplies; increase supply 
chain capacity for COVID-19 products; and adapt data systems for COVID-
19 surveillance and vaccine tracking.
    USAID implements a wide range of health programs in PEPFAR 
countries, including but not limited to those responding to COVID-19, 
malaria, tuberculosis, neglected tropical diseases, and pandemic 
threats, such as Ebola and Zika. USAID implements these programs while 
remaining fully dedicated to PEPFAR, the Agency's largest health 
program. USAID utilizes funding from multiple appropriations to support 
these activities, and the Agency has rigorous financial tracking 
systems in place and remains accountable to appropriations for each 
program area. As described above, USAID also routinely and 
comprehensively monitors HIV program performance; the Agency has no 
evidence that PEPFAR target achievement is negatively impacted by the 
USAID COVID-19 response.
    In South Africa, for example, Global VAX acceleration plans have 
built on existing PEPFAR platforms to deliver integrated services. 
During a USAID-supported vaccination campaign from February to April 
2022 in the coastal region of KwaZulu-Natal, 57 percent of individuals 
reached were first-time COVID-19 vaccine recipients, and 69 percent of 
individuals were high-priority populations. USAID partner BroadReach 
improved HIV screening by integrating COVID-19 vaccination community 
outreach and HIV screening, which identified nearly three times more 
HIV positive cases than routine community testing programs.

    Question. Health Worker Initiative: The President's Budget Request 
proposes $1 billion over the next 5 years to fund the international 
elements of a Health Worker Initiative.
    Can you provide more details about the proposed Health Worker 
Initiative?

    Answer. The COVID-19 pandemic has further exacerbated the projected 
global 18 million health worker shortfall, which primarily impacts low-
and middle-income countries and raises additional threats to the 
stability of health systems. Health worker shortages have impacted the 
ability of countries to maintain routine service provision--including 
maternal, child, and newborn health, HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other 
essential primary health care services--while meeting demands for 
COVID-19 specific services. The health workforce is the backbone of 
countries' health systems and investment is imperative to build health 
system capacity to provide services to achieve collective global health 
goals and resiliency for the future and global health security (GHS).
    The Global Health Worker Initiative (HWI) is meant to serve both an 
internal guide to better align and coordinate U.S. resources and an 
external call to action to coordinate significant, but disparate, 
investments in global health workforce deliverables. In addition to 
investments made across the U.S. Government, several countries, 
including G7 and G20 countries, and multilateral and regional 
organizations, have increased investments but with no mechanism to 
align these efforts against a common set of goals and metrics. The 
Health Worker Initiative serves as a strategic opportunity for the U.S. 
Government to demonstrate its technical leadership in strengthening the 
health workforce and mobilize coordinated attention and action around a 
set of coalesced priorities.
    Funding will serve as catalytic investment to advance country 
health worker priorities aligned to the four pillar areas of HWI focus 
to expand a sufficiently trained, protected, well-equipped and 
supported workforce:

  1.  Advance Health Worker Protection: Ensure health workers are 
        better protected and safeguarded from violence, harassment, and 
        discrimination; that they can access prioritized vaccinations 
        and adequate PPE; and that mental health services are available 
        and accessible to address burnout.

  2.  Expand the Health Workforce: To help address the global health 
        worker gap, the Initiative will advance efforts to create 
        career pathways and expand paid employment opportunities in the 
        public and private health sectors, helping countries to plan 
        and manage multidisciplinary health worker configurations well-
        equipped to meet provision of patient-centered services at the 
        primary health care level.

  3.  Advance Equity and Inclusion: Advance efforts to build a more 
        diverse cohort of health worker graduates and leaders that 
        reflects inclusivity, address numerous barriers, including 
        gender, ethnic/racial, and geography.

  4.  Expand Technology and Innovation: Work with partners in the 
        region to further harness innovation and expand digital 
        technologies that equip health workers with the ability to 
        provide more efficient, quality-integrated service delivery, 
        including telehealth services that can extend the reach of 
        health services from facilities and into communities, including 
        the most marginalized populations

    USAID envisions the majority of funds be programmed through 
missions with a key focus to advance agency localization efforts 
shifting greater leadership and ownership for health workers to local 
institutions. The aim is that catalytic funding across a subset of 
countries will also motivate additive investments by other donors, 
including G7 and G20 countries, multilateral and regional organizations 
and the private sector, that would also be coordinated under the HWI 
framework. USAID is continuing to work with the NSC and other agencies 
and can provide more details as further plans are developed.

    Question. In which countries or contexts would this program be most 
valuable?

    Answer. USAID has coordinated with other agencies to lead the 
development of proposed criteria for country prioritization for the HWI 
that includes:

  1.  Overall need aligned to the four areas of HWI focus with 
        prioritization for countries on the World Health Organization 
        Health Worker Support and Safeguards List that have a service 
        coverage index lower than 50 and density of doctors, nurses and 
        midwives that is below the global median of 48.6 per 10,000. 
        For reference, 46 out of the 47 countries on this list are also 
        USAID-supported countries (all but Eritrea), which further 
        demonstrates the significance of HWI;

  2.  Level of existing U.S. Government global health investments in 
        countries that could be leveraged and built upon (e.g. PEPFAR, 
        PMI, GHS) and as indication of where additional investment in 
        the health workforce could further accelerate and support 
        sustained achievement of global health goals; and

  3.  Enabling environment including current policies and political 
        engagement for prioritization for increased investment and 
        strengthening of the health workforce.

    Question. Health Worker Initiative: How will this Health Worker 
Initiative support the U.S.'s global COVID response or in our other 
global health programs?

    Answer. A critical priority is to reclaim lost ground on core 
global health strategic goals--including to reduce child and maternal 
deaths, combat infectious disease threats, and control HIV/AIDS. 
Reversing this damage requires addressing the core source of fragility 
in LMIC health systems--the lack of a robust health workforce that is 
consistently and adequately paid, trained, supported, and coordinated--
particularly in primary health care. Health systems anchored in a 
strengthened primary health workforce are proven to deliver markedly 
lower maternal and child mortality, improved equity, and better cost 
efficiency. And, as COVID-19 has shown us, strong systems are integral 
to detecting and responding to emerging epidemic and pandemic threats.
    HWI will aid the U.S. global COVID-19 response and other global 
health programs through expanding a comprehensive health worker 
pipeline, equipped and better managed to respond beyond singular health 
program needs. This would include collective services at the primary 
health care level, and into local employment so that fewer external 
resources are needed to support health workers in the future and that 
there is both stronger county and regional workforce capacity ready to 
efficiently respond to the next global health crisis.
    USAID has been at the forefront of advancing health workforce 
priorities for global health for more than 20 years and is well 
equipped to support implementation of HWI. HWI investments will not 
work in a vacuum and will support existing mission health workforce 
activities as well as allow missions to expand into new areas of health 
workforce support that will help further advance U.S. health 
investments and progress towards global health goals. USAID will issue 
policy guidance that includes a set of indicators to ensure that 
funding from this Initiative that is allocated to missions will be 
leveraged and coordinated with other types of GH funding (e.g. global 
health security), as well as other agency investments to amplify impact 
that is aligned to country health priorities. While USAID has been 
working across the interagency to inform development of HWI priorities 
it is envisioned that USAID will guide interagency coordination across 
countries to ensure alignment and leverage of interagency health worker 
investments.

    Question. Humanitarian Assistance: The Putin regime's unprovoked, 
brutal war against Ukraine has exacerbated the conditions driving food 
insecurity globally and has had a particularly damaging impact on 
fragile states in East Africa, North Africa, and the Middle East. Given 
how the 2007-2008 global food price crisis provoked riots and economic 
and political instability in countries from Africa to South America, it 
is clearly in the national security interests of the American people to 
respond. Remarkably, and despite claims that the Administration is 
seeking to ``reinvigorate U.S. humanitarian leadership,'' the FY 2023 
budget request proposes to cut humanitarian assistance by nearly 18 
percent, relative to FY 2022 enacted levels.
    While in full agreement that other donors need to step up and do 
more, how can an 18 percent decrease in humanitarian assistance 
accounts be justified at a time when displacement and food insecurity 
levels are at all-time highs?

    Answer. We are also concerned with the unprecedented and growing 
global humanitarian needs, which have been exacerbated by Russia's 
invasion of Ukraine. The FY 2023 request includes $10.45 billion for 
humanitarian assistance worldwide in base IDA, FFP-Title II, MRA, and 
ERMA and $1.8 billion--above the FY 2022 base enacted level of $8.65 
billion. We are grateful for the nearly $5 billion in supplemental 
resources Congress provided in FY 2022 to address unanticipated 
circumstances in Afghanistan and Ukraine, as well as the global food 
crisis. We will continue to assess evolving humanitarian needs, and 
consultation with Congress is an important part of our effort to ensure 
we have sufficient resources to respond.

    Question. The proposal to reduce food aid was accompanied by a 
vague reference to efforts to reform the Food for Peace program. While 
Food for Peace has served as America's flagship food aid program since 
1964, its success is hampered by arcane U.S. purchase and shipping 
requirements that unnecessarily drive up costs. These inefficiencies 
led Congress to authorize an alternative, the International Disaster 
Assistance--Emergency Food Security Program (IDA-EFSP), which enables 
USAID to utilize the right tool in the right place at the right time.
    Specifically, what reforms do you intend to propose to make the 
Food for Peace program more efficient and effective?
    Will you commit to working with your authoring committees, the 
Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Foreign Affairs 
Committee, to socialize, negotiate, and enact urgently needed food aid 
reforms?
    Should those reforms include a change to U.S. cargo preference 
requirements, which have outlived their usefulness purpose? If not, why 
not?
    What is the cost differential between U.S. commodities shipped on 
foreign-flagged vessels and U.S.-flagged vessels?
    What is the time differential between U.S. commodities shipped on 
foreign-flagged vessels and U.S.-flagged vessels?
    On average, how many U.S. flag carriers bid on USAID food 
assistance procurements?

    Answer. Yes, the Agency commits to working with the Senate Foreign 
Relations Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee, to 
socialize, negotiate, and enact food aid reforms. At a minimum, 
specifically, USAID will pursue technical legislative fixes to the Food 
for Peace Act that will reduce administrative burden for new, small, or 
local partners; allow USAID to support emergency response operations 
and quality non-emergency program design with Title II funds; 
streamline the award-making process; and improve flexibility between 
humanitarian funding streams to ensure that the most appropriate 
funding tool is used for every crisis.
    Given the extremely high levels of global humanitarian need, USAID 
is supportive of all efforts to increase the speed and reduce the cost 
of providing life-saving assistance. Cargo preference requirements 
increase the cost and reduce the timeliness of life-saving emergency 
food assistance. Russia's war against Ukraine threatens to reduce 
global food, fuel, and fertilizer supplies and increase the cost of 
these commodities. Between Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21) and FY22 (year-to-
date), the average cost to purchase a representative basket of food and 
deliver it to the areas of the world where USAID works most has risen 
by approximately 23 percent. In FY21, USAID paid approximately 46 
percent more per metric ton (MT) to ship commodities on U.S.-flag 
vessels than foreign-flag vessels: the average ocean rate per MT was 
$162 for U.S.-flag vessels and $111 for foreign-flag vessels. 
Additionally, in FY21, of the 1.7 million MTs of commodities for which 
USAID issued solicitations, approximately 42 percent (714,000 MT) did 
not receive any U.S.-flag offers/bids.
    When USAID does not receive a U.S. flag bid on a solicitation (due 
to lack of availability or otherwise), USAID makes a determination of 
non-availability (DNA). Upon this determination, USAID notifies the 
Maritime Administration (MARAD) of the DNA and contracts with a foreign 
flag carrier based on the lowest landed cost offer received that 
complies with the terms and conditions of the solicitation (e.g. 
capacity and availability to meet the requirements as specified in the 
solicitation), and past performance of the service. If it was necessary 
to wait for a U.S. flag ship to become available in lieu of chartering 
a foreign flag ship, at this time, it would take approximately 2-3 
additional months for emergency food commodities to reach their 
destination.

    Question. Democracy, Rights, and Governance: Gender: The FY23 
Budget request includes $200 million for the Gender Equity & Equality 
Action Fund.
    How will this money be spent compared to the previous fund, which 
was named Women's Global Development and Prosperity Fund?

    Answer. The GEEA Fund builds and expands upon the successes and 
lessons learned from the Women's Global Development and Prosperity (W-
GDP) Initiative and its corresponding ``WGDP Fund,'' by expanding upon 
the three W-GDP pillars (workforce development, entrepreneurship, and 
enabling environment), with a comprehensive set of priorities and 
principles. The priority areas, for instance, incorporate prevention 
and response to gender-based violence where it impacts women's economic 
development, and address issues such as the gender pay gap and unpaid 
care responsibilities.
    The GEEA Fund priorities include: promoting economic 
competitiveness through well-paying, quality jobs; expanding care 
infrastructure and value domestic work; securing women's economic 
future through green jobs and building resilience to climate change; 
promoting entrepreneurship, and financial and digital inclusion, 
through trade and investment; and dismantling systemic gender barriers. 
The GEEA Fund key principles for programming include a focus on 
partnerships, localization, transformation of systemic and structural 
inequalities, an intersectional approach, utilization of gender 
analyses, prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse, and 
consultations.

