## Guide To Nongovernmental Organizations For The Military

A primer for the military
          about private,
          voluntary, and
      nongovernmental
           organizations
             operating in
           humanitarian
            emergencies
                 globally



## Guide To Nongovernmental Organizations For The Military

A primer for the military about private, voluntary, and nongovernmental organizations operating in humanitarian emergencies globally Edited and rewritten by Lynn Lawry MD, MSPH, MSc Summer 2009
Originally written by Grey Frandsen Fall 2002
The Center for Disaster and Humanitarian Assistance Medicine (CDHAM) Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences (USUHS) International Health Division Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) U.S. Department of Defense Copyright restrictions pertain to certain parts of this publication. All rights reserved. No copyrighted parts of this publication may be reprinted or transmitted in any form without written permission of the publisher or copyright owner. This pdf document is compatible with Adobe Acrobat Reader version 5.0 and later. The file may open in earlier versions, but will not necessarily appear as it was designed to appear, and hyperlinks may not function correctly. Acrobat Reader is available for free download from the Adobe website http://get.adobe.com/reader/

## About Cdham: Advancing Medicine In Humanitarian And Disaster Relief

The vision: To contribute to national security by achieving regional and global stability through health care diplomacy.

The U.S. military has a long history of responding to disasters and participating in humanitarian assistance missions. Until recently, however, these missions were considered less important than traditional combat and combat support missions. Events in the 21st century have made it clear that our national security depends on stability around the globe. This was emphasized in recent Department of Defense (DOD) guidance establishing stability sperations, including humanitarian assistance and disaster response (HA/DR), as missions with a priority equal to combat operations. The mission: To provide support to Department of Defense agencies, through education & training, consultation, direct support and scholarly activities, regarding the role of health care in response to disasters and humanitarian assistance missions.

The Center for Disaster and Humanitarian Assistance Medicine (CDHAM) was formally established at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USUHS) by the Defense Appropriations Act of 1999. Organized within the Department of Military and Emergency Medicine at USUHS, CDHAM is postured as the Defense Department's focal point for academic aspects of medical stability operations. The successful delivery of aid depends on a coordinated effort between the host nation, United Nations agencies, other governmental organizations, and many NGOs. With respect to HA/DR missions, the DOD will function in a supporting role to other agencies, such as the Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development. Effectiveness requires achieving synergy by optimizing each participant's relative strengths. Although the primary target audience for this Guide to Nongovernmental Organizations for the Military, 2nd edition, is the Department of Defense, it is intended to be a practical source of information about many NGOs for the entire humanitarian assistance community. It is hoped that it will also serve as a bridge to better understanding and cooperation. I would like to recognize Dr. Lynn Lawry for her efforts revising this guide as an author and the senior editor. Without her expertise and dedication, it would not be the quality product it is. It is also appropriate to recognize the work done by Mr. Grey Frandsen as author of the initial guide. Charles W. Beadling, MD, FAAFP, IDHA, DMCC Director, Center for Disaster and Humanitarian Assistance Medicine Department of Military and Emergency Medicine Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences

## About The International Health Division Oasd(Ha)-Ihd

The International Health Division (IHD) advises the assistant secretary of defense (Health Affairs) on policy related to interaction of the military health system with host nation civilians and their health infrastructure in stability operations, counterinsurgency, and humanitarian assistance/disaster response. The IHD is supervised and resourced by the deputy assistant secretary of defense for force health protection and readiness. In accordance with DOD instructions, IHD is committed to partnerships in policy with NGOs, the Interagency, allies, private groups and others. IHD identifies gaps in knowledge, policy and capabilities, and informs OASD(HA)'s continuous quality improvement to meet the challenges of disaster response, complex emergencies, fragile states, and conflict zones. In these circumstances, DOD recognizes it is rarely the health lead except by default; however, MHS must be able to effectively support other agencies and, when necessary, take lead in areas that are too dangerous or otherwise inaccessible to nonmilitary agencies and assets.

## Introduction

This book is about nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), often referred to as private voluntary organizations (PVOs), nonprofits, charities, and (humanitarian) aid organizations. Its aim is to orient the military with NGOs: their operations, strengths, limitations, budgets, practices, and other characteristics that make them unique actors in a large and dynamic humanitarian community. Every NGO is unique: no two have exactly the same objectives, missions, operating procedures, or capacities. To provide a cohesive body of information, generalizations are often made and detail may be sacrificed. This book has been produced specifically for uniformed services personnel, but it may prove useful to others  in understanding some of the military-specific issues in foreign aid. The annexes in this book play an important part in constructing an understanding of NGOs and the NGO community. Designed as a quick reference, annex 2 is a compilation of the most informative websites highlighted in different sections of the book. Annex 1 covers the basics for NGOs commonly found in humanitarian emergencies around the world and ones the military are likely to encounter. In addition, a more comprehensive and searchable database of NGOs can be found at www.globalhealth.org. This publication was initially written in the spring and summer of 2002 by Grey Frandsen, at the time a project officer for CDHAM and a graduate student at the Johns Hopkins University School for Advanced International Studies (SAIS). Mr. Frandsen served as special assistant to Ambassador Carlos Pascual, who headed the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization (S/ CRS) at the State Department, and S/CRS advisor on NGO-military relations. Using the original text as a guide, the book was rewritten and updated in 2009. Many people contributed to this effort and are designated as authors in the chapter they wrote or edited. Additional editorial help came from Jennifer Espititu MD, MPH (UNC-Chapel Hill), Warner Anderson (IHD), Charlie Beadling, and Kevin Riley (CDHAM). The extensive NGO list in annex 1 was researched and written by Kristen Saenger and Helen Barnhardt, both first-year medical students at Uniform Services University of the Health Sciences, with the help of Gregg Nakano (CDHAM). We are grateful to everyone who helped in this revision. This publication was funded and published by the Center for Disaster and Humanitarian Assistance Medicine, but does not express the opinion, findings, or position of CDHAM, the Uniformed Services University system, or the U.S. Department of Defense. For feedback, suggestions, or additions, contact Dr. Lynn Lawry at  llawry@ihresearch.org

## Acronyms And Abbreviations1

| ACF                                | Action Contre la Faim (Action Against Hunger)                                      |
|------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| ADRA                               | Adventist Development and Relief Agency                                            |
| AFCENT                             | Allied Forces Central Europe                                                       |
| AFDRU                              | Austrian Forces Disaster Relief Unit                                               |
| AOR                                | area of responsibility                                                             |
| ARC                                | American Refugee Committee                                                         |
| ASD                                | Assistant Secretary of Defense                                                     |
| BHR                                | Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance                                                 |
| CAP                                | consolidated appeal process                                                        |
| CARE                               | Cooperative for Assistance and Relief Everywhere, Inc                              |
| CBO                                | community-based organization                                                       |
| CCF                                | China's Children Fund                                                              |
| CCP                                | comprehensive campaign plan                                                        |
| CDC                                | U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention                                    |
| CE-DAT                             | complex-emergency database                                                         |
| CHART                              | Combined Humanitarian Assistance Response Training                                 |
| CHW                                | community health worker                                                            |
| CHW                                | local community health worker                                                      |
| CIDA                               | Canadian International Development Agency                                          |
| CIDI                               | Center for International Disaster Information                                      |
| CMO                                | civil-military operations                                                          |
| CMOC                               | civil-military operations center                                                   |
| CMPT                               | Consequence management planning team                                               |
| CMR                                | crude mortality rate                                                               |
| COM                                | chief of mission                                                                   |
| COOPI                              | Cooperazione Internazionale                                                        |
| COTS                               | commercial off-the-shelf (technology)                                              |
| CRS                                | Catholic Relief Services                                                           |
| CTS                                | commodity tracking system                                                          |
| CWS                                | Church World Service                                                               |
| DAC                                | Development Assistance Committee                                                   |
| DALIS                              | Disaster Assistance Logistics Information System                                   |
| DART                               | Disaster Assistance Response Team, of OFDA                                         |
| DASD                               | Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense                                              |
| DCHA                               | USAID Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance                  |
| DFID                               | Department for International Development (UK)                                      |
| DHA                                | UN Department of Humanitarian Affairs (Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian |
| Affairs effective January 1, 1998) |                                                                                    |
| DLA      | Defense Logistics Agency                                                     |
|----------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| DODD     | U.S. Department of Defense directive                                         |
| DOD      | U.S. Department of Defense                                                   |
| DPT      | diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus vaccine                                       |
| DRC      | Danish Refugee Council                                                       |
| DRI      | Direct Relief International                                                  |
| DP       | displaced population                                                         |
| ECHA     | Executive Committee for Humanitarian Affairs                                 |
| ECHO     | European Commission Humanitarian Office                                      |
| FAA      | Foreign Assistance Act                                                       |
| FAM      | food aid management                                                          |
| FFP      | USAID BHR Food for Peace program                                             |
| FHA      | foreign humanitarian assistance                                              |
| FOG      | Foreign Operations Guide                                                     |
| GSM      | Global System for Mobile communications                                      |
| GTZ      | Gesellschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit (Germany)                         |
| HA       | spectrum of humanitarian assistance provided by any organization             |
| HA/SOLIC | humanitarian assistance/special operations, low intensity conflict           |
| HACC     | humanitarian assistance coordination center                                  |
| HA/DR    | humanitarian assistance/disaster relief                                      |
| HAO      | humanitarian assistance operation                                            |
| HAST     | humanitarian assistance survey team                                          |
| HCA      | humanitarian and civic assistance                                            |
| HEA      | household economy approach                                                   |
| HHS      | U.S. Department of Health and Human Services                                 |
| HOC      | humanitarian operations center                                               |
| HRO      | humanitarian relief organizations                                            |
| HRW      | Human Rights Watch                                                           |
| IAEA     | International Atomic Energy Agency                                           |
| IASC     | UN Inter-Agency Standing Committee                                           |
| ICDO     | International Civil Defense Organization                                     |
| ICRC     | International Committee of the Red Cross                                     |
| ICVA     | International Council of Voluntary Agencies                                  |
| IDHA     | International Diploma in Humanitarian Assistance                             |
| IDP      | internally displaced person/population                                       |
| IDRA     | international disaster relief assistance                                     |
| IFRC     | International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies             |
| IGOs     | international or intergovernmental organizations                             |
| IMC      | International Medical Corps                                                  |
| IMF      | International Monetary Fund                                                  |
| INSARAG  | International Search and Rescue Advisory Group                               |
| IO       | intergovernmental organization or international organization (noted in text) | | IOM    | International Organization for Migration                                 |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| IQC    | indefinite quantity contract                                             |
| IRC    | International Rescue Committee                                           |
| IRIN   | Integrated Regional Information Network                                  |
| IRT    | international relief teams                                               |
| IWG    | interagency working group                                                |
| JFC    | joint force commander                                                    |
| JLOC   | joint logistics operations center                                        |
| JTF-CM | joint task force-consequence management                                  |
| KAP    | knowledge, attitudes, and practice                                       |
| LEMA   | local emergency management authority                                     |
| LNO    | liaison officer                                                          |
| LOC    | logistics operations center                                              |
| LWR    | Lutheran World Relief                                                    |
| MCDA   | military civil defense assets                                            |
| MCDU   | Military Civil Defense Unit of OCHA                                      |
| MCI    | Mercy Corps International                                                |
| MDM    | Medicins du Monde (Doctors of the World)                                 |
| MOOTW  | military operations other than war                                       |
| MOU    | memorandum of understanding                                              |
| MPDL   | Movement for Peace, Disarmament and Freedom                              |
| MSF    | Medicins sans Frontieres (Doctors without Borders)                       |
| NATO   | North American Treaty Organization                                       |
| NERS   | national emergency relief services                                       |
| NGO    | nongovernmental organization                                             |
| NRC    | Norwegian Refugee Council                                                |
| OASD   | Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense                             |
| OCHA   | UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs                   |
| OFAC   | Office of Foreign Assets Control                                         |
| OFDA   | USAID BHR Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance                     |
| OSOCC  | on-site operations coordination center                                   |
| PAHO   | Pan American Health Organization                                         |
| PDD    | Presidential Decision Directive                                          |
| PHR    | Physicians for Human Rights                                              |
| PK/HA  | Peacekeeping/Humanitarian Assistance                                     |
| PRM    | Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (U.S. Department of State) |
| PVO    | private voluntary organizations                                          |
| RCB    | Relief Coordination Branch                                               |
| RI     | Relief International or Refugees International (noted in text)           |
| SAR    | search and rescue                                                        |
| SCF    | Save the Children Fund                                                   |
| SCHR   | Steering Committee for Humanitarian Response                             |
| SecDef     | Secretary of Defense                                               |
|------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------|
| SHAPE      | Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe                          |
| SMART      | standardized monitoring and assessment of relief and transition    |
| SO/LIC     | special operations, low-intensity conflict                         |
| SOP        | standing operating procedures                                      |
| SSTRO      | stability, security, transition, and reconstruction operations     |
| TBA        | traditional birth attendant                                        |
| UMCOR      | United Methodist Committee on Relief                               |
| UN         | United Nations                                                     |
| UN-CMCoord | UN Humanitarian Civil-Military Coordination                        |
| UNDAC      | UN Disaster Assessment and Coordination Standby Team               |
| UNDP       | UN Development Program                                             |
| UNDRO      | Office of the United Nations Disaster Relief Coordinator (now DHA) |
| UNEP       | UN Environmental Program                                           |
| UNFPA      | UN Family Planning Agency                                          |
| UNHCR      | Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees                    |
| UNICEF     | UN Children's Fund                                                 |
| UNOCHA     | see OCHA                                                           |
| UNOPS      | UN Office of Project Services                                      |
| USAID      | U.S. Agency for International Development                          |
| USD        | U.S. dollar                                                        |
| USG        | U.S. government                                                    |
| USTRANSCOM | U.S. Transportation Command                                        |
| VHW        | village health worker                                              |
| VITA       | Volunteers in Technical Assistance                                 |
| VOICE      | Voluntary Organizations in Cooperation in Emergencies              |
| WFP        | World Food Program                                                 |
| WHO        | World Health Organization                                          |
| WSH        | water sanitation and hygiene                                       |
| WVI        | World Vision International                                         |

## Policies And Definitions Related To Aid, Relief, And Development

Cecili Sessions MD, MPH and Lynn Lawry MD, MSPH, MSc R
ecent changes in U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) policy have transformed the military medical tradition of health-care assistance around the world into a core U.S. military mission. This chapter summarizes current U.S. government (USG) and DOD guidance, international guidelines, and key definitions to facilitate the understanding required for "a carefully coordinated deployment of military and civilian, public and private, U.S. and international assets.... in support of a broader U.S. Government effort to advance U.S. interests by assisting an existing government with internal challenges or helping establish a new social, economic, and political domestic order in the shortterm, and in the longer term, by establishing conditions for a sustainable peace."2
That is, these policies guide and direct the DOD in foreign aid and disasters.

## Dod Guidance

DOD Directive 3000.05, Military Support for Stability, Security, Transition, and Reconstruction Operations (20051128), addresses the DOD role in support of reconstruction and stabilization as a core U.S. military mission, with a priority comparable to combat operations; encourages integrated civilian and military efforts and close work with interagency and foreign partners, international
organizations, and the private sector.3 It provides the following definitions:
-
Stability operations are military and civilian activities conducted to establish or maintain order in foreign states and regions and to advance U.S. interests and values. Immediate goals include providing security, restoring essential services, and meeting humanitarian needs. Long-term goals focus on capacity-building to promote a stable and legitimate state with democratic institutions and a market economy capable of meeting its citizens' basic needs (that is, water, food, sanitation, public health, and medical care).
-
Military support to stability, security, transition, and reconstruction operations (SSTRO) includes DOD activities that support U.S. government plans for stabilization, security, reconstruction, and transition operations that lead to sustainable peace while advancing U.S. interests. Although tasks may be best performed by U.S. or foreign civilian professionals, DOD is instructed to  be prepared to perform all tasks necessary to establish or maintain order when the civilian community cannot do so.4
Joint Operating Concept, Version 2.0, December 2006, www.dtic.mil/futurejointwarfare/concepts/sstro_joc_v20.doc U.S. Department of Defense, "Directive 3000.05: Military Support for Stability, Security, Transition, and Reconstruction (SSTR) Operations," November 28, 2005, www.dtic.mil/doctrine/training/sstr.pdf (accessed November 12, 2009).
4
U.S. Department of Defense, "Directive 3000.05," p. 2
-
Medical requirements are to ensure that DOD medical personnel and capabilities are prepared
to meet military and civilian health requirements in any stability operation.5 In addition to
conventional responsibilities of peacetime and operational medicine, the twenty-first century paradigm of the Military Health System includes the following strategic elements of medical stability operations (in order of increasing complexity): medical security cooperation, Mil- Mil medical capacity-building, medical support to international humanitarian assistance/ disaster relief, health sector stabilization, and health sector reconstruction.
-
International or intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) are global or regional organizations representing alliances between two or more national governments for political, strategic, economic, social, or humanitarian objectives; examples include the United Nations (UN), the World Health Organization (WHO), the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and the African Union.
-
The *private sector* includes individuals and for-profit corporations, especially those involved as financial donors or providers of humanitarian assistance.
Publication JP 3-08, Interagency, Intergovernmental Organization, and Nongovernmental Organization
Coordination during Joint Operations, volumes I and II (20060317), describes the operating
environments, core competencies and organizational structures of various civilian organizations to
facilitate interagency partnerships.6 This document provides comprehensive insight into the NGO
community, including the following working definitions:
-
Interagency partnerships are those involving multiple U.S. federal government agencies and public and private organizations. The  National Security Act of 1947 (NSA 47) defines DOD participation in the interagency process.
-
Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) are independent, nonprofit, private organizations with humanitarian goals, which may be local, national, or transnational and have formal or unstructured management. A broader USAID definition also includes private or nonprofit entities that are not affiliated with local or national government and receive USAID funding, such as foundations, firms, academic institutions, and cooperative development organizations.
-
Private voluntary organizations (PVO) are included in the NGO category, but DOD working with these organizations should recognize that this combination is not necessarily widely accepted across the U.S. government or even by the organizations. The USAID definition describes a nonprofit, tax-exempt organization that relies on voluntary contributions of funds or staffing from the general public, and is involved in international development activities.
The Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) maintains a list of entities subject to economic sanctions programs. Legal counsel must verify that a particular organization is not on the list OFAC maintains, because personnel are prohibited from dealing with such entities.

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is an autonomous federal agency under policy direction of the secretary of state, shapes foreign policy through administration of U.S. foreign economic assistance, and serves as the lead for interagency foreign disaster assistance. Presidential authority for emergency relief and long-term humanitarian assistance is coordinated through the USAID Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) in response to disasters declared by the chief of mission (COM), that is, the U.S. ambassador. Overseas assets include missions, offices, and regional organizations, in addition to the deployable disaster assistance response team (DART)specialists with disaster relief skills rapidly deployed to assist U.S. embassy management of USG response to foreign disasters. **DODD 5100.46**, *Foreign Disaster Relief*, describes the relationship between DOD
and USAID.

Publication JP 3-29, *Foreign Humanitarian Assistance* (20090317), outlines joint doctrine for foreign humanitarian assistance (FHA) operations by DOD and "provides the doctrinal basis for
interagency coordination and for U.S. military involvement in multinational operations."7 The chapter
on NGOs mentions organizations that can facilitate coordination, including the American Council for Voluntary International Action (InterAction), a coalition of 165 U.S.-based NGOs, and the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). The following guidance is also provided for DOD interactions with NGOs: clearly articulate the role of the military to the NGOs. Be aware that not all NGOs appreciate military assistance or intervention, and some have charters that prohibit collaboration with armed forces. Consider the use of a third-party liaison, such as USAIDthe lead federal agent for government FHAand review recorded lessons learned. The section titled Key Non- U.S. Government Participants and Organizations describes the terms:
-
Host nations are those receiving assistance coordinated by the U.S. embassy and granting permission for FHA by U.S. forces through formal or informal agreements.
-
The *United Nations* is an intergovernmental organization focused on maintaining international peace and security, developing friendly international relations and harmonious actions, and promoting cooperation to solve international problems and preserve human rights and freedoms.
-
Private contractors are for-profit, independent actors that the local population often considers representatives of the U.S. government despite being employed by a wide range of customers to provide security, technical, and logistical expertise.8
Moreover, the previous edition of JP 3-29 was published 20010815before the start of the global war on terrorand the following terms represent what it terms a substantial transition.
-
Developmental assistance missions establish or maintain secure conditions for the delivery of FHA by relief organizations, including storage and transportation of relief materials, providing armed escorts for convoys or personnel, and protecting shelters for dislocated civilians.9
-
Security assistance is a group of programs in support of U.S. policies and objectives that provides materiel, training, or services to foreign nations in exchange for grant, credit, or currency.10
-
Peace operations encompass multilateral crisis response and contingency operations designed to contain conflict, shape an environment supportive of reconciliation and rebuilding, and facilitate the transition to a legitimate state; include peacekeeping, peace enforcement, peacemaking, peace building, and conflict prevention, and are further described in JP 3-07.3, Peace Operations.11
-
Civil-military operations centers (CMOCs) are physical or virtual meeting places of stakeholders that serve "as the primary collaboration interface for the joint force among indigenous populations and institutions (IPI), IGOs, NGOs, multinational military forces, the private sector, and [other government agencies] OGAs" and are further described in JP 3-57, Civil- Military Operations.12

## Usg Guidance

Publication NSPD-44, *Management of Interagency Efforts Concerning Reconstruction and Stabilization* (20051207), concerns foreign states and regions at risk of, involved in, or recovering from armed conflict or civil strife, and instructs the secretary of state to integrate U.S. government efforts to engage in transition and reconstruction activities, and to harmonize such efforts with U.S. military security and stability operations.13 The directive emphasizes interagency, civil-military coordination by mandating not only integration of contingency plans by the secretaries of the Department of State and the Department of Defense, but also development of a framework for coordination of stability operations and reconstruction activities. Publication HSPD-21, *Public Health and Medical Preparedness* (20071018), introduces a national strategy to "transform our national approach to protecting the health of the American people against all disasters" and directs the establishment of a National Center for Disaster Medicine and Public Health at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USUHS) as an academic center of excellence on subjects including international health, international disaster and humanitarian medical assistance, and military medicine, with joint missions carried out by DOD and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).14
International Declarations and Guidelines The following summaries of international guidelines pertain to the roles and responsibilities of NGOs and international civil-military cooperation.

10
Ibid., p. I-9.
Ibid., p. I-10.
The **Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness** (2005) is a UN declaration that supports "partner country efforts to strengthen governance and improve development performance" by aligning donor commitments with priorities established by the nation receiving assistance (partner country) and setting targets for 2010 aligned with twelve indicators based on the partnership commitments.15

-
Signatories reaffirm pledges to strengthen national development strategies, build capacity, enhance accountability to citizenry to maximize combined effectiveness, and define measures and standards of performance and accountability.
-
The declaration acknowledges and addresses the following challenges: failure to provide predictable or multiyear commitments, inadequate delegation of authority to field staff, inadequate integration of national agendas and global programs, and corruption and lack of transparency.
-
In the spirit of mutual accountability, *partnership commitments* include several indicators of progress to be tailored to specific situations, including fragile states, measured nationally and monitored internationally:
ownership or effective partner country leadership in operational development strategies;

alignment of more predictable, untied aid flow with partners' strategies, using partner country procurement and financial systems, and strengthening capacity;

harmonization through common procedures and shared analysis;

managing for results or outcomes, rather than outputs; and

mutual accountability of donors and partners for development results.
The OCHA **Oslo Guidelines** (2007), titled The Use of Foreign Military and Civil Defence Assets in Disaster Relief, "establish the basic framework for formalizing and improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the use of foreign military and civil defense assets in international disaster relief operations" and define the following key terms.16

-
The UN seeks to provide assistance guided by the basic humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, and impartiality, and "with full respect for the sovereignty of States."17

Humanity. Human suffering must be addressed wherever it is found, with particular
attention to the most vulnerable in the population, such as children, women, and the elderly. The dignity and rights of all victims must be respected and protected.18

Neutrality.19 Humanitarian assistance must be provided without engaging in hostilities or
taking sides in political, religious, or ideological controversies.
16
See UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Guidelines on the Use of Foreign Military and Civil Defence
Assets in Disaster Relief ("Oslo Guidelines"), November 2007, p. 4, www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/47da87822.html
(accessed October 15, 2009).
17
Ibid., p. 8.
18
"Oslo Guidelines," p. 8.
19
Neutrality is difficult for many NGOs and some have taken this out of their guiding principles. In any disaster, putting programs on one side of the line or the other makes the other side perceive they are not neutral when in fact the reason for doing so may have been safety or access.

Impartiality. Humanitarian assistance must be provided without discriminating as to ethnic origin, gender, nationality, political opinions, race or religion. Relief of the suffering must be guided solely by needs and priority must be given to the most urgent cases.20

Humanitarian assistance. Humanitarian aid must be delivered to a crisis-affected population for the primary purpose of saving lives and alleviating suffering, and provided in accordance with the basic humanitarian principles. Categories of aid include direct assistance (on-site distribution of goods and services), *indirect assistance* (transportation
of relief goods or personnel), and *infrastructure support* (less directly of benefit to or visible by those affected).21
-
International disaster relief assistance (IDRA) includes materiel, personnel, and services provided to a partner country by the international community and facilitation of such actions by neighboring states. IDRA is considered humanitarian assistance if it conforms to humanitarian principles.
-
Military and civil defense assets (MCDA) are personnel, equipment, supplies, and services provided by foreign military or civil defense organizations in support of IDRA, and viewed as a tool of last resort complementing existing relief mechanisms to provide specific support to specific requirements, in response to the acknowledged humanitarian gap. MCDA can be mobilized and deployed as part of a bilateral or regional alliance, or as part of a UN operation. Affected states must request or consent to such assistance as part of an appeal for international assistance, and MCDA should be provided at no cost. The MCDA states that any personnel on disaster relief missions will be unarmed and in uniform and that security will be provided by the affected state. Unarmed UN MCDA, accepted as neutral and impartial, and clearly distinguished from other military units, can be used to support the full range of humanitarian activities, if requested by the humanitarian coordinator or resident coordinator and maintained under civilian control.22
-
The Civil-Military Coordination section (UN-CMCoord) of OCHA is responsible for mobilizing UN MCDA and fostering civil-military coordination in an emergency. Parameters for the use of resources by MCDA and modus operandi are to be established before deployment, in accordance with international law, and in consultation with the affected state and UN- CMCoord.
The *InterAction Standards* (2007) for PVOs govern the activities of a coalition of international NGOs with American chapters or exclusively U.S.-based humanitarian organizations, formally known as the American Council for International Action.23 The standards emphasize human dignity, social justice, public awareness, ethics, respect for diversity, and a sense of professionalism, and InterAction member organizations review them annually to recertify compliance. Specific sections cover governance, organizational integrity, finances, communications, and management of human resources, programs, public policy, implementation, and administrative guidelines. Civil-Military Guidelines and Reference for Complex Emergencies (2008) is the first collection of core humanitarian instruments developed by the UN and the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) regarding civil-military relationships in complex emergencies with the aim of assisting professionals in reflecting "humanitarian concerns at the *strategic, operational, and tactical* levels."24 The document answers questions about peace operations, provides operational guidelines for peacekeepers, and defines key military terms, abbreviations, and acronyms for a UN audience to facilitate civil-military coordination in UN operations. It also references the two documents described below:
-
IASC Guiding and Operating Principles on Civil-Military Relationship and Use of Military Assets (1995) codifies common positions across a wide range of international humanitarian actors. IASC guiding principles emphasize increased attention to the perception of neutrality and impartiality when military assets are used in humanitarian assistance, and the potential risk of political considerations being reflected, rather than humanitarian principles. Operating principles are summarized by the statement, "a humanitarian operation using military assets must retain its civilian nature and character."25

-
The *Code of Conduct* (1994) of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement is
presented in annex 4 of this guide.26 It stipulates that members of international civil society
are expected to adhere to its 10 core principles relating to humanity, impartiality, neutrality, nondiscrimination, sovereignty, cultural sensitivity, community involvement, capacitybuilding, sustainability, and accountability in providing foreign humanitarian assistance.

## Defining Emergencies

NGOs work in and respond to *humanitarian emergencies*. This is a generic term covering situations from natural disasters to man-made conditions that negatively affect human populations. To prevent confusion, the UN Inter-Agency Standing Committee delineates the differences between emergencies and disasters:27

-
An *emergency* is "an extraordinary situation in which people are unable to meet their basic survival needs, or there are serious and immediate threats to human life and well-being." Events and processes that can cause disasters do not always do so, and disasters do not always result in emergencies. Thus droughts or outbreaks of migratory pests may or may not
result in widespread crop failure, a disaster that may or may not have consequences grave and immediate enough to warrant the declaration of an emergency.28

-
A *disaster* is "the occurrence of a sudden or major misfortune [that] disrupts the basic fabric and normal functioning of a society (or a community). An event or a series of events [that] give rise to casualties and/or damage or loss of property, infrastructure, essential services or means of livelihood on a scale [that] is beyond the normal capacity of the affected communities to cope with unaided."29
-
Natural disasters come in many forms and have many effects on populations. Floods, droughts, earthquakes, landslides, tornadoes, and hurricanes are all types of natural disasters that affect populations. NGOs respond to the needs of communities affected by natural disasters and often tie longer-term development programs into relief activities. Natural disasters can be devastating to a country or region in a variety of ways, including the destruction of infrastructure, health systems, water and sanitation systems, local economics, crops, and the onset of high disease and mortality rates. Depending on the type and size of natural disaster, the effects on a population are highly variable.
Although both categories will be described as humanitarian emergencies in this guide, the differences between them are important to remember.

Humanitarian Crises Any form of humanitarian emergency can further deteriorate into a type of humanitarian crisis increasingly encountered in the current operational environment.

Complex humanitarian emergencies (CHE) stem from multiple causes and have variable effects on populations. The UN describes "a humanitarian crisis in a country, region or society where there is a total or considerable breakdown of authority resulting from internal or external conflict and which requires an international response that goes beyond the mandate or capacity of any single agency
and/or the ongoing UN country program."30 The term CHE Natsios, former director of OFDA and now
administrator for USAID, highlights five characteristics of a humanitarian emergency:
-
Civil conflict is rooted in traditional ethnic, tribal and religious animosities and accompanied by widespread atrocities.
-
National governmental authority deteriorates to a point where public services disappear. Political control is passed to warlords, provincial governors over whom the central government has lost control, and occasionally traditional local leaders.
-
Mass population movements occur as a result of the desire or need to escape civil and political conflict and the necessity for food and water.
-
A disturbed or destroyed economy suffers from hyperinflation and destruction (or complete devaluation) of currency, the gross national product sees large declines, unemployment reaches depression levels, and markets collapse completely.
-
Food security declines, possibly as a result or exacerbation of drought, which quickly leads to severe malnutrition that may in turn quickly lead to mass starvation.31
A CHE is an extreme disruption of governance, with more lethal, destructive, and insidious effects than any other form of conflict because an entire society or region is traumatized. The greatest losses of life (70 to 90 percent) in humanitarian emergencies occur following an emergency or disaster rather than directly due to the disaster (be it man-made or natural). These so-called *indirect deaths* are attributable to the breakdown of health and social services, health information (surveillance systems), mass displacement, overcrowding or poor temporary living conditions, and the loss of livelihoods, all characteristic of CHEs.32 Maynard points to *identity conflicts* as a new and unpredictable root of humanitarian emergency that may grow out of the denial of rights, economic disparity, elite manipulation, historical vendettas, or growth in social chaos. This form, she argues, includes not only political identities and struggles with emerging or retreating regimes, conditions or changes, but also the "full spectrum of societal interaction."33 A quest to form identities often spurs entire societies to become involved in disparate acts or violent activities. Within the current operational environment, NGOs respond to complex humanitarian emergencies on a regular basis, often dealing with large-scale effects of the emergency that include massive population movements, food production and distribution problems, disease, lack of water, injuries and large death tolls caused by any or each of these symptoms. As a result, 50 to 90 percent of those suffering the consequences of these disasters are civilians. Particularly vulnerable populations include children, women, the elderly, and the disabled.34
In 2008, OCHA listed complex humanitarian emergencies of various forms in more than 25 countries and regions.35 From Afghanistan's political collapse and major conflict to Central Africa's recent genocides and continuing civil wars, most are experiencing massive levels of displacement and increased rates of mortality, violence, malnutrition, and disease. Table 1.1 provides an alphabetical listing of countries the UN defines as complex emergencies in 2009.

and Response," *Disaster Medicine Public Health Preparedness* 2008; 2: 19299.
33
Kimberly Maynard, *Healing Communities in Conflict: International Assistance in Complex Emergencies* (New York:
Columbia University Press, 1999), www.cc.columbia.edu/sec/dlc/ciao/access/maynard/maynar (accessed November 10, 2009).
34
Frederick M. Burkle, "Complex Humanitarian Emergencies: A Review of Epidemiological and Response Models," Journal
of Postgraduate Medicine [serial online] 52 (2006):1105, www.jpgmonline.com/text.asp?2006/52/2/110/25155 (accessed November 10, 2009).
35
UN/OCHA data on complex humanitarian emergencies, www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/WCE?OpenForm.

| Afghanistan                                 | Kenya                          |
|---------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|
| The Balkans (Bosnia, Kosovo)                | Lebanon                        |
| The Caucuses (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia) | Nepal                          |
| Chechnya (Russian territory)                | Indonesia                      |
| Colombia                                    | Iraq                           |
| Haiti                                       | Palestinian Territories/Israel |
| Central African Republic                    | Sierra Leone                   |
| Chad                                        | Somalia                        |
| The Democratic Republic of the Congo        | Sri Lanka                      |
| DPR Korea                                   | Sudan                          |
| East Timor (now independent)                | Tajikistan                     |
| Eritrea                                     | Uganda                         |
| Ethiopia                                    | Zimbabwe                       |

NGOs respond not only to natural disasters and complex humanitarian emergencies, but also to manmade disasters, epidemics, technological or industrial accidents, and either regional or neighboring crises that affect large populations worldwide. In most such emergencies, populations are displaced or under physical, social, psychological, political, or economic duress.36 Uniformed, government, and DOD personnel may be more familiar with definitions of humanitarian emergencies through a tradition of involvement in humanitarian assistance and disaster response (HA/ DR), foreign disasters, or foreign disaster relief, as defined by joint doctrine and DOD directive.37

-
Foreign assistance can range from the sale of military equipment to donations of food and medical supplies to aid survivors of natural and man-made disasters. Assistance from the United States takes three formsdevelopment, humanitarian, and security.
-
Foreign disaster is defined as "an act of nature (such as a flood, drought, fire, hurricane, earthquake, volcanic eruption, or epidemic), or an act of man (such as a riot, violence, civil strife, explosion, fire, or epidemic), which is or threatens to be of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant U.S. foreign disaster relief to a foreign country, foreign persons, or to an intergovernmental organization."38
-
Foreign disaster relief   is prompt aid that can be used to alleviate the suffering of foreign disaster victims. Normally it includes humanitarian services and transportation; the provision of food, clothing, medicine, beds, and bedding; temporary shelter and housing; the furnishing
2009), www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/new_pubs/jp1.pdf; Joint Chiefs, *Intergovernmental Coordination*, JP3-08, www.
dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/new_pubs/jp3_08v1.pdf (accessed June 1, 2009).
38
Joint Chiefs, *Intergovernmental Coordination*, p. GL-8.
of medical materiel and medical and technical personnel; and making repairs to essential services."39
U.S. forces conducting foreign humanitarian assistance as part of a North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) operation should be cognizant of the following NATO-specific definitions:40

-
Humanitarian assistance. "As part of an operation, the use of available military resources to assist or complement the efforts of responsible civil actors in the operational area or specialized civil humanitarian organizations in fulfilling their primary responsibility to alleviate human suffering."41
-
Humanitarian operation. "An operation specifically mounted to alleviate human suffering where responsible civil actors in an area are unable or unwilling to adequately support a population. It may precede, parallel, or complement the activity of specialized civil humanitarian organizations."42
Displaced Persons Victims of humanitarian emergenciesincluding earthquakes, famine, severe drought, floods, civil and intrastate wars, human rights abuses, and dire economic conditionsare often, even typically, displaced from their homes, sometimes within their native country and sometimes across national borders.