    Question. Europe and Eurasia: Ukraine: Many local Ukrainian aid 
organizations and networks complain to us that large international aid 
groups are poorly organized for their work in Ukraine because they do 
not know how to work in a country that has both an ongoing war and a 
functioning government, working transport systems, and active public 
services.
    How can USAID most effectively bridge the gap between large 
multilateral aid organizations and local partners so assistance can 
flow to the areas and people that need it most?
    How much assistance does USAID assess is making it the last mile, 
making it to the people that need that are most in need?
    How much aid does USAID is being held up in warehouses or being 
distributed to those people who are in less dire circumstances?

    Answer. We acknowledge the critical role that local Ukrainian 
organizations play in this response, and are committed to building and 
scaling engagement with these groups. Many of USAID's awardees are 
engaging local Ukrainian organizations as sub-grantees.
    USAID is providing humanitarian assistance through the United 
Nations (UN) and international non-governmental organizations (INGOs), 
which often partner with local organizations to deliver assistance. 
Currently, USAID is working with 44 local organizations in Ukraine as 
sub-awardees and anticipates an increase in that number. However, USAID 
recognizes that some local organizations have not previously worked 
with international donors, engaged in humanitarian work, or programmed 
the significant amount of money that is currently flowing into the 
Ukrainian humanitarian response. In some cases there is a need to set 
up, or further develop, their internal systems (e.g., compliance, human 
resources) and to provide training and capacity building. Engaging 
local organizations as sub-awardees via UN or INGO partners is one 
approach to mobilizing local humanitarian action while ensuring the 
necessary compliance, oversight, and systems are in place in line with 
our donor requirements.
    In areas experiencing active conflict, insecurity remains the most 
significant access constraint near frontlines, making it difficult for 
even local organizations to deliver aid. Humanitarian actors continue 
to call for humanitarian pauses to the conflict to allow for safe 
passage without security guarantees. In addition, mine contamination 
following the Government of the Russian Federation's tactical retreats; 
destroyed roads and bridges; and restrictions of the movement of 
humanitarian actors and people in need of assistance are other critical 
access issues that have impeded humanitarian aid delivery.

    Question. Western Hemisphere: Venezuela: Please describe the 
attitude of the Maduro regime towards independent civil society in 
Venezuela, and the environment of state-led threats in which civil 
society operates in Venezuela.

    Answer. The Maduro regime continues its hostility towards 
independent civil society in Venezuela, including legal and financial 
threats, extra judicial violence, forced migration, and other forms of 
harassment. Currently, the Illegitimate National Assembly is revisiting 
passage of a non-governmental organization (NGO) law that would make it 
mandatory for NGOs to join a national register to carry out activities 
in the country. All NGOs that operate in Venezuela would need to 
provide the authorities with information on their constitution, 
statutes, activities, providence, administration, and the final 
destination of their resources. Significantly, the law would require 
details on an NGOs source of financing.
    In April 2022, the Maduro regime included the country's NGOs in a 
proposed anti-terrorism bill that would codify the regime's ability to 
restrict, harass, or criminalize specific institutions it finds 
threatening. In May 2022, 326 Venezuelan NGOs signed a petition 
demanding the revocation of the draft bill.
    USAID recognizes the serious threat that our civil society partners 
work on a daily basis. Their safety and security is a top priority.

    Question. What impact would easing sanctions on the Maduro regime 
have on its ability to repress internationally-recognized human rights 
in Venezuela?

    Answer. USAID is encouraged by progress in the International 
Criminal Court's (ICC) investigation of the Maduro regime for crimes 
against humanity, and we also believe that the United Nations' Office 
of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Fact Finding Mission has 
produced valuable information on the regime's pervasive and systematic 
human rights abuses. Venezuela's USAID-supported human rights 
organizations have made important contributions to the work of the ICC 
and the UN.
    The Maduro regime continues human rights abuses despite existing 
sanctions. Given the Maduro regime's history, USAID does not believe 
that the additional resources would be used for the benefit of the 
Venezuelan people. The regime continuously prioritizes its available 
funds for security institutions that violate human rights, to the 
detriment of Venezuelan's basic freedoms and their well-being. If the 
United States lifted sanctions in a way that allowed the regime to 
accrue revenue, resources available to the regime would be stolen and/
or used to finance state security and other forms of social control, 
including greater control over humanitarian access.

    Question. What impact would easing sanctions on the Maduro regime 
have on the morale of our partners within Venezuela's civil society?

    Answer. Venezuelan civil society organizations have diverse 
perspectives on sanctions. On one end, some believe sectoral sanctions 
should be relieved because the increased revenues in the country, 
however poorly managed, will bring urgently needed humanitarian relief. 
On the other end, some believe the regime will never implement 
democratic or humanitarian concessions so sanctions must be continued, 
along with other measures, to weaken the regime. Others hold a position 
somewhere in between: that sanctions must be relieved only when 
democratic and humanitarian compromises are reached.
    We do not have a formal survey of opinions at this time. A majority 
of the civil society organizations our partners work with believe that 
sanctions should be leveraged for concessions, and that the U.S. 
Government should uphold individual sanctions against regime officials, 
especially against those that have clearly demonstrated a disregard for 
human rights. However, there are also those that opine that such 
measures over the last few years have had little impact on democratic 
or humanitarian conditions in the country.
    USAID will continue to work with allies to build multilateral 
pressure on the Maduro regime, hold regime members accountable for 
their criminal activities, identify those who undermine democracy or 
abuse human rights, and provide humanitarian assistance to alleviate 
the suffering of the Venezuelan people.

    Question. In your opinion, what are the minimum conditions that 
should exist in Venezuela to ensure that easing sanctions on the Maduro 
regime does not significantly enhance its capacity to repress 
Venezuelan civil society?

    Answer. At this time, USAID does not consider that the Maduro 
regime has demonstrated any progress on democracy or human rights that 
would trigger any consideration of a major change in United States 
sanctions policy.

    Question. What impact is the migration crisis caused by the Maduro 
regime having on the ability of Colombian authorities to meet their 
population's needs?

    Answer. Over 6 million Venezuelans have fled the country with over 
1.8 million migrants residing in Colombia. The majority of these 
migrants have no intention of returning to Venezuela. Through our 
regional USAID socio-economic integration programs, over the past 3 
years, we have supported tens of thousands of migrants with job skill 
building, entrepreneur training, professional recertification, and 
access to the financial and banking system.
    USAID is providing assistance to facilitate the socio-economic 
integration of Venezuelan migrants into countries throughout South 
America. The continuing significant influx of migrants across the 
region poses governance, economic, and social challenges. To mitigate 
these challenges in these countries, USAID is working to strengthen 
local institutions to provide basic services and effectively and 
equitably absorb the inflow of migrants.
    Specifically in Colombia, USAID is supporting the Government of 
Colombia (GOC)'s implementation of the 10-year temporary protected 
status for Venezuelan migrants announced in February 2021, as well as 
helping the GOC manage its borders by enhancing its capability to 
document and track incoming Venezuelan migrants and Colombian 
returnees. USAID will also support the GOC in increasing the capacity 
of its education system to provide sustainable and inclusive quality 
education in communities impacted by Venezuelan migration; support 
Colombian institutions to raise awareness of migrant issues, prevent 
human rights violations, protect those under threat, and respond to and 
investigate abuses; work to protect basic human rights for migrants, 
improve access to livelihoods and jobs, and promote community building 
to counter bias and discrimination; and strengthen Colombia's health 
system to help communities respond to the strain of hosting Venezuelan 
migrants and Colombians returning from Venezuela.

    Question. Central America: What is USAID's assessment of the impact 
of ending Title 42 removal authority on illegal migration flows through 
Central America?

    Answer. While Title 42 remains in effect, the Administration 
remains focused on doing its due diligence to prepare for potential 
changes at the border. USAID provides support to returned migrants in 
their home country of origin.
    USAID works closely within the interagency and with governments in 
the region to improve humane migration management and promote safe, 
humane, and legal migration pathways throughout Central America. We 
have alerted countries to the upcoming changes in processing at U.S. 
borders and requested flexibility in repatriating individuals without a 
legal basis to remain in the United States.
    I would refer you to the Department of Homeland Security and the 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevent (CDC) for further information 
regarding border processing and the Title 42 Public Health Order.

    Question. Please describe the specific reforms the Administration 
is seeking from each of the governments in Mexico and the countries of 
northern Central America to reduce illegal migration from the region, 
including the concrete and verifiable benchmarks by which USAID will 
measure the efficacy of its programs related to the ``Root Causes 
Strategy for Central America.''

    Answer. Mexico: The United States and Mexico remain committed 
partners on security cooperation to protect our citizens and to make 
our nations safer and stronger. During the October 2021 High-Level 
Security Dialogue, the United States and Mexico adopted the 
Bicentennial Framework for Security, Public Health, and Safe 
Communities, which modernizes our security cooperation and establishes 
a comprehensive, long-term approach for binational actions to pursue 
the safety and security of our societies. The Framework builds on our 
cooperation under the Merida Initiative, incorporates lessons learned, 
and offers a more comprehensive approach to security cooperation. With 
the adoption of the Framework, our countries committed to transforming 
our cooperation to better protect the health and safety of our citizens 
and promote the development of the most vulnerable communities in both 
countries, prevent criminal organizations from harming our countries, 
and pursue and bring criminals to justice.
    The Bicentennial Framework places a sharper focus on addressing the 
root causes of violence and insecurity in communities on both sides of 
the border. USAID continues to actively target individuals most likely 
to be victims or perpetrators of violent crime through focused 
reinsertion interventions for at-risk youth (secondary prevention) and 
social reinsertion programs for youth in conflict with the law 
(tertiary prevention). In collaboration with local governments, justice 
system operators, policymakers, civil society service providers, and 
private sector stakeholders, USAID promotes the institutionalization 
and replication of proven violence prevention models and the expanded 
utilization of alternative sentencing for youth offenders. The 
Bicentennial Framework also allows the expansion and scaling up of 
programming informed by evidence with proven results at the local 
level. In collaboration with state and local partners, USAID has 
developed successful approaches to address community violence, divert 
at-risk youth from crime, and better respond to high-impact crimes. 
Support and buy-in from the Federal Government are critical to 
expanding these initiatives more broadly and ensuring long-term 
sustainability.
    In support of our security cooperation objectives, USAID continues 
to develop robust Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plans--with clear 
output, outcome, and context indicators--for its own activities. Using 
these indicators, USAID sets baselines and targets, and works with 
partners to monitor progress and adapt as needed to achieve high-level 
outcomes. For example, in rule of law, USAID supports attorneys general 
offices and courts, among other institutions, to increase the 
efficiency and effectiveness of criminal and civil justice systems. 
These programs include developing analytical ability, improving 
victims' access to justice, and building public support for criminal 
justice reforms. To measure progress, USAID tracks prosecution rates 
for high-impact crimes, aiming to increase from a baseline of 12.2 
percent in 2018 to 15 percent by 2022. Also, the percent decrease in 
average time for all case resolutions in State Courts is expected to 
decrease by 10 percent in 2022. Compliance rate with precautionary 
measures is expected to increase to 90 percent in target states, from a 
baseline of 88 percent.
    Under the Bicentennial Framework, the United States and Mexico 
committed to develop joint indicators to measure high-level outcomes 
from our work. The final indicators remain under negotiation but will 
focus on significant outcomes needed to assess progress in our priority 
areas.
 southern mexico and development cooperation with the gom in northern 
                            central america
    During Vice President Harris' June 2021 trip to Mexico, USAID 
opened up a new partnership with the Mexican Development Agency 
(AMEXCID) to work jointly to address the root causes of migration in 
Northern Central America. Under a joint framework called Sembrando 
Oportunidades, USAID and AMEXCID are working to coordinate our major 
economic growth and livelihoods project to give communities at risk of 
migration, the best potential outcomes possible by transferring 
beneficiaries from GOM programs to our own which offer them longer term 
support.
    Sembrando Oportunidades includes support for economic development 
in southern Mexico, promotes clean energy, and deals with the root 
causes of migration in cooperation with AMEXCID. Our strategic alliance 
with Mexico addresses root causes in Northern Central America and 
southern Mexico, through an MOU that was witnessed last year by our 
Vice President. We also work to help AMEXCID improve their own systems 
as a young institution to achieve greater impact. We have found this 
partnership to be very productive, and it has helped the USG 
immeasurably in improving our own diplomatic and development relations.
                        northern central america
    In line with five pillars of the Root Causes Strategy, USAID 
prioritizes development programs that address the key drivers of 
irregular migration from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, with 
particular focus on immigration to the United States.
    In practical terms, this entails aiming to focus programs 
geographically in areas with higher out-migration, and demographically 
on populations exhibiting higher propensity for irregular migration. It 
also means that collection and use of migration-related data is in 
addition to generating the evidence needed to track progress toward 
achievement of USAID's development objectives.
    To measure development outcomes, USAID and the Department of State 
track a robust set of performance and country commitment (context) 
indicators. Examples include jobs and sales generated through support 
to firms, at-risk youth reached with crime and violence prevention 
services, as well as satisfaction with police, courts, and local 
government services.
    For migration, USAID regularly analyzes migration data from 
multiple sources, including sensitive data from the U.S. Customs and 
Border Protection (CBP), gauges attitudes and opinions of Central 
Americans related to migration through perception surveys, and 
commissions evaluations, assessments, and studies that provide deeper 
insight into outcomes and operational context.

    Question. Middle East: Syria: Assistance in Regime-Held Areas: I 
was deeply concerned to learn that this Administration is supporting 
both State and USAID funding in Assad regime-held areas.
    Given Assad's systematic manipulation of international aid, how can 
the U.S. ensure assistance does not benefit the Assad regime?
    How does U.S. support for ``early recovery'' projects in Assad-held 
areas further core U.S. objectives?
    Please provide USAID's definition of ``reconstruction funds''? What 
is the distinction between reconstruction and early recovery?
    What are the red lines in terms of U.S. assistance in regime 
controlled areas?

    Answer. We employ a range of risk mitigation measures to prevent 
our assistance from benefitting the Assad regime or other sanctioned 
individuals or entities in Syria, including when such entities may 
control territory in Syria. Our humanitarian partners are required to 
have comprehensive risk mitigation plans that include, among other 
things: independent beneficiary selection and verification; post-
distribution monitoring; warehouse security measures; financial and 
procurement controls; background checks for sub-partners, vendors, and 
staff; protocols for mitigation of and response to waste, fraud, and 
abuse; efforts the partner will undertake in collaboration with other 
organizations, such as the development of joint operating principles or 
information exchanges on risks in the operating environment; and 
measures to mitigate the risks that sanctioned groups or individuals 
could receive reputational benefit from the proposed activities, such 
as a sanctioned group or individual claiming credit for assistance or 
services provided. All partners are also required to fully cooperate 
with a USAID-contracted third-party monitoring service to monitor the 
implementation of all programs and provide immediate updates on any 
interference with aid, particularly with regard to sanctioned groups. 
All USAID partners are additionally required to employ their own third-
party monitoring contractors to monitor the implementation of their 
programs on the ground. All USAID partners are also required to provide 
immediate incident reports on any interference or instance of fraud, 
waste, or abuse, even if only alleged, to the USAID Office of Inspector 
General, the award's Agreement Officer, and Agreement Officer's 
Representative.
    USAID-funded early recovery programs in regime-controlled areas are 
very limited in scope--such as small scale repairs of water pumps and 
community based livelihood programs targeted at vulnerable women--and 
do not involve direct support to national Syrian Government 
institutions, nor (like all USAID humanitarian programs) are they 
directed by them. Early recovery in Syria does not mean reconstruction 
or support to the central government, normalizing relationships with 
the regime, or removing pressure on Assad to engage in the political 
process.
    USAID distinguishes early recovery programming from reconstruction 
programming by design, intent, and scale. Humanitarian early recovery 
is a form of humanitarian assistance that aims to reduce immediate and 
protracted humanitarian needs by strengthening the self-reliance of 
affected populations through generally small-scale programs at the 
individual, household, and local community level; improving individual, 
household, and community welfare; and therefore reducing dependence on 
external assistance.
    Like all other humanitarian programs, early recovery activities by 
humanitarian agencies are conducted based on community needs and with 
independent partners. The United States does not support reconstruction 
directed by the Syrian Government, which would be designed to benefit 
its own narrow interests. We believe irreversible political progress 
toward a political solution in line with United Nations Security 
Council Resolution (UNSCR) 2254 is both a necessary and vital condition 
for reconstruction and we have not seen progress on this front.

    Question. Renewal of UN Mandate for Cross-Border Humanitarian 
Assistance: In July, the UN-monitored Syria cross-border mechanism will 
expire and the UN, along with partners and allies, will have limited 
ability to partner with local entities to continue to deliver aid to 
millions in NW Syria. The risk of a catastrophic humanitarian event is 
astronomical.
    Please describe the efforts that USAID is taking to encourage the 
UN and other partners to hand off necessary programs to local entities 
so that essential programs can continue in the event of non-renewal.
    How can the DART team, based out of Gaziantep, Turkey, maintain its 
ability to partner with the UN and other entities to ensure 
humanitarian aid will flow to those in need in the event of non-
renewal?
    Should the Russians and/or the Chinese issue a veto, what would 
non-renewal look like for Syrians and the international community?
    Do you believe that cross-line assistance is a substitute for 
cross-border assistance?
    Please describe your engagements with humanitarian partners on the 
event of renewal or non-renewal.
    Are humanitarian partners preparing to hand off essential programs 
in NW Syria should the mechanism not be renewed?
    In the event of non-renewal, what posture would the DART team and 
USAID take on continued aid assistance to NW Syria?

    Answer. USAID strongly shares your concerns regarding the 
potentially catastrophic humanitarian consequences of non-renewal of 
the United Nations' (UN) cross-border mandate for delivery of 
humanitarian assistance into northwest Syria. Preparations to date have 
confirmed USAID's assessment that any contingency operations in the 
event of a non-renewal would only cover a fraction of the UN's current 
caseload of assisting 2.4 million people per month through cross-border 
aid. We support using all modalities to deliver humanitarian assistance 
to Syrians in need, including both cross-line and cross-border 
mechanisms, but we have also been clear and consistent with Security 
Council members, allies, and partners, that given the numerous 
challenges of delivering cross-line aid, it cannot match the scale and 
scope of cross-border aid into northwest Syria.
    Since the passage of UN Security Council Resolution 2585, there 
have been four UN cross-line missions to northwest Syria; with the most 
recent delivering food aid for 43,500 people. By contrast, in a typical 
month, UN cross-border aid through Bab al-Hawa delivers enough food for 
1.4 million people. Frankly, there is no comparing the two. Cross-line 
assistance simply cannot substitute for cross-border.
    Since the start of this Administration and consistently across all 
three administrations in office since the Syrian conflict began, USAID 
has regularly consulted with partners and allies on the best ways to 
maintain humanitarian access and deliver U.S. humanitarian assistance 
to the Syrian people, including in the northwest. USAID is in constant 
discussion with UN leadership and UN agencies about humanitarian needs 
in northwest Syria and the unique mandates and capabilities that each 
agency brings to this humanitarian response. USAID consistently 
stresses to UN agencies the importance of meeting needs in northwest 
Syria through all means available. USAID is also in constant discussion 
with UN agencies and our non-governmental organization (NGO) partners 
about the need to support local humanitarian partners in northwest 
Syria and across the whole of Syria. NGOs play an indispensable role in 
this response, and USAID has and will support efforts to enhance their 
capacities.
    All of these channels will remain open up to and beyond the vote to 
reauthorize UN cross-border aid to Syria this July. We will continue to 
use all means available to advocate for continued humanitarian access 
and to deliver U.S. humanitarian assistance to the Syrian people, 
including in the northwest, in coordination with the UN, NGOs, other 
donors, and partner countries. In any emergency response, including in 
Syria, USAID expects humanitarian agencies to prepare for all 
reasonable scenarios so life-saving aid keeps flowing to those who need 
it.
    USAID is available to provide further details in response to your 
questions in an appropriate setting.

    Question. Palestinian Assistance: Turning to Palestinian 
Assistance, how are we trying to encourage the Palestinian Authority to 
abandon support for terrorism, including pay to slay?

    Answer. We agree with you that the practice of prisoner and martyr 
payments or any support for terrorism is abhorrent, and the Biden-
Harris administration is committed to continuing to work to end the 
practice of Palestinian prisoner and ``martyr'' payments. We continue 
to urge Palestinian Authority leaders and officials to end this 
practice in meetings at all levels. Most recently, in her meeting with 
Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh, Deputy Administrator Isobel Coleman 
emphasized the need to end the unacceptable practice, until which time 
USAID will strictly adhere to restrictions on assistance to the PA 
under U.S. law.
    We believe it is critical for Israel and the PA to refrain from 
unilateral steps that exacerbate tensions and undercut efforts to 
advance a negotiated two-state solution, including incitement to 
violence and providing compensation for individuals imprisoned for acts 
of terrorism.

    Question. Yemen: What steps can USAID take to improve oversight of 
operations in Yemen given our limited presence on the ground?

    Answer. We place the highest priority on ensuring U.S. taxpayer 
funds are effectively supporting their intended purpose. USAID requires 
our partners to have proper safeguards and risk mitigation systems to 
support the provision of assistance to those who need it most. USAID 
also utilizes various oversight mechanisms to ensure programs reach the 
intended beneficiaries, including third-party monitoring, partner 
vetting, geo-tagged photos, and videos of distributions. USAID/Yemen is 
also rolling out third-party, in-person site visits in limited areas 
deemed secure. We work closely with partners, the Republic of Yemen 
Government, other donors, and our Inspector General to identify risks 
and take steps to protect our assistance.

    Question. How can USAID use U.S. assistance to further U.N.-led 
peace efforts?

    Answer. The truce is an opportunity for a durable and inclusive 
resolution to the conflict and expands the space for much-needed relief 
that USAID and the international community are providing to millions of 
Yemenis. A key U.S. policy objective in Yemen is to support a United 
Nations (UN)-led inclusive, negotiated political settlement to the 
conflict. The United States supports the Republic of Yemen Government 
(ROYG) as the internationally recognized government and aligns 
assistance to enable the implementation of a resolution to the conflict 
consistent with U.S. national interests, through coordination with U.S. 
Special Envoy Timothy Lenderking's office.
    At the beneficiary level, USAID identifies and supports local-level 
initiatives that mitigate conflict, strengthen social cohesion, and 
promote the peaceful resolution of differences. Our work utilizes a 
step-by-step framework for building the resilience of community 
members, civil society organizations, the private sector, traditional 
leaders, and local government officials to collaboratively identify and 
address local issues through conflict mitigation and service delivery 
projects.
    USAID also trains formal and informal leaders, organizations, and 
networks to serve as neutral arbitrators and peace-builders to meet 
community and constituent needs. As of March 2022, 24 grants totaling 
nearly $1 million have been awarded to community-based Yemeni 
nongovernmental organizations to engage youth in community and civic 
life; build unity and tolerance across historical or other divides; 
promote innovative tools to reconnect communities and reignite pride in 
commonalities; and amplify women's participation in community peace-
building and/or service delivery. For instance, youth grantees have 
produced art, media, and community events that showcase messages of 
peace and reconciliation, build understanding across groups, and 
celebrate Yemen's shared cultural heritage.
    USAID also facilitates increasing civil society and women's voices 
in ROYG decision-making on the peace process.
    These investments, carefully coordinated with U.S. Special Envoy 
Timothy Lenderking's office, align our assistance to support a United 
Nations (UN)-led inclusive, negotiated political settlement to the 
conflict, a key U.S. policy objective in Yemen.

    Question. How can USAID use U.S. assistance to improve the 
internationally-recognized government's ability to deliver services?

    Answer. Economic growth programs in Yemen support the stabilization 
and creation of a productive macroeconomic environment by supporting 
capacity-building activities and reforms in the Central Bank of Yemen 
(CBY) and other Republic of Yemen Government (ROYG) institutions. With 
our support, Yemen successfully launched its first-ever foreign 
exchange auctions, improved port productivity and wait times in Aden, 
and unfroze nearly $400 million worth of deposits at the CBY.
    USAID/Yemen's trade facilitation activity focuses on improving port 
procedures at the Aden and Mukalla Ports in partnership with the port 
authorities and Yemen Customs Authority. USAID interventions aim to 
reduce trading costs and delays, counter corrupt practices, increase 
transparency (as per World Trade Organization's Trade Facilitation Act) 
by digitizing trading procedures and reducing trade-related 
bureaucracy. This collective set of interventions is designed to i) 
facilitate the flow of essential goods into Yemen, particularly 
humanitarian aid, food products, and critical medical supplies for 
combatting COVID-19; (ii) enhance the competitiveness of Yemeni 
producers, particularly small and medium enterprises; and (iii) promote 
Yemeni exports.
    To enhance Yemen's access to international financial systems, USAID 
upgraded the CBY's access to SWIFT, a network for financial transfers 
that underpins transparency and accountability. These improvements are 
important for businesses that struggle to operate in a normal market 
environment by increasing citizen trust by enhancing the ROYG's 
responsiveness and ability to mitigate the impact of the crisis.
    USAID also works closely with the Ministry of Education to support 
a stronger, resilient education system which provides quality formal 
education for Yemeni children. These actions include curriculum reform, 
teacher training and improving access to school, with a special focus 
on girls. In collaboration with the Ministry, USAID has established 
non-formal education centers in communities to help the roughly 2 
million internally displaced children continue their education.
    Likewise, USAID is strengthening the Ministry of Health to deliver 
quality maternal, child and reproductive health care to over 220 
clinics. Activities include systems strengthening to ensure there are 
no supply chain breaks in key medicines and materials as well as 
extensive training and capacity building for doctors, nurses, midwives 
and other healthcare professionals.
    USAID collaborated closely with local authorities to assist more 
than 1.5 million vulnerable Yemenis with increased, sustainable access 
to clean water, improved sanitation services, and hygiene awareness 
sessions to prevent the spread of communicable diseases such as cholera 
and COVID-19.