The military has many names for displaced persons. In publication JP 3-29, for example, the term is frequently *dislocated civilians*. When talking with the international community, however, only two populations are distinct:
-
Refugees cross international borders and have a valid fear of persecution.43 They are protected
under international law by UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).
-
Internally displaced persons (IDPs) are displaced within their country of origin.44 Unless
UNHCR is mandated by the UN to protect IDPs, IDPs are not protected under international law.
This distinction between IDPs and refugees is important. According to international law, it is the responsibility of each national government to provide assistance and protection for its IDPs incountry. However, many IDP situations arise from civil conflict and violence or when the legitimacy and authority of a central government is in doubt. Consequently, there is frequently no local authority

stanag/aap006/aap6.htm (accessed November 12, 2009).
willing and able to provide assistance and protection for IDPs. Refugees, however, are under the protection of UNHCR. Understanding this distinction can aid the military in knowing who to call to discuss provision and protection for these displaced populations.

## Executive Summary

  NGOs are a major component of the
global aid system.
  NGOs respond to all types of
complex humanitarian emergencies and natural disasters.
Chapter 2.
Introduction to NGOs N
ongovernmental organizations are essential to humanitarian relief in bringing years of experience in public health and preventive medicine programming to a crisis zone.

  Understanding NGOs is vital
in today's complex world of humanitarian emergencies and assistance-disaster response operations.
  NGOs follow codified, well-tested
international standards of care.
More than 90 percent of aid coordinated by the United Nations is provided by NGOs, 95 percent of which is provided by only 35 to 40 major American and European organizations.45 NGOs worldwide number in the thousands and vary widely in their performance, professionalism, sense of responsibility, and attention to standards in accordance with the Humanitarian Code of Conduct.46

  NGOs are defined by their voluntary,
independent, and not-for-profit status.
  NGOs have unique charters and
missions.
The term *humanitarian community* refers to the body of organizations and individuals dedicated to providing assistance to people in need internationally. Organizations that are neither an NGO nor a government agency (civilian or military) may be international organizations (IOs) and will normally be indicated by name. IOs are international bodies like the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), the World Food Program (WFP) and other independent UN agencies like the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).  The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is often described as a NGO, an international, or an intergovernmental organization, but it is not any of these. The ICRC is an organization with a hybrid nature. As a private association organized under the Swiss Civil Code, its existence is not in itself mandated by governments. Yet its functions and activitiesto provide protection and assistance to victims of conflictare mandated by the international community of states and are founded in international law.47 A nongovernmental organization is a legally constituted entity created by private organizations or people with no participation in or representation of any government. When an NGO is funded totally or partially by a government or governments, it maintains its nongovernmental status only as long as it excludes government representatives from membership.

## History

The first NGO, Rotary, which later became Rotary International, dates to the early twentieth century. In the early 1900s there were more than 1,000 recorded NGOs important to women's suffrage, scientist rescue, and refugee issues. The term NGO came into use in 1945 with provisions in Article 71 of chapter 10 of the United Nations Charter, when organizations that were neither governmental nor member states were needed for a consultative role to the UN. On February 27, 1950, international NGOs (or INGOs) were first defined in resolution 288 (X) of ECOSOC as "any international organization that is not founded by an international treaty."48
In June 1997, the vital role of NGOs and other major groups in sustainable development was recognized in chapter 27 of *Agenda 21*, leading to intense arrangements for a consultative relationship between the United Nations and nongovernmental organizations. Globalization throughout the twentieth century heightened the importance of NGOs, which have since developed to emphasize humanitarian issues, developmental aid, and sustainable development.

## Ngo Characteristics

NGOs are founded, developed, and managed by civilians.
-
NGO personnel are highly professional and skilled, trained or educated in disaster management, public health, logistics, technology, water sanitation, communications, medicine, geology, sociology, and psychology.
-
Staff are of different backgrounds, training, nationalities, and cultures.
-
Most NGOs have moved to use all local staff to build capacity and have large human resource databases that keep emergency personnel and cadres of career aid workers on call.
-
NGOs have major global procurement capabilities for relief supplies, technical and capital assets, vehicles, and other material that can be used to respond to humanitarian emergencies.
NGOs can be not-for-profit (nonprofit).
-
NGOs require funding from external sources to design, implement, and manage their programming.
-
NGOs obtain funding from numerous sources including government agencies, private foundation grants and private contributions or gifts-in-kind from companies and other organizations.
-
Donations of cash, material, or even services (legal, technological, and the like) to NGOs normally qualify as charitable gifts and can be used to lower tax liability for the donor.
-
In the United States, legal charitable status for an organization is granted by the federal government under the classification of 501(c)(3) that enables the charity to receive taxdeductible donations from individuals or corporations.
-
To become a not-for-profit organization, an NGO must be charitable in its mission, managed and accounted for by a board of directors with no financial interest in the programs or operations of the organization, and maintain financial accounting methods that are fully open to the public at all times (see chapter 3).
-
NGOs can also be solely for-profit or have arms within the organization that are for-profit (for example, International Relief and Development).
NGOs are unique.
-
Although NGOs worldwide number in the thousands, they vary widely in their performance, professionalism, sense of responsibility, attention to standards and in accordance with the Humanitarian Code of Conduct.49
-
The vast majority, 95 percent, of NGO relief work is provided by only thirty-five to forty
major American and European organizations50 that, on the whole, follow codified, well-tested
international standards of care.51
NGOs share many characteristics.
-
NGOs typically serve the public, beneficiaries, needy populations, constituencies, or target groups that have been affected by some emergency, disaster, or massive reduction of livelihood.
-
Activities are intended to serve needs that a donor feels appropriate but aid is based on need rather than any political agenda.
-
NGOs share a relatively small labor pool of emergency, relief and humanitarian assistance workers, and often times share personnel, practices, and customs.
-
NGOs have many of the same donors (especially foundation, UN, and large government grant types), compete for a limited pool of funding, and must be financially accountable in many of the same ways.
NGOs coordinate activities and resources internally and externally (see chapter 7 for more detail).
-
Internal coordination, though not always formal, is the most common way civilian sectors organize in humanitarian emergencies. When more than 100 organizations are present in a region responding to a given emergency, the rationale for pulling together coordination bodies to manage information flow, project locations, shared resources, and combined efforts is clear and immediate.

Examples: In Kosovo, Burundi, Darfur, Iraq, and Afghanistan, NGOs coordinated extensively within the NGO community to manage information, for safety as well as advocacy bodies to international donors or local and regional governments.
-
External coordination between NGOs, militaries, governments, and donor agencies has also produced a substantial amount of experience for all parties involved in coordinating, communicating and generally interfacing with one another. The preferred external coordination for NGOs is a UN-coordinated effort (OCHA), not a military-run effort, unless the UN is not available to do so.
Examples: In Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq, NGOs and militaries interfaced in military run operations centers (HACC or HOC). These meetings served as a place to exchange information (especially security concerns) and discuss strategies, criticisms, and even logistical and service capacities.
NGOs neither "coordinate" with, nor are they "coordinated by" the military.52

Quick Reference
No one source covers all NGOs and nonprofits worldwide, but several are useful for quick online reference:
  www.interaction.org (U.S.-based
international NGO consortium)
  www.ngovoice.org (European-based
international NGO consortium)

-
Some NGOs maintain large communication capabilities, and often use the same technologies as governments or military units when there is no local infrastructure (satellite phones and VSATs, Internet, global cell phones, and so on).
-
NGOs represent a large group of professionals well seasoned in field work who have been to many (if not more) conflict regions than the military.
-
NGO professional staff are highly educated, often holding advanced degrees in medicine, law, international policy, public health, and engineering, and have decades of experience in disasters.

  www.charitynavigator.org (guide to
financial reports of almost every U.S.- based NGO)
  www.reliefweb.int (relief and
development portal listing various NGO updates and resources)
  www.global-health.org (searchable
database of NGOs and other NGO related resources)

Given the hundreds of NGOs in the United States and the thousands more worldwide, the list of activities, services, strengths, expertise, abilities, capacities, and policies that make up this varied and dynamic field is incredible. Today, large, professional NGOs with substantial operating budgets and emergency response capacity are shedding the corner charity image and becoming major technical agents of humanitarian assistance worldwide. Civilian capacity to mitigate, manage, and respond to humanitarian emergencies has grown rapidly in the last 40 years. Established and substantial NGOs today have operations in numerous countries, major coordination mechanisms, strong governing structures and partnerships with local and international governments, military, and other international actors. Some NGOs have lobbying arms devoted to influencing policymaking and national level foreign assistance. NGOs rely on substantial organizational infrastructure to maintain numerous emergency operations around the world, and it is becoming apparent that NGOs are now more important than ever.

## Executive Summary

NGOs are extremely diverse and can be characterized by their missions or response.
  Two important NGO activities
addressed here are emergency response-relief and development.

Chapter 3.
What Is an NGO?

N
ongovernmental organizations come in many forms, sizes and types. Many are religiously oriented, regionally based, technically specialized, or communitybased organizations. Most are small, though the more well-known are worldwide entities with international umbrellas and national chapters.

  Other equally important NGOs focus
on human rights and advocacy, conflict mitigation and resolution, and education.
  NGOs are operational in almost every
emergency around the world.
  NGOs generally need external financial
support as well as technical, logistical, and programmatic support.
When an NGO is created it establishes a mission or vision statement, and a series of objectives and goals that guide it as an organization. If an NGO is founded with the mission of responding to disaster victims that are children, for example, it will seek to raise funds, capacity, and knowhow to deliver programming to assist child victims of a disaster. The focus may also be regional, country specific, or to provide a specific service.

The global community of NGOs encompasses a wide range of organizations, which can usually be categorized into four basic types:
-
humanitarian aid, both emergency response and developmental
-
advocacy groups such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty, and Physicians for Human Rights
-
faith-based groups are humanitarian aid groups originally founded on faith principles but do not use religion as a part of the aid given (Mercy Corps) Insert footnote "missionary aid groups (by definition not NGO's) seek to "spread the word" using humanitarian aid to access to those who they consider needing spiritual help; more or less conditional aid (Samaritan's Purse, Hope Ships)"
The following organizations are smaller in capacity, staff size, or funding levels but operate in numerous locations across the world. Some are unique and focus solely on a specific sector or specialty.
-
Air Serv International
-
American Refugee Committee
-
Americares
-
Doctors of the World
-
Direct Relief International
-
Project Hope
-
Relief International
-
OXFAM
-
Volunteers In Technical Assistance
As noted, some NGOs are advocacy organizations. That is, they do not supply aid per se but instead focus on advocacy issues specific to the disaster to draw public attention with the aim of changing
international, domestic, or host country policy. Recent examples of such type of advocacy include women's rights in Afghanistan, and the genocide in Darfur.
-
Refugees International
-
Physicians for Human Rights
-
Human Rights Watch
-
Amnesty International
-
Landmine Survivors Network
-
MADRE
Faith-based organizations are the largest growing group of NGOs and accounted for 10.5 percent of USAID dollars to nongovernmental aid organizations in fiscal 2001, and 19.9 percent in 2005. Some of the older, more experienced NGOs were founded on religious principles (Mercy Corps) but do not proselytize as part of their programming, though others do. An easy way to identify these groups is from their mission statements, which are typically available on the group's website. Samaritan's Purse states that they have a "single-minded commitment to evangelism through aid relief" (www. samaritanspurse.org). The following list is not comprehensive (or based on size) but outlines evangelical NGOs, which the military frequently encounters:
-
Samaritan's Purse
-
Shelter Now
-
Cure International
-
Food for the Hungry
-
Hope Ships
-
World Vision
-
Catholic Relief Services
-
UMCOR
-
Church World Service
In today's world, it is important to understand these differences. Using a missionary group in a Muslim country can cause havoc and distrust, as well as put aid programs at risk if the host country does not understand that not all NGOs are oriented to promote religion. NGOs can be found in every country, and though the NGOs studied in this manual are primarily oriented internationally and mostly headquartered in western countries, most of the thousands of NGOs globally are local or indigenous civil society organizations that operate much as nonprofits do in the United States. More than 30,000 NGOs operate internationally, of which approximately half represent various western-based organizations working in developing countries.53

## Characteristics Of Aid

NGOs work in five areas:54

-
international relief and development
-
democracy promotion and electoral support, human rights and good governance
-
conflict mitigation, management, and resolution
-
civil society support and community-based service
-
education, medical, and state service replacement (traditionally formed locally to substitute or enhance lacking or nonexisting government services)
This manual focuses on **international relief organizations** found in numerous places internationally and constantly responding to humanitarian emergencies. Of course, depending on the location and type of emergency the reader is considering, the number and type of organizations involved will vary. Local (host nation) NGOs and the various other organizations are often found in humanitarian emergencies and are used as partners, facilitators, or guides to international NGOs and IOs that deliver emergency services. Keep in mind, however, that international NGOs have moved to using primarily local staff in a response for building host nation capacity, safety, and credibility among recipients of aid. Just because you don't see a flag does not mean an international NGO is not there. International NGOs are and have been prominent features in international responses to humanitarian emergencies globally. The United States and other governments have come to rely heavily on NGOs and their vast network of local and international connections. Because NGOs have extensive groundlevel experience and are many times present before humanitarian emergencies arise, there exists an immediate capacity and knowledge of what needs to be done to respond to humanitarian needs. NGOsboth locally and internationallyfocus their work in a ground-up fashion that uses local capacity, local and regional organizations, familiarity and intimate relations with the community to implement programs. This is one of the primary advantages that NGOs have when compared with government and military agencies responding to the same type of emergency. Instead of duplicating efforts or having to establish new programs from scratch, donors now use the NGO community as an extension of capacity, and often as partners in formulating regional-level responses or policy.

## Ngos Overseas

NGOs are found in most overseas disaster and emergency settings. NGOs are present in all phases of the emergency, including well beforehand. Their work includes various levels of activity:

-
The onset of the emergency (acute phase) normally lasts for approximately a month in new emergencies. NGOs deliver all forms of emergency services, including emergency medical assistance, shelter, water and sanitation services, displaced population management, food and water provisions and nonfood items such as cooking utensils and blankets and the like.
-
The recovery stage includes the period just after the initial chaos and expanded relief efforts are implemented. More assessments, detailed analysis, and extended and more far-reaching services can be delivered once security is better and the host nation, NGOs, and the donor community have identified priorities.
-
The rehabilitation and development stages normally take hold after about six months, when the crude mortality rate (CMR) is close to baseline, and populations have been repatriated or settled and longer-term programs are designed and initiated.55
The primary objectives of most NGOs responding to emergencies are to reduce the crude mortality rate, lower the level of physical, emotional and psychological suffering, provide stable food and clean water sources, provide for services of displaced populations and to generally assist national governmental or international efforts to stem large-scale suffering and humanitarian tragedy. This suggests that NGOs are often the first international organizations into an area during or after a humanitarian emergency, and often remain the only form of international presence in areas that are especially rough. U.S. military forces often encounter NGOs that have been in-country for years and that have specialized or in-depth knowledge of the country's or region's culture, politics, demographics and terrain and other pertinent forms of familiarity that comes with time and experience. InterAction (www.InterAction.org), the U.S. consortium of U.S.-based international NGOs, states that its 170+ member organizations are operating in "every developing country" in the world.56 This means that in any operation in a developing country, government or military units is likely to find a U.S.-based NGO on the ground. It is also likely that international NGOs based in Europe and the United States will be on hand in humanitarian emergencies. Many NGOs sustain multiple programs in more than one country at a time. Larger NGOs, such as CARE, Save the Children, Catholic Relief Services, and World Vision, specialize in responding to numerous emergencies simultaneously, often using leverage from one emergency to respond to another, or relying on an extensive network of national chapter organizations to establish a footing in an emergency. Smaller organizations will also often respond to more than one emergency at a time, but have to choose their responses more selectively.

## Ngo Assistance Activities

In most responses to humanitarian emergencies four major objectives are commonly held by the international community, by NGOs and by military units participating in humanitarian assistance operations (HAOs):
-
reduce excess mortality
-
reduce or minimize excess disease, disability and unstable health conditions generally
-
provide infrastructure rehabilitation (including health-care facilities, water and sanitation systems, roads, telecommunication systems, and so on)
-
ensure and protect return passage for displaced populations (refugees and IDPs)
NGOs vary in their program capacity and may carry out any or all of several functions: emergency assistance, long-term development, peace building, and sustainability programming. Key policy and operations are designed with several goals in mind: preserve life and minimize suffering by providing warning of natural events that often result in property damage and loss of life, sometimes extreme (such as hurricanes); preserve life and minimize suffering by responding to human-generated disasters; foster self-sufficiency among disaster-prone nations by helping them achieve some measure of preparedness; alleviate suffering by providing rapid, adequate response to aid requests; and enhance recovery through rehabilitation programs. Although most NGOs subscribe to the elimination of extreme poverty, many work as development agencies in specific theaters, including postconflict environments. In addition, assistance activities can be divided into three categories based on the degree of contact with the affected population. Direct assistance is face-to-face distribution of goods and services. Examples include support of medical clinic services, supplies, and personnel. These services can be and usually are long term. Indirect assistance is at least one step removed from the population and involves such activities as transporting goods or relief personnel, support for ministries of health, and technical assistance such as assessments of hospitals, clinics or even population needs and gaps. The third category, infrastructure support, involves providing general services, such as road repair, hospital repair, airspace management, and power generation, which facilitate relief but are not necessarily visible to or solely for the benefit of the affected population.

## Categories Of Ngo Response

The thematic division between those NGOs that focus on disaster-emergency response and those that focus on longer-term or community-based development is significant. Nonetheless, it is not uncommon to find organizations that participate in both longer-term and shorter-term programming in disaster-affected areas or developing regions or countries.

Disaster and Emergency Response NGOs Many NGOs focus only on disaster response. This means that some arrive at the earliest possible time during or after an emergency, implement emergency response programs, and leave shortly after the first stages of an emergency are complete. NGOs focus on being light, nimble, and efficient with very little red tape to prevent immediate action. NGOs that provide medical assistance pride themselves in being specific in their mission and efficient in their capacity to deal with emergency health matters while working to rebuild local capacity in the host country to deal with ongoing crises with the end state goal of improving health infrastructure and public health capacity. Organizations that maintain disaster response capacities can respond immediately to humanitarian emergencies and are often part of a team of organizations that will arrive in an emergency setting before any other agencies or organizations. Albania and Kosovo, East Timor, earthquakes in Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Peru, and China, floods in Mozambique of 2000 and 2001, Afghanistan, and the Indian Ocean tsunami of December 2004 showed that civilian capacity to muster resources and deliver emergency, search and rescue, and engineering specialists to the affected regions was indeed impressive. In many cases, NGOs were either already operational on the ground at the onset of the emergency or were the first responders, delivering relief personnel often only hours after the onset of an emergency. Larger organizations have disaster response teams ready to respond to man-made and natural disasters on a moment's notice, and though normally reliant on private sector transportation, they can be deployed with considerable speed and resource to manage portions of the initial stages of the emergency. For those organizations that can afford to have a series of doctors, engineers, coordinators, and other general relief specialists on call, there is often a roster of people the organization can call on to ship out to an emergency-effected region to better assess the needs.

Long-Term Development NGOs Other organizations shy away from relief and disaster response specialties (either solely or entirely) and focus on providing longer-term developmental assistance to populations affected by complex humanitarian emergencies that have existed for long periods, or in generally desperate conditions in very poor countries. Some NGOs do both relief and development, but those that focus solely on development are often sensitive about the delineation between how their activities are distinct from emergency responses or temporary fixes. Vested in working closely with the host community, region, or country, a development-focused NGO establishes stable projects that focus on economic development, health-care system enhancement, infrastructure rehabilitation, and other longer-term and thematic programs through local capacity building. Many development-oriented NGOs are primed to provide emergency services in their area of operation. The NGO may not have specific emergency response strategies, but those that have been in a country or region for a long time have an advantage in knowing a region's workings, terrain, and culture extensively. When a humanitarian emergency strikes, many development NGOs can easily harness resources to be the first responder, or to serve as an information source for donors and emergency response NGOs soon to arrive. NGOs like Winrock International do not normally participate in emergency response activities even though they may be in the area.57 Winrock is a development NGO that specifically provides support for economic development in developing communities. It has no capacity to respond to emergency needs outside of providing information to other NGOs about the area, people, resources, and other pertinent information. Because it does not normally use trucks, warehouses, local procurement channels for large commodities, or emergency networks, it would not be a prime candidate to shift its programming to an emergency response-oriented framework. On the other hand, NGOs that focus on development such as CARE, World Vision, Food for the Hungry, or International Relief and Development are also capable of responding to a humanitarian emergency. Each has extensive worldwide networks of emergency response capacities and personnel, as well as comprehensive policies and experience in responding to humanitarian emergencies. Although they participate in development-oriented programming, these organizations can quickly adapt their capacities and become a viable humanitarian emergency response when a humanitarian emergency arises. This differentiation between the two major types of international NGOs is essential. Both have value and should be understood as part of the NGO community, but are often different in objectives, missions, and capacities. Multisectoral NGOs that participate in global relief and development activities are valuable in an emergency because of their unique blend of ground-level knowledge of an area gleaned from development projects and significant know-how on emergency response acquired during missions worldwide. Development-oriented NGOs are valuable in that they can easily provide an extensive body of knowledge and understanding that would not normally be readily available for the international NGOs and donor organizations arriving specifically to respond to a new emergency. Table 3.1 (*see following page*) distinguishes comparative advantages, weaknesses, and other characteristics between emergency response NGOs, development NGOs, and those active in both sectors. Although not comprehensive, it can be useful in understanding the various dynamics of each type of NGO.

## Why Are Ngos Overseas? Why Are They In My Aor?

Military and other entities that begin operations in humanitarian emergencies will find various types of NGOs in the area that focus on many different types of services. There is often overlap, and sometimes an organization will specialize in general sectors that may or may not be needed in a given emergency.

| Emergency Response         | Development          |
|----------------------------|----------------------|
| Comparative                |                      |
| advantage or               |                      |
| strength                   |                      |
| Extensive expertise in     |                      |
| logistics, communications  |                      |
| and coordination; rapid    |                      |
| deployment; specialized    |                      |
| capacity to handle         |                      |
| emergency health,          |                      |
| infrastructure, and so on  |                      |
| Extensive ground-          |                      |
| level knowledge of         |                      |
| a region's people,         |                      |
| culture, language,         |                      |
| economy, society,          |                      |
| political atmosphere;      |                      |
| close relationships        |                      |
| and networks with          |                      |
| local NGOs, other civil    |                      |
| society organizations,     |                      |
| government                 |                      |
| Often lack capacity        |                      |
| to handle multiple         |                      |
| stages of humanitarian     |                      |
| suffering (emergency);     |                      |
| often limited by narrow    |                      |
| mission or project scope   |                      |
| Weaknesses                 | Often lack knowledge |
| of needy population's      |                      |
| culture or politico-       |                      |
| economic atmosphere;       |                      |
| often unaware or not       |                      |
| knowledgeable about        |                      |
| region's transportation,   |                      |
| communications structures, |                      |
| ministry regulations, and  |                      |
| the like. Often have to    |                      |
| establish new systems and  |                      |
| programs from scratch,     |                      |
| requiring set-up and       |                      |
| learning-curve time        |                      |
Extensive knowledge of the ground with the capacity to shift operational strength to emergency response; support of an international network of emergency response individuals, programs and policies; ready for anything; sensitive to needy population's needs, strengths, and capacities Sometimes not strong enough in any one sector or programming area; potentially weak in coordination efforts with other relief or development NGOs or even militaries
Provides body of knowledge and extensive networks between local NGOs, governments and donors that can be shared with emergency response entities, donors and militaries
Value to an emergency
Provide emergency relief and humanitarian assistance; concentrated expertise and capacity to provide immediate services; normally host to emergency specialists, medical personnel and an efficient logistics system to complete assessments, coordinate and deliver HA
Winrock International, Catholic Relief Services, UMCOR
Examples
Medicine San Frontiers (MSF), International Rescue Committee (IRC), International Medical Corps (IMC), Doctors of the World (MDM), Air Serv International
Where found
At the onset of an emergency; immediately after large-scale fighting has stopped or natural disaster; after peace agreements and cease-fires; during conflict (variable depending on scale, accessibility); up to 6 months after an emergency
In poor or postemergency countries and/or regions; in rural and urban areas with substantial offices and presence in specific areas of operation; 3 to 6 months after an emergency. Can be incountry for a decade or more.
Duration
1 week to 6 months for natural disasters and postconflict response; indefinite for complex emergencies and continuing humanitarian emergencies
Indefinite, often lasting more than 20 years in a specific region; normally provides programming until donor priorities shift
Size
Variable
Variable
Variable
Constituency
Victims of a humanitarian emergency
Postconflict, poor and poverty-stricken populations
Donors
Governments, UN agencies, private contributions, and NGO savings that have been set aside for emergency spending
Foundations, governments, development oriented UN agencies, churches, synagogues, and mosques, religious organizations, corporations

An NGO will be found in a humanitarian emergency for three primary reasons.

Can immediately harness knowledge of local conditions and atmosphere for most appropriate forms of emergency response; can leverage the strength of local entities and relationships; has large sense of credibility in eyes of local populations as not an outsider World Vision International, Catholic Relief Services, CARE, Oxfam, Relief International, Save the Children, International Relief and Development. In both development and emergency settings, often using an existing development project in an emergency-affected country to launch emergency HAOs; can be in-country for a decade or more (IMC in Afghanistan more than 23 years) Indefinite A combination of emergency victims and the postconflict poverty-stricken Variable

-
It has a *comparative advantage* in responding to a specific emergency, it has current operations in the area that precede the emergency, it has specific capacity nearby that could be utilized in the emergency, or it has a specific expertise or strength in the affected region or emergency type.
-
It has a *specific interest in the area*, suggesting that it was formed to serve a specific population or region, and any emergency within that population or region would naturally warrant a response from it.
-
It targets a *specific type of victim*, and when an emergency or situation creates victims of this type, it is a natural responder.
NGOs have a number of advantages in a disaster.58

-
They are able to experiment freely with innovative approaches and, if necessary, to take risks.
-
They are flexible in adapting to local situations and responding to local needs and therefore able to develop integrated projects, as well as sectoral projects.
-
They enjoy good rapport with people and can render microassistance to very poor people as they can identify those who are most in need and tailor assistance to their needs.
-
They can communicate at all levels, from the neighborhood to the upper echelons of government.
-
They can recruit both experts and highly motivated staff with fewer restrictions than the government.
At the same time, they also have a number of disadvantages.
-
The paternalistic attitudes of some NGOs may restrict the degree of participation in program or project design by the local community.
-
Approaches to a problem or area may sometimes be either restricted or constrained.
-
An approach or idea may not be replicable because the project or selected area is not representative, the project coverage is relatively small, or outside financial resources are too restrictive.
-
What is called the *territorial possessiveness* of an area, sector, or project reduces cooperation and coordination across agencies, and is often seen as threatening or competitive.
The most common NGOs military personnel are likely to come in contact with are profiled in annex 1, which harnesses a representative cross-section of the types of organizations that can fall within the NGO category and are likely to interface with the military in disasters. The range extends from the world's largest NGOs to smaller organizations, but does hold steady the condition that each operates in humanitarian emergencies in countries other than its origin. It is, however, worthy of note that many U.S.-based NGOs changed their charters to respond to the Katrina disaster.

Executive Summary
  NGOs emerge from a variety of
religious, community, interest, or expertise backgrounds, often starting quite small.

  NGOs are governmentregistered, legal entities with management structures and financial reporting requirements.
  The NGO community has
adopted standards and codes of conduct that many but not all sign and abide by.
NGO Structure, Authority, and Standards N
ongovernmental organizations emerge from communities, civil society organizations, collective activities, religious organizations, universities and individual initiatives. Often started as small volunteer projects, NGOs are sometimes referred to as grassroots organizations, voluntary organizations, charities or nonprofits, all names that denote the voluntary, public service, and community orientation that NGOs have. In legal and organizational terms, there is little difference between an NGO and a nonprofit or not-for-profit organization in the United States. Nonprofits and NGOs are the same thing, and only when nonprofits extend their activities overseas are they popularly called NGOs or private voluntary organizations
(PVOs).59 The term NGO denotes an organization that is based nationally or locally but that raises money and organizational capacity to participate in international relief and development activities. This, of course, is only sensitive to organizations based in western or donor countries that extend services through NGOs in developing countries. Nonprofit organizations in developing countries are also often called NGOs but are defined as local NGOs when deciphering differences between international and indigenous organizations that work locally. NGO can be understood by their orientation or level of operation.60

-
Charitable orientation often refers to a top-down effort with little participation by the beneficiaries. It includes NGOs with activities directed toward meeting the needs of the poor distributing food, clothing, or medicine and providing housing, transport, schools, and the like. Such NGOs may also undertake relief activities during either a natural or man-made disaster.
-
Service orientation includes activities such as providing health, family planning, or education services in which the program is designed by the NGO and beneficiaries are expected to participate in implementing the program and in receiving the service.
-
Participatory orientation is characterized by self-help projects where beneficiaries are involved particularly in implementing a project by contributing cash, tools, land, materials, labor, and so on. In the classical community development project, participation begins with the need definition and continues into the planning and implementation stages. Cooperatives have a participatory orientation.
-
Empowering orientation incorporates the aim to help people develop a clearer understanding of the social, political, and economic factors affecting their lives, and to strengthen their awareness of their own potential power to control their lives. Sometimes these groups develop spontaneously around a problem or an issue; other times outside workers from NGOs play a facilitating role in their development.
Although this manual focuses on international NGOs, it may be helpful to understand there are many types of NGOs, from community to internationally focused groups.
-
Community-based organizations (CBOs) spring from personal initiatives. These can include sports clubs, women's organizations, neighborhood organizations, and religious or educational organizations. There are a large variety of these, some supported by NGOs, national or international NGOs, or bilateral or international agencies, and others independent of outside help. Some are devoted to raising the consciousness of the urban poor or helping them understand their rights in gaining access to needed services and others are involved in providing such services.
-
Citywide organizations include organizations such as the Rotary or Lion's Club, chambers of commerce and industry, coalitions of business, ethnic or educational groups and associations of community organizations. Some exist for other purposes, and become involved in helping the poor as one of many activities. Others are created specifically to help the poor.
-
National NGOs include organizations such as the Red Cross, YMCAs and YWCAs, professional organizations, and the like. Some have state branches and assist local NGOs.
-
International NGOs range from secular agencies to religiously motivated groups. Their
activities vary from mainly funding local NGOs, institutions, and projects, to implementing the projects.
NGOs have constituencies and develop specialties or areas of interest in which its programming, solicitations, fundraising and growth is oriented. When NGOs are met in the field, there are wide variances in size, appearance, activity, and expertise. It is crucial to understand that when various NGOs operate in the same emergency, there are large but often subtle differences between them. The international NGOs that are covered in this manual normally have headquarters in a major city of an industrialized country such as Washington, DC, Los Angeles, Seattle, Atlanta, New Haven, Brussels, London, Paris, Geneva, Rome, or Tokyo. NGOs come from any number of places, however, and bring with them a variety of sources of support. With shrinking relief budgets, many NGOs now will have offices in both the United States and Europe to take advantage of funding from different sources, governments, and donors.

## Ngo Foundations And Structure

NGOs founded in the United States to serve populations outside the United States fall under the same rubric that nationally based and local organizations do. An NGO is an incorporated or organized body that abides by laws, can make contracts, employ people, make legally binding relationships with

other entities, and generally operate as a corporation within the country or state of origin. For those NGOs based in the United States, each state has different regulations, although most require that the organization fulfill several requisites:
-
establish and maintain a mission or charter, and articles of incorporation or association;
-
establish a board of directors or trustees that assume responsibility for the organization's financial, operational and general well-being as well as legal status;
-
establish tax-exempt status from both the federal government Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the appropriate state government entities should the organization want to accept taxdeductible and to remain somewhat free of federal and state taxes themselves;
-
maintain audited and accredited financial records; and
-
remain financially, legally, and organizationally sound, and abide by specific rules or guidelines set forth by federal and state law.
Most NGOs are incorporated organizations that are structured to protect its founders, employees and board members from personal liability. The incorporation process serves to establish bank accounts and contracts, to accept donations, purchasing abilities, and buy insurance, and establish relationships with other organizations and governments or other entities. As an organization, the NGO is the embodiment of its mission and of the articles of incorporation or association.

Board of Directors The board serves as the trustee body of the NGO, normally part of the large-scale decision-making process and thematic issues of the organization. There is no financial benefit or reward for board membership and members have no financial interest in the organization's programming. Although in many cases, board members agree to give (sometimes substantial) financial gifts to the organization. board members are valuable in that they extend the organization's resources into various communities and encapsulate personalities that are not specifically significant in daily operations but that lend credibility to the organization as a whole. Many NGO boards are packed with celebrities, former government officials, experts, academics, and community leaders with the intention of attaining recognition or publicity that would not otherwise be attainable. During emergency appeals, NGOs will often send board members out to make public statements, write newspaper or journal editorials, make speeches, or give interviews to spark focus on the organization's work and needs in responding to the emergency. NGO boards vary widely in style. Some are very active, often establishing close relationships with NGO officers and staff and involving themselves in programmatic planning processes and fundraising and therefore must be consulted when new programming is in planning. Other boards are largely fundraising entities, lending their names to give credibility to an organization's fundraising practices. In a few cases, boards are primarily symbolic, giving way to an NGO's strong leadership, and only fulfilling the legal requirements of meeting a specific number of times each year and certifying financial obligations.

An NGO's board is legally liable for the organization. In some U.S. states, and in some other countries, this liability differs. Generally, though, the board is the pinnacle of oversight of the organization's direction, mission, articles of incorporation or association, executive leadership and even programs. It is normally involved in only the larger thematic decision-making and guidance, not the daily workings of the NGO unless there are specific issues. Occasionally a board member will tour an NGO's programming in the field. NGOs often have board members who were once colleagues or government and military officials. Understanding that boards generally have a large level of influence or involvement with the NGO is essential to understanding what type of tact or approach is appropriate when attempting to work with, coordinate, guide, or even understand a particular organization. Table 4.1 outlines a few of the differences between various types of NGO boards.

| Features or Characteristics           | Benefit                                 |
|---------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
| Well-known individuals                | Assists the NGO with credibility should |
| the NGO alone be unknown, small or    |                                         |
| new. Also provides the NGO with star  |                                         |
| power or the ability to raise money   |                                         |
| when associated with a popular or     |                                         |
| well-respected mentor.                |                                         |
| Technically oriented                  | Can assist the NGO officers and staff   |
| with know-how, regional knowledge,    |                                         |
| donor identification and management   |                                         |
| experience. Often valuable for NGOs   |                                         |
| that are new or that are seeking      |                                         |
| guidance in a new sector or region.   |                                         |
| Removed                               | Often valuable if NGO has strong        |
| officer and staff base. Gives NGO     |                                         |
| personnel room to operate, and only   |                                         |
| serves the minimum requirements       |                                         |
| established by law.                   |                                         |
| Large                                 | Extends the NGOs reach into various     |
| communities and is a sign that        |                                         |
| something is being done right; also   |                                         |
| provides increased levels of leverage |                                         |
| and of sources of knowledge.          |                                         |
| Small                                 | Easy to manage and involve in           |
| decision-making; NGO personnel        |                                         |
| can form close relationships with     |                                         |
| the board and can utilize the board's |                                         |
| functions easily. Easier to find      |                                         |
| consensus for decision-making and     |                                         |
| thematic issues.                      |                                         |
Sometimes unwieldy to manage; top level NGO personnel spend significant time managing board meetings, functions, travel plans, and coordination. Often cannot offer substantial credibility with the general public; potentially limited and stems the board's innate function of spreading the NGO's presence into different communities. Often offers no guidance or allows NGO to veer from mission or charter; can often become too removed and
lose influence over NGO officers and
staff. Problematic if poor decisionmaking becomes common. Often unwieldy and difficult to manage; potentially removed and difficult to find firm decision-making or unified opinions. Potentially weak or limited in scope of outreach possible; Potential for negative signal to donors or public.

## Ngo Guidelines, Codes, And Standards

Practically speaking, NGOs are not governed by any specific international law. They are free to participate in international operations as a unique and independent actor, and although neutrality or other specific guidelines protect their activities, they are largely unaccountable to any entity that the NGO is not under contract with (a specific donor, government, or company). Instead, the collective NGO community is governed by a series of self-initiated or externally imposed legal and ethical guidelines. These include the following elements:
-
Restrictions within the legal structure of the NGO's country of origin. This might be tax laws, donor restrictions, accountability and transparency standards, political or geographical limitations, and the like.
-
Guidelines, rules, or stipulations of the donor agency or source. In receiving funding from a donor, NGOs will often be subject to the special requirements the donor agency sets out. Large government donors, such as USAID or the United Kingdom's DFID (Department for International Development), are often bound by restrictions as to hiring, religious activity, associations while implementing programs, geographical flexibility, safety measures, reporting procedures, accounting methods, antiterrorism compliance (since 2001), and even technical specifications. An NGO will have an interest in operating within the guidelines of any donor requirements when it has an overarching interest to maintain positive relations with the donor.
-
Restrictions within the legal structure of the country in which the NGO operates. When an NGO operates in any country, it must register with the central or provincial-state government authorities, and continue throughout the emergency, to report to that entity, its activities, whereabouts, materials it uses, funds it receives and the types of materials imported (assuming that there is still some form of central government authority). NGOs must abide by local, state, national and international laws generally, and during emergencies must remain accountable to the donor community, to its constituencies, and to the national government or lead governing authority in the region.
The trend is for NGOs to join or propose coordination mechanisms (see chapter 7) and as donor pressure continues to mount on NGOs to maintain credible, accountable, and transparent programming while providing effective services, NGOs have created a series of standards and best practices that help to improve the overall quality, consistency, and fluidity of NGO programming worldwide. This is helpful for outside agencies that have to deal with NGOs, for NGOs themselves, and ultimately for the recipients of NGO programming.

The following are the most commonly used and cited standards:
-
The Sphere Project (www.sphereproject.org)
-
The Interagency Standing Committee Guidelines (www.humanitarianinfo.org/iasc)
-
MSF Clinical Guidelines (www.refbooks.msf.org/MSF_Docs/en/MSFdocMenu_en.htm)
-
SMART Indicators (www.smartindicators.org)

## The Sphere Project

The aim of Sphere is to improve the quality of assistance to people affected by disaster including the accountability of states and humanitarian agencies to their constituents, donors and the affected populations. Sphere is a voluntary initiative of international and national NGOs, the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, UN agencies, donor agencies, host governments, and representatives from affected populations. Sphere is based on international humanitarian, human rights, and refugee law and the Code of Conduct: Principles of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in Disaster Response Programs.

The objectives of the initiative are to (1) to improve the commitment to and effective use of Sphere by all actors involved in humanitarian action; (2) to strengthen the diversity and regional balance of organizations in the governance and implementation of Sphere; (3) to develop and nurture a cadre of people who are able to use Sphere effectively; (4) to coordinate and interact with other humanitarian initiatives, and work together when that complements Sphere's aim; and (5) to understand and increase the impact of Sphere.61 A revision of the handbook is scheduled for release in 2010.

The Sphere Project text is available online without charge (www.sphereproject.org). The website also lists upcoming training courses and other resources useful for NGOs. The Sphere Manual, the staple of the project, presents technical standards in five sectors: nutrition, food, health, shelter and camp design, and water and sanitation. It is formally endorsed by the U.S. Department of State's Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM), USAID (OFDA), UNHCR, and the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC). The manual is used in training around the world, the focus of which has been primarily on outreach, international training, security, and minimum standards.62

## The Inter-Agency Standing Committee

The IASC is a unique interagency forum for coordination, policy development and decision-making involving the key UN and non-UN humanitarian partners. The IASC was established in June 1992 in response to UN General Assembly **Resolution 46/182** on the need to strengthen humanitarian assistance. General Assembly **Resolution 48/57** affirmed its role as the primary mechanism for interagency coordination of humanitarian assistance. The IASC develops humanitarian policies, agrees on a clear division of responsibility for the various aspects of humanitarian assistance, identifies and addresses gaps in response, and advocates for effective application of humanitarian principles. Together with Executive Committee for Humanitarian Affairs (ECHA), the IASC forms the key strategic coordination mechanism among major humanitarian actors. The objectives of the IASC are sixfold: (1) to develop and agree on system-wide humanitarian policies; (2) to allocate responsibilities among agencies in humanitarian programs; (3) to develop and agree on a common ethical framework for all humanitarian activities; (4) to advocate for common humanitarian principles to parties outside the IASC; (5) to identify areas where gaps in mandates or lack of operational capacity exist; and (6) to resolve disputes or disagreement about and between humanitarian agencies on system-wide humanitarian issues.

The following IASC guidelines are available (effective late 2009):
-
Operational Guidelines and Field Manual on Human Rights Protection in Situations of Natural Disaster
-
Women, Girls, Boys & Men: Different NeedsEqual Opportunities. IASC Gender Handbook for Humanitarian Action
-
IASC Policy Statement Gender Equality in Humanitarian Action
-
Disaster Preparedness for Effective ResponseGuidance and Indicator Package for Implementing Priority Five of the Hyogo Framework
-
IASC advocacy paper Humanitarian Action and Older Persons: An Essential Brief for
Humanitarian Actors
-
Checklist for field use of IASC Guidelines on Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Emergency Settings
-
Guidelines on the Use of Foreign Military and Civil Defence Assets in Disaster ReliefOslo Guidelines (Revision 1.1, November 2007)
-
Civil-Military Guidelines and References for Complex Emergencies
-
Guidelines for HIV/AIDS Interventions in Emergency Settings
-
Implementing the Collaborative Response to Situations of Internal Displacement. Guidance for UN Humanitarian and/or Resident Coordinators and Country Teams
-
Special Measures for Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse
-
Plan of Action and Core Principles of Codes of Conduct on Protection from Sexual Abuse and Exploitation in Humanitarian Crisis
-
Respect for Humanitarian Mandates in Conflict Situations
-
Saving Lives Together: A Framework for Improving Security Arrangements Among IGOs, NGOs and UN in the Field
-
Exit Strategy for Humanitarian Actors in the Context of Complex Emergencies

## Msf Clinical Guidelines

These guidelines were developed by Medicins sans Frontieres (MSF) and are freely available to downloaded from their website (www.msf.org).63 Well-known and used across the NGO community, they include
-
clinical guidance,
-
essential drugs,
-
management of epidemic meningococcal meningitis,

-
obstetrics in remote settings,
-
rapid health assessment of refugee or displaced persons,
-
refugee health, and
-
tuberculosis guidelines.

## Smart Indicators

SMART is a voluntary, collaborative network of all humanitarian organizations: donors, international and UN agencies, NGOs, universities, research institutes, and governments. It includes organizations and humanitarian practitioners who are leading experts in emergency epidemiology and nutrition, food security, early warning systems, and demography. SMART addresses the need to standardize methodologies for determining comparative needs based on nutritional status, mortality rate, and food security and establishes comprehensive, collaborative systems to ensure reliable data is used for decision-making and reporting. SMART was initiated in response to the lack of a coherent understanding of need, in turn attributable to the use of many methodologies, consistent, reliable data for making decisions and reporting, the necessary technical capacity to collect and analyze reliable data and comprehensive, long-term technical support for strategic and sustained capacity building. The goal of SMART is to reform the system-wide emergency responses by ensuring that policy and programming decisions are based on reliable, standardized data and that humanitarian aid is provided to those most in need. The SMART methodology uses crude death rate (CDR) and nutritional status of children under five as the most vital, basic public health indicators of the severity of a humanitarian crisis. These two indicators are used to monitor the extent to which the relief system is meeting the needs of the population and the overall impact and performance of the humanitarian response. NGOs with certain U.S. government funding are required to report using SMART to retain funding.

## Ngo Codes Of Conduct And Standards

The Principles of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in Disaster Response Programs is also a staple reference document for many NGOs.64 Although not universally accepted, these norms normally are accepted by U.S.-, Canadian-, and European Union based NGOs and provide the language for what most NGOs feel is their creed or most basic elements of service. The language is general and includes the primary theme that every person deserves and should receive humanitarian assistance when needed. As well, it suggests that aid should be given impartially and without stipulation or restriction, and that beneficiaries are humans and should be treated as such (for the full text, see annex 4).

## Executive Summary

  NGOs employ many types of people,
but are normally managed by seniorlevel professionals who come from years of NGO, government, military, or private sector careers.
InterAction has a series of PVO standards that each of its member NGOs must follow. These are compiled in an extensive document that serves as a guiding tool for NGO management. The intent was to ensure and strengthen public confidence in the integrity, quality, and effectiveness of member organizations and their programs. The standards cover budgetary allotments, gender balance on governing boards, financial accountability, and hiring practices, and provide a baseline series of standards in management activities to promote professionalism and accountability among the InterAction members.65

## The More Standardization, The Better

  Some NGOs rely heavily on volunteers
and interns, but most of the larger have developed a staff of experienced professionals who manage daily relief operations and humanitarian assistance efforts.
  NGO management structures
are unique, but generally loosely structured, ground-up systems that permit fast and critical decision-making.
A large part of the international NGO community promotes standardization and protocols because it ensures that such a wide-ranging body of organizations operating in such critical settings have some form of accountability. All of the referenced guidelines, standards, and codes of conduct are common knowledge among the NGO community.

  NGOs hire and employ full-time and
part-time contractors for short and long-term projects, consultants, volunteers, interns and outside vendors.
  NGO personnel training is becoming
more available, enabling NGOs to train their work force in technical and general relief management techniques.
NGO Personnel and Policies B
ecause NGOs are so varied in their mission and capacities, regions of operation or constituencies, NGO staff too are varied in their composition and characteristics.

When military and NGO personnel come into contact, there is often a mixture of curiosity and frustration that emerges from two very different cultures. Whereas military personnel are normally part of a stringent and well-defined hierarchy, NGO personnel are part of a largely decentralized organizational structure, often tasked with responding to the needs of NGO beneficiaries before that of the NGO. NGO staff members are from different backgrounds and have extensive experience in conflict regions, disaster areas, hostile living conditions, emergency settings and in danger. They carry long histories of involvement in these types of settings, and often develop highly valuable skills and abilities that outweigh those of government, military or international organization capabilities in many cases. There is also a flow of personnel between government, military, and NGOs. Government officials often retire from USAID, the Department of State, or the Department of Defense and join an NGO to serve as a senior level manager or consultant. Military personnel also often find themselves cycling out of active duty and entering the service of an NGO doing jobs similar to those they had in the military. NGO personnel as well often move from the private sector into the government or UN (less to the military). Although NGO staff members are often young and inexperienced and often thought of as unprofessional, today's NGO staff labor pool is highly professional and skilled. NGOs started gaining ground as primary actors in emergencies during the 1980s and 1990s. With this increased field time and exposure, NGO personnel started gaining expertise and credibility. Today, thousands of NGO employees travel, live, and work worldwide and have dedicated their careers and lives to serving within NGOs. This class of relief workers now dominates the way the international community responds to emergencies.

## Who Works For An Ngo?

NGOs employ all types of people. No one type of personality, profession, or capability characterizes an NGO staff member, and though it is common to find people with similar desires and experiences, most often few patterns can be discerned. For military and government personnel not used to working with NGO staff, a few generalizing characteristics can be helpful. NGO personnel are often
-
graduates of advanced degree programs often in public health, international relations, medicine, social work, engineering, political science and communications;
-
highly professional, with memberships in professional associations, certificates, and specialized training;
-
well-traveled and multilingual, having worked, lived, or studied in international destinations for extended periods;
-
extremely knowledgeable about the emergency affected regions they work in after living and working there, or knowing the types of emergencies the region is affected by;
-
highly motivated, often volunteering for long periods with minimal pay, or voluntarily working in harsh conditions;
-
dedicated to the people they are serving and to their NGO; and
-
more and more often local staff running programs in the field rather than westerners.
Looking at a few standard candidate requirements for new hires can also help. Table 5.1 presents shortened mid-level job candidate requirements from the International Rescue Committee (IRC), the International Medical Corps (IMC), Oxfam Great Britain, and ACTED. The qualification requirements vary widely, as do the types of position each NGO is soliciting. For general management positions, qualifications for ideal candidates will normally include wide-ranging, management-oriented experiences, and more sectoral-focused positions will demand expertise and extensive experience (in both the subject and specific country) with a specific trade or project type.

## Ngo Staff Positions

From ex-military, government, or UN executives to young volunteers or fresh college graduates, NGOs employ a wide range of talent, labor, and abilities to manage and staff the NGO's diverse programs. And though the type of employees at NGOs worldwide is as diverse as the NGO community, it is valuable to understand how an NGO manages its staffing and programs overseas. For the purposes of this manual, NGO staff member positions can be identified within six groupings: general support staff (normally at headquarters), general international field staff (younger, less-experienced but skilled expatriots), senior international field staff (country and program directors, senior-level officials, senior management), experts, local staff, and executive management.

IRC Job Announcement: Regional Director, East Africa - 7 years international work experience, preferably in a refugee or displaced person setting - 3 years experience at senior management level, including at least 2 years experience as country director - Proven experience as a strong manager and negotiator - Previous budget and fiscal oversight responsibilities - Experience working with the UN, EU, US and other government agencies a plus - Graduate degree in relevant field preferred - Must be computer literate - Must be self-reliant, the regional coordinator will have at most one local support staff person - Must be willing to travel 25 percent to 35 percent of time IMC Job Announcement: Country Director Positions - Knowledge of donor practices, the program proposal process, and humanitarian or development program
solicitations and applications
- Ability to conduct and or supervise new program assessments and write cogent proposals and budgets  - Familiarity with international humanitarian operations, coordination structures, and the mandates of donors,
UN agencies, and other NGOs
- 5+ years of field experience in humanitarian relief or development programs focused on primary health care
and public health in insecure settings
- Graduate degree in public health, public policy, or related field - Fluency in English required; second language skills (i.e., working knowledge of French, Spanish, Portuguese,
Swahili, etc.) a plus
- Strong written and oral communication skills necessary - Ability to analyze and prioritize needs - Proven organizational and supervisory skills Oxfam Job Announcement: Humanitarian Coordinator - Proven analytical and planning skills - Leadership and management skills of multidisciplinary teams operating within complex matrix management
frameworks
- Experience and knowledge of the international humanitarian sector, sufficient to advise staff on the legal and
institutional framework within which humanitarian action takes place
- Three years field experience of emergency and developmental work and a continuing commitment to
humanitarian action
- An understanding of public health principles and preferably experience of at least one of Oxfam's areas of
distinctive competence in humanitarian response
- A understanding of and active commitment to promoting gender and diversity issues in all aspects of Oxfam
GB's work
- Representational, advocacy and diplomatic skills to enable the post holder to operate effectively within
Oxfam and in external networks
- Competence in written and spoken English - Ability to travel up to 12 weeks per year ACTED Job Announcement (Afghanistan): Road Programs Manager - Knowledge of non asphalted road networks - Proven experience in a related field - Professional English - Control of the data-processing tools - Necessary qualities: autonomy, rigour, direction of the contact
General Support Staff General support staff members are employees or volunteers most often found at the NGO's headquarters (HQ) somewhere in western Europe or the United States. As generalists, these people focus on providing the backstopping and support services for NGO field operations. Significant time is given to providing logistical support for shipping, procurement, personnel travel and other programmatic assistance needs. General support staff members normally are also charged with human resource duties (hiring, recruiting, managing health care, insurance, often travel and other benefits), fundraising and publicity (solicitation, fundraiser event planning, gifts-in-kind organization, media relations and advertising), accounting, board relations and recruitment, information technology (IT) support (rare for smaller organizations) and the like. Larger organizations will have specialized staff members for website development and technology support, warehouse and shipping staff, specialized fundraisers, and lobbyists. Many organizations have access to a seemingly endless source of labor from universities: interns often populate NGO headquarter locations and provide research, media monitoring, general administrative duties, and clerical tasks. General staff at headquarters are normally low to mid-level, excluding senior human resource personnel and accounting staff. Although not necessarily part of the decision-making process, general staff ensure that much of what the executive management and board members plan is put into action. General staff are normally valuable for their knowledge of an organization's overall programmatic strategies and capabilities, and are large storehouses of information.

General International Field Staff These NGO expatriate staff members (expats) make up a large portion of an NGO's international staff base, normally filling mid-level management positions and participating in general programmatic oversight, creation, logistical services, and implementation. Normally younger men and women that are just starting in the field or that have fewer than five years of experience will find themselves assisting program managers in various duties, managing local staff, managing logistical services or shipments, participating in establishing and managing refugee or IDP camps, and will often write reports or proposals with the guidance of more senior level staff. General international field staff members are the backbone of any international NGO operation, and normally fulfill some of the more unpopular tasks or demands placed on NGOs working in underdeveloped, conflict, or emergency affected areas. Striving to find a place in the international NGO community, these staff members are enthusiastic, ambitious, and willing to take a heavy workload in bad working conditions. In emergency settings, 20 to 24 hour workdays are common, and poor food, bad traveling conditions, personal danger, and major health risks are all just part of the job. Many of these personnel have at least an undergraduate degree and often an advanced one in international relations, public health, communications, engineering, or social work and may speak multiple languages, but they are also often paid poorly. Furthermore, many are employed or volunteer under a specified time contract; ranging from 3 months to a more common 1- or 2-year contract. They are often required to move from job to job, changing organizations, countries, and job functions numerous times. Although not specific to any one disaster or emergency, an informal labor pool of NGO workers who move from one emergency to another, taking up similar roles in each organization they work for does exist. It is not uncommon to meet the same people in different emergencies in different countries, regions, or continents. By traveling light and working hard, these individuals are valuable and carry with them experiences that can translate into more efficient humanitarian assistance programs. It is not uncommon for NGO personnel to cycle to HQ after long stints in the field, or to move to more permanent senior-level HQ roles that will help the organization connect field and HQ programs more efficiently.

Senior International Field Staff This group includes expats with an expertise employed to manage entire countrywide or regional programs for an NGO. Sometimes referred to as country director, regional director, senior advisor, or coordinator, these individuals have worked in the humanitarian assistance field for career-length spans. Older and often with decades of experience, they manage other international and local staff members, and are charged with ensuring that programs are implemented appropriately. As the seniormost NGO staff person in a given region or country, this person controls budgets, grant processes, personnel, logistics, relations with the host country, donors, local and foreign military (if present), and other NGOs. Enjoying a comfortable level of autonomy, these individuals are relied on for their sound judgment, experience, and contacts within the international aid community. Senior staff members normally have extensive knowledge of the donor and aid community, as well as close friends and peers within the UN, the U.S. government, and the U.S. military. Senior NGO staff will be found in recurring emergencies, and often travel to launch new projects in a newly affected area. Once in the senior level (varies in pay grade, title and duties for each NGO), an NGO staff member is somewhat of a permanent fixture, and fewer changes between NGO employers occur. Senior field staff often will phase out of an international location, and return to HQ for a more managerial role.

Specialized Subject Matter Experts NGOs often employ medical doctors, engineers, psychologists, pilots, water sanitation and hygiene (WSH) specialists, transportation and logistical specialists, agricultural, or economic specialists on short to medium-term contracts or assignments. Because the needs in any postconflict or postemergency settings are so varied, NGOs keep rosters of deployable experts who can be dispatched in a relatively short time. These experts are deployed to the affected region to begin work in their specialized field. Normally supported by the general international field and local staff, experts focus on providing their services without much involvement in the normal daily NGO functions (fundraising, management, accounting, logistics). Experts are normally hired on short-term contracts, though they may work for the same NGO consistently and may not be from industrialized nations. Many medical doctors enjoy time off from normal private practice or hospital duties while serving with an NGO in a humanitarian emergency, using their skills in a new venue for a short period and then returning to their usual work. Many NGOs keep emergency rosters with updated lists of those willing to be called on short notice, and what their specialty and requirements are. In the last decade and because of funding constraints and the need to standardize programs, fewer volunteers are used and more international staff who can commit to one- to five-year contracts are filling these once short-term agreements. However, for specialized needs, (such as surgical subspecialties, NGOs maintain rosters.

Local Staff Local NGO staff members are hired in country and are often victims of the emergency an NGO is responding to. Local staff fill a wide variety of job functions from drivers, security guards, cooks, storehouse managers, administrative clerks to medical doctors, program managers, translators and experts, and are essential to the success of any NGO program. When first arriving in an emergency-affected area, NGOs normally attempt to hire *fixers* (translators and drivers combined) who can quickly orient the expats and secure housing, food, and the basic resources needed for launching an operation. The fixer serves as a link to the local population and market. He or she can help exchange money, open local bank accounts, move shipments through ports or borders, help an international NGO register with the local government, find additional staff members, and keep the NGO personnel safe. Once programs are initiated, NGOs employ local staff at all aspects of the management, leaving larger organizational issues to senior management and international matters for the NGO.66 NGOs pride themselves on empowering local populations with the skills and resources to manage effective assistance programs themselves. By training the trainers and incorporating local staff into most processes during an emergency, NGOs create local capacity to respond to and manage future emergencies. Local NGO staff normally outnumber the international staff in an emergency-affected region. Smaller NGO operations will sometimes have one or perhaps three expats on staff to between 10 and 50 locals.

Executive Management Executive management for NGOs also varies widely. Most management teams are comprised of professional, senior-level executives from a variety of fields. As mentioned, former government, military, private sector, and long-term NGO professionals are well suited for management positions, often bringing a unique blend of outside management experience and connections with other sectors that may prove valuable for an NGO's programs and fundraising. For larger NGOs, senior management plays a direct role in developing, managing, and guiding an NGO's growth and activity. An NGO executive focuses on ensuring that programming and emergency response efforts fit into the NGO's mission and capacities, are funded, coordinated, and part of a larger international picture. Program oversight, fundraising, lobbying, advocacy, coordination, and general organizational management fill up most parts of the day for senior managers. NGO executives also spend significant time and resources managing, growing, and engaging the NGO's board of directors. While running the NGO, an executive also must plan for future growth, challenges, setbacks, legal issues, budgets, competition, employee loyalty, and donor relations. Many of the same tasks fall to executives of smaller NGOs. These individuals are normally founders or an inside hire, and often are directly engaged in every aspect of the organization. Some CEOs and presidents find themselves making their own travel arrangements, running photocopies, writing proposals, and taking care of other activities normally relegated to staff members. In all cases, an NGO's success within its mission, its capabilities, direction and funding are heavily dependent on the NGO's leadership. With a strong and flexible board of directors, an executive can manage effective humanitarian assistance programming, can assure that program implementation is sound and appropriate, and can make sure that the NGO's growth potential or strengths are maximized (growth may not be desired).

## Hierarchy And Staff Management

NGOs are structured in different ways. Most, though, depend on a loose structure centered on locations, programs, a hierarchical relationship between HQ and field offices, emergency teams dispatched to new crises, and sometimes partnerships agencies. NGOs face many of the same problems that private companies, government agencies, and militaries have when dealing with management issues. Typical burdens include lack of financial or material resources, technical support, or personnel security. Communication between offices, staff members, and programs is always difficult. Last, although NGOs have established national chapters or umbrella organizations to manage worldwide coordinated fundraising, public relations, and public appeals, most NGOs also deal with the challenge of being everywhere at once. At almost every NGO, the board of directors is the ultimate decision-making body and is accountable for the well-being of the NGO. The executive director, president, or CEO is the manager of the organization, and normally fulfills two types of functions, encapsulating board management and general organizational management. Below the executive director is an array of senior officer positions, normally each with a portfolio, sector, or section of the organization to manage (Assistant director of finance, vice president of operations, program manager, and so on). These managers provide the daily, hands-on management of NGO staff members worldwide, and are normally part of the executive director's planning body, strategy makers, and proponents of the organization's objectives and mission. Many NGOs are flexible in their hierarchy. This translates to a heavy emphasis on making decisions at the lowest possible level. For an organization with permanent offices in various countries, this means that a country director or regional manager will normally be the ultimate authority for each country. Decisions concerning personnel, budget use and reporting, personnel safety and the like are all major areas of responsibility of a country director or regional manager. Although closely coordinated with the executive director and senior officers at HQ, NGO staff members establish a hierarchy within each program in a specific country. A country director will normally manage multiple programs in the area of concern, and is responsible for ensuring that reporting is appropriate. Financial, programmatic, and personnel reports are filed with HQ often, and it is the duty of the program officer at HQ to liaise with senior staff and officers to ensure that the principles of the organization and the guidelines of the grant are followed. Because large portions of NGO funding come from grants, NGO personnel are assigned tasks and responsibilities within the grant framework. This makes each program, ideally, a well-mapped project that requires minimal oversight. This is not always the case, however, and more often than not NGOs find themselves in difficult working conditions and in situations that require adjusting the original program. For flexible staff members with wide-ranging abilities, this is of little consequence. For smaller organizations with less capacity, this could cripple program implementation. Figure 5.1 presents a sample organizational chart on how an NGO may structure itself. Although the schematic is not holistic or standard for every organization, it shows the relationships between various levels within the organization, and where entry points are for coordination or collaboration. Coordination usually starts with field-based staff members. Little to no contact with an NGO's HQ is standard, and most communication is done on either the country director level or the programmatic level, and a program manager or officer will be the NGO point person. For example, an NGO may have various programs within a country or region, all of which fall under one director, but a program manager or director who reports to that director normally manages each program. In Figure 5.1 (*see following page*), three lines indicate possible entry points for an NGO and military interface. This identifies a common theme among NGOs operating in humanitarian emergencies and across multiple programs: depending on the size of the organization and the scale of the program, the lead coordinating staff member may be the country director, the program director or manager, or one of the expat staff members within the project. Despite clear lines indicating responsibilities for NGO operations, the liaison for the military and outside entities will be varies widely. Larger NGOs will often have a designated civil-military affairs staff member assigned to specific regions or countries.

## Ngo Hiring And Contracts

NGOs take various approaches to hiring staff. Many NGOs operating in emergencies maintain shortterm contracts with their employees because of the nature of the work: short, intense, and unsure conditions that require immediate response and that may end relatively quickly. When a new emergency arises, NGOs are under intense pressure to deploy current staff to establish programs, and to hire new regional, sectoral, or general experts to join the teams immediately. When the NGO identifies that it can and should respond to an emergency, funding and donations often will dictate how many new hires can be made, and what level of experience can be afforded.67 Larger NGOs have a professional human resources (HR) office that is a key ingredient to properly staffing NGO activities overseas, to maintaining a safe and professional work force, and in passing on the NGO's image and professionalism to new hires or contractors.

NGO Employment Sites
A number of websites are available for potential NGO employees to use to learn about and apply to open positions. None are exhaustive, but the trend among NGOs to use online employment sites is growing.
  ReliefWeb: www.reliefweb.int/vacancies  InterActions: www.interaction.org/jobs  OneWorld.net: http://us.oneworld.net/jobs  Idealist.org: www.idealist.org  International careers: www.internationaljobs.org  UN: http://146.115.72.186:8181/un/un.cfm

HR offices within larger NGOs, and sometimes a single HR officer for a smaller NGO, normally keep a databases of CVs, which are kept on file for a certain period and can be searched by category, sector, or expertise when the need arises. Because emergencies are relatively unpredictable, it is in this light that hiring and employment practices of NGOs are often challenging. Some challenges include
-
limited funding for the maintenance of full-time professional staff levels;
-
short-term needs for experts during emergencies;
-
no longer-term needs (and thus job security) for experts;
-
inability to compete with privatesector or government salaries;68
and
-
harsh working conditions, lack of safety or personal comforts, stressful conditions, long hours, and
often
challenging
work
environments.
Many NGO lifers have grown accustomed to this lifestyle. NGO contractors will often bounce between different NGOs in different emergencies around the world, holding 3-, 6- or 12- month contracts before moving on to their next assignment. Larger organizations, such as World Vision International, are focusing on hiring and keeping personnel by increasing benefits, personal comforts, and other incentives for staying on board between emergencies or even during prolonged programs.

An anonymous World Vision Australia staff member is a good example of how many NGO staffers are becoming more permanent members of international emergency response teams and the NGO community in general. This individual is currently stationed in Afghanistan, having started in southern Sudan in Operation Lifeline Sudan (OLS) as a logistics officer, moved to East Timor for a similar position, been sent to Kosovo, and then detailed to his current assignment.69 Enjoying his work, he has also benefited from World Vision personnel policies and practices that make his ability to work, live, and have a life within emergency settings tolerable. With ample vacation time, travel allowances, vacation stipends, excellent health, and procedures that ensure his satisfaction and job utility, he and many other World Vision staff members are breaking the traditional mold of contractor lifestyles that would see upwards of three or four employers per year in various emergency settings. In hiring practices, HR offices and representatives are faced with making quick decisions and often do not meet the contractor in person, although video conferencing has made face-to-face interaction less anonymous. NGOs often employ people already in the area of concern, or those on assignment in some other region. By reviewing a candidate's credentials, referring to references and background data (including criminal checks), and by attempting to learn the person's reputation, an HR office often makes a hiring decision that other sectors would cringe at making. People seeking employment with NGOs have a few resources at their disposal. Sometimes fresh out of undergraduate or graduate school, current employment with another NGO or other profession, people can use the Internet, e-mail, and publications to learn which positions are open, what each position requires, the terms, and how to apply. Most applications today are submitted electronically by e-mail or website form.

## Ngo Personnel Policies

NGO Training Organizations
The following websites list courses for NGOs for specialized training for improving technical capacity and professionalism:
  Alnap: www.alnap.org  CHART: http://coe-dmha.org/course_chart.htm  H.E.L.P.: www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/
htmlall/helpcourse
  IDHA: www.cihc.org/idha  INTRAC: http://bricksandmortar.wordpress.
com/2009/02/05/intrac-ngo-training-courses
  InterWorks: www.interworksmadison.com  Karl Kubel Institute for Development Education:
www.kkid.org/ngo_training_programmes.asp
  RedR: www.redr.org

Many of the religiously based NGOs require employees to sign a faith-compliance or acknowledgment of religious beliefs, policies, or orientation, which the NGO maintains. For some potential employment candidates, these types or requirements are deterrents. In efforts to remain neutral or nonbiased, many humanitarian workers strive to remain independent and free from any association with a larger cause. Although the days of handing out Bibles and food together to beneficiaries are largely over, major overtones of proselytizing from some organizations remain. NGO personnel policies are normally basic and straightforward. Policies normally include safety procedures, neutrality, NGO code of conduct acknowledgments, descriptions of duties, appropriate behavior in specific areas, sexual harassment awareness training, and sometimes a confidentiality agreement. Many NGOs have new hires sign a form that suggests they have read the Red Cross code of conduct, and that they agree, understand, and will abide by its elements. Many organizations attach specific policies to specific positions. For World Vision positions open in Afghanistan, candidates are told that strict behavior restrictions exist, and that religious sensitivity must be maintained at all times. A warning about the use of alcohol is given as well.70

## Ngo Training Sources

As NGOs and the NGO community become more professional and established, so too are resources that assist NGOs to manage, operate and implement programs more effectively. Most of the training programs that exist are focused on providing humanitarian personnel with training in specific sectors, topics, or themes. RedR, founded initially as Registered Engineers for Disaster Relief, is now a leading organization that provides not only an extensive roster of professionals that can be called on by partner agencies, but also a significant level of training to NGO personnel globally. Founded in England in 1979, it has offices in more than five countries. InterWorks, of Madison, Wisconsin, also provides NGO personnel and organizational training to a variety of clients. Specific seminars, distances learning options, and direct consulting services are ways that InterWorks helps NGO personnel develop professional, technical, and general skills that are of use in the field. The InterWorks website explains it this way:
InterWorks provides customized training, distance learning and consulting services that enhance our client's efforts to reduce disaster risks, prepare and respond to humanitarian emergencies and build peaceful and sustainable societies.... InterWorks provides... solutions to [the] United Nations, NGOs, governmental, academic and military organizations involved in international development, disaster management and humanitarian emergency response. We are dedicated to addressing your particular priorities, opportunities and constraints, and delivering our services when and where you need them. To date, our staff have worked in more than 60 countries.71
Training and consulting services that InterWorks provides are primary indicators that disasters are becoming increasingly complex and professional. Still, gaps exist between NGOs and other agencies, potentially because of management structure and the lines of work associated with NGO operations. Although the number of NGOs is rising, there is not necessarily a significant parallel shift in the level
70
of professionalism and expertise. Paul Thompson, executive director and cofounder of InterWorks, suggests that though some sectors are increasing in capability, many still have not progressed from
1980s levels of capacity and know-how.72 This is troubling, Thompson believes. "Many NGOs are staffing their projects with generalists," he says, "and that means that an NGO doing a shelter project after a conflict or earthquake can manage materials and the logistics of the program, but may not know the appropriate materials, structures, geometry or plumbing to use for that region. Kosovo was a good example. Of the more than 10 NGOs that were executing emergency shelter programs, only three or four were competent and had shelter or construction experts."

NGOs also depend largely on training conferences and courses held at various times of the year by different hosts. For an extensive list of training conferences, classes, and programs, Reliefweb (www. reliefweb.int) is the most likely to have comprehensive databases available online. It lists numerous training programs for humanitarian assistance management, logistics, telecommunications, sectors,
and many other topics.73 The H.E.L.P., IDHA, and CHART courses are examples of civil-military
relations programs, specific humanitarian assistance courses, and medical response training courses that involve both civilian and military participants:
-
H.E.L.P. Managed and taught by the ICRC, the H.E.L.P. course was created in 1986 to upgrade professionalism in humanitarian assistance programs conducted in emergency situations. These courses are given all over the world and since 1986 have helped train approximately 1,600 health professionals and humanitarian aid workers from the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, United Nations agencies, NGOs, ministries of health, armed forces medical services, and various academic institutions.
-
International Diploma in Humanitarian Assistance (IDHA). The Center for International Humanitarian Cooperation developed a practical, academic program offering an international diploma in humanitarian assistance with the goal of creating universally accepted basics that should be taught to humanitarian aid workers. This course enables aid workers to function more effectively and efficiently in times of war or in the event of natural disasters. More than 990 UN, NGO, military, diplomats, academics, political, and religious groups from more than 120 nations have graduated from the program.
-
Combined Humanitarian Assistance Response Training (CHART). This 5-day course is
designed to introduce military and civilian personnel to the spectrum of humanitarian action within complex emergencies and natural disasters. Course participants discuss the unique issues in coordination, public heath, security, and logistics necessary to support or execute a humanitarian program or operation. Graduates are better prepared to respond in their respective capacities to emergencies through their increased awareness and enhanced understanding of different humanitarian response environments including the difficult civilmilitary relationship.

## Ngos And Inter- And Intra-Ngo Relations

NGOs are just like other organizations. There are good managers, bad managers, rivalries, weaknesses, deficiencies, staff shortages, and various other problems. Of specific value to this manual are two types of conflict: field-headquarter conflicts within an NGO, and NGO-to-NGO conflicts between organizations.

## Executive Summary

  NGO funding comes from a variety of
sources: the UN, the U.S. government, EU governments, private citizens, and foundations.
  Because NGOs depend on funding to
become and remain operational, NGOs must spend a considerable amount of time preparing funding proposals and solicitations.
  Only a fraction of total international
spending by the United States and EU countries is spent on humanitarian relief.
Many NGOs experience ongoing conflict between field and HQ offices. Although the root of the conflict be explained various ways, evidence is clear that HQ personnel continually feel left out of field-based decision-making, and that field personnel feel continually pressured and burdened by HQ demands and processes. Field staff members are often experts in their trade and are able to make decisions quickly. HQ staffers often attempt to put more management into the decision-making process because of specific donor regulations or senior-level director management style. In any case, this straddling for position often creates tension between staff members who feel the urgency of the moment (field level) and those who have to archive and account for field operations from a safe and comfortable HQ location.

  NGOs spend billions of dollars every year
in humanitarian assistance activities, far outspending any other agency or organization globally.
The NGO community is also known for rivalries between NGOs. Many NGOs develop institutional relationships with others, creating bonds in some cases and tension in others. Furthermore, many NGOs depend on external funding from the same few donor agencies. When vying for the same grant award, NGOs must compete with each other to obtain the grant. Although the lowest bidder does not always get the grant, it is true that NGOs must jostle and position for funding in tense environments. NGO operations often depend on it. Without that grant, NGOs may have to pack up and go home, which would mean laying off personnel and capacity. This is institutional competition. In any case, tensions within and between NGOs are not major factors in gauging an NGO's capacity, but often can be a sign of institutional credibility and performance. An NGO with low personnel morale and negative attitudes toward their work and employer could signal a specific weakness in management or organization culture. An NGO with a bad reputation throughout the NGO community may be a signal of poor programming or practices. However, it is important to keep in mind that NGOs, for reasons including safety, personality of field staff, funding, and the like may have a poor reputation in one country but be considered effective and successful in others. Still, as in other organizations and communities or sectors, there are always problems at NGOs, and most navigate through them successfully.