    Question. Afghanistan: The Administration seems to be surprised 
that the Taliban are behaving like the Taliban. We've seen them eject 
women and girls from school, re-instate guardianship laws, and it's 
clear that the Taliban maintains a relationship with al-Qaeda.
    What is the wisdom in the Administration's plans to issue a 
national interest waiver to allow direct financial benefit to the 
Taliban?
    How does the Administration find leverage to change Taliban 
conduct?
    To what degree do you feel assistance is a point of leverage?

    Answer. For questions regarding the national interest waiver, we 
refer you to the U.S. Department of State.
    USAID works closely with the Department of State and other 
interagency partners to identify options for engaging with the Taliban 
to hold them accountable for their public commitments. We work closely 
with the Afghanistan Affairs Unit in Doha to raise concerns and issues 
through their channels. USAID programs operate to support humanitarian 
and basic needs of the Afghan people, while also seeking to promote 
economic stabilization within Afghanistan. With the recent news of the 
Taliban issuing a decree forcing Afghan women and girls to observe 
hijab and strongly encouraging them to stay home, USAID is actively 
working with interagency partners to identify measures to pressure the 
Taliban to reverse this decree, as well as other policies that 
contravene their public commitments. Unfortunately, the Taliban have 
shown that assistance does not sway their thinking or their actions; 
further, they have not demonstrated capacity to solve the ongoing 
humanitarian and economic crisis and alleviate the suffering of Afghans 
on their own.

    Question. Summit for Democracy: In the ``year of action'' between 
the 2021 and 2022 Summits for Democracy, what deliverables does USAID 
expect to share with Congress?

    Answer. At the 2021 Summit for Democracy, USAID announced 14 
deliverables under the umbrella of the new Presidential Initiative for 
Democratic Renewal (PIDR). The PIDR centers on five areas of work 
crucial to the functioning of transparent, accountable governance, and 
in which we perceive our democracy assistance efforts need an update to 
meet the present moment: supporting free and independent media, 
fighting corruption, bolstering democratic reformers, advancing 
technology for democracy, and defending free and fair elections and 
political processes. USAID's deliverables include a number of 
innovative programs and initiatives, including:

   The Powered by the People initiative, which will use new 
        methods to empower and improve the efficacy of citizen 
        movements;

   The Defamation Defense Fund (recently renamed ``Reporters 
        Mutual'') activity, which will provide liability coverage to 
        shield investigative journalists from defamation lawsuits and 
        allow them to continue their critical work.

   The Combating Transnational Corruption Grand Challenge, 
        which will allow USAID to work with global partners to develop 
        innovative tools and technologies and launch joint initiatives 
        to reduce transnational corruption.

   The Defending Democratic Elections Fund, which will help 
        countries and electoral community actors to proactively address 
        the wide range of contemporary threats to elections and 
        political processes.

   The Advancing Digital Democracy initiative, which will work 
        with governments, technologists, and civil society to foster 
        digital ecosystems in which technology is developed, used, and 
        governed in ways that advance democracy and respect for human 
        rights.

   The Partnerships for Democracy initiative (the name will 
        likely change, to avoid confusion with the House Democracy 
        Partnership), which will surge support to countries 
        experiencing democratic openings, bringing government and non-
        governmental stakeholders together to pursue inclusive reforms, 
        improve service delivery, and demonstrate that democracy 
        delivers.

    USAID does not anticipate announcing major new USAID programs in 
connection with the second Summit for Democracy. USAID intends to use 
the platform provided by the second Summit to elevate and highlight 
progress made on the ambitious suite of programs announced at the first 
Summit. USAID will use the Summit to expand on these programs and build 
on the lessons learned over the last year.
    To the extent USAID conceives any new deliverables during the Year 
of Action, we are committed to sharing them with Congress in advance of 
the second Summit.

    Question. As we approach the mid-summer check-in point, do you 
believe countries are taking actionable steps to promote and defend 
democracy?

    Answer. At the first Summit for Democracy (S4D) in December 2021, 
leaders from governments, civil society, and the private sector made a 
diverse series of commitments to strengthen democratic governance, 
protect human rights, and counter corruption and authoritarianism. 
Through the first Summit, the Year of Action (YoA), and future Summit 
convenings, the U.S. Government (USG) seeks to build on this momentum 
and spur collective action to bolster democracies and counter 
backsliding.
    During the first Summit, 100 leaders made over 700 commitments on 
which their governments would make progress during the YoA. Country 
commitments focused particularly on: taking aggressive action to 
counter corruption; defending journalists and activists and protecting 
media freedom; protecting marginalized communities, particularly women; 
defending democratic elections; and expanding access to justice. The 
State Department has confirmed and published official written 
commitments from more than 50 countries.
    While it is too early to evaluate the success of the Summit, the 
U.S. Government and its partners have taken important steps to ensure 
that countries follow through on their commitments to promote and 
defend democracy. The U.S. Government is raising country-level 
commitments in bilateral engagements, seeking participation on ours, 
and seeking to amply the broader goals of the Summit in multilateral 
engagements.
    In particular, since the first Summit, USAID, the Department of 
State, and other interagency partners have launched a series of 
consultative processes to support governments in making verifiable 
progress on their commitments. This includes launching a series of 
multi-stakeholder platforms, called Democracy Cohorts, that bring 
together non-governmental organizations, which bring specific expertise 
and/or resources, with governments that demonstrate political will to 
make progress on their Summit commitments.
    Civil society stakeholders are also using their networks and reach 
to raise awareness about countries' Summit commitments and provide the 
information and analysis critical for holding governments accountable 
for the commitments they have made. For instance, the International 
Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA), an 
intergovernmental organization headquartered in Sweden, is tracking and 
providing analysis of country commitments and supporting broad 
engagement on the Summit objectives via a dedicated Summit for 
Democracy resources portal.
    The State Department has also launched a government-to-government 
structure, the Focal Group, that provides an opportunity for Summit-
participating governments to provide input on planning for the first 
Summit and encourage partners to share progress on Summit commitments. 
The first Focal Group meeting took place last month, and we expect 
future quarterly meetings to provide opportunities for countries to 
report on progress on commitments.

    Question. Please describe the USAID Anti-Corruption Task Force's 
scope of work.
    What deliverables can the Anti-Corruption Task Force expect to 
produce?

    Answer. USAID's Anti-Corruption Task Force (ACTF) was activated by 
Administrator Power on June 25, 2021 to coordinate USAID's anti-
corruption activities and align Agency policy and programming with the 
Administration's new strategic directions and prioritization of anti-
corruption. The ACTF has functioned as a central coordinating body and 
surge capacity, shaping the U.S. Government's and USAID's strategy, 
priorities, and programmatic responses in the fight against corruption.
    The ACTF is led by an Executive Director and Senior Advisor, who 
reports directly to the Administrator, and is staffed by top experts 
drawing from within and outside USAID. It is currently housed within 
USAID's Bureau for Development, Democracy, and Innovation (DDI).
    In its first year, the Task Force led an aggressive push to 
revitalize and adapt anti-corruption efforts within USAID. Deliverables 
included:

   Shaping the first-ever U.S. Strategy on Countering 
        Corruption;

   Designing and announcing a bold suite of anti-corruption 
        programs--including the Empowering Anti-Corruption Change 
        Agents Program, Defamation Defense Fund/Reporters Mutual 
        Insurance Fund, Combating Transnational Corruption Grand 
        Challenge, and Global Accountability Program--during the first 
        Summit for Democracy (S4D);

   Expanding support to and collaboration with the Open 
        Government Partnership and Extractive Industries Transparency 
        Initiative to advance reforms in countries including Honduras, 
        Malawi, Moldova, and Zambia;

   Launching the Anti-Corruption Response Fund and using it to 
        support reforms in the Dominican Republic and Democratic 
        Republic of the Congo;

   Hosting the inaugural Anti-Corruption Evidence and Learning 
        Week and initiating new research on social and behavioral 
        approaches to anti-corruption, strategies for fighting 
        corruption in low political will environments, and addressing 
        COVID-enabled corruption; and

   Showing solidarity with anti-corruption activists and 
        champions through dozens of public events, private meetings, 
        briefings, speeches, podcasts, op-eds, and blogs.

    The ACTF is working to help key countries and reformers--from the 
Northern Triangle to Eastern Europe--step up their efforts to fight 
corruption by providing technical assistance, establishing new 
programs, connecting reformers to other support structures and 
partners, and showing political support and solidarity.
    As the ACTF enters its second year, the task force is shifting from 
setting this bold new direction to delivering on USAID's anti-
corruption vision. The focus going forward will be on 1) expanding and 
adapting anti-corruption programming and increasing USAID's 
responsiveness to windows of opportunity, backsliding, and 
experimentation; 2) issuing concrete plans, processes, and frameworks 
to drive implementation of the U.S. Strategy and related policies/
strategies; 3) commissioning and disseminating cutting-edge research, 
evidence, and data on corruption to inform USAID's programmatic work 
and resource allocation; 4) activating risk-based, targeted, and 
proportional measures, tools, and practices to effectively safeguard 
U.S. assistance from corruption; and 5) building USAID's long-term 
capacity to influence policy outcomes, demonstrate thought leadership, 
catalyze wide-ranging partnerships and coalitions, and fund cutting-
edge programs in the anti-corruption space.

    Question. With the wide range of commitments or declaration of 
intentions from participating countries, how can USAID appropriately 
and accurately measure progress on shared goals?

    Answer. USAID does not plan to independently measure country 
commitments but is supporting the efforts of the Department of State 
(DoS), National Security Council and civil society stakeholders to 
develop appropriate and accurate approaches to measure progress on 
shared goals without duplication of efforts. For example, USAID is part 
of an informal group that gathers monthly to share information on 
commitments with civil society and other multilateral partners.
    Internally, USAID plans on using existing annual reporting systems 
to collate relevant data and information regarding Presidential 
Initiative for Democratic Renewal (PIDR) activities to ensure that 
USAID is tracking the relevant indicators related to programming that 
relate to county commitments. USAID plans on developing an internal 
monitoring plan to efficiently and accurately track data related to its 
programming under the PIDR. USAID is also working with Missions to 
explore how they are best able to support the Year of Action and 
partner commitments.

    Question. It was recently announced that as part of the Summit for 
Democracy, the USG would host ``civil society consultations'' on a wide 
range of topics.
    What do you expect the outcome of these meetings to be?
    Does the USG plan to incorporate civil society organizations in the 
second Summit for Democracy?

    Answer. The U.S. Government will engage civil society in the Summit 
through two processes:

  1.  Democracy Cohorts. The U.S. Government has launched a multi-
        stakeholder platform, known as ``Democracy Cohorts,'' to 
        galvanize collective action toward fulfilling commitments in 
        areas of common interest. Democracy Cohorts will be co-led by 
        civil society organizations and governments. Cohorts will be 
        action-oriented, working together to further refine and 
        demonstrate progress toward implementing Summit commitments, 
        and potentially offering recommendations for new commitments or 
        other announcements for the second Summit. Governments are 
        encouraged to participate in one or more of these thematic 
        cohorts along with civil society organizations that have 
        particular issue expertise.

  2.  Civil society consultations. These consultations are designed to 
        be recurring, virtual convenings with a broad swath of 
        nongovernmental organizations, philanthropies, and the private 
        sector to discuss fulfillment of our first Summit commitments, 
        as well as inform the agenda and priorities for the second 
        Summit.

    They also provide a forum for exploring ways that civil society and 
government can work together to accelerate progress on key thematic 
issues. To date, there have been thematic consultations on topics as 
wide-ranging as Civic Space, Rule of Law, Technology for Democracy, 
Government Transparency/Public Procurement, and Media. These 
engagements have focused on asking civil society partners what 
commitments they would like to see democracies make significant 
progress in ahead of the next summit and how can the USG and civil 
society work together to implement existing commitments.
    USAID is working collaboratively with the State Department's Summit 
for Democracy Cell to convene these consultations, which respond 
directly to civil society demands for greater engagement and 
involvement in the follow up to the first Summit.
    We are also encouraging all Summit-participating countries to 
engage with local civil society organizations as they follow through on 
their first Summit commitments and develop new commitments for the 
second Summit.
    While second Summit planning is still in its early phases, the USG 
also seeks to create the space for gathering their ideas for the 
broader agenda and for their active participation in the second Summit 
for Democracy.

    Question. Multilateral Aid Review: Do you support a review of all 
U.S. multilateral aid, especially given the recent news of ongoing 
corruption and fraud within the UN system? Why or why not?