## Conclusion: Ngo Staff Are Good To Go

NGOs depend on a solid class of professional, experienced, and senior-level disaster and emergency managers that have worked in some of the most severe, harsh, and challenging environments in the world. The days of witnessing untrained and young "humanitarians" attempting to get involved are not over, but now more than ever value is placed on professional operations, experience, protocol, training, and capacity to handle extremely technical tasks in difficult working environments. Advanced degrees and program specialties are major rank indicators, and most mainstream NGOs found operating in humanitarian emergencies can be trusted to meet their objectives.

## Chapter 6. Ngo Funding

Gregg M. Nakano

See www.charitynavigator.org for
financial evaluations of U.S.-based
NGOs, expenses, breakdown of
expenses, rating among similar NGOs,
financial statements, leadership,
contact information, and mission
statement.

N
ongovernmental organizations are legal entities established within a regulated and legal framework normally hosted by a mix of national and local government structures. Depending on where the NGO is established (the United States, the UK, and so on), different rules and laws govern how the organization can accept donations, how it must report its financial data, and to whom it is accountable. The international governmental community, and the NGO community specifically, does not respond to every humanitarian emergency. Political considerations, special interest pressures, national security concerns, funding constraints, or general humanitarian interests often guide international humanitarian assistance responses. No two responses are the same; the level, types, duration and strategy implemented differ greatly in every emergency. NGOs are only part of international responses to humanitarian emergencies. Governments, the UN, militaries, private individuals, corporations, companies, and volunteer groups often contribute in various ways to humanitarian emergencies. NGOs require external funding sources to respond, and though some NGOs can afford to establish emergency operations for short periods without specific external support, many NGOs eventually turn to UN funding, U.S., UK, or other government grants, private contributions from foundations, communities, or individuals, or umbrella organizations that distribute funding on behalf of another agency or organization. NGOs spend a significant amount of time fundraising and raising awareness about their programs and mission with various communities, populations, target audiences, and potential supporters. Support comes from multiple sources and varies as to its proportion of the total budget from NGO to NGO. Catholic Relief Services (CRS) is governed by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and supported by Catholic churches worldwide with funding and relief supplies. Although its budget relies primarily on government grants, more than one-third of its funding comes from private contributions. Direct Relief International (DRI), based in Santa Barbara, CA, relies heavily on contributions from the surrounding community and companies based in the area, making their location extremely important in deciphering what types of programs DRI initiates or supports. To move out of the area would be to stem much of the support for its programs and activities, or potentially shift the vision of DRI
to fit that of another community.74 An NGO often relies heavily on donor intent and support. NGOs while catering specifically to needs must also take into consideration the desires and intent of specific donors or donor communities. Although in many cases they do not necessarily conflict, NGOs must often find a balance between the needs of and the willingness or desire of what a specific donor may want to fund or support. It is important to remember that NGOs answer to those they aid, their board of directors, the donors, and the public. NGOs without question depend heavily on donors. Because they are nonprofit entities and have neither revenue streams nor fee-for-service systems, NGOs can operate only in emergency settings for a minimal time before needing donor support. Even a large NGO, often depending on the scope or scale of the emergency, must solidify funding after the initial phases of an emergency if it is to continue with its programming. Some NGOs have the capacity to maintain emergency response funds specifically for such use. CARE, World Vision, CRS, MCI, and other large NGOs make this a priority, and are known for their unique ability to muster resources immediately during an emergency without first obtaining donor support for their activities. Most NGOs do not have large emergency funds and external funding availability thus tends to determine the timing, type, place, duration, and scale of NGO response activities.

## International Humanitarian Assistance And Ngo Funding

The term *nongovernmental organization* is often used by military personnel to identify any number of communal groups that prioritize issues affecting U.S. foreign policy objectives. By some estimates, there are as many as 20 million of organizations around the world which meet these criteria, ranging from Mom and Pop community groups that collect used clothes to the multimillion dollar corporations able to build municipal sanitation systems. Within the United States and for our purposes, NGO legal status will be primarily defined as an organization's ability to qualify for 501(c)3 tax exemption status. Tax-exempt status is provided to organizations that are "charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals. The term charitable is used in its generally accepted legal sense and includes relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erecting or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the burdens of government; lessening neighborhood tensions; eliminating prejudice and discrimination; defending human and civil rights secured by law; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency."75 By 2008, the IRS had recognized more than 1.9 million tax-exempt organizations, the combined assets of which represented $2 trillion dollars.76 These organizations are divided by the IRS into five broad categories: charitable organizations, churches and religious organizations, political organizations, private foundations, and other nonprofits. Most of the larger organizations with tax-exempt status can be found online at www.irs.gov/app/pub-78. All U.S.-based organizations must maintain their qualifications and submit an annual report of their funding sources and expenditures to retain tax-exempt status. This is usually accomplished by submitting a Form 990, which mirrors Form 1040 for individual citizens. Form 990 is one of the key determinants used by watchdog organizations like Guidestar and Charity Navigator to monitor and evaluate the efficacy of NGOs. Organizations that fail to maintain their qualifications or to properly submit their Form 990, lose their tax-exempt status and are updated each tax period on the IRS website. The IRS will also suspend tax-exempt status for those organizations identified by the Department of Treasury as potentially engaged in charitable fundraising for the purpose of supporting terrorist activities per Executive Orders 13224 and 12947. A list of State Department counterterrorism-designated organizations is available online at www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/other/des/122570.htm.

In general, NGOs are considered nonprofits because the resources and services they provide highlight certain values or ideals rather than commercial gains. As values-driven organizations, NGOs rely on other individuals and entities with similar priorities to provide the means to continue their work. In general, common value transfer mechanisms include gifts, grants, contracts, and collective agreements.

## Sources Of Funding

Gifts are "the voluntary transfer of property (including money) to another person completely free of payment or strings."77 In most cases, a donation of cash is generally the most appreciated as money can be transferred around the world and transformed into goods, services, and property almost instantaneously at little to no cost. Gifts may also come as donations-in-kind, which may be goods, services, or property that have value. Although appreciated by most NGOs, donations-in-kind in the form of goods cannot always be transferred or transformed into the specific resources necessary for a particular operation or location. This is an important consideration for U.S.-based NGOs that are soliciting resources for overseas operations. For example, even though canned food may be exactly what is needed for a famine, there are incremental administrative and logistical costs in moving it from here to there. At best, a pipeline that will pick up the various costs to inventory, ship, track and distribute the donation-in-kind already exists. At worst, the donated items waste valuable time, energy, and money as the NGO tries to deliver a well-intentioned but inappropriate gift of food, clothing, or medicine.

Many times these frustrated goods end up failing to clear customs and clutter up shipping ports or disaster airfields. In some cases, donations-in-kind are inappropriate for the beneficiary (pork and beans for Jews or Muslims, for example) or have a negative impact on the economy of the local population (donating rice to a rice-growing region). Other times, as in the case of bottled water, the cost of shipping and handling equals or exceeds the amount of money necessary to create a sustainable solution, such as digging a well or installing a purification system. Donations-in-kind in the form of services are generally appreciated by most NGOs because they has the potential to lower administrative costs otherwise be spent paying people for their time. This includes everything from the sweat equity of swinging a hammer at Habitat for Humanity or providing pro bono legal or financial consultations through the Business Executives for National Security. That said, donations of services can cause more damage than they are worth when the donor does not understand the NGOs mission or respect their operating procedures. Donations-in-kind in the form of property or monetary securities are appreciated as a way to build up the total assets of the NGO. These resources do not necessarily offer additional resources for operational responses, however. In general terms, NGOs that specialize in disaster response operations will tend to solicit cash donations because of their liquidity, whereas NGOs focused on long-term development will be more amenable to accepting donations-in-kind. Although an individual, foundation, or corporation may make a gift of money, property, or services to an NGO, the U.S. government will usually use either a contract or a cooperative agreement. The legal definitions for contract, grant, and cooperative agreement follow:78

-
Contracts. "An executive agency shall use a procurement contract as the legal instrument reflecting a relationship between the United States Government and a State, a local government, or other recipient when (1) the principal purpose of the instrument is to acquire (by purchase, lease, or barter) property or services for the direct benefit or use of the United States Government; or (2) the agency decides in a specific instance that the use of a procurement contract is appropriate."79
-
Grants. "An executive agency shall use a grant agreement as the legal instrument reflecting a relationship between the United States Government and a State, a local government, or other recipient when (1) the principal purpose of the relationship is to transfer a thing of value to the State or local government or other recipient to carry out a public purpose of support or stimulation authorized by a law of the United States instead of acquiring (by purchase, lease, or barter) property or services for the direct benefit or use of the United States Government; and (2) substantial involvement is not expected between the executive agency and the State, local government, or other recipient when carrying out the activity contemplated in the agreement."80
-
Cooperative agreements. "An executive agency shall use a cooperative agreement as the legal instrument reflecting a relationship between the United States Government and a State, a local government, or other recipient when - (1) the principal purpose of the relationship is to transfer a thing of value to the State, local government, or other recipient to carry out a public purpose of support or stimulation authorized by a law of the United States instead of acquiring (by purchase, lease, or barter) property or services for the direct benefit or use of the United States Government; and (2) substantial involvement is expected between the executive agency and the State, local government, or other recipient when carrying out the activity contemplated in the agreement."81
From an NGO perspective, the primary differences between a contract and a grant are that a grant would provide resources to the recipient for the execution of a public good rather than the specific benefit of the federal government. Because the primary purpose of transfer of resources is not for the direct benefit to the federal government, less oversight and reporting were required. In a cooperative agreement, like a grant, resources are provided to the recipient to execute a public good rather than for the specific benefit of the U.S. government. However, like the contract, a cooperative agreement requires substantial administrative monitoring and evaluation. Thus a cooperative agreement offers the NGO a level of separation from being a direct service provider to the U.S. government, yet still requires a significant amount of administrative effort. From a government perspective, potential advantages and drawbacks are calculated somewhat differently.82 Although a contract is usually awarded through a competitive process and spells out the standards for the delivery of goods and services to USAID, the solicitation process can be can be time consuming and manpower intensive. Once the contract is awarded, additional staff is needed to monitor and evaluate performance against agreed standards. When no direct-hire staff are available, this responsibility must be delegated to short-term contractors, who may not be familiar with the agency rules and protocols. In other cases, this responsibility may fall to local hire staff, who may be uncomfortable with reporting irregularities in execution or might be influenced by the contractor. Cooperative agreements and grants are also awarded on a competitive basis and could be equally time consuming in the solicitation process. However, once the cooperative agreement or grant were awarded, oversight or monitoring of the project would be minimal. Although this left loopholes for shortcuts or inflated estimates, it did not require the agency to expend limited administrative capacity or funds on monitoring and evaluation. Even though cooperative agreements and grants did not allow USAID to levy legal penalties or receive compensation for poor quality or incomplete work, poor execution could result in banning the NGO from funding. Blacklisting by the United States, the largest national donor in the Development Assistance Committee (DAC), could significantly damage an NGO's reputation with other donors, potentially resulting in millions of dollars lost in future revenues.83 Over time, USAID developed other ways to maximize the benefits of the different funding mechanisms while minimizing the drawbacks. Contracting officers started exploring variations of the traditional practices and began using indefinite quantity contracts, umbrella grants, and cooperative agreements. In an indefinite quantity contract, a solicitation is drafted outlining product or services specifications for a specified amount of time, but without limiting the units of delivery. In this way, USAID could design specifications for a particular product, like wool blankets, and award a vendor a contract to provide a "no less than... but not limited to" clause to avoid re-competing delivery for each new operation. These indefinite quantity contracts would usually be awarded for common use items (plastic sheeting, water purification units, hygiene kits) or services (transportation of personnel, translation of documents, education and training) and last roughly three to five years. The primary benefit over a simple contract being that the program officer does not need to learn new standards or build new relationships each time the same product or service is needed. Another way of employing a wide variety of skills and capabilities in a single grant or cooperative agreement is to award an umbrella grant. Much like hiring a general contractor to build a house, USAID would award an umbrella grant to a designated lead agency, which would oversee a consortium of subgrantees. Although no one organization would be able fulfill all the requirements of a program alone, by working together and sharing a funding source, they could. Umbrella grants and cooperative agreements allowed USAID to use all the skills of a great number of smaller NGOs to accomplish complex or large tasks. Although umbrella grants created another layer of administrative costs and limited control over the subgrantee selection, the mechanism provided the consortium members the flexibility to assign and modify responsibilities based on changing needs without having to stay within one particular discipline or function.

## U.S. Government And Ngos

The NGO's primary benefit in working with the government is that large sums of funding can be accessed immediately and augmented seamlessly over time. In some cases, contracting officers have signature authority to commit hundreds of thousands of dollars without referring back to headquarters. But though a close relationship with the government is beneficial for receiving funds, it also presents certain challenges and drawbacks that can make using government funds for humanitarian operations difficult. Before the end of World War I, NGOs did not rely heavily on the U.S. government, for two reasons. First was American isolationism and a general lack of interest in overseas affairs. Second was a lack of federal funds. Charitable giving and volunteerism have long been a sustaining principal throughout American history. As early as 1630, Governor John Winthrop of Massachusetts understood that, to survive, the colonists would need to "be knit together, in this work, as one man. We must entertain each other in brotherly affection. We must be willing to abridge ourselves of our superfluities, for the supply of others' necessities" and that "every man afford his help to another in every want or distress."84 In the generations that followed, settlers often relied on each other for mutual assistance and protection. Many times these informal compacts became the de facto governing bodies as people were thrown together on a common journey West. In most cases, these associations were built around the Christian church, which became the nexus of charitable works in the community. And though American Christian charities sent thousands of missionaries abroad, they did so primarily in the name of religious rather than national service. World War I began to change the perception of the role of the federal government in supporting humanitarian work. With the ratification of the 16th Amendment, for the first time in U.S. history, the federal government had a significant budget collected through the income tax on its citizens. "Driven by the war and largely funded by the new income tax, by 1917 the Federal budget was almost equal to the total budget for all the years between 1791 and 1916."85 Even so, it was not until World War II
that collaboration between NGOs and the U.S. government began in earnest. At the end of World War II, President Truman created an advisory Committee on Voluntary Foreign Aid "to tie together the governmental and private programs in the field of foreign relief."86 Recognizing that the United States would have to provide significant postconflict development assistance for Europe if the global economy were to recover, the U.S. government reversed the Morgenthau Plan, which focused on the elimination of German industrial capability, and implemented the European Recovery Program, what became known as the Marshall Plan. Although the bulk of the Marshall Plan's funds were channeled through organizations like the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration and went directly to national governments; there was a growing recognition of the importance of NGOs like Oxfam, which formed in 1942 to donate food supplies to starving women and children in enemy-occupied Greece.

Perhaps one of the best-known NGOs established in the aftermath of World War II is CARE, then called the Cooperative for American Remittances to Europe.87 Formed through a coalition of 22 American organizations, CARE provided food relief to Europe purchased with donations from private citizens. In this case of governmentNGO cooperation, CARE provided as much as 60 percent of the private assistance provided during the Berlin Airlift, and the U.S. government provided the logistics support free of charge. On the other side of the world were organizations like the China's Children Fund (CCF), formed to help children orphaned during the Japanese invasion of China. For the most part, these NGOs were sustained by local churches and operated on a shoestring budget. Without the benefit of the Internet or cell phones, these humanitarian missionaries solicited donations by traveling throughout the United States, sharing their stories, photographs, and world vision with local congregations. Thus, throughout this period, it was Christian charities rather than U.S. tax dollars that financed the work of many of these efforts.88
Between 1948 and 1951, the Marshall Plan delivered an estimated $12 billion ($100 billion in 2008 dollars) worth of food, fuel, raw materials, and equipment to begin the reconstruction of Europe. But NGOs funded with private donations had played an essential role in meeting the individual needs official sources missed. By taking the initiative to help a fellow human in need, NGOs had significantly minimized the federal government's expenses to help the world recover from World War II.

## Usaid

Seeing the power of humanitarian assistance to influence without force, Congress formally recognized that "a principal objective of the foreign policy of the United States is the encouragement and sustained support of the people of developing countries in their efforts to acquire the knowledge and resources essential to development and to build the economic, political, and social institutions which
will improve the quality of their lives."89 To manifest this aim, the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
established the U.S. Agency for International Development  and gave it the primary responsibility for achieving five principal goals:
-
alleviating the worst physical manifestations of poverty among the world's poor majority,
-
promoting conditions enabling developing countries to achieve self-sustaining economic growth with equitable distribution of benefits,
-
encouraging development processes in which individual civil and economic rights are respected and enhanced,
-
integrating developing countries into an open and equitable international economic system, and
-
promoting good governance through combating corruption and improving transparency and accountability.
Buoyed by President Kennedy's promise to "those peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery... to help them help themselves, for whatever period is requirednot because the Communists may be doing it, ... but because it is right," USAID recruited hundreds of teachers, engineers, doctors, and development specialists to directly implement programs on the ground.90 By 1962, USAID had roughly 8,600 direct hire employees deployed around the world. Embedded in the establishment of USAID and the Peace Corps, also established during the Kennedy administration, was a desire to replicate the success of the NGOs in improving the image of the United States as a prosperous alternative to communism. Locked in a political, military, and economic battle with the Soviet Union, the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 provided a mechanism of influence with the Non-Aligned Movement or so-called Third World that would not lead to thermonuclear war.91
Developing nations, which had not declared which camp they would support, the communists or the capitalists, often became the dual beneficiaries of a battle by potlatch. Collaboration between USAID, the Department of Defense, and the Department of State to achieve U.S. foreign policy objectives continued to increase in strength and fraternity over the next ten years, but the loss of the Vietnam War in 1975 brought about disillusionment with the ability of development assistance to "win hearts and minds." The staff of USAID was gradually whittled down from a high of more than 10,00092 during the Vietnam era to 3,162 in 1990.93 As more and more experienced USAID
personnel left the agency with no pension or desire to enter the private sector, they joined existing or created their own NGOs. With USAID's organic capacity to implement government programs, the number of private voluntary organizations doing the work in the field increased from 18 in 1970 to more than 190 in 2000.94
In 1984, understanding the need to improve coordination between the different NGO efforts, the American Council of Voluntary Service formed a merger with Private Agencies in International Development to become the American Council for Voluntary International Action, or InterAction. The idea was to provide a collective voice that could lobby the U.S. government to take action in humanitarian activities like the Ethiopia famine. As the largest coalition of U.S.-based international NGOs, InterAction sought to leverage "the impact of this private support by advocating for the expansion of U.S. government investments and by insisting that policies and programs are responsive to the realities of the world's poorest and most vulnerable populations."95 With the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, the imperative to continue development assistance to "win hearts and minds" diminished even further. The needs of dispossessed populations from the breakup of Yugoslavia, postcolonial civil wars in Africa, and poorly governed or oppressive states around the world were increasingly provided with NGO personnel, equipment, and expertise. Correspondingly, the number of international NGOs surged from roughly 6,000 in 1990 to an estimated 26,000 by
2000.96 After decades of continuous budget and personnel cuts, USAID was eventually transformed from an agency in which U.S. direct-hire personnel implemented projects in the field to one where an increasing number of short-term contractors oversaw NGO grantees who carried out most of its day-to-day activities. Before the end of the cold war, NGOs had been mostly engaged in long-term development work. Tied to their missionary purpose, NGOs would spend years, sometimes generations, learning the local languages, preaching the Gospel and working to improve the communities' quality of life. Dividing the world into categories and regions such as the West, the Soviet Bloc, and Non-Aligned or Third World regions limited the ability of NGOs to move freely between the different camps and become a truly global organization. But with the breakdown of the Soviet Union and the U.S. government's curtailing or abandoning of overseas development assistance programs, NGOs were provided the ability and opportunity to become increasingly engaged in rapid response operations either as proxies or in the absence of government agencies. In many cases, this meant working in postconflict environments or the midst of a civil war. But these new opportunities brought with them a realignment of funding strategies. Initially NGOs were able to operate in complex humanitarian emergencies with impunity because all parties saw their presence as mutually beneficial. This was primarily because of the NGOs adherence to the humanitarian imperative, the concept that the prime motivation of a response is "to alleviate suffering amongst those least able to withstand the stress caused by disaster."97 As long as the U.S.

government transferred the resources in the form of a grant with the intent of benefiting all, the aid could be "given regardless of race, creed, nationality of the recipients and without adverse distinction or any kind."By respecting the local culture and ensuring that assistance was not used to further a political or religious standpoint, NGOs were able to create a humanitarian space that allowed unarmed and unprotected individuals to work unmolested in the midst of ongoing conflicts or atrocities. Although humanitarian space did not protect NGOs from nonspecific violence or criminal activity, NGO personnel were able to work unscathed within conflict zones for months and, in some cases, years on end. To maintain acceptance of the local population and protection of humanitarian space, most NGOs attempted to ensure that only a portion of the funds they received were from governmental sources and that the government funds accepted did not carry the perception of bias. Once a contract is used as a mechanism to transfer resources, the U.S. government creates a legal obligation of service. This in turn transforms the NGO into an agent of the government and thus a legal target for enemy combatants. Although this distinction was not an issue in the decade that followed the end of the cold war, it rapidly complicated the way NGOs managed funding as the United States embarked on the global war on terror. By 2002, USAID was responsible for development assistance programs in more than 150 countries, but had only 1,985 direct-hire personnel.98 USAID deployed more than 600 direct-hire personnel to oversee programs in 71 countries but was unable to staff permanent representation in the other 80 nations receiving U.S. government assistance, relying instead on NGOs. A review of USAID capabilities by the Government Accounting Office showed that in fiscal year 2000 (FY2000), "USAID directed about $4 billion of its $7.2 billion assistance funding to nongovernmental organizations, including at least $1 billion to private voluntary organizations (charities) working overseas"99 (see figure 6.1).

Realizing that any reconstruction efforts in Iraq would exceed the staffing of the agency, USAID began readying a number of multimillion dollar agreements with NGOs to cover the anticipated requirements. This posed a number of challenges for the NGOs. Because the development assistance was based on support of U.S. government policy objectives, funds were earmarked funds for specific projects dictating where, when, how, and thus, by extension, who received assistance on the ground. By definition, this act would change the NGO's assistance from humanitarian, providing assistance based on need, to conditional, where assistance would be given in exchange for political allegiance or military information. But perhaps more dangerous to the NGOs was the loss of perceived neutrality in the eyes of the combatants. In being seen as agents of a belligerent power in an armed conflict, the humanitarian space, which had previously kept NGOs safe, was gradually eroded. This was especially challenging for those NGOs that had traditionally received a substantial percentage of their budget from government funding and was complicated by the emotional passions stirred up by the invasion of Iraq. If an NGO decided not to accept U.S. government funding, it gave the perception of being seen as being against the war and, by extension, as anti-American. This could damage potential funding streams, not only with the federal government, but also with the traditional NGO donor church base, whose congregations tended to support the invasion. But, given the lack of international support for the invasion, the NGOs could lose strategic access to Muslim populations by being seen as part of a resurgent Christian crusade. With more than 1 billion Muslims in the world and constituting a majority in more than 40 nations, the NGOs recognized another threshold in governmentNGO relationships was being crossed.

contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements to NGOs
$4 billion (35%)
Fund transfers to foreign countries
$1.9 billion (26%)
Funding of U.S. government agencies
$0.9 billion (13%)
Funding of public international organizations
$0.2 billion (3%)
Other assistance
$0.2 billion (3%)

The principles of humanitarian assistance were further complicated by the broad powers granted to military commanders providing conditional aid in the field. Armed with Commanders Emergency Response Program (CERP) funds, money taken from the former Iraqi president, Saddam Hussein, military commanders engaged in what were called quick impact programs designed to gain the immediate compliance of the occupied territories. By early 2004, military commanders working directly with local citizens to identify and respond to immediate needs with low-cost, high-impact projects spent more than $126 million on more than
5,000 education, health-care, electricity, water, and security projects.100 And though the idea was for CERP projects to be a grassroots effort by local commanders to quickly deal with short-term needs, speed often outweighed sustainability. In cases where the Department of Defense was not closely linked with USAID, military commanders implemented programs that duplicated or conflicted with reconstruction programs assigned by USAID to NGOs. In the breakdown of overseas development assistance from 2001 to 2007, the United Statesin contrast with the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, France, Belgium, Switzerland, and Germanydid not break out the funds allocated to NGOs to implement assistance programs into a separate category (see table 6.1). Over time, this omission may strengthen inferences that the U.S. government views NGOs as parastatal entities or that the NGOs are just a cut-out for occupying forces. At its worst, this perception might eventually erode the acceptance of the local population that protected NGOs working in complex humanitarian emergencies or eliminate the concept of humanitarian space altogether.

USG% of
Total
Sector
United States
Development
Assistance
Countries
Education
$841.41
$8,430.38
10
Health
$1,135.03
$4,338.61
26
Population policy and reproductive health
$4,477.92
$5,651.10
79
Water and sanitation
$432.14
$4,360.28
10
Government and civil society
$4,604.87
$11,565.24
40
Social infrastructure and services
$ 1,216.31
$3,252.96
37
Economic infrastructure
$3,121.84
$11,793.81
26
Agriculture, forestry, fishing
$1,222.97
$4,245.36
29
Industry, mining, construction
$220.21
$812.28
27
Trade policy and regulations
$187.49
$520.40
36
Multisector and cross-cutting
$1,159.53
$6,545.53
18
General budget support
$391
$3,126.40
13
Food aid and other commodity assistance
$539.70
$1,081.47
50
Action related to debt
$103.55
$9,761.15
1
Emergency response
$3,045.96
$6,166.57
49
Reconstruction and rehabilitation
$65.69
$698.06
9
Disaster prevention and preparedness
$44.21
$131.36
34
Administrative costs to donors
$1,394.26
$4,884.30
29
Support to NGOs
...
$2,139.69
...
Refugees in donor countries
$512.75
$1,969.68
26
Other costs
$7.66
$1,316.29
...
Total
$24,724.50
$92,790.92
27

## Corporations, Foundations, And Individuals

To be able to operate independently, most NGOs, like mutual fund managers, develop a diversified portfolio across individual, corporate, and government donors. These portfolios are designed to go beyond searching for government grants in the areas noted in table 5 to actively solicit support for a specific issue, beneficiary group, or topical news item. The percentage of each funding source is usually based on the NGO's balance between long-term development assistance and crisis response capability. In general, the more long range and development focused an NGO is, the less pressure to seek funds from sources, like the U.S. government, that might compromise their impartiality. To do this, most NGOs rely on a variety of private sources for financial support. These include unsolicited contributions from citizen or corporate donations, gifts-in-kind contributions, foundation or corporate grants, and religious or civil society-based funding. Some NGOs receive one or the other, limiting either government or private contributions for organizational or capacity reasons, and some NGOs combine sources of funding to maximize all potential contributions. And though it may seem a daunting task, American private individuals and corporations collectively donate a greater percentage and sum of their resources to charitable organizations than the federal government does. In raw numbers, private contributions from American foundations and companies in 2006 collectively amounted to more than $49 billion,101 whereas official development assistance donated by the U.S. government came to only $24 billion.102  Since the early 1970s, companies have undergone a transformation from being interested solely in making money to becoming responsible corporate citizens. This change has largely been driven by the NGOs and had its greatest impact on how companies are defining profits and the bottom line. When the United States was originally established, there were no legal mechanisms to appropriate taxes for federal government operations. Instead, operating expenses were paid for by donations from the various states. By 1787 and the Constitutional Convention, it became apparent that taxation would be necessary to pay for expenses. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gave Congress the "Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States." By 1792, tax receipts "totaled $208,943 this fiscal yearless than one tenth of the amount collected through customs duties. The cost of collecting this money was about twenty percent of the total revenue collection."103 The challenges of collecting any taxes continued as people continued to move farther and farther west across America. Thus taxes initially focused on goods that required a permanent address and were not essential to all, such as liquor and tobacco. Thus from roughly 1800 to 1900, individuals and businesses were allowed to keep almost all of their profits. During this time, businesses would donate to charitable organizations, but there was very little incentive, aside from one's conscience, for any sort of voluntary contribution that reduced profits. In the economic Darwinism of this period, the workers' hardships in the factories and damage to the environment were considered an externality the company did its best to avoid paying. As reflected in Charles Dickens's *Oliver Twist,* published in 1838, or the *Communist Manifesto*, published 1848, the role of business was to make a profit, regardless of the human cost. Even though the 13th Amendment to the Constitution abolishing slavery in the United States was ratified in 1865, it did little to improve working conditions. The flush labor market filled with newly freed slaves and soldiers returning from the Civil War gave business owners little incentive to focus on "relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged." However, by the Progressive era, roughly 1890 to 1920, people began looking at the conditions in the workplace and forcing businesses to institute more human conditions. Although not formally recognized by the term NGO at the time, charitable organizationslike the Salvation Army, brought to the United States from Great Britain in 1879; United Way, established by a Denver priest, two ministers and a rabbi to address the city's welfare challenges in 1887; and Rotary, established "for the purpose of doing good in the world" in 1917helped address the needs by those disabled by predatory business practices. With new immigrants continuing to stream into the United States every day willing and able to put up with longer hours for cheaper pay, businesses did everything they could to avoid making changes that might reduce their profits. Slowly, through trade unions and the NGOs, worker protections and business practices continued to improve resulting in the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, which included the first federal standards for child labor. This attitude began to change radically in the 1960s as the Baby Boomers began to come of age. Sheltered from the worst abuses suffered by their parents and grandparents and raised with the notion that America was a force for good in the world, they demanded more, not only from the U.S. government but U.S. companies as well. One turning point in the idea of corporate social responsibility was the publication of *Silent Spring* in
1961. The book detailed the impact of the uncontrolled use of DDT, an insecticide, had in reducing the animal (particularly bird) populations and the potential effects on human health. The book echoed concerns of NGOs, such as the World Wildlife Foundation, formed in 1961, also concerned with the endangerment of animal species and environmental degradation. When the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), formed in 1970, finally banned the use of DDT in the United States two years later, it was a recognition of the changing focus of the American population and the power of NGOs to effect change. More directly, it sent a clear signal to businesses and corporations that the external costs must be considered when developing a product or providing a service. NGOs like Greenpeace, formed in 1971 to protest underground nuclear testing in highly seismically unstable area, began to raise awareness of the environmental costs of relying on industry and technology to solve all the world's problems. Highly visible accidents like the partial core meltdown at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in 1979 and the 1984 chemical accident in Bhopal, India, validated NGO concerns about industry safety standards. The complete nuclear reactor meltdown in Chernobyl in 1986 and the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989 helped consolidate the view that NGOs were more than just muckraking cranks, and that, left unchecked, business practices could cause serious and often long-lasting damage to the environment. By the time the character Gordon Gekko made his famous speech, "Greed is good," in the 1987 movie *Wall Street* the tide toward corporate social responsibility had already begun to turn. "About one in every ten dollars of assets under management in the U.S.an estimated $2.3 trillion out of $24 trillionis being invested in companies that rate highly on some measure of social responsibility."104 Of the top ten companies in the Global 500, the world's largest companies, all have corporate social responsibility programs with a link prominently displayed on their website.105
"Companies are beginning to discover that the questions, 'How can I accomplish more good in the world?' and 'Where is the market opportunity?'
are essentially the same thing."106 Increasingly businesses are talking about working for the "triple bottom line" or "people, planet, profit" in a way that achieves social, environmental, and economic advances in a sustainable fashion. As more and more consumers demand that companies become active global citizens, the more businesses are seeking NGOs as partners to solve community relations problems. In the past, private companies contributions to NGOs came in the form of cash donations or donationsin-kind. But as more companies develop their own corporate social responsibility programs, the focus of engagement is finding a strategic partner who shares core values. Corporate philanthropy today focuses on a trialogue of the company, which assists with funding, management, and resources; the consumers, who select the branding message of the company or NGO; and the NGO, which works to improve the local population's quality of life while increasing the company's bottom line. Table 6.2 (*see next page*) presents a ranking of some of the top foundations, corporations, and community donors.107 And even as companies move their production facilities overseas or search out new consumers to purchase their products, they are beginning to discover the value of the NGOs acceptance model. Rather than relying on gunboat diplomacy or the imposition of unequal trade practices to open up new markets, multinational companies are learning to tailor their messages and products match the needs and sensibilities of the local population. Much of this transformation has been driven by NGOs. In an interconnected world with a 24-hour news cycle, anyone with a "laptop computer, a website, and an email address ... can wreak havoc on a giant multinational."108 Businesses must ensure that working conditions meet the minimum standards within the host nation.109 But more than just avoiding bad press for poor work conditions, corporations are learning the potential of transforming today's beneficiaries into tomorrow's consumers. Called by some the "fortune at the bottom of the pyramid," businesses are finding it beneficial to work with NGOs. "The basic economics of the bottom of the pyramid market are based on small unit packages, low margins per unit, high volume, and high return on capital employed."110 Instead of packaging products like shampoo, soap, and skin cream in large quantities for people who make less than $1 a day, companies are learning to repackage it into one time trial-size servings, and make a miniscule profit many times. Taking a new twist from Henry Ford's "sell to the masses, eat with the classes," businesses are rediscovering that making 1 cent of profit 1 billion times still equals $10 million dollars.

Top foundations
1.
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (WA)
$2,011,675,000
2.
The Ford Foundation (NY)
$526,464,000
3.
AstraZeneca Foundation (DE)
$517,675,952
4.
The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation (CA)
$421,400,000
5.
The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (NJ)
$407,698,000
6.
GlaxoSmithKline Patient Access Programs Foundation (NC)
$344,193,427
7.
Lilly Endowment Inc. (IN)
$341,863,979
8.
The David and Lucile Packard Foundation (CA)
$307,935,012
9.
The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation (NY)
$300,199,000
10.
Silicon Valley Community Foundation (CA)
$291,096,834
Top corporations
1.
The Bank of America Charitable Foundation, Inc. (NC)
$188,236,685
2.
Sanofi-Aventis Patient Assistance Foundation (NJ)
$77,414,396
3.
Wal-Mart Foundation (AR)
$110,895,707
4.
The Wachovia Foundation, Inc. (NC)
$96,909,222
5.
Citi Foundation (NY)
$96,422,843
6.
GE Foundation (CT)
$91,486,393
7.
The JPMorgan Chase Foundation (NY)
$79,895,591
8.
ExxonMobil Foundation (TX)
$75,214,761
9.
Wells Fargo Foundation (CA)
$64,359,430
10.
Johnson & Johnson Companies Contribution Fund (NJ)
$58,734,462
Largest community foundations
1.
Silicon Valley Community Foundation (CA)
$291,096,834
2.
California Community Foundation (CA)
$216,019,934
3.
Greater Kansas City Community Foundation (MO)
$192,905,943
4.
The New York Community Trust (NY)
$166,053,450
5.
The Chicago Community Trust (IL)
$115,544,031
6.
The Columbus Foundation and Affiliated Organizations (OH)
$110,778,929
7.
Foundation for the Carolinas (NC)
$106,345,459
8.
The San Francisco Foundation (CA)
$96,511,000
9.
The Community Foundation National Capital Region (DC)
$91,206,281
10.
Tulsa Community Foundation (OK)
$87,148,870

And, as NGOs discover that goods given away free are not valued as much by the recipient, by working with businesses and the local population, they can develop sustainable development assistance models that continue to grow and expand after an investment of seed capital. Businesses, being profitmaking ventures, are more likely to scrutinize the way an NGO manages its budget than a government organization or individual donor. Thus the development of these NGObusiness partnerships has had complementary benefits of making the corporation more socially responsible and aware at the same time that it encourages the NGO to be more financially responsible in its efforts to do good.

## Individuals

Despite the increased focus on corporate social responsibility over the past 20 years, perhaps most surprising statistic is that individual private citizens accounted for $229 billion, or roughly 75 percent, of the total amount donated in 2008. This dwarfs the the $78.3 billion from foundations ($41 billion), charitable bequests ($23 billion), and corporations $14.3 billion, as noted in figure 6.2. Not only do individuals donate more in terms of total amount, they also donate more as a percentage of their total income. In contrast to the federal government, which allocated only 0.16 percent of the gross national income in 2007 to development assistance; since 1964, roughly the same time as the establishment of USAID, individual private citizens have consistently donated more than 1.4 percent of their gross income to charitable causes.111 Thud private individual donations continue to be the primary source of most NGOs' income (see figure 6.3). As might be expected, the bulk of those donations go to religious charities. Of course, this does little for the NGOs concerned with international affairs, given that fewer than 2 percent of all donations are earmarked for overseas response. When religious groups were asked if America should help overseas, 55 percent responded, "We should pay less attention to problems overseas and concentrate on problems here at home."112 But, like the humanitarian pioneers of the past, NGOs are increasingly courting a new class of individuals to raise resources and awareness to address the problems of the future. The first class of super-empowered individual is the magnate. Whether the Nobel Peace Prize, established after Alfred Nobel decided he wanted to be recognized posthumously as something other than the merchant of death or the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, established from the largess of Andrew Carnegie, who wrote in *The Gospel of Wealth* that "all personal wealth beyond that required to supply the needs of one's family should be regarded as a trust fund to be administered for the benefit of the community,"113 these individuals reshape the way the world thinks because of where they place their resources. Among contemporary examples, Bill Gates is probably the best known. Gates, whose wealth has been as much as $100 billion, depending on stock value, has been ranked the richest man in the world on several occasions. In 1984, he established a foundation that would transfer some of the wealth accumulated through Microsoft into charitable works. Over time, the foundation grew to an organization with more than 750 employees and endowment of over $27 billion making grant payments equaling $2.8 billion (2008) to organizations in all 50 states and roughly 100 nations. With a budget of $27 billion, about the combined gross national incomes of Eritrea, Belize, Bhutan, Maldives, Guyana, Antigua and Barbuda, Gibraltar, San Marino, Saint Lucia, Djibouti, Liberia, Burundi, British Virgin Islands, The Gambia, Seychelles, Grenada, Northern Mariana Islands, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Vanuatu, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Comoros, Samoa, East Timor, Solomon Islands, Guinea-Bissau, Dominica, American Samoa, Tonga, Micronesia, Cook Islands, Palau, Sao Tome and Principe, Marshall Islands, Anguilla, Kiribati, Tuvalu, and Niue combined, the Gates Foundation is less an nongovernmental organization and more an extragovernmental force. With consolidated financial practices, the Gates Foundation can account for grants as large as
$200,665,210 or as small as $500 with equal accuracy.114 And being a business with a sense for how to manage funds, it has been able to attract other super-empowered individuals, such as Warren Buffet, ranked as the richest man in the world in 2008, to donate millions, even billions, of dollars to the foundation to expand their charitable works.115 That said, big foundations act very much like the government and don't necessarily make it easier for all NGOs to increase their funding. The second type of super-empowered individuals does. One of the keys to donations is visibility of needs. As long as ignorance confers innocence, there is no responsibility to act on behalf of something that one is unaware of. Although not as egregious as launching wars based on erroneous information, the effects of ignoring or suppressing information that might otherwise cause people to act can be just as devastating. The Ethiopian famine of 1984 is one example of the second super-empowered individual. During the twelve short months of 1984, a number of world events consumed U.S. leaders' attention. Iran turned the tide against Iraq and both sides escalated hostilities by attacking oil tankers in the Persian Gulf. With Israel's war in Lebanon heating up, the CIA station chief in Beirut was kidnapped and eventually tortured to death; the Marines had been withdrawn after a fatal attack on their barracks the previous year. Premier Indira Ghandi ordered an attack on Sikh separatists in the Golden Temple, resulting in her assassination four months later. To assist the insurgency against the Soviet occupation, the CIA's budget for operations in Afghanistan was tripled. That year, United Kingdom and China agreed to the terms of restoration of Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty. U.S. support for El Salvador's military government against the Farabuno Marti National Liberation Front (FMLN) continued, as well as assistance to other Latin American nations struggling against popular insurgencies. Desmond Tutu was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his opposition to apartheid. In March 1984, faced with the prospects of a poor harvest, the Ethiopian government announced that as many as 5 million people could be at risk of starvation by the end of the year. By August, the effects of the poor harvest were beginning to show and thousands of people began starving to death each day. Oxfam made the largest contribution in its 40-year history, 500,000, in an effort to spur the western governments to respond, but to no avail. Despite a bumper harvest of grain in September, the western nations declined to offer Ethiopia famine relief.

Frustrated with the lack of official interest, Bob Geldoff gathered with a number of fellow singers to record a single, "Do They Know It's Christmas," in late November, hoping to raise perhaps as much as
70,000 for the famine response.116 Within a week of the song's release, it went to #1 in the British charts and raised 8 million by the end of that year. This event became a watershed for NGO funding. For the first time, entertainers could play a significant role in providing resources for overseas assistance by lending their name recognition and entertainment skills to raise awareness and resources for humanitarian needs. Social edutainment, or the focus of providing educational material in a popular format, slowly became a legitimate way to reach a more secular generation that was unlikely to donate money through traditional church donations. Major institutions like the United Nations took note and in 1988 began recruiting entertainers like Audrey Hepburn, herself a former refugee, to be what became known as goodwill ambassadors, who could raise awareness of the unmet needs of millions around the world. Some entertainers, like Bono, who participated in the original Band Aid, went on to become major voices for development assistance and disaster response. More than ever, individuals with star power, such as Angelina Jolie, Lucy Liu, Brad Pitt, Nicole Kidman, Mia Farrow, George Clooney, Don Cheadle, Matt Damon, and Drew Barrymore, are offering an advertising donations-in-kind to raise awareness of existing humanitarian needs.117 But more than individual contributions to specific needs, celebrities bring a modern and secular cachet to the idea of helping others. The last category of super-empowered individual is perhaps the most significant as well as the least recognized, the humanitarian genius. Muhammad Yunus, the founder of Grameen Bank, is probably the best known. Grameen Bankthe word *grameen* means rural or village in Bangladeshiwas first started in 1976 as an action research project to look at ways to create opportunities for self-employment for the unemployed in Bangladesh and increase savings, investments, and income through a injection of credit. The program, which provided micro-loans to groups, turned out to be so successful that the government of Bangladesh took formally recognized the idea in 1983. A people's movement, borrowers of Grameen Bank own 90 percent of the shares and the government owns the rest. Other individuals, such as Dean Kamen, who turned his intellect to developing a universal water purification system after building the Segway, or Eric Rasmussen, who is developing common information sharing systems with Google for disaster responses, are changing the way the world perceives, measures, and values human life. NGOs are increasingly focused on concentrating these individuals' talents, intellect and efforts and intellect through consortiums like Architecture for Humanity, where innovative building ideas are freely shared for common benefit. Technology, Education, Design (TED) forums are another example of this and replicate on a more individual level, the efforts of other NGOs like National Public Radio (NPR) and Public Broadcasting Station (PBS), attempt to raise awareness and influence value judgments.118

Executive Summary
Future Trends
  NGOs coordinate and are part of a
community of organizations.

Perhaps one of the greatest impacts on the way NGO are funded was the introduction of the Internet: instant news, cutting across demographic lines, and instantaneous transfers of funds.

  NGO association value lies in their
providing a common forum for discussion and debate, coordinating a common voice and advocacy efforts, and hosting professional and technical standards.

  The International NGO Council,
InterAction, and VOICE are the leading global NGO consortiums-associations.
  NGOs coordinate during both regional
and national emergencies, and often share resources, information, and capabilities.
  NGOs also coordinate with the UN and
both national and local governments.

Because the Internet serves as an information commons where all can compete equally, the idea of an official voice is lost within the crowd. Rather than relying on a single source for definitive definitions, increasingly reality is defined by mass perception. This is best exemplified by the shift from Encyclopedia Britannica to Wikipedia. This is important in that the Internet allows NGOs to raise awareness of injustices and humanitarian needs around the world and strip away the innocence of ignorance.

  NGOs and military will interface in
disasters, though what happens programmatically varies.

Because the Internet is accessed equally by people of all description, anyone can hear the message an NGO is sending. By appealing to fundamental human values, the NGO can reach the widest audience, as long as its website is in the appropriate language and an appealing format. And as the newspapers are discovering, because it takes little to no time to go from reporting to print, it is a far quicker way to get work out about a disaster or humanitarian crisis and can offer far more detailed information with more regular updates. But perhaps the most empowering aspect of the Internet is the ability to transfer funds instantaneously around the world. Because banking has transformed from a centralized institution to institution process to a decentralized individually managed system, the ability to gain donations or transfer funds directly to projects around the world has increased exponentially. In addition, and significantly, because traditional transfer fees are rapidly being discarded, the economy of sending small sums of money increases. Thus, collectively, the Internet has changed the opportunities for NGO funding by providing instantaneous information on human needs around the world stripping away the innocence of ignorance, providing the information to all equally so that everyone can be aware of the needs, and creating a mechanism for sending even modest sums of money instantaneously to areas in need. In many ways, the ubiquity of the Internet and vast number of NGOs supporting different agendas and interests have allowed a closer approximation of the democratic ideal of a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Because everyone competes equally, the traditional definition of a state being the entity with ultimate authority to use violence is slowly evolving to the entity able to serve as the framework of common values and provide human security or the means to live. Increasingly, largely through changes brought about by the Internet and abdication of government responsibility for humanitarian needs, NGOs are becoming a force of their own. Since 1991, the importance of NGOs in international politics has increased substantially because of their willingness to take on the traditional role of providing for the needs of the population. And though the local government may have retained control over the use of violence, in many cases those entities have been unable to provide the goods or services necessary to live. Over time, support and respect for government by force is reduced to merely fear, leaving the NGOs as a moral authority amidst the chaos of humanitarian needs. Although the impacts of these changes are still being played out, the idea of NGOs as dependent organizations obliged to beg for funds to continue operations is gradually changing. As noted earlier, not only corporations, through their social responsibility programs, but governments, in their need to show a beneficent face, rely increasingly on NGOs, in some cases to validate their work, in other cases to implement it. For those associations, funding has become less an owner-client relationship, and more a partnership of equals where each individual and group brings their specific talents and resources to accomplish a mutually agreed on goal. In many ways, this manifests the 10th Amendment of the Constitution, which states that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Instead of taxing individual incomes and redistributing wealth according to a centralized top down system, governments are seeing the benefits of a wholeof-society approach. By allowing individuals to educate themselves and make personal decisions where they want their resources to go, foreign policies and overseas responses more closely reflect the will of the people. This whole-of-society approach goes beyond the joint or interagency discussions being debated today or the public-private partnerships being tested as ways to implement programs tomorrow. With more than 1.9 million tax-exempt organizations, with combined assets represented $2 trillion in the United States alone, NGOs are the wave of the future.

NGO Coordination C
oordination is an extremely important part of international relief activities and operational efficiency. A common military misperception regarding NGOs, is that they do not coordinate, plan, or cooperate. In fact, NGOs spend much of their time doing exactly that. NGOs depend heavily on the NGO community in any given disaster, because individual NGOs often have limited resources and need to piggy-back transportation, communication, and security elements of their programming with other NGOs. Coordination also limits parallel programming and maximizes limited funding. Because most international NGOs that respond to international emergencies are funded by the same UN and government donor agencies, donors will often mandate or require each of its implementing partners to cooperate and coordinate their activities. As well, many NGOs operating within the same programmatic sector or within the same region, find themselves coordinating activities, transportation, security protocols, and advocacy efforts. As discussed in chapter 4, some NGOs will coordinate with military units. By communicating and sharing information about various regions, hotspots, or dangers that may exist within a military's AOR, NGOs can understand more fully where they can deliver humanitarian assistance. NGOs also seek geographical data, satellite imagery, airlift support, logistical support, landmine removal services, and other forms of assistance from militaries if there is a DOD mandate to do so.

## Ngo To Ngo Coordination

Coordination within the NGO sector can be found globally. In almost every humanitarian disaster, NGOs will seek to immediately establish some form of coordination mechanism, often in the form of an NGO council, an association, cluster meetings, a weekly meeting, e-mail listserv, or website. Because NGOs are often the first to respond to a humanitarian disaster, this body may be the only way of coordinating the international community has during the initial stages of a disaster. As disaster response efforts progress during a disaster, this coordinating body, which may start as an informal group, often serves later as the contact point for military, government, and donor agencies to the NGO community in general. Most NGOs participate in at least some form of coordination during a disaster. This does not mean that NGOs give up autonomy or share programming advantages: NGOs remain independent and guard their privacy and programmatic specialties, regions, proposals, funding sources and ideas closely. In using a common language, these private organizations can benefit from pooling resources (transport cost sharing, logistics services, safety and security, communications infrastructure, and the like), sharing experiences, setting standards, and organizing campaigns in responding to a humanitarian disaster. Many smaller and medium-sized NGOs, and even large NGOs with expansive programming and capacity, find it necessary to participate and contribute to coordinating bodies that share information and services. By participating in coordination meetings, smaller NGOs with limited manpower can often piggy-back with larger NGOs for assets, information, safety, transportation, and other services. Larger NGOs often seek the skills or technical expertise that highly specialized smaller NGOs often have.

## How Ocha Coordinates In A Disaster

  provides emergency response tools at
the start of a crisis including the UN Disaster Assessment and Coordination Team (UNDAC)
  provides search and rescue
coordination in accordance with the International Search and Rescue Advisory Group (INSARAG) guidelines, civil-military coordination personnel, logistics coordination support
  helps access military assets as a last
resort in disaster response
Coordinating efforts are partly a manifestation of NGO communities that exist internationally. Internationally operating NGOs are part of a community that often shares knowledge, advocacy efforts, positions, opinions, resources, and labor pools. Some NGOs partake in community efforts more than others, but most find some form of camaraderie with other NGOs as well as reasons to communicate or share resources and information. Many NGOs responding to disasters today face similar challenges and resource restraints, and it is not uncommon for NGOs in the field to share housing, warehousing, equipment, and sometimes staff.119

  provides management tools for use
by humanitarian response agencies to assist in planning, response, and coordination
In sum, NGOs coordinate with other NGOs to
-
increase logistical and service capacity,
-
share and obtain new information pertinent to a humanitarian operation,
-
increase the weight of NGO community suggestions and appeals,
-
reduce operational costs,
-
increase security, and
-
enhance efficiency and transparency.
Figure 7.1 shows, simplistically, how an NGO can increase both its message and, for example here, its logistical capacity.120 If NGO A decides to work alone within a disaster and conduct its programming in refugee camp design and management, it will depend entirely on its own resources. Without any organization willing to share equipment, expertise, staff, or information, this NGO will be relatively isolated in its programming, most likely aloof to any major regional changes in condition, new practices, or developments in refugee care, and other similar programs other NGOs are conducting. If an NGO chooses not to coordinate at the initial onset of a disaster, it could waste valuable time in conducting assessments that others may have already conducted, or attempt to design or propose programs that have already been designed or proposed.

If NGO B coordinates with other NGOs in the region of concern, it can join in a consolidated appeal to donors and governments involved in the disaster. When speaking together with other NGOs, NGO B is increasing its capacity to advocate for the programs it thinks are most valuable during the disaster. Using the logistical capacity variable to express benefits for working together, it can be seen that when NGO B joins other NGOs, it has at its disposal shared convoy and cargo space, warehouses, information that may flow other NGOs working in various surrounding regions, communication equipment, and the like. When more NGOs work together, per-NGO operation costs are reduced and more (efficient) services can be delivered. The graph on the right of figure 7.1 shows an increase in both advocacy strength and logistical capacity.121

## Ngo To Donor Or Government Agency Coordination

In addition to coordinating within the NGO community, NGOs coordinate with lead UN agencies, government agencies, and other international organizations. Although an NGO may be required to work closely with the organization that is funding its programming, information sharing between the NGO community and the national government and UN agencies is also valuable to all organizations involved. Every organization depends on information during a disaster, and because no one organization (NGO, IO, or otherwise) can obtain or manage all pertinent information in every sector, NGOs, donors, IOs, and the UN tend to provide and receive information in formal or informal relationships with each other. The UN, IOs, and government agencies all have access to large levels of information, normally dealing with funding, political settings, large-scale refugee movements, repatriation patterns, and region-wide public health concerns. NGOs, on the other hand, have specific on-the-ground data, understand refugee-IDP sentiments, can detect community or subregional instability, health dangers or outbreaks, and know the lay of the land when implementing relief or development activities. The preferred mechanism of coordination for NGOs in a disaster is the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, whose mission is to mobilize and coordinate effective and principled humanitarian action in partnership with national and international actors.122 OCHA
was established by the UN General Assembly (Resolution 46182-to strengthen the United Nations' response to complex emergencies and natural disasters and to improve the overall effectiveness of the UN's humanitarian operations in the field. It supports and facilitates the work of UN agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and works closely with host governments, supporting them in their lead role for organizing humanitarian response in emergency situations. In a disaster, OCHA focuses on humanitarian coordination, related policy issues, advocacy, information outlets, and funding.123

-
At the country level, OCHA may appoint a *humanitarian coordinator* (HC) with the overall responsibility for ensuring that response efforts are well organized and coherent. This coordinator works with government, international organizations, NGOs, and affected communities. They preside in an established OCHA office set up to support the HC.
-
On *policy issues* related to humanitarian action, OCHA will support the development of a common policy position among humanitarian agencies and at the international level through the United Nations.
-
In *advocacy* on humanitarian issues, OCHA serves as the speaker on specific areas  concerning the protection of civilians, prevention of displacement, disaster preparedness and the efficiency of humanitarian response. Each year OCHA determines its advocacy priorities
which can include (but may not be limited to), internal displacement, climate change, and gender-based violence.
-
OCHA is the lead for *information outlets* for humanitarian actors. The following outlets are the most comprehensive and up-to-date networks for all humanitarian information.
The Integrated Regional Information Network (IRIN) provides news and information through text and radio services (see www.irinnews.org).

ReliefWeb is the global hub for time-critical humanitarian information on complex emergencies and natural disasters, and its maps and reports are some of the most valuable, well-organized information this site has (see www.reliefweb.int/rw/dbc.nsf/ doc100?OpenForm).

OCHA Online provides an overview of key issues and challenges facing the humanitarian community and hosts OCHA's advocacy materials (see http://ochaonline.un.org).
-
As to *funding* for humanitarian action, OCHA is active in improving the way in which the
international humanitarian system seeks and manages funding. Through its participation in the Good Humanitarian Donorship initiative OCHA aims to contribute to improving the quality and quantity of humanitarian funding. The Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF), The Consolidated Appeals and The Financial Tracking Service (FTS) are all managed by OCHA.
Figure 7.2 presents generally the types of information that both the NGO and the UN-donor-military communities have. Because the difference in the type of information obtained during a disaster by NGOs and UN-donor-military entities is substantial, the market of information valuable to each party is correspondingly large.

NGO community contributions
to coordinating mechanisms
(generalized)
donor, UN, and military
contributions to coordinating
mechanisms (generalized)
Relief
International
U.S.
military
IMC
UNHCR
coordinating
mechanism
and/or area
of mutual
interest for
coordination
IRC
USAID/
ECHO
knowledge of
ground-level
conditions, lay of
land, IDP-refugee
sentiments,
local-level
health problems,
technical
requirements,
civilian logistical
capabilities in
specific regions,
local government
civil society
relationships
knowledge of
political conditions
and developments,
donor themes and
priorities, funding
levels in pipeline
or available,
donor government
priorities, national
government
relations, largescale intelligence
information, largescale patterns and
numbers

The U.S. military will want to participate in a coordinating mechanismformal or informalto obtain ground-level information and potentially valuable subregional population movement numbers, health problems, and ground-level themes otherwise not available. Information about funding sources, political and economic events, donor priorities, macro-scale intelligence, and other normally inaccessible information. In the cases of conflict-mediated disasters, information on unexploded munitions, landmine data, troop movements, border crossing changes, checkpoints, and other specific military information that may make NGO response unsafe, change the political landscape in displacement camps, or change displacement flows is all important to NGOs in effectively meeting the needs of displaced persons. By working together, all entities can walk away from coordination meetings with more information than they contributed. With regard to advocacy, the NGO community within its working groups and cluster meetings will participate in an information exchange forum and then advocate decisions, demands, or ideas on behalf of the group with regard to the needs of the displaced or at-risk persons. Without undermining each member NGO's autonomy, the association makes each voice stronger, and bolsters the NGO community presence when dealing with other large bureaucratic entities, such as the UN, militaries, and government agencies. Figure 6 shows how NGOs often work together in a common forum or coordinating mechanism that then serves as a direct advocate or contact point for other entities within a disaster setting.

## Ngo-Military Interface

Since 2001, new and revised DOD instructions and guidance have changed how the military interacts with NGOs and how NGOs interface or interact with foreign militaries. This subject is dealt with indepth chapter 18 of this guidebook.

## Ngo Coordination At Home

Much of the coordination within the NGO community is handled in major capitals in western countries. Although most of an NGO's staff is deployed in disaster or development programs around the globe, experts, policymakers, academics, and NGO leaders are working with each other to strengthen performance, awareness, and funding levels for humanitarian affairs. More simply, NGOs come together to think; to advertise and to lobby; share lessons learned, experiences, challenges, and reports; and to create standards. Two coordinating bodies especially important outside an immediate disaster setting are InterAction and VOICE. Both organizations serve as consortiums of international NGOs and provide a range of services to their members. A third, the International Council of Volunteer Associations, overlaps with InterAction and VOICE but is more broad than either.

Executive Summary
  NGOs are staffed by
largely local staff and a few expatriates, and often drive Land Rovers, trucks, and cars in emergency settings.
  In conflict areas, NGOs may
not be visible.

  NGOs may use flags or large
stickers to display their logo and signal their presence where they work, live, or store material.
  It may also not be expedient
for safety reasons to identify their presence.
-
InterAction (www.interaction.org) is a consortium of 170-plus U.S.-based NGOs and NPOs that operate internationally. Some of the largest and the smallest NGOs in the world are members of InterAction, with annual operating budgets ranging from less than $1 million to more than $400 million. From specific child-rights advocacy NGOs to the larger disaster response NGOs, InterAction is the central place where many of the leading NGOs in the United States congregate and visit for information, access, and assistance. Specifically, member organizations list programming activities in disaster relief, and others list programs in refugee and migration sectors. InterAction hosts forums, an annual conference, and working committees; coordinates closely with the U.S. government, U.S. military, and the UN; and provides a large body of technical resource for member NGOs. Located in Washington, DC, it spends a considerable amount of energy lobbying specific government agencies for more attention, funding, and support for international assistance programming. InterAction is a large supporter and contributor to the Sphere Project. It also has an extensive resource collection on civil military relations that offers downloadable guidelines and policy briefs possibly helpful to the military who find themselves in the same area as humanitarian aid workers (see www.interaction.org/civmil).
-
VOICE (www.ngovoice.org), or Volunteer Organizations in Cooperation in Emergencies, the European counterpart of InterAction, is based in Brussels, Belgium, and is Europe's central NGO coordination point and thought and activity center. Its website provides listings of all members, their websites, and countries of operation. VOICE publishes a widely read journal, *The Humanitarian Review* (published every two months), that normally finds its way to the hands of many relief workers, disaster specialists, policymakers, and think-tank employees. Many of VOICE's members are also members of InterAction, normally as national chapter organizations or parts of the same umbrella organization.
-
ICVA (www.icva.ch), the International Council of Volunteer Associations, is a Europeanbased and internationally targeted association established in 1962 that provides many of the same services InterAction and VOICE do, but with a wider and more varied membership list. Member organizations are involved in human rights and legal issues, advocacy, refugee and migration work, education, democracy and governance issues, and other sectors not covered in this manual.
Both InterAction and VOICE provide their member NGOs with an extensive array of services. These two bodies differ from regional NGO associations because they conduct business as an organization with independent missions, objectives and activities that may not be directly from a member NGO. InterAction and VOICE are organizations in and of themselves that exist to serve their members, but that also carry on activities aimed at promoting the organization and those objectives set forth upon foundation. Why the fuss about these organizations? They represent member NGOs and serve as pools of thinking and resource for the NGO community, but also as stark proponents of specific efforts that normally include increasing government foreign aid budgets and levels of awareness for specific emergencies. InterAction and VOICE are lobby organizations in Washington, DC, and European capitals, and are now integral parts of how western governments craft their foreign assistance budgets and priorities. As well, they serve as conduits of information to the public, often sponsoring advertisements or awareness campaigns nationally to promote proper donation contributions or support for their member NGOs internationally.

NGO Identification and Presence N
GOs, NGO personnel, and NGO operations do not in fact "look" like anything in particular. Sometimes identifiable by their trucks, logos, staff, or flags, NGOs are civilian organizations and do not require any form of specific uniform or standard presence. Some may argue this point, though, and suggest that NGOs are extremely sensitive to identifying themselves as major actors within an emergency. Many NGOs do indeed attempt to delineate themselves from other NGOs, from combating parties, and almost always attempt to remain distinct from any nonneutral entities within the region of operation. In recent years, NGOs have gone from visible, easily identified cars, trucks, and offices to nondescript ones. Because NGOs have become targets for violence, this is now the norm. NGOs participating in disasters are visible to U.S. or international peacekeeping forces when transporting goods, managing refugee, or IDP populations, or providing medical assistance. Because there are so many NGOs, military personnel often become confused or pessimistic about working with one or another, citing too many differences between them, or an inability to tell one from another. This is normally short-sighted, and a brief review of how an NGO identifies itself in a large pool of international actors is important. An NGO will often attempt to brand itself and make itself visible by using logos, flags, stickers, labels, websites, t-shirts, and jackets. Although not normally a formal area of study or even of concern, at least identifying the more common NGO icons that are now somewhat common in humanitarian disaster settings is deemed essential to this guidebook. The most identifiable aspect of an NGO is its logo. These are used on office doors or compounds, personnel vehicles, trucks and containers, letterhead and correspondence, and sometimes flags. The logo is one way to indicate location for coordination purposes, beneficiary benefit, or donor sight. Table 8.1 presents several well-known logos (*see following page*).

## Identifying Ngo Personnel And Equipment

With very few exceptions, NGOs traditionally have not used uniforms and normally do not impose a dress code on their employees and volunteers. Many NGO employees will wear their NGO's logo on shirts, coats, or hats, and often will also wear an armband or some other form of insignia that separates them from local populations or other international staff in the area. International staff that still fall under the rubric of expatriate are also often visible if their physical features differ from that of the local population of the country or region in question. That is, there is no easy way to identify NGO personnel. Instead, and to generalize grossly, many NGO personnel wear what has become seemingly if informally standardmultipocketed vest (normally tan or black), khaki pants, chukka boots, and sometimes a badge with an ID card or insignia. Medical personnel often wear or tote fanny-packs filled with essential tools and medicines, and engineers and logisticians often carry small tool belts. Again, these are generalizations, but it holds true that often expats are largely identifiable by their clothing, physical stature differences, skin color differences, and association with other similar expats (see chapter 5 for a more in-depth discussion). NGO personnel almost always require personal transportation within the emergency-affected region. Smaller organizations often rent local cars or hire a taxi for an extended period of time during the assessment or initial onset period. In traveling between cities or rural areas, programs or regions, smaller NGOs find major challenges in providing the most basic of transportation for its personnel. Larger NGOs with more capacity will often bring in large four-wheel drive vehicles or rent vehicles locally. Some NGOs will also hire individuals locally to drive the vehicles and care for them (maintenance, security at night). NGOs use many of the same types of vehicles. Obtained from the UN when implementing UN-funded projects, and sometimes purchased or leased, four-wheel drive vehicles are popular for rugged and sometimes not-so-rugged areas. Table 8.2 identifies vehicles representing a few of the types NGOs typically use in emergencies.124 Other types of vehicles are used as well. NGOs often buy used vehicles on the local market, rent local vehicles, or hire drivers and their vehicle for periods of time. Many cited cases show that NGOs will pay drivers more than national medical staff during emergencies because keeping a good and flexible driver is essential to the health of any program. Drivers are often more than chauffeurs. Serving as guides, translators, and junior logisticians, they become essential to any new NGO program during an emergency. Depending on the type of disaster and conditions of the region, NGOs often will set up at least two distinct locations within an area of potential operation: one for working or storage (or both), and the other for living. By renting a house, office space, a hotel room or often enough putting up a tent or temporary structure, NGOs set up shop where the staff will work, coordinate, communicate, and store supplies. A second location is often established to house personnel. Although sometimes office

## Executive Summary

and living space are shared, it is not too uncommon for an NGO to set up a separate living quarters to support an operation. This is a generalization, and depending on the size of the NGO and the type of program, an NGO can easily have more than two offices and numerous living quarters. If the NGO is operating programs that distribute material, storehouses or warehouses are used and most often rented from local owners.

  NGOs participate in all facets
and stages of an emergency.
  Different NGOs specialize in
responding to various stages of emergencies.
  NGOs are quick, nimble,
and largely free-roaming organizations strapped only by their budgets or selfimposed mandates.
In Kosovo in 1999, a number of NGOs and IOs established living and working quarters in a few residential areas just outside the downtown area of Pristina, Kosovo's provincial capital. Immediately after NATO forces moved in and made the environment somewhat safe for NGOs to operate in more actively, NGOs began setting up office and living quarters in the same areas. NGOs would hire Kosovar Albanians to assist in finding and then negotiating the terms for a leased house or office space, and Albanian families would often willingly move out of their homes to take advantage of the high rents they could charge the NGOs. NGO logos began popping up on gates outside of the homes and on garages, and soon larger four-wheel-drive vehicles and NGO personnel dominated this area of the city.

  NGOs are not always on
their own able to manage major logistical efforts, large population movements, major food or water provision, or communication tasks.

## Conclusion: Ngo Staff Levels "Positively" Diverse

NGO personnel are diverse. They come from all backgrounds, cultures, races, and are of both sexes and all ages, some very young and some very old. They are competent and dedicated to their mission. While NGOs often employ young staff members, there is normally a management structure that is in tact and accountable. An NGO's diversity is often one of its primary assets. With  diversity, an NGO may be able to take advantage of multiple points of view, shared experiences, regional and language expertise, and a generally adaptable work force. With a number of nationalities, an NGO can move into more emergencies in different regions with confidence that any one of its staff members has a deeper understanding of some aspect of the emergency operation, the population in need, the climate, UN politics or economy, and that this will reflect positively in the NGO's operation. Many people outside of the NGO community are critical of the perceived lack of accountability or management structures among NGOs. Although this can be true of smaller organizations, most established NGOs are well staffed and capable of coordinating and operating in emergency settings.

## Part 2. Ngo Capacities And Services

Chapter 9.
NGO Emergency Deployment and Response N
GOs participate in all facets of an emergency, from development and early warning activities before an emergency, immediate and relief-oriented activities during an emergency, and reconstruction efforts afterward. This chapter outlines briefly various elements of an NGO emergency deployment and activity throughout all stages of an emergency. This manual uses the term *emergency* loosely, but it is valuable to define various stages of an emergency to better understand where NGOs fit in. Whether it is a natural disaster (such as an earthquake or tropical storm), ongoing civil war, new conflict, full-scale intrastate war, or major poverty, NGOs approach emergencies in various ways, and often depending on the stage of an emergency. This guidebook turns away from more technical literature concerning stages of an emergency, and emphasizes the clear periods of NGO involvement. The three phases, simplistically, that NGOs are involved in are the preemergency or onset, the emergency itself, and the aftermath. NGOs respond at each stage.

## Ngos And The Preemergency Phase

International NGOs that respond to humanitarian emergencies are often already involved in development projects in the affected region or country. Whether the emergency is natural disaster or war, chances are good that at least a few international NGOs are familiar with its territory, populations, and problems.

Poverty-stricken regions tend to be more affected than others by large-scale disaster and conflict.125
Although a developing country may be able to manage and limit the loss of life or physical damage during an emergency effectively, population displacement, disease outbreak, crumbled infrastructure, high indirect death count, and slowed political and economic development are not uncommon.126
Development activities beforehand play a key role in defining NGO responses to emergencies. Given that NGOs are particularly active in poorer countries and regions, and because these are (as noted) often the hardest hit by natural disasters or conflicts, development NGOs are often the strongest agents of relief delivery and solid emergency response programming once conditions become acute.

## A Short List Of Development Activities Includes

-
developing public health infrastructure, including rehabilitation or building clinics and hospitals, training doctors and medical personnel, upgrading equipment or fixing old equipment, and providing public health education;
-
building educational infrastructure, often building or repairing schools, developing curriculum, and providing school materials;
-
supporting or enhancing local infrastructure, including roads, water, sewage, and electrical systems; and
-
developing legal infrastructure, human rights education, and political party capacity building.
Much of the work of international NGOs is only a portion of larger assistance packages. Development NGOsoften the same that respond to emergenciesdevelop capacity, tools, knowledge, trust, and a working fluency of ground-level conditions before the emergency ever emerges. These NGOs can easily transfer the knowledge and much of their capacity into a response mode. Large organizations such as CARE, CRS, World Vision, Relief International, and Church World Service can also readily turn their organization's expertise to developing emergency responses and consolidating resources quickly. Their development programs may be managed by different departments, offices, or even country-level chapter organizations, but these all draw from the same best practices, personnel, equipment, and logistical expertise. As well, trucks that may have been part of a rural farming development project or an intimate knowledge of the region's border and importing procedures can greatly ease or facilitate incoming international relief responses. These NGOs also have relationships with donors that can easily be leveraged to expedite the funding process for new emergency programming. Foundations, government agencies, and UN departments often take months (or longer) to initiate an implementing partner agreement for any type of grant or contract award. If an NGO has a working relationship with a donor, it can easily assess, confer, and apply for funding much more quickly than otherwise. Development NGOs and NGOs active in preemergency settings are also valuable for early-warning activities. NGOs operate at the ground level of a region or country, and often are the first organizations to witness or experience an activity or event that may lead to more serious conditions in the future. Whether ethnic or religious violence, storm conditions, food security, or drought, NGOs can relay information to coordinating agencies, the local government, the UN and donors as it arrives. Through NGO associations, early warning information can be collated, organized, and passed off to other pertinent entities as a comprehensive body of data. Considerable attention is now being paid to early warning activities. Thanks to an extensive network of NGOs that feeding information into central databases, the international relief and development community has a fair idea of what problems currently exist, and where local problems might evolve into larger humanitarian emergencies. Many websites have been developed to monitor and publish information pertinent to early warning analysis and activity.127

## Table 9.1 Early Warning And Disaster Alert Websites

IASC Humanitarian Early Warning Service (HEWSweb)
www.hewsweb.org/home_page/default.asp HEWSweb is an interagency partnership project aimed at establishing a common platform for humanitarian early warnings and forecasts for natural hazards. Its main objective is to bring together and make accessible in a simple format the most credible early warning information available at the global level from multiple specialized institutions. This website displays the latest forecasts, reports and alerts on drought, floods, tropical storms, locust infestation, El Nino, earthquakes, and volcanic activity. It has dedicated pages for each of these natural hazards and includes additional references and resources. In the near future, HEWSweb will also offer the opportunity to access and share information on sociopolitical crises.
Global Disaster Alert and Coordination System
www.gdacs.org The Global Disaster Alert and Coordination System provides near real-time alerts about natural disasters around the world and tools to facilitate response coordination, including media monitoring, map catalogues, and its Virtual On-Site Operations Coordination Centre.
Humanitarian Information Centers and Partners
www.humanitarianinfo.org A space where the humanitarian community can share and access information resources in order to improve the planning and delivery of humanitarian assistance. A provider of information products and services that enable the humanitarian community to deliver assistance more effectively, following principles of good practice in information management. A focal point for data collection, analysis and dissemination in support of the provision of humanitarian assistance, developing and supporting data standards. A facilitator for initiatives and activities related to information management in the field, particularly in collaboration between other humanitarian actors in support of existing coordination structures. An advocate for a culture of information-sharing in the humanitarian community, generating awareness of good practice and making it possible for agencies to develop common standards and practices in the field.
Global Information and Early Warning System on Food and Agriculture (GIEWS)
www.fao.org/WAICENT/faoinfo/economic/giews/english/giewse.htm GIEWS is a major source of information for NGO personnel managing early warning activities and potential trouble-spot monitoring. It is supported by the UN Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO).
Global Early Warning System for Major Animal Diseases, including Zoonoses (GLEWS)
www.who.int/zoonoses/outbreaks/glews/en GLEWS is a joint system that builds on the added value of combining and coordinating the alert mechanisms of FAO, OIE and WHO for the international community and stakeholders to assist in prediction, prevention and control of animal disease threats, including zoonoses, through sharing of information, epidemiological analysis and contribute to joint field missions to assess and control the outbreak.
Global Outbreak Alert & Response Network (GOARN)
www.who.int/csr/outbreaknetwork/en Earlier WHO and partners started the Global Outbreak Alert & Response Network with the aim to combating the international spread of outbreaks among humans, ensuring that appropriate technical assistance reaches affected states rapidly and contributing to long-term epidemic preparedness and capacity building.
Early Warning System (FEWS)
www.fews.net FEWS is a resource for individuals seeking information on food levels, weather, news and resources for famine and CHE effects on food levels and food security. FEWS is supported by USAID.
Forum on Early Warning and Response (FEWER)
www.fewer-international.org FEWER International is a global coalition of nongovernmental and governmental agencies and academic institutions working to promote coordinated responses to violent conflict
INCORE
www.incore.ulst.ac.uk/cds/countries INCORE is a good online source for information on activities, publications, and events.
International Crisis Group (ICG)
www.crisisweb.org Extremely thorough and in-depth, ICG is a leading think tank that publishes periodically on international conflict. All reports are free.
Minorities at Risk Project
www.cidcm.umd.edu/mar The Minorities at Risk (MAR) Project is a university-based research project that monitors and analyzes the status and conflicts of politically active communal groups in all countries with a current population of at least 500,000. The project is designed to provide information in a standardized format that aids comparative research and contributes to the understanding of conflicts involving relevant groups. Selected project materials on more than 283 groups (the MAR database and codebook as well as detailed historical chronologies) are available for researchers, public officials, journalists, students, activists, and others interested in the topic. The project also has collected data on 118 ethnopolitical organizations representing MAR groups in the Middle East and North Africa.
African Conflict Journal
www.africanconflict.org The African Conflict Journal is an online resource for news and information on current and developing conflict in Africa.
OFDA/CRED Database
www.cred.be This website is dedicated to providing data on more than 12,000 disasters. Normal users include national governments, NGOs, UN agencies, and academic institutions.
WHO Health Action in Crises
www.who.int/disasters Sponsored and hosted by the World Health Organization (WHO), this resource is a popular destination for not only early warning information, but also for disaster and emergency information.