    Answer. The U.S. Government is deeply concerned about allegations 
of financial mismanagement and wrongdoing within the United Nations, 
including the most recent allegations at the United Nations Office of 
Project Services (UNOPS). USAID, working with the interagency, is 
committed to holding all implementing partners accountable for 
protecting U.S. taxpayer resources from the risks of waste, fraud, and 
abuse.
    The U.S. Government supports rigorous performance and evaluation 
measures for multilateral entities to ensure U.S. taxpayer dollars are 
aligned to achieve U.S. foreign policy objectives. The United States is 
committed to ensuring efficiency and effectiveness in international 
organizations to maximize their ability to deliver on their important 
mandates.
    Pursuant to USAID operational policy, the Agency reviews the 
organizational capacity of individual multilateral organizations 
(identified as Public International Organizations or ``PIOs'' within 
Agency policy) to identify and help mitigate the risks of waste, fraud, 
and abuse of USAID resources, prior to entering into funding 
arrangements with such organizations. These reviews are informed by 
external evaluations and international assessments of particular 
multilateral organizations, including those conducted by the 
Multilateral Organization Performance Assessment Network, of which the 
U.S. Government is a member.
    USAID coordinates closely with other U.S. departments and agencies 
to help inform and advance U.S. Government oversight and reform 
priorities for individual multilateral organizations, as well as for 
the wider multilateral system, to help improve performance; increase 
transparency and accountability; and advance the development, 
humanitarian, and foreign policy interests of the United States.

    Question. Indo-Pacific: The Pacific Islands have many development 
needs, particularly in the energy and education sectors. What has USAID 
done with the Pacific Islands in these areas in the past 5 years?

    Answer. USAID has not historically programmed education activities 
for the Pacific Islands. However, through existing activities we have 
held project management certification courses to support Pacific Island 
countries to access climate finance, and we have hosted joint trainings 
with the Taiwan International Cooperation and Development Fund 
(TaiwanICDF) on health and digital connectivity targeting key Pacific 
Island country government staff and technical officers. Going forward, 
we intend to increase our funding and investments in the region.
    USAID's cooperation with Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and Papua 
New Guinea has spurred joint initiatives such as the Papua New Guinea 
Electrification Partnership (PEP), which aims to increase 
electrification in Papua New Guinea from 13 percent of the population 
to 70 percent by 2030, and we have partnered with Australia and Japan 
to expand access to secure and reliable high speed digital connectivity 
in Palau.
    To support the multi-country PEP initiative, USAID recently 
announced a 5-year, up to $57 million program to strengthen the 
effectiveness and viability of PNG Power Limited, promote off-grid 
models, strengthen energy regulatory systems, catalyze private-sector 
investment, and conduct effective public outreach. The activity aims to 
facilitate energy access for 200,000 households, which will be 
supported through multiple strategies including the development of 
micro-grids in remote communities. USAID will partner with private 
sector companies to provide these energy solutions to communities.
    USAID's Energy Regulatory Partnership Activity via the National 
Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners also supports USAID PEP 
by strengthening energy regulatory capacity, including creating the 
regulatory framework for off-grid electrification.
    Through the Trilateral Infrastructure Partnership, USAID and the 
Department of the Interior are partnering with Japan, Australia, and 
the Government of Palau to cofund an undersea fiber-optic spur to 
Palau. The project will connect to a new U.S. International Development 
Finance Corporation-financed undersea cable, the world's longest, 
spanning from Singapore to the United States. While Palau is currently 
served by an undersea cable, this second cable would provide additional 
bandwidth, as well as critical and reliable redundancy that is not 
sufficiently provided by satellite internet service to improve economic 
growth and virtual education opportunities.

    Question. What are our plans in the next 5 years to help the 
Pacific Islands access energy resources and build energy 
infrastructure?

    Answer. The FY 2023 request will reinforce the U.S. Government 
partnership with the Pacific Island Countries (PICs) to advance 
strategic priorities in the region to address climate change, 
accelerate the economic recovery from COVID-19, and promote democratic 
resilience. FY 2023 resources will mobilize sustainable climate 
finance; increase access to climate resilient, high-quality investment 
and infrastructure; strengthen early warning systems and decision 
support tools; improve the enabling environment; and adopt climate-
smart livelihoods.
    We will continue deepening USAID's collaboration with Australia, 
Japan, New Zealand, South Korea, Taiwan, and other like-minded 
partners. We will also leverage our strong partnerships with regional 
institutions, including the Pacific Islands Forum, the Secretariat of 
the Pacific Regional Environment Programme, and the longstanding 
Pacific Community.
    U.S. assistance will support Papua New Guinea (PNG) to achieve its 
renewable energy targets, through the PNG Electrification Partnership, 
which will bolster the capacity of the country's energy utilities 
corporation. Resources will expand electricity connections and increase 
competition, promote new renewable energy models, including viable off-
grid electrification, and catalyze greater private sector investment in 
Papua New Guinea's energy sector. Partnering with like-minded 
countries--Australia, Japan, and New Zealand--and the private sector, 
the USG will support PNG's goal of connecting 70 percent of its 
population to electricity by 2030, up from 13 percent today.

    Question. The Chinese Government has been very active in pursuing 
development opportunities within the Pacific Islands. Does USAID have 
any major development projects planned for the Pacific Islands in the 
coming years? If so, what are they? If not, what are the regulatory, 
resource, or logistical obstacles to carrying out large development 
projects in this region?

    Answer. USAID has been expanding our development work in the 
Pacific Islands as part of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy, while 
working within the parameters of regional and bilateral funding 
allocations, and is also leveraging partnerships with like minded 
donors in the region to increase our work in the Pacific Islands. In 
keeping with the objectives of the Asia Reassurance Act of 2018, USAID 
programs across Asia and the Pacific strengthen democratic systems, 
foster economic growth and private sector investment, and improve 
natural resource management.
    In order for U.S. companies to compete in the Indo-Pacific region 
freely and fairly, they need citizen-responsive governance; respect for 
human rights, fundamental freedoms, and democratic values. These 
conditions help increase stability in a region of the world that is 
home to the majority of humanity.
    Among other achievements, USAID has successfully accelerated trade 
and investment through streamlined procedures; confronted illegal, 
unreported and unregulated fishing through partnerships with the 
private sector, governments, and civil society; promoted open and 
inclusive digital ecosystems; and bolstered the global health security 
agenda in the Indo-Pacific.
    We consider our Pacific neighbors to be essential partners in 
fostering a free and open Indo-Pacific region. Our work is designed to 
address the region's most pressing challenges, such as mitigating the 
effects of climate change, supporting transparent and high-standard 
infrastructure financing, driving digital connectivity, and fostering 
good governance and sustainable development--including support for 
coastal fishery management.
    USAID is planning two new activities that will benefit the Pacific 
Islands to leverage resources from like-minded partners to offer 
sustainable alternatives for private sector-led financing and economic 
growth. The first, USAID's new Digital Connectivity and Cybersecurity 
Partnership (DCCP)-Pacific program that is expected to be awarded in 
Fall 2022 will engage with private technology firms, internet platforms 
and other service providers to advance access and connectivity in the 
Pacific.
    Secondly, USAID is designing a new climate finance activity to 
support Pacific countries to access financing. It will draw on lessons 
learned from USAID's existing climate finance activity to identify new 
pathways to increase climate finance and investment for the Pacific 
Islands to fully implement nationally determined contributions, 
national adaptation plans, and similar expressions of national climate 
priorities.

    Question. What are the priority countries for USAID in the Pacific 
Islands? How is USAID coordinating with State Dept. and DoD efforts on 
these priority countries?

    Answer. USAID is implementing development programs in 12 Pacific 
Islands countries: Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), Fiji, 
Kiribati, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea (PNG), Republic of Marshall 
Islands, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu. USAID has 
staff based in six of these countries--Fiji, PNG, Solomon Islands, FSM, 
Marshall Islands, and Palau. As an integral member of the embassy 
community in these Pacific countries, USAID works closely with the 
inter-agency to carry out development programming and to ensure that 
increased presence, programming, and messaging are used to strengthen 
the U.S. Government's position and influence in the region. For 
example, in Papua New Guinea, USAID is working closely with the U.S. 
Indo-Pacific Command for procurement and deployment of vaccines and 
other health commodities to support countries' COVID-19 response, and 
to support disaster risk reduction and the fisheries sector. And in 
Washington, USAID coordinates with the State Department directly as 
well as with other USG agencies working on the Pacific Islands (such as 
the Department of the Interior) through regular National Security 
Council coordination meetings.

    Question. The Solomon Islands are an area of particular concern 
given reports of a potential Solomon Islands-China security assistance 
agreement. What has USAID done in the past 5 years with the Solomon 
Islands, and where are there opportunities to deepen U.S. engagement 
with the Solomon Islands in the short-term?

    Answer. Working closely with the Solomon Islands government, USAID 
launched a 5-year, $25 million Strengthening Competitiveness, 
Agriculture, Livelihoods and Environment (SCALE) Project in 2020. The 
project works with five implementing partners to focus on economic 
growth and trade in Solomon Islands, with specific emphasis on the 
development of the agribusiness sector and improved management of the 
forestry sector. Since the launch of SCALE in late 2020, USAID has been 
in regular consultation with the Solomon Islands Ministry of National 
Planning and Development Coordination and has collaboratively worked 
with relevant line ministries.
    USAID also has been supporting the health systems strengthening and 
COVID-19 response in the Pacific including Solomon Islands since the 
start of the pandemic. USAID has provided $52 million to prevent the 
spread and mitigate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic across the 
Pacific Islands. USAID assistance contributes to testing capacity, 
provides technical assistance and communication support for vaccination 
campaigns, and addresses shortages in supplies. In Solomon Islands, 
USAID facilitated U.S. donations of 153,270 Pfizer doses through COVAX 
between November 2021 and April 2022.
    In the area of disaster risk reduction, USAID works at the regional 
level as well as with national and provincial governments and local 
communities in the Solomon Islands to strengthen community resilience 
to the effects of climate change, natural disasters, and severe weather 
events. Since 2019, USAID has provided nearly $8 million in regional 
Disaster Risk Reduction programming for the Pacific Islands region to 
support community and government disaster planning, preparation, and 
response, including a joint effort with the U.S. Geological Survey to 
provide seismic monitoring equipment to improve the monitoring of 
volcanic risks. Over the same time period, USAID provided an additional 
$2.6 million for Disaster Risk Reduction activities specifically in the 
Solomon Islands through the International Federation of the Red Cross 
and World Vision Solomon Islands, as well as $100,000 to respond to 
Tropical Cyclone Harold.
    USAID also supports collaborative approaches to managing 
biologically diverse marine and coastal resources in Solomon Islands as 
part of international and regional programs. The Pacific Coastal 
Fisheries Management and Compliance and Our Fish Our Future projects 
launched in 2021 will have dedicated coordination mechanisms within 
Solomon Islands to stimulate national engagement in regional efforts.
    Through the Consortium for Elections and Political Process 
Strengthening (CEPPS), USAID's Strengthening Democratic Governance 
Pacific Islands (SDGPI) supports technical assistance to the Solomon 
Islands Election Commission (SIEC); third party election oversight and 
inclusive elections especially among marginalized groups; and youth 
participation leadership and citizen participation in local governance.
    USAID, in collaboration with the U.S. Embassy in PNG, is excited to 
implement an activity to launch a dynamic advocacy-oriented American 
Chamber of Commerce (AmCham) to facilitate trade and investment between 
the United States and Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Vanuatu.
    USAID is planning to award a Digital Connectivity and Cybersecurity 
Partnership (DCCP) Activity in Fall 2022. DCCP-Pacific is expected to 
be a new, 5-year, up to $24 million regional activity, subject to the 
availability of funds, that will support the digital transformation of 
Pacific Island countries. This activity would be available to identify 
critical ICT support needs in Solomon Islands.
    USAID is open to opportunities to strengthen marine security and 
introduce longer-term development programming to build the resilience 
of health systems in the Pacific to withstand routine shocks such as 
natural disasters and outbreaks/pandemics. We will continue to engage 
with our regional partners to identify needs in the Solomon Islands.

    Question. How is USAID working with our allies and partners to 
reduce redundancy and coordinate on development financing in the 
Pacific Islands?

    Answer. We will continue deepening USAID's collaboration with 
Australia, Japan, New Zealand, South Korea, Taiwan, and other like-
minded partners, working to identify areas of collaboration, overlap, 
gaps, and/or potential leverage of resources. We will also leverage our 
strong partnerships with regional institutions, including the Pacific 
Islands Forum, the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment 
Programme, and the longstanding Pacific Community, as well as our 
partnerships with Pacific nations' governments, civil society, and 
private sector.
    USAID will continue to engage like-minded donors directly, in-
country, and through multilateral initiatives such as the Quadrilateral 
Security Dialogue (Quad), U.S.-Taiwan Pacific Islands Dialogue, U.S.-
Japan-Australia Trilateral Infrastructure Partnership, the Trilateral 
Pacific Security Dialogue, and others. In addition to the U.S. being 
part of the PNG Electrification Partnership (PEP) with PNG, Australia, 
Japan and New Zealand and the Palau undersea cable spur with Australia 
and Japan, USAID also will continue to pursue opportunities to 
establish relationships with multilateral financial institutions and 
other new development partners who share our values and objectives in 
the region.

    Question. What is our engagement and coordination with the UK on 
development in the Pacific Islands?

    Answer. USAID has not engaged with the United Kingdom (UK) on 
country-level coordination in the Pacific Islands. However, there is 
strong interest from London for USAID and the UK to do so, and USAID is 
in discussions with the UK following the release of its new strategy 
for international development on May 16, 2022. The strategy includes a 
focus on building resilient supply chains, humanitarian support, and 
meeting climate and biodiversity goals in the Indo-Pacific region.