Surveys and assessments are also key elements during the preemergency phase. Many suggest that assessments come primarily after an emergency has been declared or is apparent, but just as many organizations include surveys and assessments in preemergency settings. Some emergencies are not predictable, but others are. Large-scale famines, food shortages, and often conflict or ethnic strife can be predicted to some degree, and early warning activities often can alert the international community of the need for action.128 What happens then?

NGOs respond to many preemergency and emergency settings with assessment or exploration teams. If a country or region is thought to be slipping into a large-scale humanitarian emergency, many NGOs will send small groups of experts to identify the root causes of the emergency, specific infrastructural and technical data, population movements, food and water resources, roads, ports, airstrips and bridges to serve as relief supply hubs, and other factors that help identify need, capabilities, challenges and potential focus for the international community.

Although the assessment phase is complex and the focus of much professional consideration and debate, NGOs use assessments several ways:
-
to identify types, numbers, and places of needy populations;
-
to identify specific requirements for needy populations;
-
to identify general political, economic, cultural, ethnic, religious, geographic, and climate factors that may be pertinent to an international response;
-
to define areas of most need;
-
to define relationships with national and local government entities, ministries of health and interior, local NGOs, civil society groups, and populations at risk; and
-
to define appropriate resource levels, methods for implementation, and general requirements for NGO-specific or international community-wide deployment of aid programs.
USAID recently convened a technical working session for the Standardized Monitoring and Assessment of Relief Transition (SMART) group. Although it focused primarily on food security and nutritional surveys, it reveals a few important points. First, NGOs, government, and UN agencies are all striving aggressively for a series of standardizations for collecting data. This means that until now, NGOs and other agencies that have conducted initial surveys during humanitarian emergencies have been using different frameworks to report their findings. By attempting to create standards and by using central store-houses of data, NGOs and other agencies may also be able to cut down the redundancy, inaccuracy, and variations in the methods used to collect data during surveys or surveillance studies. When a disaster hits, displaced populations (DPs) need assistance. When multiple NGOs survey the same area or conditions but use different methods to collect data and report their findings, the results can be complicated and inefficient.

## Top Ngo Reference Publications

  UNHCR. *Handbook for Emergencies*, 2nd ed. (1999)
  USAID/OFDA. *Field Operations Guide*, version 3.0 (1999)
  Frederick Cuny. *Disasters and Development* (Dallas TX:
Intertect Press, 1994)
  The Sphere Project. www.sphereproject.org
system is had. With clear calls from NGOs, religious organizations, government, and military agencies, the UN, the United States, and many EU nations did little to prevent genocide in 1994 in which up to (and potentially more than) 800,000 people were killed.

NGOs are effective at rapid assessments, coordinating information with donor and UN agencies, and turning information into implementation for specific humanitarian operations. Information-sharing between NGOs is often another story, and will be covered in more depth in later chapters. This is not always the case with larger bureaucratic systems. Information is digested and distributed to appropriate NGO staff members, and within a few days, an appropriate plan can be created. During the preemergency phase, assessments often are carried out to be prepared for subsequent emergency conditions in that country or region. NGO assessments are often used by USAID and other government agencies, and NGOs will often piggyback on OFDA/DART assessments. When a country or region becomes an emergency setting, NGOs are often prepared and capable of acting immediately because of their activity in the preemergency phases. NGO activity within the emergency phase can also be well thought-out, practical, and effective.

## Ngos And The Emergency Phase

As military and government officials now know, NGOs will be found operating in humanitarian emergencies. Even when conditions are at their worst, civilian-led efforts to provide for EPs dominate the landscape of complex humanitarian emergencies (CHEs), disaster settings and generally bad places. NGOs have responded to almost every humanitarian emergency around the globe (including disasters within the United States), and very few CHEs are sever enough to keep out relief workers. Chechnya, parts of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), parts of Colombia, the Timors, and Sri Lanka are a few places known for their no-man's land status for NGOs and are difficult to work in. This is not to say that NGOs do not work there, but only that one may be hard-pressed to see a Range Rover, chukka boots, a tan vest, or a generally expat-looking relief worker often, though they're most likely nearby.

When an emergency strikes, whether natural or man-made, NGOs respond in various ways:
-
deploying medical teams and basic medical supplies immediately to treat the most severely affected persons;
-
deploying assessment teams to survey the damage, take count of potential needs, and promptly report the needs of the EPs;
-
establishing communication systems for NGO personnel (often done by UN or IO agencies specializing in this field);
-
delivering various relief supplies, including food, medical equipment, and medicines;
-
initiating public information campaigns to raise money for and awareness about the crisis;
-
coordinating efforts with other agencies and organizations within the emergency-affected area, granting other funding agreements, and so on;
-
establishing territory or sectoral strongholds throughout the emergency-affected area for funding purposes and to spread out specific comparative advantages.
Larger NGOs often bring in their own supplies from nearby programs in neighboring regions. This can include trucks, generators, relief materials, tents, nets, cans, and sometimes food. Smaller NGOs often solicit for funds first to procure relief material within the region or from outside sources during the emergency. Depending on whether the emergency is a rapid or emerging onset, NGOs will react in various ways.

Rapid Onset If an emergency is an earthquake, tsunami, or hurricane, disaster effects are immediate. Populations are displaced, infrastructure is damaged and the means of meeting primary needs have often been removed as a result of the disaster. NGOs respond by arriving, quickly assessing humanitarian conditions (rapid assessments), and then distributing immediate services aimed at alleviating the most dire of affected areas and those primary needs that have been stripped away. Primary medical care, food rations, water, and temporary shelter are normally key focuses of an immediate emergency response while damage is surveyed and cleaned or repaired. It has been suggested that any international humanitarian response to emergencies should aim at providing the local population with skills and capacity to rebuild their lives themselvesboth during and after an emergency.129 Although international resources and some expertise may be required in many instances, that local NGO staff should be trained and equipped with the knowledge to continue the development process after the initial emergency response period ends. Rapid onset emergencies are obviously more difficult to deal with. Humanitarian needs of the EPs are difficult to assess in tight time frames. NGOs are pressured to arrive, orient themselves, and then immediately figure out what needs to be done while somehow delivering services. This is not always the case, and when NGOs or humanitarian agencies are familiar with the lay of the land, there is less of a learning curve. Still, NGOs face difficult tasks. With help from government and donor agencies, NGOs can normally begin providing services that are of immediate concern even as they perform assessments and surveys for larger or more intricate projects.

Gradual Onset If the emergency has a more gradual onset, NGOs have a harder time mustering resources for fullscale responses. The term *gradual onset emergencies* is often synonymous with complex humanitarian emergencies, noting a deterioration of humanitarian conditions over time. Crude mortality rates (CMRs) increase slowly, no major political or natural events occur to spark attention, and the deterioration of humanitarian conditions are often the result of complex conflicts, civil wars, or civil strife. This often makes it hard for NGOs to access all portions of the needy populations. NGOs participate in gradual onset emergencies often by using a part-relief and part-development approach to delivering humanitarian services. This assistance is much different than that in rapid onset emergencies. In gradual onset emergencies, NGOs are faced with the challenge of needing to provide for various EPs even as conflict or continuing emergency conditions make it impossible to establish any permanent relief or development structure.

More clearly, in gradual onset emergencies, NGOs must face the difficult task of working with a continuing emergency. A rapid onset emergency goes as quickly as it comes, though it may happen again or the effects may be felt for some time in various ways. Gradual onset emergencies continue to grind down humanitarian conditions without respite, however. NGOs face the challenge of providing for needy populations, staying politically neutral, and developing sustainable ways of maintaining programs. Donor fatigue often kicks in, and operation fatigue often chokes an NGO's willingness to pay the high costs of operating in unsure or unsafe conditions. Chechnya is a good example. Because violence still has a grip on the entire region, relief agencies have had a difficult time providing emergency services to the populations within Chechnya, and in establishing solid networks and structures for continued humanitarian assistance. NGO employees often get burned, injured, demoralized, and often professionally frustrated in such conditions, which makes an operation that much harder. Still, in most CHEs and gradual onset emergencies, NGOs have done anything but given up. With incredible stubbornness and display of dedication, NGOs have operated in places like Sudan, Angola, Chechnya, Burma (Myanmar), Cambodia, Colombia, and others most people would think of as the last place to visit or work with diligence and persistence. In many instances, the NGO sector has developed a system of specialization in which many participating organizations work to delineate tasks depending on specialization, expertise, capacity, or size. For example, the continued and harsh working conditions of southern Sudan have forced NGOs to work closely together and with donors to establish AORs and methods to better distribute the capacity of the civilian sector. In places like Somalia, Albania, Kosovo, and Iraq, NGOs have worked side by side with military units, have been directly engaged in the planning process, and have implemented humanitarian assistance amidst continuing violence. NGO personnel, in many places globally, are in danger every day, and often are victims of violence or the generally harsh conditions of an emergency setting. NGOs that do focus on providing long-term emergency assistance are, as mentioned, challenged with keeping streams of project funding in the funding pipeline. Because longer-term emergencies are often forgotten in the wake of a new or more urgent emergency elsewhere, NGOs struggle to keep donors engaged and willing to expend funds. This is a substantial challenge.

NGOs have come up with various ways of getting around the seemingly insurmountable challenges:
-
establishing strong NGO networks to share lessons, experiences, infrastructure, capacity, and security within an emergency-affected region;
-
continually waging public relations campaigns on specific and often forgotten emergencies, both from the field and from headquarters;
-
establishing regional capacity, often keeping staff, equipment, and relief supplies as near as possible to beneficiaries who may be in inaccessible areas, ready for delivery on a break in violence or the conditions that normally prevent the immediate delivery of humanitarian assistance; and
-
providing strong and unified lobbying efforts to the UN and other governments, often by giving reports or accounts of what is happening on the ground.

## Ngos And The Postemergency Phase

After the most devastating and chaotic stages of an emergency are passed, conditions settle into a normal buzz of activity. NGOs focus on managing their displaced population assistance programs and begin to tailor specific programs for specific subgroups of the affected population. Women, children, the elderly, and minority groups are often given special attention. NGOs also begin to undertake more in-depth assessments and surveillance and continue to advocate for more international support for the emergency. International response normally begins to taper off after the height of an emergency, and though the media may begin to look elsewhere for footage, NGOs normally stay the course. Although focusing at first on emergency programs, many NGOs specialize in providing services to EPs that extend into development-oriented programming. Local capacity building, specific training, education, and economic development are all potential positive externalities that stem from NGO activity during and immediately after an emergency. NGOs that specialize only in emergency response will often leave the area after the crisis ends. MSF, for example, does so because its primary focus is immediate emergency medical services. Other NGOs may scale back their emergency teams and capacity and begin shifting to more development-oriented programs that will assist the community in the future. Albania is a good example: NGOs arrived to provide Kosovar Albanians assistance while they were refugees in Albania. Once they returned to Kosovo, many relief agencies remained in Albania and used their newly established capacity to help rehabilitate hospitals and clinics, schools, water systems, and roads. Many NGOs are multisectoral and deliver humanitarian assistance during emergencies while also providing development assistance to EPs in the same or similar settings. Often NGOs are limited by the type of donations they receive. For those that operate on private donations only, the time and scope of activity is limited by the time the NGO can and wants to operate during and after a given emergency. NGOs that depend on grants may see funding dry up after the emergency is over, and thus have to pack up and go home. This is common. Many UN, US and EU grants are short term and provide funding only for emergency-response oriented programs. NGOs that want to remain in the region must establish new relations with new donors (often the same donor agency but in a different office or department) and get funding for postemergency or development programs. This transition is often difficult.

## Sample Deployment Schedule

NGOs are often the first humanitarian organizations to arrive in an emergency scene. Once an emergency hitsshould it be a new emergency and rapid onsetan NGO has any number of transportation options to move a small team of personnel inside the affected area. Government agencies and military units are hard pressed to meet this agility, and many times military or government personnel will find that on their arrival, they're greeted with NGO staff members who have been in-country for some time. This is an obvious advantage to having a small organization, few rules or regulations governing deployment or travel, and flexible staff members devoted to a profession of responding to emergencies. Should an emergency hit an unsuspecting population, or if a CHE gets dramatically worse, NGO deployment may look something the schematic presented in table 9.2.

| Stages                                                         |
|----------------------------------------------------------------|
| Emergency onset or rapid                                       |
| deterioration of CHE                                           |
| announced/information made                                     |
| public                                                         |
| NGO obtains information about emergency from public or         |
| normal information channels (CNN, the Internet, e-mail         |
| discussion lists, newspapers, field reports) and convenes      |
| meeting of senior-level staff (directors, program-specific     |
| officers, regional officers and managers).                     |
| Situation is analyzed, information briefings and discussion    |
| are held on what can and should be done.                       |
| Working group established and key staff members assigned       |
| to steer NGO activity for the emergency.                       |
| Maps and country data are compiled by lower program            |
| officers and contacts with donors, other NGOs, and field       |
| offices (if applicable) are made to get more information.      |
| Emergency onset or rapid                                       |
| deterioration of CHE                                           |
| Assets in region or available generally if the NGO has         |
| nearby programs are reviewed. Contact made with program        |
| or country directors of NGO's programs in area; initial        |
| assessments given over e-mail or telephone about what the      |
| NGO can do for this emergency and what assets can be used      |
| to deploy to new emergency.                                    |
| Onset settles into                                             |
| humanitarian emergency,                                        |
| displaced populations, and                                     |
| substantial EPs; international                                 |
| community sets in motion                                       |
| assessment                                                     |
| NGO decides whether to send assessment and initial             |
| response teams from HQ or regional area; if yes, personnel     |
| on staff or contracting specialists are contacted and oriented |
| and dispatched with various equipment (often a tote bag or     |
| container with medical equipment, a satellite phone, field     |
| guides and other general purpose equipment).                   |
| Donor or other assessment reports may be released to the       |
| NGO community.                                                 |
| International community                                        |
| response                                                       |
| NGO personnel enter emergency-affected area and begin          |
| assessments.                                                   |
| NGO personnel attempt to coordinate activities with HICs,      |
| other NGOs, and government or donor agencies. If military      |
| units are involved, interaction with CMOCs or liaisons is also |
| a priority.                                                    |
| Housing established for NGO personnel; drivers and             |
| translators hired; assessment teams hired; often local         |
| medical personnel hired or recruited for service with NGOs;    |
| NGO assessments for logistical access made and reported to     |
| HQ or regional office.                                         |
1 1 and 2 (time differences often must be considered) 2 and 3 4, 5, and 6
| More international response                                  | NGO establishes AOR or sector specialty within emergency,     |
|--------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------|
| often liaising with donor agencies (UNHCR, USAID, ECHO,      |                                                               |
| etc) and writing proposals for funding.                      |                                                               |
| NGOs coordinate with HQ and private donors, often            |                                                               |
| launching PR campaigns to raise awareness of cause and to    |                                                               |
| raise funds from communities or the public.                  |                                                               |
| NGOs coordinate with local NGO partners, or establish new    |                                                               |
| partnerships with local NGOs that deliver specific services. |                                                               |
| Funding and programs                                         | NGOs begin to receive donor funding and begin                 |
| implementing larger programs (and replace the smaller,       |                                                               |
| emergency-response oriented programs with refugee camp       |                                                               |
| design and management, large-scale public and primary        |                                                               |
| health programs, water and sanitation, transportation, food  |                                                               |
| and nutritional support, etc).*                              |                                                               |
| Logistical challenges                                        | International aid begins to flood into emergency-effect area; |
| ports and airports are back-stocked with relief supplies,    |                                                               |
| food, and material, and NGOs and UN agencies are hard-       |                                                               |
| pressed to get relief material out of the ports and to       |                                                               |
| distribution points.                                         |                                                               |
| NGOs still soliciting for new programs and often still       |                                                               |
| implementing relief.                                         |                                                               |
| Emergency management,                                        |                                                               |
| rehabilitation                                               |                                                               |
| NGOs settle into program implementation and                  |                                                               |
| management, monitoring and assessing new needs or the        |                                                               |
| change of conditions, often implementing smaller programs    |                                                               |
| for smaller communities (minorities, women, children,        |                                                               |
| disabled, elderly) and being selective with program targets. |                                                               |
| Main large-scale emergency now potentially under control,    |                                                               |
| and population movement has been stabilized, as has been     |                                                               |
| the logistical supply of relief supplies, food, security and |                                                               |
| information.                                                 |                                                               |
| International community working with military units (if      |                                                               |
| applicable), national governments and with displaced         |                                                               |
| population leadership or representative councils or          |                                                               |
| committees.                                                  |                                                               |
| Emergency teams are often removed, and longer-term           |                                                               |
| NGO personnel are contracted, hired or transferred to        |                                                               |
| manage current emergency-oriented programs, and the          |                                                               |
| development of new development or longer-term relief         |                                                               |
| programs.                                                    |                                                               |
| Rehabilitation and repatriation                              | NGOs now assist with the facilitation of repatriation, and    |
| programs begin closing. Often NGOs will transfer capital     |                                                               |
| assets or remaining material to new emergencies, or to       |                                                               |
| development programs in postemergency settings.              |                                                               |

* NGOs begin providing services almost immediately on arrival in an emergency-affected area. Often NGO personnel will take all they can when traveling to the region, and many times NGO personnel will come from other areas or regions with specific supplies. Most common are medical supplies and communications equipment.

There is no standard timeline or operational mechanism for NGOs that governs their responses to emergencies. In fact, every NGO is different in how it responds. For those NGOs with operations close to a region affected by an emergency, materials and personnel can be transferred with minimal thought.

714 714 721 21? ?

Regional know-how and connections make it easier for these NGOs to arrive and begin implementing programs immediately. NGOs without programs close to or in an affected area need more time and effort to establish programs. Staff, materials, donor relations, and regional know-how must be mobilized. More money is needed for overhead, because an NGO new to an area must ship or procure locally everything for both implementing and supporting emergency programs. Still, many NGOs (often larger NGOs) have slush funds or emergency accounts designed expressly for emergencies. These funds are only a small portion of the NGO's total annual expenditures, and are kept to be used as cash to establish new emergency response programs. Generally, the larger the NGO, the larger the cash account. Still, even small NGOs attempt to prepare for emergencies in the future, and getting themselves established in an emergency setting before requiring donor funds for operations gives credibility and operational freedom within an emergency-affected area. Larger NGOs traditionally have a solid donor foundation, whether primary support is from donor agencies or from private donations, and are often the most capable in delivering the primary phases of a humanitarian response. A small NGO without regional capacity usually finds respond to new emergencies especially difficult; it must use limited resources to transport people to the new area while attempting to establish some relationship with donors. And, without knowing the region well, it depends heavily on immediate donor funds. This means that a small NGO must arrive in an emergency-affected area, establish its footings, and promptly start writing and submitting project proposals. Contracted experts often make up a large percentage of a small NGO's operations and ideally bring to the NGO their experience as emergency managers or sectoral specialists. If a smaller NGO has positive relations with a donor from other regions, it may expedite the funding process in the new emergency.

## Ngo Needs During Deployment

NGOs cannot do everything themselves. They may be on the ground first and they may have the technical capabilities, the freedom, and the regional knowledge to begin programs immediately, but they do not have major logistical capacities to move large levels of commodities, large water quantities, communications equipment or to keep EPs safe. NGOs have three major weaknesses that can be identified in the deployment phase:
-
no large-scale transportation mechanisms, including cargo aircraft, seafaring vessels, large fuel stocks, or appropriate ground transport mechanisms;
-
no capable communications equipment and access to international bandwidth, telecommunications infrastructure and maintenance requirements; and
-
no independent means of establishing or maintaining operations in violent conditions, protecting its personnel and operations, EPs when operating emergency programs in war zones.130

Executive Summary

  NGOs vary in scale, scope, and ability to
respond to emergencies.
There are more, but these three seem to identify the critical curbs on an NGO's ability to act independently of any UN, government, or military agency. Because NGOs are civilian entities, they must often use whatever commercial services are available for communications and transportation and other logistics, and must depend on military forces to provide safety and organization within conflict regions. Without the help of outside entities, then, NGOs would be able to provide only a fraction of their services, and possibly be unable to implement their programs or distribute their services.

  The capacity of NGOs collectively or
individually is hard to measure. In fact, no credible method of evaluating the NGO community's total capacity exists. Examining annual budgets, staff levels, and number of country operations can help.
  Headquarters (HQ) operations can range
in size and complexity and provide an NGO with make-or-break support.
In many emergencies, U.S. and European militaries provide important backbones of support for humanitarian emergencies. NGOs often depend on large-scale military intervention and support, which can turn around and provide EPs with faster, more thorough humanitarian services. The UN, too, provides its services in a number of cases when dealing with commodities and large-scale equipment movement.

  Through various procurement methods,
NGOs can move in and out of private markets to obtain time-sensitive and critical equipment without bureaucratic restrictions. NGOs are also often assisted by UN, government, and military agencies with larger procurement and equipment capabilities.
Militaries have distinct advantages when responding to humanitarian emergencies. The U.S. military, in particular, is most likely the largest agency with the most capacity to respond to humanitarian emergencies. Whether it be transportation, security, communications, or search and rescue, military unitswhen transformed into humanitarian response-oriented unitscan be extremely effective when working with the NGO sector. The military provides NGOs support in several forms:
-
operations in both conflictual and consensual atmospheres, often allowing NGOs to operate in safe zones or with protection; protection for EPs during large-scale emergencies and conflicts;
-
major logistical transportation services, including large-scale airlifts, oceanic and maritime services, road and bridge repair, control of access points, facilitated border crossings, and access lines or safe zones for humanitarian supply transport; and
-
communications infrastructure and maintenance, often established within short time-frames and available to civilian agencies for use.

Militaries and NGOs have now had ample time to understand the others' weaknesses, and where military units often provide essential services for NGOs and EPs directly, NGOs have strong advantages in terms of rapid and longer-term relief programs.

## Conclusion: Ngos Lead The Way

NGOs, then, can deploy quickly and efficiently and can bypass major political, organizational or structural challenges with their small teams, independent nature, and specialties in sectors and regions. NGOs don't have large-scale logistical capacities, but can often use commercial transport services, the UN, and militaries to move supplies into an emergency-affected region. Many NGOs have significant in-house logistical capacities and can manage the large-scale commitment of aid to DPs in the harshest conditions, but they still require the support of IOs and other entities. NGOs are both relatively small and neutral. They focus on specific DP cohorts, sectors, and regions, and target their services according to the direct needs of the DPs in concern. NGOs often use off-theshelf technologies to establish communications during the onset of an emergency, and do not require major support services or security for their personnel. When NGOs respond, they often have a good sense of what types of programs are required and will work, as well as experienced and professional staff members who can make quick decisions based on years of experience. NGOs are without question invaluable during an emergency. Although they do not have unlimited cash reserves (and sometimes have no cash whatsoever), major logistical capacities, or protection capabilities, NGOs are the driving force in deploying humanitarian assistance programs. With more than 50 years of experience, NGOs now know what to do and how to farm out resources effectively to manage emergencies.

## Scale And Scope Of Ngo Activity

Ann Yu PhD
T
here are thousands of operating NGOs but only a handful are capable of responding to emergencies internationally, and few of these have the know-how, organizational capacity, and funds to respond to international emergencies consistently.

## Size And Capacity Of Ngo Community

The NGO community involved with international humanitarian assistance is large and diverse. This is clear from the membership profiles of InterAction the largest coalition of U.S.-based international NGOs. Of its 175 members, the number whose program areas are classified in either refugee or development or disaster and emergency relief is presented in table 10.1.131 The 90-member European UnionVOICEthe main NGO interlocutor with the EU on emergency aid, relief, and rehabilitation and disaster preparedness has a similar breakdown.132

| InterAction members                                                            |   175 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------|
| Members classifying some or all of their work as disaster and emergency relief |    75 |
| Members  classifying some or all of their work as refugee and displacement     |    41 |
| Total organizations in the two program areas                                   |    86 |

Measurements of community-wide capacity are hard to quantify. NGOs can do many different things and muster many resources, whether acting together or individually. NGOs have different capacities and the same NGO may have a different capacity in one emergency than it does in another. NGO capacity fluctuates because regional or sectoral specialties may be required in one region over another and because donor intent or relations with NGOs are different in various emergencies. In any case, the number of employees, offices, operations, programs, and number of HQ personnel may be clues to how active or strong an NGO can be during an emergency. NGO funding levels are also good indicators for capacity.

## Size And Capacity Of Individual Ngos

Individual NGOs of course vary in size and capacity. The larger ones, such as CARE, CRS, and MSF, all have substantial individual capacities to respond to emergencies and to manage emergency activities for extended periods. To get an idea of the variety of sizes within the NGO sector, the Cuny Center's Greater Efficiency work gives a good glimpse into the budget types and percentages that NGOs expend during an emergency:
the 25 operational InterAction members reported total revenue of $2 billion in 1998 or 1999 (the latest report for some agencies was 1998 and for the others was 1999). Very few agencies are able to identify the fraction of that amount devoted to HA. It likely falls between 1/3 and 1/2. For example, in 2000 Catholic Relief Services (CRS) spent $151,152,000 on emergency programming out of a total annual expenditure of $371,000,000, or 41%, while CARE's 2000 annual report shows $58,842,000 spent on emergency programs out of a total expenditure of $409,289,000 or 14%. Adventist Development and Relief Agency International (ADRA), an agency with a mandated emphasis on disaster relief, estimates that their average annual expenditure on emergency programs is between $40,000,000 [and] 50,000,000, which is between 60% and 75% of their budget. A ballpark estimate of average annual expenditures for the principal 25 US-based NGOs is between $5 million and $100 million.133
NGO capacities are not necessarily measured by annual operating budgets. In some cases NGOs with small budgets have large impacts during emergencies, even as NGOs with seemingly incredible budgets have minimal impact. Many NGO capacities come in-kind from gifts to the organization. During the Kosovo crisis, for example, Wal-Mart provided a few NGOs with container loads of hiking boots and clothing for distribution among the then-refugee Kosovar Albanians. The container was sent from the East Coast of the United States and did not reach a Greek port until after the refugees had returned home. The container was then sent to Kosovo and after a few weeks, many Kosovars that lived in the southern part of Kosovo were wearing shiny new hiking boots.134 Aside from private donation for materials or equipment NGO can also obtain commodities donated by government agencies donated medical supplies (see chapter 11), capital assets (UN contracts and loaned materials), local NGO partnerships and partnerships with companies or government relief agencies, off-the-shelf technology, and other types of tools or resources an NGO can use to leverage its strength during an emergency. As mentioned in chapter 8, NGOs often keep reserves of cash for responses to new emergencies. Some NGO capacity can be found in the UN Central Registry. In line with a UN order to create a central register that inventories all disaster management capabilities, Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) has provided the web-based OCHA Central Register.135 It is a portal website that archives information and organizes resources that are reported by NGOs, UN agencies and governments that are ready for deployment at the behest of a government or UN agency. Within the OCHA Central Register is the Emergency Stockpiles of Disaster Relief Items section. This area includes specific inventories of NGO and IO warehouses in storage for future emergencies. It is valuable to see how few resources are currently available for emergencies, and how crude the NGO inventory management system is sector-wide.

## Executive Summary

  NGOs work extensively in the health sector,
covering emergency medical needs to longerterm public health programs.
  NGOs must prioritize when entering an
emergency, health needs vary in each emergency, and priorities often shift during an emergency.
Stockpiled materials listed in the database are to be used for international humanitarian emergencies through the UN or other partner agencies. The relief materials must comply with the following three stipulations:
-
the stocked disaster relief items can be made available for international assistance through the UN,
-
the disaster relief items are provided on a nonprofit basis, and
-
the stockpile activity is not limited to local relief operations (that is, in the country of the stockpile's location).136
  Providing clean drinking water, immunizations,
and food security are always at the top of priority lists when NGOs formulate response plans.
  The most effective relief programs come after
methodical and thorough surveys, assessments and analysis of the conditions that affect a population in an crisis.
  Misappropriated assistance or the wrong types of
assistance can be the result of too little regional or situational understanding in an emergency.
The OCHA Central Register is neither an extensive site nor extremely user-friendly. It does, however, provide valuable information about locations of specific stockpiles and who oversees them. For example, MSF France manages extensive warehouses, as do USAID and other national aid agencies. It is a start, and developments have been made recently to make the site more accessible. More on this topic will be discussed in chapter 14.

## Headquarters And Staff

  No single NGO can provide all the necessary
medical assistance programs of a specific emergency. Even the NGO community requires assistance from militaries, governments, and other agencies for logistical support and technical or large-scale assistance measures.
NGOs often manage multiple emergency responses around the world at the same time; operations at HQ can be complex. Staff levels range from two to 100 at headquarters and often up to 2,000 in the field. The range for the top 25 or 30 NGOs based in the United States for field staff is between 1,000 and 2,000. Headquarters staff members often focus on a range of issues including but not limited to fundraising, programmatic backstopping, administration and accounting management, program development, public relations, and government liaising. HQ staff members also help manage commodity and relief material equipment and are often the central coordinating and hiring body for personnel. Most HQ activities are focused on supporting field activities and the stronger the HQ staff, the better the programs run in the field. Many HQ functions are essential to the viability of relief programs abroad.

## Obtaining Equipment And Tools

NGOs typically do not have large capacities in maintaining fleets of trucks, cranes, well-digging machines, or other technical or capital assets. Instead, they secure use of the appropriate equipment needed during an emergency response. Local procurement, where appropriate and available, is the first choice. Another option is to work with large brokers that specialize in providing major shipments of trucks, cars and other hardware otherwise hard to come by in emergency settings. Sometimes also the UN or government agencies will bring in shipments of specific equipment and distribute the equipment to implementing partners like NGOs or IOs. Well-digging machines, large generators, satellite stations, specialized trucks and personnel vehicles, land-mine removal equipment, water and sanitation equipment, and even some construction tools are often hard to obtain, and therefore procured by coordinating with NGO associations or other international agencies. NGOs normally can build the costs of required equipment and tools into a grant proposal or contract agreement with donor agencies. Such costs are usually considered a justified expense because the international community would not have any other way of obtaining the appropriate goods otherwise. An NGO's primary strength in procurement comes from the ability to participate in market systems around the world. Whereas government and military entities are often strapped by procurement guidelines, purchasing restrictions, or liquidity concerns, NGOs can move in and out of local and international markets to obtain the appropriate equipment and tools for their programming. NGO personnel are normally not required to procure equipment from any specific vendor and normally can deal effectively with local business people or international companies alike. Although an NGO may not have an unlimited amount of funding for any specific program, it can still procure equipment quickly and efficiently. Very little bureaucracy or regulations governing purchasing or procuring exist for an NGO, and this is a benefit during an emergency. NGOs do not, for the most part, have access to large cargo planes, major water purification systems, and communications equipment. Liaising with military offices and UN agencies is one way around the problem.

## Conclusion: Where Ngos Don'T Go

There are very few places and types of emergencies that NGOs are likely to respond to. NGOs have little capacity, for example, to respond to chemical, biological, or nuclear incidents. Still, the NGO footprint in humanitarian assistance is large and NGOs will continue to find ways to meet the needs of emergency-affected populations.

NGOs and Health Services N
GOs participate in a wide spectrum of health-related activities during humanitarian emergencies and in general have significant capacity. When working with UN agencies and IOs, NGOs serve as the front-line combatant against epidemics, large-scale malnutrition, and ultimately high mortality rates. It is essential to understand that some NGOs specialize in health care, and some do not and that NGOs normally do not work alone in the health sector. Coordination within and outside he NGO community is considerable. UN agencies like the World Health Organization (WHO), Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), UNHCR and UNICEF, for example, are all key leaders and partners in assisting NGOs with their missions and capabilities particularly in health. NGOs provide groundlevel information about health needs of displaced and nondisplaced populations, and are also the implementing agent for health programs. WHO and UNICEF, meanwhile, are often the backbone of support for shipments, surveillance, comprehensive data compilation, guidelines, and technical services. The health sector incorporates a large swath of sectoral activities. NGOs are often, as mentioned, the first actors into an emergency setting and just as often the last to leave. NGOs provide valuable ground-level information for the international community as well as the ground-level implementation of health services. Because NGOs are so often either first on the ground in an emergency or active in the health sector in a region beforehand, they are often best suited to respond. Once an emergency hits, the NGO community can normally collect assessment data, surveillance systems, and program proposals before other organizations can gear up. Once the international community and larger agencies (UN, government) are ready to begin implementing or funding programs, the NGO community serves as an orienting body or partner for creating a comprehensive, emergency-wide health program. NGOs report to the international community and then implement programs with financial and technical support from organizations and donors such as WHO, UNICEF, OCHA, USAID, and CIDA. NGOs are thus by far not the only operating agencies in the health sector during an emergency. UNICEF, CDC, OFDA and DART teams, the World Food Program, and other larger agencies often have operational wings that can implement programs just as NGOs do (and sometimes with larger scale or technical capacity). Still, NGOs provide the bulk of emergency health programming and are normally the implementing agents for donor and coordinating agencies.

## Health Priorities In An Emergency

When NGOs and the international community respond to a humanitarian emergency, health services provisions are generally implemented immediately. Major, rapid onset emergencies require a series of immediate responses. Less than rapid onset situations, though, often provide enough time for the international community to measure and methodically map out the types of services that a population may need to curb excess mortality and general human suffering. Still, in both cases, priorities need to be established so that scarce resources can meet time-sensitive needs. The international community targets specific tasks in humanitarian emergencies, and often order priorities during a response. According to USAID's *Field Operation Guide* (FOG), the priorities can be arranged as presented in figure 11.1.137 The diagram suggests that water is one of the top priorities, as are vaccinations against measles, particularly for young children. The diagram, however, can be misleading. The international community prepares an array of responses in every emergency, and every emergency is different. Ideally, priorities are established using assessments, surveys, surveillance, local and international experts, historical lessons, and an array of other variables. NGOs take such painstaking steps because too broad a response can deplete resources, thin the ranks of available staff and expertise, and ultimately be ineffective. Although many NGOs can and do manage multiple programs, it is more common that an NGO specializes and focuses its efforts in a particular sector. In health programs, NGOs carve out niches, territories, or forms of services so as not to overlap with other NGOs, to maximize donor funding, and to minimize the waste and inefficiencies inevitably generated when attempting to manage multiple programs at the same time.