    Question. What is our engagement and coordination with France on 
development in the Pacific Islands?

    Answer. USAID welcomes increased engagement and coordination with 
France that supports the long-term resiliency and protects the 
sovereignty of Pacific Island nations. The FRANZ Arrangement, a 
partnership between France, Australia and New Zealand, is activated 
during humanitarian responses in the Pacific region. It provides a one-
stop shop for host governments to provide requests for assistance, 
allowing donors to coordinate who can cover which needs.
    USAID has successfully coordinated with FRANZ to respond to the 
recent volcanic eruption and tsunami in Tonga. USAID has observer 
status in FRANZ, but welcomes opportunities to further expand our 
engagement in the Arrangement for humanitarian assistance in the 
Pacific Islands.

    Question. What is our engagement and coordination with Japan on 
development in the Pacific Islands?

    Answer. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has a 
longstanding relationship with Japan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs 
(MOFA) and the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). Together, 
we actively coordinate development and humanitarian assistance 
globally, including in the Pacific Island Countries (PICs). USAID has a 
Senior Development Counselor in the U.S. Embassy Tokyo who is 
responsible for engaging with the Government of Japan to ensure 
Official Development Assistance policy and budgets are aligned and 
coordinated to the extent possible with the U.S. to achieve maximum 
results. USAID's Philippines, Pacific Islands and Mongolia field 
office, based in Manila, manages staff in Papua New Guinea, Solomon 
Islands, Fiji, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, Palau, and the 
Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), collectively providing assistance 
to 12 Pacific Island nations. These teams collaborate with Japan's 11 
embassies that cover 16 countries and JICA teams in 10 countries for 
project-level coordination.
    USAID and Japan coordinate closely on transparent, high-quality 
infrastructure development in the PICs, including through the Blue Dot 
Network. Australia, Japan, and the U.S. have also committed to working 
with FSM, Kiribati, and Nauru to build a new East Micronesia Cable, 
which will provide improved quality and secure communications to 
approximately 100,000 people across the three countries. At present, 
USAID and Japan are in discussions on coordinating Disaster Risk 
Reduction and reconstruction in Tonga after the devastating January 15, 
2022, volcanic eruption.

    Question. What is our engagement and coordination with Taiwan on 
development in the Pacific Islands?

    Answer. USAID is deeply engaged with Taiwan on development 
collaborations in the Pacific Islands. The Taiwan International 
Cooperation and Development Fund (TaiwanICDF) is providing up to 
$600,000 to USAID's Pacific American Fund (the Fund), a 5-year grant 
facility that addresses critical development challenges across 12 
Pacific Island Countries. The Fund aims to improve the quality of life 
in vulnerable communities and improve access to services in remote 
communities by awarding grants on an open and competitive basis to 
qualifying local, national, and internationally operating civil society 
organizations, including private small-and-medium enterprises, non-
governmental organizations and institutions, universities, and faith-
based organizations.
    Additionally, in Papua New Guinea, USAID partnered with the Taipei 
Economic and Cultural Office (TECO) to donate wheelchairs to the 
Government's National Department of Health. USAID partnered with TECO 
to coordinate the distribution of wheelchairs to 11 health care clinics 
throughout the capital.

    Question. What is our engagement and coordination with Australia on 
development in the Pacific Islands?

    Answer. In July of 2020, USAID and Australia's Department of 
Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) signed a global memorandum of 
understanding (MOU) on development cooperation on the margins of the 
Australia-U.S. Ministerial Consultations (AUSMIN). The 5-year MOU 
focuses on advancing an open, inclusive, prosperous, and secure Indo-
Pacific region--and it fits within the Administration's broader efforts 
to, in partnership with allies and partners, advance an affirmative 
vision for the region and enhance American global engagement around the 
world. USAID's coordination and collaboration with Australia spans 
across several sectors, including in democracy and governance, digital 
connectivity, and energy.
    We enjoy close coordination with Australia in the Pacific Islands 
as one of our strongest likeminded development partners. We regularly 
coordinate at both the field and Washington level on the most pressing 
challenges facing the Pacific Islands. This partnership has been 
expanding in recent years to include coordination in COVID-19 
assistance, including vaccines, infrastructure development, renewable 
energy, climate, and good governance.
    Through the Trilateral Infrastructure Partnership (TIP), we are 
partnering with Australia and Japan to finance the estimated $30 
million undersea cable to Palau that will provide reliable and secure 
connectivity. We are also partnering with Australia alongside Japan and 
New Zealand to increase Papua New Guinea's (PNG) electricity access 
from 13 to 70 percent by 2030 through the PNG Electrification Project. 
We are also working together through the Quad Infrastructure 
Coordination Group to align our infrastructure programming to 
strengthen the infrastructure enabling environment in the region, as 
well as improve project bankability and mobilize investment. In the 
governance sector, we coordinate with Australia to provide election 
support across the Pacific Islands, especially important with upcoming 
elections in July in PNG.
    Australia is also interested in enhancing our cooperation on 
climate, building on USAID's expertise in mobilizing climate finance in 
the Pacific through our Climate Ready activity. USAID has worked 
closely with Australia through the Quad Vaccine Experts Working Group 
to support COVID-19 efforts in PNG with funding, technical assistance 
and vaccines. Furthermore, USAID has expanded its footprint in the 
Indo-Pacific region, with our first-ever Senior Development Counselor 
for Australia having arrived in Canberra in August 2021 to assist in 
building out our development presence in the region.

    Question. What is our engagement and coordination with New Zealand 
on development in the Pacific Islands?

    Answer. New Zealand is one of USAID's strongest development 
partners in the Pacific region. To improve and enhance devolvement 
outcomes and donor coordination, as part of the U.S. Government's 
Pacific Pledge, USAID is now present in Papua New Guinea, Solomon 
Islands, Fiji, Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, and 
Palau.
    USAID has also expanded its footprint in the Indo-Pacific region, 
with the notable addition of our first-ever Senior Development 
Counselor based in Australia. The incumbent serves as the primary point 
of contact for donor coordination with Australia's development 
structures in Canberra and we have proposed expanding the position to 
fill a similar role for New Zealand.
    USAID also coordinates and engages with New Zealand through a 
number of multilateral modalities. This includes UN organizations and 
bodies as well as more ad-hoc groups such as the Trilateral Pacific 
Security Dialogue.

    Question. Is USAID regularly engaged in discussions about the 
Administration's proposed Indo-Pacific Economic Framework?

    Answer. USAID is engaged with our interagency counterparts to 
identify opportunities for USAID programs to advance the Indo-Pacific 
Economic Framework. IPEF is designed to address the economic challenges 
of the 21st century such as developing rules for the digital economy, 
ensuring secure and resilient supply changes, investing in clean energy 
infrastructure and the clean energy transition, increasing 
transparency, and fighting corruption. USAID will work with the 
interagency, other donors, and partners in the region to address these 
challenges.

    Question. What role will USAID play in the implementation of the 
Indo-Pacific Economic Framework?

    Answer. USAID has Mission experts on the ground in current IPEF 
countries, India, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Vietnam, with 
programs that address many of the issues under the pillars of the Indo-
Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF). USAID's in-country experts 
collaborate with host country governments, civil society actors and the 
private sector to design and implement activities to advance the goals 
of the IPEF. We also have strong working relationships with regional 
institutions such as the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and 
the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), with whom we 
provide world-class technical assistance, and have been exploring how 
to do more to bridge South and Southeast Asia connectivity through the 
Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral and Economic Cooperation 
(BIMSTEC).
    Leveraging our teams on the ground across the region, USAID stands 
ready to utilize our development programs and partners as well as new 
tools to analyze and act upon data, leveraging our Inter-agency PRC 
Economic Influence Dashboard to target and to provide technical 
assistance to host governments, bilateral and regional institutions, 
and to assist with any outreach.
                                 ______
                                 

             Responses of Ms. Samantha Power to Questions 
                Submitted by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

    Question. The U.S.-Russia Investment Fund (TUSRIF): I expect you 
are familiar with the family of Enterprise Funds that were created by 
USAID's Bureau for Europe and Eurasia (E&E) over the years to jump-
start the emergence of democratic capitalism in the formerly communist 
countries of Europe and Eurasia and the follow-on Legacy Foundations 
that have emerged to operate as philanthropies afterwards.
    As you know, there is an investment account belonging to The U.S.-
Russia Investment Fund (TUSRIF) that holds around $153 million. There 
has been a bureaucratic impasse for more than a decade that has 
effectively frozen this account. The follow-on foundation related to 
Russia, the U.S. Russia Foundation (USRF) has been operating for years, 
supporting groups, individuals and projects to promote the rule-of-law 
and democratic capitalism in Russia with an endowment that is now 
around $150 million. I understand it spends about $5 to 6 million per 
year on grants and programs. It also benefits from the earnings on the 
other $150 million that belongs to the now-dormant TUSRIF. We can leave 
for another discussion an assessment of whether and how the USRF is 
able to do worthwhile work in support of rule-of-law in Russia these 
days.
    But in this urgent moment, it would seem that the `frozen' $153 
million in the TUSRIF account should be moved as soon as possible to 
support the coming reconstruction of Ukraine. The Subcommittee on State 
Department and USAID management would like to work with you to figure 
out how to make this happen, moving the funds to support the 
reconstruction of Ukraine. If you need a change in the law or would 
like to present a Congressional Notification that will make this 
happen, we would be pleased to collaborate with you.
    What is your proposal for how to make this $153 million available 
for the reconstruction of Ukraine?

    Answer. After Russia's further invasion of Ukraine, USAID 
immediately accelerated review of options to potentially utilize TUSRIF 
reflows to support Ukraine's critical needs. USAID received a proposal 
from TUSRIF recommending the transfer of $100 million of TUSRIF reflows 
to the Western Newly Independent States Enterprise Fund (WNISEF), and 
recommended that the remaining $53 million go to the U.S.-Russia 
Foundation (USRF). USAID is exploring the feasibility of utilizing 
these funds to help address the massive needs created by Russia's 
brutal invasion and destruction of Ukraine. We believe there is a 
unique opportunity to utilize TUSRIF reflows in a way that supports 
private sector development in Ukraine and Moldova, which should remain 
the priority for the use of these funds. We are also exploring the 
potential that a portion of these funds could also be utilized by USRF 
to support needs tied to Russia. USAID met with the leadership of 
TUSRIF, USRF, and WNISEF recently to discuss these organizations' 
recent work, and USAID has recently received (at our request) more 
detailed information from both USRF and WNISEF on how they would 
utilize the funds. We look forward to working with the relevant 
committees of jurisdiction to discuss how best to utilize these funds.

    Question. Humanitarian Crises: The world currently faces a number 
of humanitarian crises, many of which have been exacerbated by climate 
change and the economic disruptions COVID-19 pandemic. Conflicts in 
Ukraine, Yemen, Syria, Ethiopia, Afghanistan, and the Sahel region of 
West Africa, just to name a few, have displaced millions of people and 
left many at risk of hunger and disease. UN humanitarian agencies, such 
as the World Food Program (WFP), UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR), UN 
Children's Fund (UNICEF), and UN Population Fund (UNFPA) can play an 
essential role in providing lifesaving food and nutrition assistance, 
shelter, health care, and educational support to the world's most 
vulnerable people.
    How do these agencies interact with and enhance the U.S.'s own 
efforts to respond to humanitarian emergencies?
    How do we ensure that these entities are adequately resourced and 
able to meet their expansive and critically important mandates?

    Answer. The United States is the single largest donor of 
humanitarian assistance worldwide. Much of this assistance flows 
through United Nations (UN) humanitarian agencies to provide life-
saving food and nutrition assistance, health programs, protection 
services, resilience-building activities, services for refugees, and 
other crucial programs that help vulnerable people. The work of UN 
agencies is critical to achieving U.S. humanitarian and foreign policy 
goals, including saving lives, stabilizing communities affected by 
emergencies, reducing disaster risk and vulnerability to future crises, 
and supporting early recovery. Robust funding for these agencies, 
available early in the fiscal year and responsive to humanitarian needs 
on the ground, is one important way Congress can help ensure adequate 
and effective resourcing for these agencies. At the same time, the U.S. 
Government acknowledges that it cannot address these issues alone, and 
continues to engage with other donors to encourage increased funding 
contributions to the UN humanitarian agencies.

    Question. USAID Assistance to Colombia: What is your assessment of 
Colombia's efforts to reduce coca cultivation and implement the 2016 
peace accord?
    How is USAID adjusting its programming to improve the effectiveness 
of those efforts?

    Answer. The 2016 Peace Accord between Colombia and the FARC was a 
historic achievement and remains the country's best tool for advancing 
a durable, inclusive end to decades of conflict. The connection between 
implementing the Accord and reducing coca is best highlighted by the 
fact that 95 percent of Colombia's coca is found in the 170 
municipalities prioritized for peace implementation. To achieve its 
promises, the Accord requires sustained budgetary, political, and 
institutional support, especially in the implementation of the Accord's 
Ethnic and gender provisions. Coca is antithetical to peace, and for 
this reason the U.S. and Colombia are focused on a holistic approach to 
fighting narcotics and bolstering rural prosperity that recognizes the 
importance of drug supply reduction, rural security, justice, economic 
development, and environmental protection, as announced (https://
www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp/briefing-room/2021/10/25/the-white-house-
releases-details-of-the-new-holistic-u-s-colombia-counternarcotics-
strategy/) at the conclusion of the October 2021 High-level Dialogue.
                      peace accord implementation
    USAID's support to peace implementation has been vital. Our 
assistance is closely aligned with the Accord's Rural Development, 
Transitional Justice, and Ethnic Inclusion chapters. With regard to the 
Rural Development Chapter, USAID has made implementation of Colombia's 
own Territorially-Focused Development Programs (PDETs) the centerpiece 
of our support under the firm belief that addressing the rural-urban 
divide is the best path for Colombia out of violent conflict. In 
support of the Ethnic chapter, we are implementing a $60 million 
program to bolster ethnic inclusion. We have also made direct awards to 
Afro-Colombian and Indigenous organizations, allowing them to implement 
their own vision of development. On transitional justice, we have 
increased our assistance to help Colombia reconcile and move beyond 
past atrocities and establish consequences for transgressions committed 
on all sides during the state's conflict with the FARC. USAID 
assistance has helped accelerate cases in the Special Jurisdiction for 
Peace (or JEP) and better protect the brave witnesses who come forward 
to share their testimony.
    USAID assistance for land titling, financial inclusion, expansion 
of the Colombian State, and rapid response community development 
projects directly supports the Rural Development chapter and is 
bringing tangible benefits to conflict-affected communities throughout 
rural Colombia. USAID's more nimble and flexible programs help pave the 
way for, and mobilize, much larger Colombian Government investments in 
the municipalities selected for peace resources.
                   new approach on counter-narcotics
    As noted above, the U.S. and Colombia are piloting a 
counternarcotics strategy that integrates public security, supply 
reduction, economic development, and environmental protection. The 
strategy aims to expand state presence and licit economic opportunities 
while strengthening communities weakened by decades of conflict.
    USAID programs complement much larger Colombian investments in 
support of licit crops and livelihoods, land formalization, local 
government strengthening, rule-of-law, human rights, and environmental 
protection efforts. We work in close coordination with these Colombian 
partners in the public and private sector, as well as with colleagues 
across the U.S. Government, especially State Department International 
Narcotics and Law Enforcement Bureau (INL). Better sequencing and 
coordination defines this new partnership effort.
    Another important adjustment under this new holistic approach is 
the addition of a strong focus on environmental protection and 
combating environmental crimes, many of which are perpetrated by the 
same illegal actors responsible for coca. Finally, together with 
Colombian and USG colleagues, we have defined new metrics of success 
beyond ``hectares eradicated.'' As the White House Office of National 
Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) announced (https://www.whitehouse.gov/
ondcp/briefing-room/2022/05/04/ondcp-welcomes-new-holistic-u-s-
colombia-counternarcotics-metrics/) recently, measures of citizen 
security, land titles, areas under environmental protection, in 
addition to coca metrics, will allow us to measure progress across the 
full range of this holistic effort.
    USAID is fully integrated with larger U.S. Government programs with 
INL, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), and the U.S. Department of 
Justice, coordinated at the Washington level by ONDCP. Together, these 
agencies are piloting this whole-of-government approach in three target 
municipalities where violence is extreme and integrated approaches can 
have tangible, measurable impact with a view toward replication over 
time with success building on success.

    Question. USAID Assistance to Sudan: In October 2021, following the 
latest military takeover in Sudan, the Administration ``paused'' the 
delivery of $700 million in FY2021 ESF funds for the country. In early 
April, however, the State Department asserted that the United States 
``stands ready to resume paused assistance once a credible civilian-led 
government is in place.''
    What is USAID's position on redirecting the funds intended for 
Sudan to other global priorities?
    If the funds are redirected, how does the Administration envision 
meeting its commitment to resume the paused assistance if Sudan returns 
to a democratic transition?

    Answer. Following the October 25 military takeover, the 
Administration paused the delivery of $700 million in FY 2021 ESF funds 
pending a review of programs that directly supported the government. 
Following that review, all assistance was redirected away from 
supporting the de facto government led by the military.
    USAID and the State Department are currently engaging with Congress 
on the plans for the $700 million and have come up with a plan that 
would obligate approximately $280 million this fiscal year. This 
includes $108 million for USAID that has already been notified to 
Congress; $99 million for USAID that has yet to be notified for 
transition and stabilization programs (Office of Transition 
Initiatives), peace building in the peripheries, democracy, human 
rights and governance, and food security and resilience (which would 
bring the total to $207 million for USAID); and $73 million for the 
State Department, of which a portion for the Bureau of Democracy, Human 
Rights, and Labor has been notified. These figures are not yet set, and 
the dialogue will continue; it is possible the amounts may change 
modestly depending on the outcome of those discussions. Through this 
funding, the United States Government aims to contribute to conditions 
under which Sudan could return to a democratic transition.
    Redirection of funds is being discussed with the interagency and 
Congressional committees.

    Question. The crisis in Ethiopia: Ethiopia, in the midst of 
political strife and ethnic violence, is experiencing one of the worst 
famines to occur in a decade, with almost 350,000 Tigrayans at risk of 
starvation.
    How has the Ethiopian Government's refusal to verify the famine 
impeded the work of your agency to provide much needed aid to 
Ethiopians, and
    How successful has USAID been in facilitating regular deliveries of 
humanitarian aid in recent weeks?

    Answer. The crisis in northern Ethiopia remains one of the worst 
humanitarian crises in the world. In Tigray alone, more than 90 percent 
of people need aid, while across Afar, Amhara and Tigray as many as 1 
million people are projected to face famine-like conditions by June. We 
have seen some of the most significant obstruction of humanitarian 
assistance in the world in the northern Ethiopia crisis. It is this 
consistent lack of access that has also limited our ability to gather 
the evidence necessary to support an official famine declaration. 
However, we know from our partners that high levels of severe food 
insecurity persist, there are rising levels of acute malnutrition, and 
hunger-related deaths have occurred.
    In recognition of the dire conditions on the ground, we and the 
humanitarian community are pushing hard to scale up assistance and 
prevent loss of life. There has been incremental progress in the easing 
of access restrictions, and USAID is cautiously optimistic regarding 
improvements to humanitarian access and the operation in northern 
Ethiopia as a whole since the March 24 humanitarian truce. Following 
nearly 4 months of road access blockages into Tigray, several 
humanitarian convoys--comprising more than 250 trucks and fuel 
tankers--arrived in Tigray by road as of early May. Although USAID is 
encouraged by recent Ethiopian Government commitments that would 
further increase the scale and frequency of trucks moving into Tigray, 
the current pace of movement is not enough to meet needs. Aid workers 
need significant, sustained, unconditional and unhindered humanitarian 
road access as well as electricity, telecommunications equipment, cash, 
and fuel to conduct their life-saving work in order to prevent this 
catastrophic situation from getting worse.

    Question. Burma: The FY23 Burma foreign assistance request is 
$109.1 million, which is 20 percent below the FY 2021 actual and 
consistent with the FY22 request.
    With the human rights situation worsening in Burma due to the 
military coup, why did the Administration decrease the budget from FY21 
actual by 20 percent?
    How does this decrease impact USAID programs for FY23?

    Answer. The U.S. stands with the people of Burma and as a result of 
the ongoing coup, resources that would have supported the government 
have been pivoted to expand work that supports the people. USAID 
continues to support the people of Burma and their aspirations for a 
democratic future, including local civil society actors fighting for 
civil and political rights in the face of military authoritarianism. 
The FY 2023 request will enable support to strengthen civil society 
capabilities to guard democratic space and human rights, maintain an 
independent media, promote peace and reconciliation in conflict-
affected regions, and improve health and food security. Given the 
current operating environment in Burma since the start of the ongoing 
military coup, the request focuses on strategic support to civil 
society actors and non-regime institutions and actors across all 
sectors.
    Programs will continue to work to strengthen the ability of civil 
society to guard democratic space, foster food security, support 
independent media, and human rights. Further assistance will serve to 
maintain and improve the health of the people of Burma as their country 
recovers from the COVID-19 pandemic and addresses various impacts of 
the coup on the people of Burma.
                                 ______
                                 

             Responses of Ms. Samantha Power to Questions 
                  Submitted by Senator Jeanne Shaheen

    Question. As you know, I traveled to the Western Balkans last month 
with Senator Murphy and Senator Tillis. The region has already been 
struggling and every one of the countries faces massive outflows of 
youth who are leaving to pursue better economic opportunities--
otherwise known as the brain drain. The Biden administration has not 
requested any additional funds for the Western Balkans region.
    Given the mounting challenges we face in the region, what is the 
Administration's strategy to maintain peace and stability in the 
region? With additional funds, how could USAID increase our ability to 
support Bosnia and Herzegovina's pro-EU aspirations, tackle youth 
unemployment and counter its considerable corruption problem?

    Answer. As you rightfully note, the Western Balkans have faced 
increasing pressure from the economic fallout of the pandemic, a lack 
of opportunities for young people to contribute to the economy or 
democratic change, protracted ethno-nationalist tension, endemic 
corruption, foreign malign actors, and now the regional ramifications 
of Russia's brutal war on Ukraine. The Biden administration's FY 2023 
request of $104M reflects a $4 million increase for the sub-region from 
the FY 2021 enacted levels.
    With generous bipartisan Congressional support, in cooperation with 
our European Union partners, USAID funds a range of bilateral and 
regional initiatives that work in concert to address these interrelated 
challenges. At the bilateral level, USAID's programming is designed to 
generate new economic opportunities, foster civic engagement, and 
address corruption by enhancing the transparency of government 
institutions while also arming citizens with the information and skills 
needed to push for change. In response to the pandemic, USAID has 
helped partner countries in the Western Balkans to obtain vaccines and 
medical equipment, institute hybrid learning, and enable enterprises to 
access financing and pivot to an increasingly digital economy. At the 
regional level, USAID is pursuing regional economic cooperation and 
constructive interaction between the countries of the region because it 
is critical for building the foundation for regional stability, peace, 
and prosperity through private sector development, natural resources 
management, supporting regional energy market integration, trade, and 
building connections across ethnic and political divides through 
peacebuilding and reconciliation programming.
    The challenges discussed above are particularly acute in Bosnia and 
Herzegovina (BiH). USAID assistance in BiH supports important anti-
corruption, youth engagement, civil society, economic growth, and 
peacebuilding and reconciliation efforts to address the key obstacles 
that continue to hinder BiH's forward progress. At the core of USAID's 
strategy is the agency's work to mitigate and disrupt the corrupt 
networks, practices, and political patronage systems that reward 
polarization and division and impede BiH's path to EU accession. Your 
continued commitment to the Western Balkans will be critical to 
ensuring all of these initiatives deliver results to the people of the 
region and the American people.

    Question. Corruption and its corrosive effects are the root of the 
forces driving these young people away from the region. Additionally, 
if Putin is stalled in Ukraine, he will look elsewhere to sow chaos and 
Putin's fingerprints of malign influence could be found throughout the 
Western Balkans.
    What specific activities is USAID undertaking in the region to 
combat corruption and support good governance? How is the war in 
Ukraine and the sanctions against Russia impacting the Western Balkans, 
and what more should we be doing more to mitigate that impact?

    Answer. Endemic corruption is indeed one of the fundamental 
challenges preventing the Western Balkans from making continued 
progress towards greater Euro-Atlantic integration. Corruption also 
opens the door for foreign malign actors like the Kremlin, which seek 
to sow dysfunction, undermine sovereignty, and manipulate the countries 
of the region for their own purposes.
    USAID is shoring up government institutions to prevent, identify, 
and prosecute corruption and supporting independent media and civil 
society to investigate and counter corruption. For example, in Bosnia 
and Herzegovina (BiH), USAID helps prosecutors and judges tackle 
corruption and strengthens the organizational capacity of the High 
Judicial and Prosecutorial Council. And this year, a local media 
partner in BiH broke several stories about fraud, waste, and abuse 
related to the pandemic, resulting in an investigation by the Sarajevo 
Cantonal Prosecutor's Office and subsequent arrests. Grassroots civil 
society activists supported by USAID have also been successful in 
identifying and calling out corruption in their communities, resulting 
in legal and legislative actions to halt the illegal construction of 
environmentally damaging small-scale hydropower plants. In Albania and 
North Macedonia, USAID is designing new anti-corruption programs 
tailored to each context. In Kosovo, with USAID support, all public 
procurement activities, including auditing, are now managed digitally 
through an electronic procurement platform, enabling greater 
transparency and accountability in procurement processes. In the 
Western Balkans, USAID supports the active engagement of local 
communities, including marginalized groups, to ensure their voices are 
heard by their local governments. Similarly, USAID supports civil 
society organizations in their watchdog roles. Across the region, USAID 
fosters the financial viability and skills of independent media, 
including investigative journalism, to ensure citizens are informed 
about the forms corruption takes in their countries and across borders.
    The world is only beginning to understand the impact of Russia's 
brutal war on Ukraine on the Western Balkans. The rise in energy and 
fertilizer prices instigated by the Kremlin is already impacting the 
agriculture sector in North Macedonia and Albania. In the immediate 
term, USAID is developing plans to boost food production and the 
resilience of the sector through investments in productivity and 
modernization, the continued implementation of food quality and safety 
standards, the improvement of vertical integration within value chains, 
and the advancement of marketing and export strategies. In addition, 
USAID supported a rapid assessment of the economic impact on the region 
and will be utilizing this analysis to ensure current and future 
programming are responsive to these shifts.
    Putin's war reaffirms the need for development programs to address 
the Kremlin's longstanding methods to undermine and control, and 
increasingly threaten the region's stability. USAID will continually 
review and tailor our approach and programming to ensure the agency is 
responsive to the Kremlin's shifting tactics, including its shift from 
malign influence to full scale, unremitting, violent aggression.
                                 ______
                                 

             Responses of Ms. Samantha Power to Questions 
                 Submitted by Senator Edward J. Markey

    Question. The development assistance budget request for Fiscal Year 
2023 states that, ``programming in Bangladesh will include 
strengthening democratic governance, combating climate change, 
supporting Rohingya host communities, and investing in agriculture and 
food security.'' Can you provide details regarding what type of support 
will be provided specifically for the communities hosting the Rohingya?