## Ngo Surveillance And Surveys

Before an NGO begins a program, it must either conduct an assessment or be privy to assessment data, surveillance results, and indicators of the population in the affected area. Many NGOs carry out information gathering on their own. Just as many tap into assessments done by IOs, the UN, or other NGOs. NGOs are not required to follow any specific or standard methodology when doing surveys or assessments, which is often a disadvantage to emergency managers who want to create a holistic picture with data from numerous agencies. NGOs most often use proven methodologies, however, and the gathered data is in turn most often used only by that NGO. Sharing, depending on the emergency, could be seen as giving up comparative advantages, special data, or even territory. Assessment or surveillance data is valuable to an NGO because it often holds the keys to funding and program support. NGOs have been criticized for inflating numbers and painting a grimmer picture than exists to increase the likelihood of funding or support. This is normally led by an NGO's desire to deliver services to a population it believes deserves attention or for which it may have the expertise. Generally, four indicators are central to helping NGOs and IOs create a series of priorities. Assessing postdisaster mortality among refugees and internally displaced persons in international disasters is determined with either a crude mortality rate (CMR) or the under-five mortality rate (U5MR), which are key indicators to define an emergency. For reference baseline, noncrisis CMRs in most of sub- Saharan Africa range from 0.3 to 0.6 per 10,000 per day. A doubled CMR (to 1 per 10,000 per day)
gives the internationally accepted threshold.138 However, CMR and U5MR alone may not help to clearly identify specific gaps in the humanitarian response or the causes of the indirect mortality. For most causes of death, a reduction in mortality is the result of multisectoral interventions, not just health. For example, a decreased mortality rate from acute respiratory infections can be a result of improved shelter, greater access, and availability to outpatient and inpatient care and better nutrition. NGOs can collect CMR data a number of ways. This manual does not attempt to provide any indepth information on data collection, but it is worth noting that there are many accepted methods and that the NGO and international community have not agreed entirely on which is best. The CMR approach is most widely used, and is probably the most accurate when no other method is available, especially in short or high-pressure situations.139 In recent years, NGOs accepting funding from the Department of State's Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (State/PRM) are required to use SMART indicators and report mortality and nutritional status to the Complex-Emergency Database
(CE-DAT).140 The SMART initiative is a multisourced, searchable database established by the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED), Brussels, with funding from State/PRM. The database and initiative are meant to provide a comprehensive picture of the human impact of conflicts in terms of mortality, morbidity, and nutrition. John Seaman of Save the Children, UK has promoted another method  for measuring the effects of an emergency that are short of starvation, adding and not specifically replacing data obtained on CMRs. His household economy approach (HEA) suggests that rural economic conditions should be taken into consideration with other information to fully understand the shock that an emergency may have on a population. By measuring the types of actions populations take to ensure welfare (food storage, planning, sharing), the prices of local commodities and foodstuffs, income, household goods, and related information, surveyors can obtain a larger and more accurate picture of the effects of an emergency.141 The second indicator is the level of malnutrition levels within a population or nutritional health of populations. Mid-upper arm circumference measurements (MUAC), weight-for-height (or weightfor-length) measurements, and other methods are used to obtain information on needy populations and potential response areas for programming, focusing primarily on food needs. Malnutrition rates higher than 20 percent signal a significant emergency and are strong indicators that higher CMRs are looming. A third method is monitoring communicable diseases. With knowledge of preemergency levels of specific diseases (HIV/AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis, dengue fever, typhoid fever), variances from normal infection rates can signal systemic or emergency-related problems. NGOs watch closely for communicable diseases like measles or cholera because outbreaks could mean that an epidemic is forming. NGOs also watch for cases of recurring diarrhea because that, too, could signal that other things are wrong. Water or food could be bad, or parasites or other diseases may be present.

Quick Read
For more information on reproductive health and how it fits into humanitarian emergencies, see a World Health Organization quick-read: Reproductive Health during Conflict and Displacement (WHO/RHR/00.13), www.who.int/reproductive-health/publications

The fourth approach is measuring the level of health-care coverage. From this, NGOs and others can estimate changes from preemergency settings, preemergency needs, or emergency or postemergency requirements. These estimates are largely informal, and very few systematic methods have been established to measure and evaluate what coverage rates really mean. In any case, the approach can give an NGO a good idea of where attention should be given, and what populations need which types of health-care access.

## Becoming Operational In The Health Sector

NGOs face a number of challenges when first responding to an emergency. For many, as mentioned, preemergency theater involvement makes a transition from development programming to relief programming relatively simple. For others, a new emergency may mean establishing new programs in a new country or region. Regardless, though, most NGOs active in an emergency do participate in some form of health programming during or after the event. Some NGOs run general, communitylevel health programs, and others provide population or service-specific programs that require specialization and focus. Most NGOs hire local health workers to implement health assessments and programs. Local medical staff, doctors, and volunteers are most often hired because of their knowledge of the community and access to information and relationships within it. NGO expats will normally manage programs and relations with donors, but will largely depend on local staff to implement the project and keep the program viable. To implement health programs, assessments are critical and are normally the first step in any response to an emergency. NGOs then move into the donor-seeking stage, attempting to establish grant or contract relationships with possible donors. Once funded or supported in some way (not always donor specific), NGOs begin mobilizing staff members and supplies to begin implementation. This normally includes two main phases. First, an NGO must staff its programs appropriately. Many NGOs rely on relationships established with physicians, nurses, or other medical professionals in the home country (most often the United States, the EU countries, Australia, Canada, and Japan) for staffing emergency programs. Calling on a roster of medical professionals that have indicated their interests or willingness in assisting in shortterm medical programs overseas, many NGOs can staff a program in fewer than 48 hours. This is costly for an NGO because the time in the field is limited. Project management staff members are also required, and, depending on how large the NGO is, may arrive in two or more stages. If an NGO has experienced experts in assessments and preprogram and emergency management, staff may be deployed to establish an understanding of the ground-level conditions and health needs of the affected population. These staff members will conduct assessments and surveys and often establish relationships with donors. Project management staff members are then deployed to initiate and operate the funded health programs. Project management staff members are not necessarily health or medical professionals, but often enough simply NGO professionals with years of experience in managing various humanitarian assistance programs. They operate the logistics, support services, relationships with donors, finance, safety and security, and community relations with other IOs, the UN, governments, and the military. They provide the structure for both local and international medical experts to work within, and keep the NGO's project moving forward. Once staffed for health programming, many NGOs face medical supply challenges. NGO personnel are responsible for understanding which drugs are essential and appropriate, where and when they're needed, and in what quantities. This does not of course mean that all the required supplies will be available or even obtainable. To combat some of the chaos associated with attempts at finding drugs, supplies, vaccines and other health-related materials from around the world and thousands of donors, some NGOs have specialized in procuring and shipping donated medical supplies to emergency settings. Pharmaceutical supply NGOs will be covered more in-depth later in this chapter.

## Ngos And Immunizations

NGOs move rapidly during or immediately after a humanitarian emergency to immunize parts or all of an affected population. Water and sanitation is a top priority, as mentioned earlier, as is preventing the rapid spread of disease. Disaster areas or CHEs normally offer ideal conditions for the spread of disease, and common prevention strategies can easily stop large-scale infection rates. NGOs have a comparative advantage in providing immunizations because of their focus on community-level staffing and program implementation, and their significance in number during an emergency response. Efforts to immunize against measles, meningitis, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, and polio are all major priorities. Children are often immunized on a mass scale before more specialized or outbreakdeterring immunization campaigns get under way. NGOs normally use local organizations through established or temporary health clinics, or use community centers or common settlement areas to deliver immunizations.142

NGOs do face a number of challenges in providing many immunizations:
-
lack of cold-chain supply management delivery to disaster-affected areas
-
inaccessibility to displaced persons because of weather, violence, political, cultural, or religious reasons
-
immunization shortages
-
lack of knowledge
-
inadequate staff member specialty in field offices
Still, NGOs provide leadership in the immunization field and often work in close collaboration with agencies such as WHO, UNICEF, CDC, ICRC, and PAHO. NGO activities with immunizations have to date been extremely effective. With appropriate surveillance and monitoring methods, NGOs are normally able to either contain or prevent major outbreaks of disease. Future challengesand challenges that exist today within the NGO community, between NGOs and IOs and other entitieswill center on standardization, early-warning methods, and effective measurement practices.

## Ngos And Community And Public Health

During humanitarian emergencies, NGOs operate through various programs that attempt to develop health consciousness, public health levels, local medical training, and primary and secondary healthcare capacity. With firm support from UNFPA, UNICEF, UNHCR, WHO, and other larger agencies, NGOs are more than ever finding adequate sources to provide major assistance to ailing public health systems and to support education initiatives aimed at reducing the spread of disease, decreasing indirect mortality attributable to failed public health infrastructure and unhealthy living conditions. NGOs, in almost all cases, rely extensively on local health-care systems, personnel, and workers. This community health initiative system empowers local systems during the emergency response phase of the crisis, but with the intent of strengthening a damaged or weak health-care system for use after the emergency is over. Community health initiatives normally use local community health workers (CHWs), village health workers (VHWs), or even traditional birth attendants (TBAs) to implement information campaigns and support or service programs. NGOs also work closely with Ministries of Health to gain access to populations. Community and public health programming includes a wide range of programs, most of which focus on disease or injury prevention, and the enhancement of local medical capacities. Of current interest to many NGOs are reproductive health (RH) programs that empower CHWs and TBAs to provide forms of birth control, education and medical services to women and children, and other programs that encourage healthy community planning and public health services. These programs place large emphasis on a woman's right to choose, public information campaigns about rape, HIV/AIDS, other STDs and other forms of family and community planning. Postwar or conflict rehabilitation often includes public health programming because a society's community health infrastructure was dilapidated, has been destroyed, or was nonexistent to begin with. For NGOs, the postconflict wake of reconstruction activities opens the door to providing services like those with local buy-in and international support. NGOs will often introduce new programs unseen before by the affected population in hopes of enhancing women's rights, community health capacities, and health practices. In Albania and Kosovo in 1999 and 2000, NGOs focused on introducing reproductive health programs to Muslim populations. With some resilience, Albanian and Kosovar health officials began adopting some of the new practices and theories. Condom education, birth control pill distribution, and women's rights training were not particularly well received by some of the more traditional Muslim communities. These activities are not always seen as emergency-oriented, but NGO activity throughout all phases of an emergency in this sector is extremely important, especially when protecting women and children or supplementing collapsed or nonexistent community health centers.

## Ngos And Medical-Pharmaceutical Supply

Unlike NGO activity in food and commodity management, NGOs do play a critical role in procuring and delivering pharmaceutical and medical supplies to emergency areas. In fact, NGOs play a larger role than any other entity in procuring medicines and medical supplies for programs during an emergency. Four large medical supply NGOs include Direct Relief International (DRI), Americares, MAP, and Operation USA. Each focuses on creating relationships with pharmaceutical and medical supply companies that can donate excess goods or overstock. The NGO receives the materials and then either stores or ships them to a partner NGO in an emergency area. Medical supply NGOs will ship medical and pharmaceutical supplies from their U.S. or Europe-based storage locations to emergency settings by private carrier, sometimes by air freight but mostly ocean freight. Once into a regional port or receiving area (airport, border, and so on), a partner NGO will receive the goods and begin the in-country process of distribution, use, or storage. Medications must follow WHO guidelines, which follow four core principles.143

## Ngo Health-Related References

These NGOs provide those in the field with all types of medical supplies, and are extremely useful in emergencies that cripple a poor country's medical infrastructure and stockpiles of medicines. Medical supply NGOs can send everything from polio vaccines to dentist's chairs or anthropometric tools.

| Emergency Library Kit (ELK)                                     | . The Department of Health Action    |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|
| in Crises (HAC) will provide on request an ELK to agencies      |                                      |
| working in the field during an emergency. The kit is intended   |                                      |
| as technical guidance to agencies in the field. Each kit comes  |                                      |
| in a metal trunk, which can be used as a bookshelf. It includes |                                      |
| 130 documents consisting of guidelines and reference manuals    |                                      |
| produced by WHO, other UN organizations, and external           |                                      |
| publishers. A summary of the contents is available online.      |                                      |
| The kit is regularly updated and costs approximately $2,300.    |                                      |
| Transportation costs are not included. Available at             | www.who.                             |
| int/hac/techguidance/tools/bibliography/en                      | .                                    |

These organizations have specialized in procurement and shipping and are not normally operational in the field. By working closely with implementing NGO
partners, medical supply NGOs can effectively focus on soliciting new donors, caring for existing stockpiles and the shipping process while other NGOs focus on distributing supplies.

"Public health leaders using social media to convey emergencies: New tools a boon." Social media tools such as Twitter and Facebook allow public health officials to reach out fast and directly to the public on everything from salmonellarelated food recalls to disease outbreaks and weather emergencies. Available at www.apha.org/publications/tnh/ archives/2009/August2009/Nation/socialmediaNation.htm. World Health Organization. "Guidelines for Drug Donations." Available at www.who.int/hac/techguidance/guidelines_for_ drug_donations.pdf.

None of the four NGOs surveyed for this section has extensive logistical capacity.

Although they maintain large stockpiles of medical supplies within the United States or Europe, they do not use an extensive technology system, logistical tracking or management systems, and normally rely only on partner NGOs or agencies for the appropriate quantities and types of medical supplies needed during an emergency. The process often looks like the flow presented in figure 11.2.

Medical supply NGOs create relationships with the private medical sector to
in turn create incentives for medical supply donatons. These donations are
sent to field locations around the world, and are distributed to NGOs that
are operational in the emergency-affected region. Medical supply NGOs are
normally not active in CHEs or disaster areas, but play critical roles in assuring
that NGOs in those areas receive pertinent and enough medical supplies.
Partner NGO
receives
shipment
Medical supply
NGO procures
medical
supplies
Ships to
emergencyaffected
area
Partner
NGO uses or
distributes
medical
supplies for DP
services

These NGOs are scattered throughout the United States and Europe and have many implementing partners around the world. Medical supply NGOs normally operate large warehouses where the supplies are received. These are sorted, dated, and stored appropriately and then sent to an emergency area when a request comes from a partner NGO or agency. All medical supply NGOs in the United States are relatively close to a seaport and have close relationships with shipping forwarders or shipping brokers. Most of the medical supplies shipped are bundled with other supplies sent by ocean freight in 20- or 40-foot containers.

Average shipping space taken by medical supplies by these NGOs is about 1000 cubic square feet per container. MAP, based in Georgia, has shipped an average of 150 containers with an equivalent of 1000 cubic square feet per container in the last two years. Direct Relief International in FY2000 made 220 shipments. This is equivalent to 691,571 pounds of material shipped.... Once into a port and after being offloaded from a ship or aircraft, a consignee, broker or another NGO will sign for the goods, become responsible for moving it out of the port area, and then to either another storage facility or directly into a distribution pattern otherwise designed. As mentioned above, once the medical shipment reaches the port it normally is no longer the responsibility of the medical supply NGO who processed and initiated the shipment.144

## Conclusion: Ngo Strengths And Weaknesses In The Medical Field

In general, NGOs are the most advanced organizations equipped to handle a range of technical, essential, and urgent medical services. This does not mean that NGOs are capable of meeting all the needs of an affected population. NGOs have both strengths and weaknesses in this sector.

## Executive Summary

  NGOs spend significant time and resources
procuring, storing, and distributing food aid to emergency-affected populations. Food is by far one of the most common types of aid in the world.
  NGOs work closely with UN and government
agencies to procure and move food into emergency regions.
  WFP is the UN's food aid agency (see
annex 8) and works closely with NGOs to effectively manage food commodity and food distribution programs.
Weaknesses First, NGOs have limited logistical capacities. For large-scale food procurement and shipments, air transport services, cold-chain management, and in-patient medical services, NGOs are at a disadvantage. Without major financial capabilities or either logistical know-how or capacity, NGOs do not maintain ocean liners, large cargo aircraft, and stockpiles of food commodities or even fleets of trucks. NGOs do not have the power to procure millions of tons of food for a specific emergency or airlift them if they did have the supply, and must rely on military, government, or UN agencies to support large-scale transportation and logistical services in many emergencies. Second, NGOs are a community and not a cohesive body. No matter how much coordination occurs, NGOs are still individual entities, often both small and private, that act independently during emergencies. This, also deemed a unique strength, often means that the NGO community does not benefit from scaling capacities or sharing duties during an operation. An NGO must recreate capacity for each program it delivers, even if another NGO is delivering a similar service. Still, although coordination levels are increasing and NGO specialization is occurring, competitiveness and independent actor problems arise and make the NGO community weaker than it could be if its members worked closely together. Third, and combining the first and second, NGOs cannot provide comprehensive services alone. Although many NGOs can provide a wide range of services from feeding centers to immunizations to public health programs, NGOs still rely on outside actors in many specific sectors or fields for support. NGOs, in very simple terms, lack the logistical capacity to manage full-scale medical programs. NGOs have been unable to deploy major food programs without the help of the U.S. or EU governments and have had to rely heavily on militaries or other agencies to help with in-patient services, major surgical capacities, large population movements and displacement, water and sanitation provisions, access and security issues, and other issues that require major technical and resource support.

Strengths NGOs provide medical services during conflict and disasters and are faced with innumerable challenges beyond those a peacetime medical provisions organization would face. Within this context, NGOs have developed strategies and priorities for responding to emergencies that help define the most urgent and important needs of a population. These prioritieswhether they concern primary medical care, food, immunizations, or public healthmean that not every issue is dealt with, and that not every need is met. Still, NGOs fill a vital role during international humanitarian emergencies, and their strengths outweigh their weaknesses in most cases. There are four major thematic strengths that NGOs enjoy in the medical sector. First, to combat the fact that there are resources and capacity limitations within the NGO community, many NGOs specialize. Medical supply NGOs are one example, and show the advancement of the NGO community to a stage where certain NGOs are now taking specific job functions that mirror larger agencies. The NGO community may be fragmented, but, with specialization, the community can begin mirroring an agency such as USAID that has specific departments for managing various activities during an emergency. This is a particular strength of the NGO community and has potential for becoming more beneficial as more NGOs specialize in various functions during emergencies. Second, NGOs within the medical sector are the most ground-level entities that exist. When the UN or USAID or other donors cannot be present in an area because of security concerns, the NGO is there. With local partnerships and an in-depth knowledge of what medical needs exist at the community level, NGOs can work closely with the international community to meet the needs of areas that might have otherwise been overlooked. NGOs add strength to the international community's ability to survey, assess, and plan appropriate and scaled responses. Third, NGOs have little overhead and bureaucratic structures that can prevent swift action in the most harsh or remote locations. NGO response teams do not require stringent force protection services, and can break down into small two- or three-person teams. NGO staff members can adapt to local environments and use local transportation, make contracts with and hire local services, liaise with the local government and community organizations, and generally act as free agents in a very chaotic picture. This is not replicated in by any other type of actor in the medical field, and NGOs are close to perfecting the adaptation technique. Fourth, NGOs use the private sector to their advantage. NGOs can use private shipping and transportation services, donated goods or financial resources, human resources, and can procure goods locally, which enhances operational efficiency. Because NGOs are often strapped for cash or other resources, NGOs must act quickly, aggressively, and purposefully to muster resources. Given their significant investment in soliciting funding or support from the private sector, NGOs often benefit from public sympathy for affected populations, donation dollars, grants, in-kind gifts, and volunteers.

NGOs and Food and Nutrition N
GOs provide massive food and nutrition aid around the world. NGOs are key survey agents, providing the community of emergency responders with appropriate, ground-level data, and are also key delivery agents. NGOs often manage extensive programs in this sector, ranging from largescale food distribution during massive famines to therapeutic or rehabilitating feeding clinics for malnourished populations. During major emergencies, NGOs work closely with and are supported by the extremely operational World Food Program that procures and distributes food directly to needy populations, and other UN and government agencies with the capacity to handle major logistical feats.

## Food Aid And Ngos

Although hundreds of millions of people do go hungry on a daily basis around the world, hunger, malnutrition, and famine are not necessarily due to a lack of food. Instead, food problems come from poor distribution mechanisms, lowering the terms of trade for a country that can lead to the reduction of the appropriate mixes of food (normal export commodity prices are potentially dropped, making it more difficult to purchase different types of food), war, and major natural disasters (entire crop rotations ruined or food stores destroyed). Food aid is often under fire by political and policy critics on two fronts:

-
Food aid disturbs markets. Food aid delivered by the international community can dramatically reduce the market price of food commodities within the targeted country. This upsets local market economies and a source of well-being for particular segments of a country's population. Although this is often not a concern for a country experiencing major famine, it is when only part of a country or region is experiencing food shortages. Somalia was an example of how food aid was often misused or abused with a resulting impact on lives not specifically associated with a famine or malnutrition.
-
Food aid is often misused or not understood. Many policymakers and observers see food aid as a dangerous political tool that is wasteful, or a cure-all to solve a country's food and humanitarian problems. Neither is the case, and though there are many examples of misused or abused food aid, most food aid is in fact delivered to the intended population. As well, food aid addresses only hunger, not the underlying conditions. Political causes, infrastructural deficiencies, conflict, or economic problems are often severe problems that external food aid can't compete with or solve with simply the distribution of food.
NGOs often steer clear of the politics and push for food aid when and where it is needed. Because NGOs operate at the ground level during emergencies, they are firsthand witnesses of how food aid is used, how it affects markets, and when it is and is not needed. NGOs are at the forefront of nutrition and hunger services, and are implementing partners with larger UN or government agencies in most phases of a food aid program. They are responsible for most food aid distribution around the world. The system of distribution, sometimes known as the pipeline, often requires intricate and involved distribution or food aid management programs. Food aid programs often follow a flow similar to that in figure 12.1. After an emergency hits, an NGO initiates food or hunger-response programs like any other program (see chapter 8). Information is collected, sorted, and analyzed, and the NGO identifies areas of potential operation and whether it has a comparative advantage in the proposed type of operation. The NGO must also consider whether funding is available. For major emergencies in which major portions of the population require food aid, NGOs must normally work closely with UN agencies and governments and sometimes local authorities. NGOs lack large logistical capacities and lift capabilities and normally cannot provide massive amounts of food from external sources without assistance. USAID and WFP are the major logistical participants in food procurement, storage, and distribution to field-level NGO management teams because of their unique capabilities to acquire large quantities of food (millions of tons), ship it (by ocean, air, truck, or rail), and to keep it coming. As shown in figure 12.1, an NGO will determine logistical requirements, work closely with the UN and governments to relay these perceived requirements, and then eventually take over the inflow and distribution of food to the affected population. NGOs have or can establish extensive field-based networks with local NGOs or communities, and are often the most efficient providers at the ground level. WFP and USAID, for example, specialize in establishing the commodity-level logistical supply system but then need smaller agents to take truckloads of food to points along the pipeline. When dealing with sustained hunger or malnutrition rates, NGOs often create feeding or therapeutic feeding centers that provide children or the severely malnourished specific nutritional treatment. Caloric intake levels, types of food, appropriate delivery methods, and other variables are all considered when implementing such a program. Household, community, or regional level approaches are also variable and will affect the types of programs the international community will implement. For example, household-level programs also must take into consideration that malnutrition is not necessarily caused by a lack of food. Care, access to appropriate foods, regularity, and sustainability can all influence a population's nutritional health. NGOs will deploy programs depending on the size, place, intensity, and scope of a nutritional crisis. Several program types are identified in table 12.1.145

## Table 12.1 Ngo Food Programs

| General food distribution (GFD)                                            | When food insecurity is prevalent, sustainable economic and health     |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| development programs are often appropriate, targeting the most             |                                                                        |
| vulnerable populations. This is not a blanket coverage, and is most        |                                                                        |
| likely not used in large-scale emergencies.                                |                                                                        |
| Blanket feeding                                                            | This is deployed normally during a severe food crisis and also targets |
| specific populations, normally extending nondiscriminatory feeding         |                                                                        |
| programs for pregnant mothers, under-5 children, elderly, and the          |                                                                        |
| sick, whether they are facing malnourishment or not.                       |                                                                        |
| Supplementary feeding program (SFP)                                        | When malnutrition rates extend over 15 percent and populations         |
| still need assistance to fill gaps and in treating specific target groups, |                                                                        |
| NGOs will provide SFPs during the day to provide warm meals,               |                                                                        |
| appropriate nutrients, and special foods for various parts of the          |                                                                        |
| affected population.                                                       |                                                                        |
| Therapeutic feeding program (TFP)                                          |                                                                        |
| TFPs are established to treat severely malnourished people, and            |                                                                        |
| to provide immediate relief to those of an emergency-affected              |                                                                        |
| population in danger of dying because of lack of food. Ideally, TFPs       |                                                                        |
| are 24-hour stations. In emergency settings, though, staff and supply      |                                                                        |
| limitations will often prevent 24-hour operation.                          |                                                                        |

A more in-depth, emergency-setting specific operations flow could include the processes identified in figure 12.2.

NGOs receive at
port, move to
storage facility
trucks take loads of
food to distribution
points
NGOs break down
and repackage for
smaller shipments
UN WFP or USAID
delivers large food
supplies
therapeutic feeding centers
supplemental feeding centers
blanket feeding or
general food  distribution
distribution
points
receive
food
shipments,
move into
staging area
NGO
personnel
move food
into specific
feeding or
blanket
supply
programs
refugee camps or
settlement areas

## Conclusion: Players In The Food Aid Sector

The international community has created a specific and resourceful community that deals with food aid and nutritional emergencies around the world, and NGOs play an important part. Table 12.1 presents the main actors in food aid.

World Food Program (WFP)
www.wfp.org
Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO)
www.fao.org
International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD)
www.ifad.org
Food Aid Management (FAM)*
www.foodaidmanagement.org
Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO)
www.paho.org
USAID/Food for Peace
www.usaid.gov/hum_response/ffp
U.S. Department of Agriculture
www.fas.usda.gov/food-aid.html
CARE
http://www.care.org
Catholic Relief Services (CRS)
www.catholicrelief.org
Lutheran World Federation/Relief
www.lutheranrelief.org
World Vision
www.wvi.org
Food for the Hungry (FHI)
www.fh.org
Caritas
www.caritas.org

## Executive Summary

No discussion of humanitarian food aid would be complete without mention of the World Food Program. WFP is an operational UN agency that provides most likely the largest quantities of food aid around the world. With internal logistical infrastructure, ships, trucks, planes, experts, and field offices, WFP offers direct support to displaced populations and also provides support to NGOs when appropriate (see annex 2 for more detail on the WFP, WHO, and UNICEF).

  Water and sanitation services are often the
most essential relief activities that can be deployed at the onset of any emergency, and can mean the prevention of disease, malnutrition, and sometimes conflict.
  NGOs manage various types of water and
sanitation programs in emergencies, ranging from emergency water provision to latrine building, filtration plant construction, or well boring.
  Other agencies are also involved in water
services, but in managing refugee camps and IDP settlements, NGOs are normally the lead agency for specific water services.
  Water is often the hardest material to
introduce into an emergency setting, because it is heavy, fragile, and must be secured at all times from unsafe or unsanitary conditions.
The Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) is a lead player in food aid, but is sometimes quiet during emergencies. With a mission of providing large-scale development assistance in food sectors and agricultural economies, the Rome-based UN agency based has created some progressive tools for the international community when dealing with and either preventing or responding to nutritional emergencies. Of specific interest to many government and military personnel is the use of satellite and imagery technology for monitoring food supplies. Now superseded by even more advanced technology, FAO created the Global Information and Early Warning System workstation, which uses satellites and GIS services. The FAO description follows.

  NGOs often empower local communities with
water conservation knowledge, sanitation practices, and sustainable equipment during and after emergencies.
  NGO activity in the shelter sector is extensive.
NGOs provide emergency housing, refugee camps and management, and longer-term housing as well.
-
FAO uses the Meteosat-based estimates of rainfall and the NOAA/AVHRR-based assessments of vegetation cover as one of the key inputs for operational monitoring of crop conditions by the FAO Global Information and Early Warning System (GIEWS). Assessment of crop growing conditions and related food production outlook is based on agrometeorological observations combined with remote sensing and other relevant socio-economic information. The development of models to integrate satellite and agrometeorological data with socio-economic and nutritional information, using GIS technology, is currently being finalized under the GIEWS Risk Mapping Project. This Project is implemented by FAO in partnership with the Save the Children Fund (SCF-UK) in London and executed by ESCG/GIEWS with financial assistance from the European Union.
-
Since early 1992, GIEWS is implementing the project "System Definition and Development of a Computer Workstation for GIEWS" with funding from the EU. The objective of the
project is to develop a tool to better integrate image and graphic data especially the socioeconomic and nutritional indicators with the satellite-based ARTEMIS products and field agro-meteorological data in the analysis and reporting process of the GIEWS analysts. The University of Arizona has been contracted to develop the GIEWS workstation. A prototype was installed and tested at FAO Rome in June/July 1993. The development of an advanced version of the workstation started in September 1993, along with the establishment of databases. Work on this version was finalized in 1995 and is now fully operational at FAO headquarters. Its applications development at the regional levels is now being undertaken within the framework of the Regional Early Warning System in the SADC region through the FAO/SADC Regional Remote Sensing Project.146
Another development that has stemmed from NGO and private sector cooperation is the FACTS software system. FACTS, or the Food and Commodity Tracking System, was created by Microsoft in 2001 in collaboration with Mercy Corps International (MCI) and Save the Children US.147 It is an online-based commodity management system that allows NGOs to monitor and track shipments from the port of entry to the point of distribution. At this point, very few NGOs have used it, and MCI and Save the Children are still in beta stages of testing. Advanced stages of this software, Microsoft and testing NGO personnel say, will allow NGOs to use handheld devices, real-time data on relief programs, and minimal bandwidth. It is still in beginning stages but represents a significant amount of energy devoted to attempting to standardize software and logistical systems.

## Cecili Sessions

T
he Institute of Medicine's 2009 report *The U.S. Commitment to Global Health* recognizes the sea change of shifting from a medical to a public health model for humanitarian assistance: "Meeting fundamental human needs lack the glamour of high-technology medicine or rescue, but their value is the significant potential for impact on health because they deal with the major causes of common disease and disabilities across the globe."148
This chapter outlines the assessment and response of the humanitarian community to the challenges of meeting Gostin's *basic survival needs* of water, sanitation, hygiene, and shelter. In the context of stability, security, transition, and reconstruction operations (SSTRO), or humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HA/DR), precarious access to safe drinking water and sanitary living conditions may become jeopardized because of security concerns, or can be overtaxed by population displacement. Shelter might be inadequate because it is either unavailable or inappropriate for the climate and terrain of a new locale. In the chaotic and crowded living circumstances that displaced persons face, the stage is set for preventable outbreaks of water-borne or vector-borne diseases that might otherwiseby access to adequate water, sanitation, and shelterbe prevented.

## Water, Sanitation, Hygiene, And The Burden Of Disease

The terms WatSan or *WASH* refer to integrated, cluster approaches by the global health community to ensure essential servicesincluding access to safe drinking water, provision of basic sanitation, and hygiene education and trainingnot only in crises but also as a form of sustainable development through capacity-building. Water systems are a perennial natural security concern,149 and UN
Secretary General Kofi Annan asserts that "access to safe water is a fundamental human need and therefore a basic human right. Contaminated water jeopardizes both the physical and social health of all people."150 Whether approached as an issue of security or of rights, access to WASH is indisputably an issue of health:
-
one in six people (884 million worldwide) lack access to safe water for basic needs from a protected well or spring within walking distance of their homes;
-
2.5 billion peopleincluding 1 billion childrenlive without access to basic sanitation or private hygiene;
-
a child dies every 20 seconds as a result of poor sanitation, resulting in 1.5 million preventable deaths yearly;
-
88 percent of diarrheal deaths worldwide can be attributed to WatSan problems; and

-
hand washing with soap can reduce the risk of diarrheal diseases by 47 percent.151
The health benefits of improved water and sanitation can be translated into increased productivity due to decreased adult and child morbidity, health-care savings, time savings due to more convenient access, and increased school attendance days.152

Almost one-tenth of the global disease burdenin disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), as a weighted measure or 6.3 percent of all deathscould be prevented by improving water supply, sanitation, hygiene and management of water resources. Avoidable health-related costs are estimated at $7.3
billion globally.153 The following significant global health concerns are directly related to the adequacy
of WASH efforts:
-
diarrhea spread by fecal-oral transmission, including cholera, typhoid, and dysentery;
-
malnutrition contributing to death, developmental challenges, and increased susceptibility to infectious diseases;
-
intestinal nematode infections from fecally contaminated soil afflicting up to one in three people worldwide; and
-
trachoma (a cause of preventable blindness), lymphatic filariasis, schistosomiasis, and malaria.154
WASH may also impact physical health through respiratory infections related to hygiene, drowning, toxic exposures, micronutrient intake, and the extremes of drought, flood, and climate change. Additionally, WASH influences social health and gender equity issues surrounding school attendance for adolescent girls and lost productivity of women procuring water.155 Adequate shelter is closely tied to the provision for water, sanitation, drainage, or the collection of household waste. Lack of shelter leaves people vulnerable to insect exposure, extremes of heat or cold, and environmental hazards, and can adversely impact mental health and community resilience.

## Standards For Emergency Shelter And Water, Sanitation, And Hygiene (Wash)

SSTRO or HA/DR interventions should ensure that *basic survival needs* of water, sanitation, hygiene, and shelter for affected or displaced populations are met in a manner consistent with international standards for humanitarian assistance and conducive to interagency sustainable development. The following summaries reference USAID, UNHCR, and SPHERE guidelines for emergency provision of shelter and water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH).

The USAID *Field Operations Guide for Disaster Assessment and Response* offers the following insights into priorities and considerations for meeting the needs of shelter and WASH, with an emphasis on involvement of those receiving assistance in the process:
-
The provision of *water* demands immediate attention from the start of an emergency. The objective is to ensure the availability of enough safe drinking water to meet at least minimal health and hygiene needs, including drinking, cooking, washing, and bathing. Sources of fresh water may be identified by local government, local population, displaced persons, UN/NGOs, terrain inspection, maps, or hydrologists. If the locally available water supply is not enough to meet the minimum needs of the population, consider relocation, because water must be brought in by truck. Water distribution is an important consideration in camp layouts to ensure easy, safe, and controlled access to water for displaced persons. (Water storage and treatment are also discussed in detail.)
-
Disruption and overcrowding of people impacted by disaster or conflict make *sanitation* a critical issue. Sanitation facilities to which individuals were accustomed may no longer be available, leading to indiscriminate disposal of human excreta and other waste products and posing a serious health threat. A comprehensive environmental health program must address provision of safe water; disposal of human excreta, wastewater, and garbage; insect and rodent control; safe food-handling practices; and site drainage. An acceptable and practical system for disposal of human waste developed in cooperation with the affected population is vital, even if circumstances necessitate a departure from culturally traditional practices. Providing special public health or *hygiene* education may be required to ensure that the
system is used.
-
Settlements are concentrations of people in physical space, and key features include *shelter* and related support services. A key objective of any shelter sector intervention should be the timely provision of safe, secure, private, and habitable shelter that provides protection from the elements. Community participation and needs are critical to determining the kind of housing needed, the materials and design, who constructs the housing, and how long it will need to last in a given situation. The intervention should feature covered living space of at
least 3.5 m2 per person, cognizant that expansion is probable as part of a future, incremental
construction process. Lack of adequate shelter and clothing can have a major adverse effect on the health and nutritional status of displaced people.156
The Sphere Project is a handbook of minimum standards in disaster response, a collaborative humanitarian charter between IFRC and NGOs, and "an expression of commitment to quality and accountability." Sphere emphasizes "the alleviation of human suffering arising out of calamity and conflict," the right to life with dignity, equitable access to services for vulnerable subpopulations, and the processes of needs assessment and key indicators of effectiveness. The following compilation of minimum standards, key indicators, and guidance notes from the Sphere handbook pertain to WASH (chapter 2) and shelter (chapter 4).