    Answer. Through bilateral assistance, USAID/Bangladesh has 
supported activities to help host communities bolster livestock and 
fisheries services, enhance water and sanitation, counter trafficking 
in persons and violent extremism, and improve natural resource 
management for host communities in Cox's Bazaar and Bandarban 
Districts. USAID also provides alternative livelihood opportunities, 
repairs and refurbishes cyclone shelters including over 200 in host and 
impacted communities, promotes agricultural mechanization, and 
strengthens agricultural value chains.
    Since 2020, USAID has been partnering with three Bangladeshi NGOs 
in Cox's Bazar to mitigate depletion of natural resources and preserve 
biodiversity. During the period, the host community members have 
planted nearly 163,000 saplings on homesteads, institutional lands, and 
along public roadways. USAID's programming in Cox's Bazar District also 
includes two grants to local partners to support host community women 
and youth through activities to combat child marriage and provide 
livelihood support and training. Lastly, USAID supports conflict 
sensitivity training in Cox's Bazar host communities to reduce tensions 
with Rohingya refugees. Through a grant to the UN Development Program 
(UNDP), USAID also monitors overall political and violent extremism 
tendencies in Cox's Bazar. USAID is closely tracking the recent reports 
on increased violence in Cox's Bazar.

    Question. The Fiscal Year 2023 budget request does not include 
details on funding needs for the Rohingya response in Bangladesh 
specifically. As the security situation in Cox's Bazaar continues to 
deteriorate with growing limitations on movement within the camps and 
to adjacent areas, and with restrictions on formal and community-led 
education initiatives as well as on income-generating opportunities, 
can you share what USAID's Fiscal Year 2023 funding needs for the 
Rohingya response are? How will the U.S. leverage its support as well 
as its broader relationship with Bangladesh to improve conditions in 
Cox's Bazaar?

    Answer. Bangladesh: USAID will continue to prioritize lifesaving 
humanitarian interventions for Rohingya living in the Bangladesh 
refugee camps of Cox's Bazar, as well as support for the surrounding 
host communities. USAID will focus on its lead responsibility, in 
refugee scenarios, to provide food assistance and nutrition programming 
within camps, in close partnership with the Department of State's 
Bureau for Population, Migration, and Refugees (State/PRM). USAID will 
provide additional assistance within host communities, including 
protection services; economic growth; water, sanitation, and health 
(WASH) services; natural resource management; and disaster risk 
reduction efforts in Cox's Bazar and Bandarban districts.
    USAID Deputy Administrator Isobel Coleman recently returned from a 
joint trip to Bangladesh with State/PRM, where they continued to push 
the Government of Bangladesh to expand education and livelihood 
opportunities for refugees in Cox's Bazar, as well as to increase 
freedom of movement. Opportunities in these spaces can start to address 
the security concerns presented by an idle population in the camps and 
place the Rohingya in a better position for either returns or 
resettlement as the response evolves. The United States also remains 
committed to finding durable solutions for Rohingya refugees, until 
such time, given the military coup d'etat and related ongoing violence 
in Burma, that conditions become possible for voluntary, safe, 
dignified, and sustainable returns that are based on the informed 
consent of those who have been forcibly displaced. USAID will continue 
to work with the Department of State to explore opportunities to work 
with the international community to advocate for alternate solutions. 
Even with these concerns, USAID support for emergency food programming 
continues to provide the Rohingya refugee population with food 
vouchers, nutrition assistance, and disaster risk reduction 
programming.
    The United States remains the largest bilateral donor to the 
Rohingya refugee response in Bangladesh, contributing nearly $1.4 
billion in humanitarian assistance since the influx of refugees began 
in August 2017. USAID remains committed to supporting the Rohingya 
population in Bangladesh in Fiscal Year (FY) 2023. USAID continues to 
work closely with like-minded donors to address the needs of the 
Rohingya and to engage the Government of Bangladesh on these pressing 
issues.
    Burma: USAID will continue to prioritize life-saving humanitarian 
assistance for displaced and conflict-affected people, including 
Rohingya, in Burma. More than 952,000 people remain displaced in Burma 
due to the country's humanitarian crisis, which includes nearly 606,000 
people who have been displaced since the February 1, 2021, military 
coup d'etat. Further, the military continues to target its attacks on 
civilians and public spaces and to escalate conflict with ethnic groups 
and other marginalized peoples while impeding humanitarian access to 
internally displaced persons in camps and communities in Rakhine where 
several hundred thousand Rohingya remain.
    As the humanitarian crisis in Burma will likely continue to worsen 
into FY 2023 and continue to exacerbate the Rohingya crisis, USAID will 
prioritize emergency food, nutrition, shelter, health, WASH, and 
protection assistance in Sagaing, Magway, Tanintharyi Regions and Chin, 
Kachin, Rakhine, Shan, Kayin, Kayah, and Mon states.
    With Russia's war in Ukraine negatively impacting global supply 
chains and straining humanitarian resources, needs will continue to 
severely outpace resources for acutely food insecure, conflict-affected 
populations in Burma. USAID will require FY 2023 funding to procure, 
transport, and distribute food commodities and other supplies to 
affected communities throughout Burma. It is imperative that the United 
States and like-minded donors continue to provide funding for life-
saving assistance and to protect hard-won development gains while there 
is still a window to do so.

    Question. The Administration's Fiscal Year 2023 budget request 
recognizes deteriorating conditions and widespread violence in Haiti 
and the need for robust international assistance. However, nearly 1 
year after the assassination of President Jovenel Moise, Haiti 
continues to experience a political power vacuum, its democratic 
processes have been paused, and corruption is rampant.
    How will USAID ensure that our assistance to Haiti is having the 
intended effect of creating economic resilience, democratic stability, 
and citizen security in Haiti?

    Answer. USAID works to build a stable and economically viable 
Haiti, focusing on improving health and education outcomes, advancing 
economic and food security, and improving the independence and 
accountability of government institutions. Our development assistance 
provides economic opportunity through inclusive, environmentally 
sustainable agriculture development and micro-, small-, and medium-
sized business development and improves the economic and environmental 
resilience of communities. USAID health programs work to fight 
infectious disease and improve primary health care services and 
increase access to water and sanitation services. USAID also seeks to 
strengthen the organizational capacity to respond to natural and 
manmade emergencies and advance citizen-responsive government 
institutions.
    Haiti is especially vulnerable to shocks and stresses--including 
hurricanes and tropical storms, droughts, floods, and earthquakes, 
socio-economic and political instability, and ongoing environmental 
degradation related to economic exploitation of natural resources. 
Since the assassination of Haiti President Jovenel Moise, the Haiti 
Government has also struggled with the issue of Haitian gangs 
establishing de facto control of parts of Port-au-Prince and in other 
parts of the country. As a result, USAID's partners have faced many 
operational challenges, including the threat of kidnapping, road 
insecurity, and fuel shortages.
    Within the democracy, rights, and governance program, we are 
continuing to implement a program to address the continued 
deteriorating situation in Haiti. Programming supports violence 
prevention, youth engagement and empowerment, increasing services to 
protect victims' legal and human rights as well as strengthening 
systems to end trafficking. At this time, USAID is conducting a rule of 
law assessment as well as a citizen security assessment to inform new 
programming in these areas.
    To provide support for citizen security, USAID is designing a new 
activity that will coordinate closely with the State Department Bureau 
for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) to 
implement a Place-Based Strategy (PBS). The PBS consolidates USG 
development assistance and security sector assistance into select, 
high-risk municipalities to build police, municipal and community 
capacities to prevent violence, curb the recruitment of youth into 
gangs, and effectively respond to the consequences of gang violence. 
The PBS addresses widespread insecurity through a multi-sectoral 
approach that strengthens the capacity of the Haitian National Police 
while also addressing the underlying drivers of violence, providing 
licit alternatives to youth and an ``off-ramp'' to those wishing to 
leave the gangs, and accessible support services for victims of 
violence.
    These programs and activities combined with other USG efforts will 
support Haiti to build a better future for Haitians.

    Question. As we discussed, Representative Velazquez and I 
introduced a bill to create a resettlement pathway for climate 
displaced persons. The October 2021 White House Climate Migration 
Report recommended that the Executive branch work with Congress to 
create such a legal pathway. Can you commit to work with my office and 
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to make that happen?

    Answer. I deeply value the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's 
support for USAID programs. I would refer you to the Department of 
State's Bureau of Populations, Refugees, and Migration for further 
information on legal pathways for climate displaced persons.

    Question. Short of new legislative tools to address the fact that 
most climate displaced persons do not meet the traditional definition 
of ``refugees,'' would you advocate in the interagency for the United 
States to do more to use existing immigration authorities such as 
humanitarian parole, temporary protected status, and extending 
educational opportunities for climate displaced persons?

    Answer. USAID's Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance provides food 
assistance to refugees and displaced persons; however, I refer you to 
the Department of State and Department of Homeland Security for 
information on the use of immigration authorities to support climate 
displaced persons. I commit to engaging in interagency discussions on 
this issue, including by contributing information on USAID's 
humanitarian and development programs that may impact climate displaced 
persons.

    Question. I am very supportive of the Administration's almost $3 
billion request to revitalize global democracy, including a more than 
14 percent increase in funding for the East Asia and Pacific region. 
How will USAID use this increase in funding to push back against the 
authoritarian playbook of repression in the Indo-Pacific and make 
investments in people-to-people exchanges, democracy promotion, rule of 
law, and the protection of human rights?

    Answer. The FY 2023 USAID request for the Indo-Pacific region, 
which totals $1.3 billion across DA, ESF, and GHP-USAID accounts, 
supports the implementation of the 2022 Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS). 
Thematically, USAID's contributions to advancing the U.S. vision for a 
free and open Indo-Pacific falls into three key objectives that align 
with the IPS pillars:

      (1) Strengthening democratic institutions to support good 
governance and human rights, which falls under freedom and openness. 
For example, in Thailand, USAID, in partnership with Mars Petcare, a 
U.S. pet food company, is equipping workers in the seafood and fishing 
industry with digital tools that allow them to swiftly report abuse and 
exploitation. This innovative mobile technology, which enables reliable 
two-way communication with authorities beyond the normal cellular 
range, has empowered fishery workers to report violations like human 
trafficking and safety incidents.

      (2) Fostering sustainable, inclusive, and transparent economic 
growth, which supports the connectivity and prosperity pillars. For 
example, USAID is deepening our long-standing partnership with and 
support to ASEAN. We will further enhance the ASEAN Single Window, a 
groundbreaking tool that is increasing trade efficiency by reducing 
costs, timelines, and paperwork barriers. In 2020, the exchange of 
electronic trade documents through the ASEAN Single Window boosted U.S. 
goods and services trade with ASEAN estimated at $362.2 billion.

      (3) Improving resilience to health and climate threats; which 
supports the resilience pillar. In India, for instance, U.S. assistance 
will advance India's role as a key regional clean energy partner, 
building on previous successes, such as supporting India to revise its 
cross-border power trade guidelines to increase regional power trade, 
strengthening regional energy security and spurring investment in 
diverse energy sources.

    USAID remains an active partner to Pacific Island countries on 
climate issues. In fact, USAID just launched two new projects to 
conserve biodiversity and strengthen the resilience of coastal 
fisheries and communities to the existential threats of worsening 
weather disasters and rising sea levels. We are also deepening 
partnerships with like-minded donors in the region, including Taiwan, 
to further support sustainable development in the Pacific Islands.
                                 ______
                                 

 Letter From Senators Bill Hagerty and John Boozman to President Biden 
        Regarding High Fertilizer Prices, Dated March 16, 2020 
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]                           
                                ______
                                 

    Article From Foreign Policy Magazine Concerning Organic Farming 
              Experiment in Sri Lanka, Dated March 5, 2022
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                                  [all]