-
Providing a minimum survival level of safe drinking *water* on a regular basis is critical. Average water use for basic needs is 15 liters per person per day, and survival needs may be as low as 3 liters depending on climate and individual physiology. Maximum distance to the nearest water point is 500 meters, with a wait time of 15 minutes or fewer. Distribution of clean and appropriate collection and storage containers (two per household) or treatment with residual disinfectants such as chlorine can minimize the health risks of recontamination of freshwater sources and ensure that there is always water in the household. Turbidity and palatability are additional concerns.
-
The standards for *sanitation* ensure that people have "rapid, safe, and acceptable access at
all times" for excreta disposal. Before construction of toilets, it may be necessary to create trench latrines or a defecation field, with 30m from groundwater sources and 1.5m above the water table. Each communal toilet may serve up to 50 people, decreasing to a maximum of 20 people as soon as feasible. Toilets should be located no more than 50m from dwellings, and be arranged by household (up to five families) or segregated by gender. Urinals should be provided for men, and the ratio of women's cubicles to men's should be about 3:1. Shared responsibility is vital for cleaning and maintaining shared or public toilets and immediate disposal of children's feces. Toilets should be designed with input from the population regarding privacy and security concerns to ensure continued use and cleaning, and to minimize fly and mosquito breeding.
-
Avoidance of risky *hygiene* behaviors requires community mobilization (2 promoters per
1000 members of the population), provision of essential materials and facilities, avoidance of overburdening, and sharing of information and knowledge between the affected population and donors of humanitarian assistance in order to identify key hygiene risks and behaviors and to ensure optimal use of facilities. At least 250g of soap should be made available per person per month. Communal bathing facilities should provide separate cubicles for males and females. One laundry wash basin per 100 people is recommended, along with private laundering areas for women. Facilities should be strategically located to facilitate hand washing after defecation and before eating or food preparation. Adequate vector control mechanisms are essential to prevent disease.
-
The Shelter and Settlement section discusses strategic and physical planning, design, construction, and environmental impact. Additionally, the recommendations for covered living space include provision of dignified accommodation, permitting essential household
and livelihood activities, and separation of by family, age, or sex as needed. At least 3.5m2
per person of living spacewith the notable exception of short-term provision of shelter in the aftermath of disaster, to save lives, or shelter the greatest number of people in need.
Existing cultural practices should be preserved whenever possible in consideration of design and materials.157

## Executive Summary Un Cluster Approach: Wash And Emergency Shelter

  Protection means helping
populations avoid being targeted for persecution or attacks
  NGOs participate in protection
activities in a variety of ways.

The UN Cluster Approach was first implemented in the aftermath in the Pakistan earthquake of October 8, 2006, and emphasizes accountability, predictability, and reliability to close identified gaps in humanitarian response provided by the Interagency Standing CommitteeUN agencies, the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, and NGOs.158

  Duty bearers are responsible for
providing protection, but NGOs fill major gaps when authorities are unable or unwilling , and when protection means relocation, advocacy, migration issues, and asylum needs.
  Emergency response NGOs
often participate in protection activities without highlighting it in their program descriptions: shelter services, advocacy, and transportation services are often part of protecting a population from discrimination or danger.
Recognizing the direct causal link between child mortality and WatSan, UNICEF (UN Children's Fund) serves as lead for the cluster on Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH). "All UNICEF WASH programmes are designed to contribute to the Millennium Development Goal for water and sanitation: to halve, by 2015, the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe water and basic sanitation."159 Active working group participants include Action Against Hunger (ACF), CARE International, CDC, Concern, Catholic Relief Services (CRS), InterAction, International Centre for Health and Migration (ICHM), IFRC, International Rescue Committee (IRC), Mercy Corps, Norwegian Church Aid, Oxford Committee for Famine Relief (Oxfam), Register of Engineers for Disaster ReliefInternational Health Exchange (RedR-IHE), UNHCR, UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), WHO, and World Vision International (WVI).160
The Global WASH Cluster Strategic Framework outlines coordination with country-level teams, standardization, capacity for humanitarian response, preparedness, and best practices.161 Additional guidance in the UNHCR *Water Manual for Refugee Situations* describes "the technical characteristics and functioning of components, structures or equipment that may form part of a refugee water supply system," while urging use of the highest possible standards and consideration of political, social, and funding circumstances.162 With mandates to protect the world's most at-risk populations, the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies co-chair the Emergency Shelter Cluster. UNHCR takes the lead in the area of IDPs affected by armed conflict, and IFRC leads in disaster situations. Additional partners include the UN Human Settlements Programme (UN- HABITAT), OCHA, the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC), Oxfam International, CARE International, the Cooperative Housing Foundation (CHF), Shelter Centre, the International Organization for Migration), UNICEF, UNDP, WFP, and the Danish Refugee Council (DRC).163 The Emergency Shelter Cluster Toolkit includes lessons learned, reference materials, coordination documents, and technical guidelines for construction and placement.164

## Summary

People cannot live long without water, and they cannot stay healthy for long without sanitation or shelter. "Far more people endure the largely preventable effects of poor sanitation and water supply than are affected by war, terrorism, and weapons of mass destruction combined," resulting in about one tenth of the global health burden.165 When HA/DR and SSTRO are conducted in a baseline context of limited or inadequate access of local or displaced populations to basic survival needs for shelter and water, sanitation, and hygiene (WatSan or WASH), USAID, UNICEF, UNHCR, and SPHERE provide evidence-based standards for intervention.

## Ngos And Protection

Steven Hansch and Grey Frandsen I
n the parlance of aid agencies, protection is distinct from assistance. Where assistance takes the form of the provision of raw commodities (food) or services (health-care attention), protection refers to something more subtle: helping local populations avoid being targeted for persecution or attacks. The core concept is to prevent any displaced population from being killed or harmed during or immediately after an emergency. Longer-term protection roles also arise for populations that have been interned, displaced for extended periods, or for those that may permanently alienated from their home after war or genocide. In this regard, protection also has a distinct meaning from security. When aid agencies refer to security they are more often referring to either the personnel security (from harm) of their staff (international and local), or referring to military security, as in peacekeeping, to quell overall violence and banditry in general. Sometimes security refers to the guarding of aid itself, as with armed security guards. The boundary between these two concepts is not always easy to define. In practical terms, protection is what civilian agencies do, security is what armed guards and military forces do. Protection implies actiondoing something to stop or reduce a genocide, massacres, or systematic rape. Increasingly in the community of NGOs, a sense has grown that each agency has an unavoidable responsibility to report what it observes, which often means to report to external authorities, the UN, western governments, or the news media. Most humanitarian aid agencies do not characterize or advertise their work as protection, even if they deliver protection as an ancillary aspect of their operations. For example, although IRC, IMC, Relief International, World Vision, and dozens of traditional aid NGOs focus on food, water, and health care, they also provide protection through their presence, observation, and reporting. Their very presence of expatriate doctors deters persecution of many local populations. And NGOs informally share observations with journalists, or host journalists to observe for themselves. Yet, the same NGOs rarely advertise these forms of protection as their main work.166
In the same situations, they may refer to their protection work when they hire protection monitors (often lawyers) to do only protection work. Some operational NGOs, such as Medicins sans Frontieres (MSF, or Doctors without Borders) speak out on abuses they observe frequently. For MSF, public voice and medical assistance are both core goals of their work. Another set of NGOs who recognize protection as a central basis of their work are human rights organizations. That is, they monitor and report on human rights problems as their main activity. These groups do not deliver any direct services (food, water, and so on) to local populations. These include NGOs that emphasize voice over aid, who publish reports, meet directly with leaders and policymakers, and speak out through the media. Several of the agencies best known in the United States and very involved in defining policy debates in Washington, DC, include the following:

-
Amnesty International (AI)
-
Brookings-Bern Project on Internal Displacement
-
Human Rights Watch (HRW)
-
Human Rights First (formerly the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights)
-
Physicians for Human Rights (PHR)
-
Refugees International
-
U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI)
One group that focuses on research publication attempts to protect civilians by reducing the stocks and flows of light weaponry in developing countries. The Small Arms Survey is an independent research group, based in Geneva, that publishes an annual survey about the problems and solutions to small arms. A third, smaller, category of NGOs seek to provide protection not through advocacy, nor through assistance, but purely through presence and accompaniment. One is Peace Brigades International (PBI), which deploys unarmed volunteers, committed to nonviolence, to zones of conflict and persecution, including Nepal, Indonesia, and Colombia. Peace Brigades has headquarters in London and in Washington DC. A similar NGO focused only on local protection work, accompanies local leaders threatened with persecution, including indigenous human rights monitors is Nonviolent Peaceforce, which has offices in Minneapolis and Brussels.167

## Differing Interpretations Of Protection

Protection for the local civilian populations in emergencies is a long-standing and basic element of humanitarian law: civilians and all those not taking part in the fighting must on no account be attacked and must instead be spared and protected. The 1949 Geneva Conventions and their 1977 Additional Protocols contain specific rules to protect civilians. In situations that are not covered by these treaties, internal disturbances in particular, civilians are conferred protection by other international bodies of law, notably human rights law, national laws compatible with international laws, and the principle of humanity. The field of humanitarian protection has evolved and grown over the past decade. Although protection actors have come to no agreement on the overlapping elements of human rights, justice, equality, international humanitarian law, common law, peace, war-crimes trials and enforcement of protection, many definitions and an understanding of responsible protection programming have been reached: for example, the ICRC's Professional standards for protection work, the Australian NGO Consortium's Minimum Agency Standards for Incorporating Protection into Humanitarian Response, and SPHERE. Several key civilian agencies view protection as being composed primarily of observing or documenting human rights abuses in the field and then reportingarguing with governmental authorities, sometimes in outrage. Other NGOs add to this a list of other practical activities that can be undertaken to protect the displaced. The following are examples of protection activities:

-
Legal action or lobbying or enjoining a government to allow asylum-seekers to stay in a countrythat is, to not be forcibly returned to the country they fled where, if returned, they might be killed. This would be an example of reference to refugee conventions and the principle of nonrefoulement. In more recent years, many of those human rights groups that had focused their attentions on refugees have shifted to give equal attention to internally displaced persons (IDPs) who had long been neglected.
-
Advocacy and lobbying by groups like Human Rights Watch, asking warring factions not to fire weapons (such as mortars) into civilian population areas, which would be a violation of the laws of war and Geneva Conventions.
-
Generating international attention to attacks on civilians in the hopes of stopping killings through international embarrassment or by the intercession of governments. For example, if an advocacy group like Refugees International calls attention to extrajudicial killings Afghanistan, or rape as an instrument of war in the Democratic Republic of Congo, they expect that the media highlight or attention will compel armed killers to back off.
-
Providing refugees with some form of personal identification so that each refugee can reclaim some legal status or record that will help them achieve some rights as a citizen, perhaps later when returning home, an activity many agencies helped with, for example, when Kosovars fled to Albania in 1999 during the war with Serbia.
-
Helping smuggle populations in danger out of areas where they are being persecuted, a common activity of protection groups working with Jews during World War II and with the underground railroad before and during the U.S. Civil War.
-
Creating and enforcing safe areas where civilians will not be targeted is a common tactic, often unsuccessful. Aid agencies help displaced families in Sri Lanka in these open assistance camps, in enclaves in Bosnia, and in IDP camps in Burundi and Rwanda.
-
Reporting rights violations as part of public health monitoring. For example, the American Refugee Committee, in charge of health surveillance for the Cambodian refugees in Thailand (in the largest camp, Kao I Dang), added physical violence to their list of reportable health
events, allowing aid agencies and authorities to begin to track down and reduce cases of political persecution within refugee communities. In more recent years, physicians have become important in speaking out against torture.
-
Just being there. Aid agencies have an enormous indirect impact on local protection when they live and work among emergency-affected populations. Just before he was killed in Chechnya, Fred Cuny called on more NGOs to join him there, pointing out that expatriate presence in Grozny, by itself, had kept the Russians from aerial bombing. Cuny was concerned about the less-mobile, urban-based elderly who would have been killed. The NGO he founded, the Cuny Center, promotes an innovative strategy for improving the readiness of communities to cope with targeted violence, called preparedness support, led by the American Casey Barrs (see http://www.cunycenter.org/Activities).
Civilian aid organizations often strive to defend their humanitarian space, by which they mean their ability to reach populations in need without compromise by affiliations with military or political forces. Thus, for NGOs and other organizations, their ability to protect local populations frequently requires themas they see itto keep their distance from combatants, whether U.S. armed forces or regional security forces.

## International And Other Organizations That Lead In Protection

A protection response may involve a range of actors, including legal, security, and humanitarian organizations. Although governmental actors remain the primary duty bearers in protecting civilian populations, other organizations have been mandated to assume certain protection roles, such as country-specific peacekeeping operations with protection mandates. Other organizations, including the ICRC, OHCHR, UNHCR, and UNICEF, have protection mandates derived from a variety of sources including international treaties, the Statutes of the Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement, and UN General Assembly resolutions. The ICRC's mission is, on the basis of the Geneva Conventions and protocols, to protect and assist victims of armed conflict and those affected by internal disturbances or tension. This includes the following:

-
visiting and interviewing, without witness, prisoners of war, and detained or interned civilians;
-
searching for missing persons;
-
transmitting messages between family members separated by conflict, including from prisoners of war and detained civilians;
-
working to reunify dispersed families;
-
providing basic health-care services;
-
providing urgently needed food, water, sanitation and shelter to civilians without access to these basic necessities;
-
monitoring compliance with and helping develop international humanitarian law; and
-
spreading knowledge of international humanitarian law.
The ICRC is knownand sometimes criticizedfor its confidential approach to dealing with sensitive issues, such as its work in places of detention. The ICRC maintains, however, that discreet dialogue is key to protecting and assisting those affected by conflict. Confidentiality allows the ICRC to build trust, open channels of communication, and influence change. Discretion also has its limits, and the ICRC reserves the right to speak out, publish findings, or stop working in exceptional cases. For example, if a detaining authority issues excerpts from a confidential report without consent, the ICRC reserves the right to publish the entire report to prevent inaccurate or incomplete interpretations of its observations and recommendations. Similarly, if after repeated requests, prisoners continue to be mistreated or the ICRC is prevented from working according to its operating procedures, it may suspend detainee visits or other operations and publicly explain the reasons. Whereas the ICRC is frequently the lead organization promoting protection for populations caught within conflict zones, UNHCR tends to be the lead in assisting those populations who have fled conflict and crossed an international border. It too demarches, meets with governments, reminds authorities about their treaty obligations, and provides direct observation and presence for refugees. Historically, UNHCR has divided its work into the two categories of assistance (most of their budget, for shelter, camp management, water, education, and the like) and protection. Of these two, although assistance dominates in their budget, protection has always dominated as their reason for existing. Thus, UNHCR fields protection officers to more areas than assistance. UNICEF describes its work as rooted in concepts of protection. UNICEF works in more countries in the world than almost any other agency, both in development and in emergencies. They promote the protection of children from harm in active conflict areas through the safety of schools. They also frequently seek to protect civilians from land-mine injuries through education. In principle, the Office of the (United Nations) High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) ought to be a leader in mobilizing protection. They convene meetings, do field research, and sometimes deploy field monitors to provide protection, as in Rwanda 1995 and 1996. But they are not well funded to be operational in this area.

## Shortfalls

NGOs have been prominent in bringing human rights abuses to international communication and news channels. But NGOs have been less effective at taking more practical actions in field locations monitoring or negotiating security, or providing security with force. For many U.S. NGOs, a challenge has been to find funding for field-level protection. Most donors, including USAID and foundations, are reluctant to fund protection-only activities, such as monitoring and accompaniment for several reasons: in part because it veers away from their assistance focus, in part because of liability (personnel being harmed) concerns, and in part because it's often easier and more visible to fund groups that focus on publication and voice. One useful example has been the militarization of many refugee camps. In numerous camps of refugees and IDPs in Pakistan, the Horn of Africa, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Indochina, and Central America, the social structures, economics, and population movements are controlled by refugee and IDP leaders who exert their own credible threats over the refugees with the threat or use of force, often with bandit or gang-like groups. Because refugee camps may exist for many years, armed factions in conflicts are able to draw on their populations for recruitment, allowing their military effort to survive or grow. Even when the warrior community lives apart from the women and children, the two groups remain linked. The refugee community provides a pool for recruitment, serves as a buffer population against attack, is a political symbol of the failure of the opposing faction, and legitimizes the warrior community. The Khmer Rouge army drove a large civilian population along with it when it retreated from Cambodia to the Thai border in 1979. Many among that population became refugees because they were so instructed and remained in exile for more than a decade because of the strategic needs of the Khmer Rouge warrior faction.NOTE166[For a detailed account of the events that led to the Khmer Rouge setting up warrior camps in Thailand, see William Shawcross, The Quality of Mercy (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1984).] A more recent example is in the Darfur refugee camps in Chad where children are a target for recruitment by warring factions. The challenge of persistent refugee warrior communities has not been solved by donors or the UN. Refugees (not combatants) have not been effectively disarmed in most crises. Afghan refugees in Pakistan and Somali refugees in Kenya remained heavily armed, though there were few threats to them while they were in these countries of asylum. The Rwandan Hutu refugees, in contrast, used their period of exile in Zaire (DRC) to rearm and retrain. In recent years, success stories of defusing warrior communities have come when political negotiations have included the leaders of each faction and peace accords have laid clear steps for demobilization and integration. Limited success has been seen in Mozambique, El Salvador, and South Africa. Even with peace agreements, however, demobilization and disarming may not succeed, as in southern Sudan.

## Conclusion: A Few Protection Ngos

Five protection-oriented NGOs are profiled here and in annex 1. These are not specifically emergencyresponse NGOs, but are nonetheless active in emergencies in a variety of ways. Human Rights Watch (HRW). Possibly the largest and most recognized of all agencies that report on human rights problems, HRW not only covers every country in the world, it also has specialized programs that track issues like landmines, arms trade, refugee asylum, torture, slavery, and the rule of law. The Human Rights Watch network grew out of Helsinki Watch, which was established as a mechanism to promote human rights across the Iron Curtain. Amnesty International (AI). Because of its extensive networks of volunteer civilian groups (chapters) around the world, particularly the United States and England, Amnesty International is the best known reporting agency. Like HRW, AI does not specialize in large-scale crises, but has traditionally focused on smaller sets of prisoners of consciencethose jailed or tortured for their political views. As an extension of this work, AI has observed patterns and trends that tip them off to larger problems, growing refugee flows, and so on. United States Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI). Based in Washington, DC, USCRI is best known for its annual surveythe World Refugee Surveywhich tallies the numbers of refugees and internally displaced persons in each crisis around the world. USCRI advocates for the right to asylum and testifies before Congress to encourage funding for refugee protection and assistance. They release special reports from time to time. In recent years they have focused on the problem of warehousing refugeesthat is, when refugees end up in isolated and closed camps for far too long, sometimes generations. Physicians for Human Rights (PHR). Based in Boston, Physicians for Human Rights is an American NGO with a large network of concerned members, including chapters at numerous medical schools. More than other human rights groups are able to, they apply scientific methods of inquiry to document problems in crisis zones, for example, reporting on the numbers of unarmed civilians harmed in Palestine, Colombia, Sri Lanka, Darfur, Zimbabwe, Kosovo, or Rwanda. Along with the ICRC and the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation, PHR catalyzed the international movement to ban landmines, which resulted in the landmine-ban treaty, for which it won the Nobel Peace Prize. PHR has developed a capacity for applying forensics in war zones, blending archaeology (unearthing graves) and forensic detective work to human rights documentation. PHR teams, among others, documented the numbers of people executed, found in mass graves in Kosovo and in Srebrenica, Bosnia.NOTE167 [The world was aware, based on journalist research, that 7,000 men were killed in Srebrenica shortly after the massacre. PHR forensics research later provided more accurate data, that more than 8,000 had been killed.] Cultural Survival. Like its British counterpart, Survival International, the Cambridge-Massachusettsbased Cultural Survival strives to protect small minority populations that many would label as ethnic or tribal. It focuses particularly on indigenous groups that speak unique and endangered languages, are not well integrated into modern economies, and are ignored or persecuted by the governments of the countries where they live. Most of Cultural Survival's work is in the Andes, Amazon forest, Guatemala, West Africa, and South Pacific islands. It raises money from the public to run centers for local language and culture documentation and training. It is the operational extension of much of the academic research done by anthropology departments of universities. Cultural Survival is especially closely tied to Harvard University's Department of Anthropology and Museum of Anthropology. Its journal, the *Cultural Survival Quarterly*, appears on newsstands across the United States and deals with themes such as refugees, land-use rights, tourism, and conflict.

## Part 3. Ngo Operations Executive Summary

  NGOs use efficient, private, and often ad hoc
logistical systems during emergencies.
  NGO operations during emergencies often
face major logistical obstacles, and their logistical systems reflect the fact that areas of operation are harsh, violent, resource-poor, and not conducive to smooth operations.
  Logistical systems are required for relief
operations and emergency responses, and each NGO has a different way of managing its logistical requirements. When individual NGOs act without coordinating with other actors, they may waste energy or efforts.
  Most NGOs farm out logistical tasks to the
private sector or rely heavily on government or military support for major logistical tasks (air lifts, commodity procurement, etc).
  Small NGOs that respond to emergencies are
often the largest victims of not producing or preparing logistical systems or protocol. By extending themselves into an emergency, they often become overwhelmed by the requirements or responsibilities placed on them by the international community.
  Larger NGOs have, in the past few years,
been extremely diligent in discussing and testing logistical systems that will span across agencies and organizations, and that will make emergency operations more efficient.
  Some NGOs do have significant capacity, but
many do not. NGOs vary in logistical capacity, and for this reason cannot be typified.
  The Department of Defense and the UN are
the largest logistical service providers in the world outside the combined capacity of the private sector. They frequently assist NGOs in emergency settings.
NGO Logistics N
GOs "do" logistics, but not necessarily in the same way as governments, militaries, or for-profit companies. NGOs are private, independent actors with limited capacity to keep major logistical capacities on-board when no emergency operations are required. Although many larger NGOs are now hiring logistics professionals, technology specialists, and operations support staff, some NGOs have very little logistical experience or capacity. The definition of *logistics* for the purpose of this guidebook is twofold. First, the word can refer to the practices and activities an organization will use to implement humanitarian assistance programming. More specifically, however, logistics are the activities that enable an organization to support fieldbased or remote activities during humanitarian emergencies. This can include procurement, shipping, communications, transportation, safety, material provision, storage, and distribution. A second definition is more general: the activities and processes of managing relief or development operations. Logistical activities in emergency settings are critical. Because emergency-affected populations often depend on external food supply, emergency medicine, communications, or other forms of resource support, logistics plays a primary role in facilitating the supply of relief material and services quickly and under harsh conditions. Although small and large NGOs have completely different ways of managing logistical processes and tasks, all NGOs face similar requirements and conditions in the field. This means that no matter the scale of activity, NGO logistics must be coordinated to meet the needs of affected populations urgently and efficiently while maintaining a fair amount of transparency to donors and other operating agencies. Because NGOs are not government or military entities they must participate on the private market in many cases, and must work within a specific set of conditions. Private shipping companies, for example, may be glad to take an NGO contract for shipping thousands of tons of relief supplies, but may deny service involving dangerous disaster settings, war zones, or complex humanitarian emergencies (CHEs). This chapter discusses five topical areas concerning NGO logistics: preemergency logistical systems, procurement and storage, shipping and transportation, distribution, and management.

## Preemergency Logistical Systems And Capacity

Unlike government agencies, the UN, and other entities, NGOs do not normally stockpile logistical infrastructure or relief materials because the time, place, and type of the next emergency are typically unknown. Before emergencies hit, NGOs often have minimal logistical infrastructure in place because regional logistical capacities are often useless and expensive to maintain. Thus, many NGOs maintain the capability to expand logistical operations quickly and specifically after choosing to respond to a particular emergency. Conversely, many NGOs specialize in various types of logistical services, and manage in-house logistical systems that rival private or government sector systems in terms of efficiency and capacity. Many NGOs have developed in-house logistical systems from years of experience operating in humanitarian emergencies, war zones, and disaster settings. By compiling lessons, NGO staff members may settle in to routines, patterns, and practices without thinking specifically about defining them as logistical processes. For example, Relief International (RI) does not have a specific logistical handbook or series of procedures formally recorded or followed in each emergency to which it responds. It does have operating procedures and staff expertise in specific areas, and logistical tasks are carried out by able staff members who know what needs to be done during the initial phases of an emergency. When an emergency hits, RI staff members use contracts with shipping companies already established for the movement of material into the affected region, use travel agencies that specialize in hard-to-find overseas transport for sending staff members to the region, and call on material or commodity donors RI has worked with in the past for the actual material it will be sending. Because RI is a relatively small operation, logistics are not necessarily operational feats nor major challenges at the headquarters level. One of the most important logistical functions provided at HQ is the management of information and decision-making for program operations in the field. NGO HQs are typically equipped with multiple telephone lines, fast internet connections, supporting literature and references for technical programming (water and sanitation, health, construction, and the like). NGOs often focus on beefing up capacity for emergency operations. Some NGOs will have spare rooms attached to their main offices for use during emergencies as "war rooms" or overflow space for increased levels of staffing or volunteers that may help out during an emergency. Relationships established with shipping, communications, travel and donors before an emergency are all essential tasks that make emergency logistics more efficient. NGOs do prepare various types of equipment for emergency deployment. Having cases of communication equipment, short-term but critical relief supplies, and other tools ready to go with emergency staff members can simplify some of the logistical tasks for managing initial assessment or relief operations in an emergency. The contents of a tote case or emergency kitand thus the beginning of logistical operationsoften include the items in the following table (table 15.1):

| satellite phone (VSAT)                                  | medical manuals/CD-ROM compilations                  |
|---------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|
| primary emergency medical kit (bandages, ointments,     |                                                      |
| sanitizers, ORS packets, pain medication, and the like) |                                                      |
| flashlights                                             |                                                      |
| maps and language books                                 | weather kit (poncho, all-weather blanket, hat,       |
| sunscreen, and so on)                                   |                                                      |
| laptop with mini printer (for proposals, e-mail), modem |                                                      |
| and potential external disk drives                      |                                                      |
| small set of tools                                      |                                                      |
| compass and leveler                                     | NGO stickers, t-shirts, or other items with NGO      |
| insignia                                                |                                                      |
| NGO annual report, operation procedures, and the like   | small office supplies                                |
| MREs or other foodstuffs for staff                      | cash                                                 |
| a GPS unit                                              | a hand-held technology device (Palm Pilot, IPAQ, and |
| so on)                                                  |                                                      |

When NGO employees are dispatched to an emergency from the United States, they'll have this minimal equipment ready to help them do their job once in-theater. NGOs also may consider training activities, contract establishment, and technology systems part of their preemergency logistical system capacity or capacity-building activities. Without specifically planning for emergencies, NGOs that are flexible can easily convert routine operations into emergency response and can rely on solid logistical capacity to ease into relief activities. Material, equipment, and operating procedures can be translated into emergency capacities and logistical tools. Trucks, radios, office space, local staff, relationships with local contractors or companies, road and transport knowledge and structures, and communication systems (inter- and intraregional) can all be easily turned into logistical tools providing an NGO with a comparative advantage in emergency response. Planning stages also are often included in the preemergency phases of an organization's logistical activities. Medium-sized and large NGOs often attempt to create a series of policies or standard operating procedures for emergency response, including logistical systems for various potential scenarios. CARE and World Vision both have emergency response units that pride themselves on being able to command large logistical capacities for delivering humanitarian relief in very short periods. This may include shifting resources from a nearby region, delivering trucks or technical equipment within a few days, or dispatching program and logistics teams to the affected region.

## Procurement And Storage

The procurement process during any emergency is often one of the most important variables that will lead to either success or failure of a relief operation. Procurement is getting important supplies to a region that are useful, timely, and appropriate for the affected population. NGOs are effective at procuring almost all material needed for an effective humanitarian response. For the purposes of this manual it is useful to highlight two types of procurement: local and international. Most relief supplies and material in recent emergencies have been procured locally. After an NGO establishes operations and funding for programs on the ground in the emergency setting, many of the relief materials are purchased and obtained locally or regionally for market prices (sometimes inflated). When a natural disaster hits, for example, most building supplies and materials can be found in nearby areas where the impact has not been as severe. Medical supplies stockpiled by the affected country's Ministry of Health and can be tapped for use in extraordinary conditions. Trucks, as used by both the NGO community and the UN and government agencies, are often rented, leased, or purchased locally, as are water trucks, generators, local communication equipment, and sometimes even technology equipment. It is often surprising to NGO personnel and others how many resources can be found on local markets in an emergency-affected region. International procurement is also necessary in humanitarian emergencies. Some emergencies wipe out a country or region's food stocks, medical facilities, housing and housing materials, and technical systems, and thus demand a response that will include replacement of or supplements to these goods. Technology equipment is often procured outside an emergency-affected area, as are advanced medical equipment, large quantities of immunizations, special vehicles, land-mine removal equipment, and food. International procurement comes in a variety of forms. For many NGOs, relationships are established before any specific emergency with local U.S.- or EU-based companies and organizations that will donate goods for a worthwhile cause or during an emergency. Pharmaceutical and medical supply companies are excellent examples of private businesses that seek to offload excess inventory or soon-to-expire material for a good cause. NGOs frequently arrange shipment of such donations directly to the region of concern, bypassing any HQ-side storage requirements. Other NGOs keep stockpiles of relief supplies and materials on the HQ-side (in the United States or EU, primarily) that are ready for deployment, with an established relationship with a shipping forwarder or shipping consolidator in a nearby port or airport. Food is a special case. When a country loses the ability to feed parts or all of its population, it does not always mean that there is a lack of food. Frequently, political problems or economic failure prevent food from being produced efficiently or from getting to the right places. Food aid, therefore, is often challenging to deliver because of the political, economic, or social conditions that gave rise to the malnutrition or hunger problem. Emergency food relief involves tapping external food sources, paying extra attention to the logistical processes of delivering food, and taking into consideration the safety of staff members, security of equipment and food stores, potential food and equipment loss, chaos, and potential failure of mission. NGOs also have established relationships with the U.S. and European governments and the UN. Government agencies like USAID, CIDA, ECHO, and DFID manage food commodity systems that allow for distributing, diverting, or purchasing large quantities of food for specific emergencies. Instead of stockpiling, these agencies depend on a global capacity shared among agencies and countries to call on grain and other food reserves on short notice. NGOs coordinate closely with these agencies in many cases, and often assisting with assessments and recommendations for the amount and types of material required. NGOs then pick up the ground-level programming within the affected region by accepting large shipments or coordinating the distribution to field storage or distribution points. The diagram in figure 15.1 shows a sample procurement process. When an NGO's management (at both field and HQ levels) decides that it is poised to respond to a new emergency, it either mobilizing a team in the region already (often the case) or dispatches a new team altogether. In either case, there are two simultaneous tracks of operations. For the field staff, relaying information and setting groundwork for logistical systems are primary duties. For HQ staff, liaising and coordinating with large government, military, and UN agencies are primary tasks to get large levels of commodities moving toward the emergency. Whether as a private shipment or large-scale food shipment, the NGO will receive the goods and move the material into local storage facilities before distribution. At the same time, NGO field staff members arrange procurement in-country, obtaining all of the supplies, materials, and tools that can be purchased either on the private markets or from other agencies or organizations in the country or region. NGOs and other relief agencies frequently depend on contracts with the private sector that determine the types of equipment and materials that may be needed during an emergencybefore it occurs. Many of these contracts are with companies in the EU or United States and guarantee that the company will provide specific supplies or services (or both) within 48 hours of request. Building material companies, communications and technology companies, and shipping and transport companies are all types of private sector firms that seek relief contracts and business with NGOs and government or UN agencies during emergencies. The private sector is ideally suited for much of this work because it can ramp up production quickly, and in the short term can divert considerable resources. For an NGO, such collaborations permit maintaining attention to life-sensitive engagements when a new emergency erupts and purchase supplies when needed "just in time" rather than storing materials in locations "just in case," which may or may not prove useful. The humanitarian industry has created a number of warehouses and stockpiles of relief materials and equipment. They are strategically located in parts of the United States, EU, Africa, and Central America to help improve response times and buffer material requirements. ReliefWeb/OCHA holds a central registry of this information but it is a bit difficult to fully gauge what materials are actually on hand.168 The website lists information about locations and partial levels of material. A map of publicly available information as of April 2008 regarding emergency stockpile contents and locations for various humanitarian organizations is available at http://ocha.unog.ch/cr/docs/rw_LSU_ stockpiles080422.pdf. Organizations with stockpiles store all sorts of goods including jerry cans, blankets, tents, hoses, and first-aid supplies and some medications, which are only used in exceptionally severe emergencies.

NGO decides
to respond to
emergency
Field
Activities
HQ
Activities
HQ staff initiate
procurement process
Logisticians and program
staff dispatched to
emergency
NGO field staff relay
needs of EPs
Material/Supply Inputs
HQ staff receive field
data and information,
then craft appeals and
solicitations for relief
material
DOD
USAID
U.S. government
NGO field staff procure
partial relief materials
from local markets
UN
HQ staff coordinate
to receive donated
materials or collaborate
with other agencies for
materials
Private
contributions
NGO field staff receive
shipment of relief goods
HQ staff initiate shipping
process
NGO field staff transfer
goods from port to
storage
NGO field staff distribute
goods to program-EPs

## Shipping And Transportation

NGOs procure supplies and materials both locally and internationally, and may ship independently or in collaboration with other NGOs or large agencies. A variety of shipping methods for moving goods from the point of origin to the point of distribution are used by NGOs in an emergency setting.

OCEAN
o
- long-range materials transport - short-range materials transport - port operations and transfers - river and lake barges - cargo movement and storage
AIR
j
- long-range heavy lifting (intraregional) - long-range passenger - short-range cargo (interregional) - short-range passenger - heliocopter
v
GROUND
- rail - truck - passenger truck - trailer - animals

NGOs typically use air and ground transport. Large ocean shipments are often coordinated by government or UN agencies and then offloaded into NGO management, but NGOs do not own large ocean-going vessels. Ocean transport is the least expensive method of shipping major quantities of goods overseas. In emergency settings, air and ground shipments are often used to deliver first rounds of aid for immediate needs or for publicity. Shipping services are also hired, but depending on the origin of goods being shipped, transoceanic transport may take weeks and even months to arrive in the closest port in the area of concern. For NGOs this means that a heavy reliance on local commodities, regional commodities and even some air transport is primary, while moving the next level of food aid or relief supplies and material by ship is secondary. In long-lasting emergencies (like CHEs), ocean shipments may become routine because the international community has an opportunity to create a supply and delivery structure. The range of the types of transportation used in any one supply chain can be numerous. Figure 15.3, for example, presents a sample 11-stage transportation process that an NGO based in Los Angeles might use to get a relief item or shipment from its local storage facility to an emergency-affected area. All times, of course, are variable, and the figure expresses a flow beginning after an item has been procured. An item could be medical supplies, a computer for NGO field staff, or building materials. Once goods arrive at port in an emergency-affected region, NGOs depend largely on local staff to assist in unloading, packing, repackaging, sorting, stacking, and loading the relief materials. An ocean liner can often be off-loaded in less than a day, and it takes approximately 10 minutes to load a oneton truck, and about two to four hours to load a 20-ton truck. It is useful to know that NGOs depend on private shipping companies, and government, UN, or military agencies that have substantial logistical capacities for shipping relief and technical equipment to emergency settings. DOD is by far the largest logistical service provider in many emergencies because of its incredible transcontinental airlift capacity, its unique short-range airlift capability, and its ability to muster technical, communication, and transportation systems almost immediately at the onset of an emergency. It is often challenging for NGOs to work with DOD because the department does not involve itself in every emergency and is restrained by other priorities and concerns that include force protection and mission-creep. For in-country operations, NGOs primarily use trucks, but may also engage lighter aircraft, and even animal or human packing. Trucks can carry large loads (up to 30 metric tons), can be leased and cared for on local markets in most regions around the world, and are versatile. Forklifts, special loading equipment, and warehousing tools are not always available, but there is often an abundance of inexpensive local labor that an NGO can use to load and unload relief materials into and out of trucks, ships, warehouses, and planes. During the peak of an emergency, NGOs will often use any method of transportation available for staff members and relief materials and equipment to project sites or distribution points. They frequently hire local taxi vans, small box vans, and even cars at the onset of an emergency. The UN often provides vehicles for partner NGOs by bringing in bulk shipments of cars directly from the manufacturer or a vehicle broker (like Bukkehave), arriving a few weeks (at the soonest) after NGOs and other international emergency management personnel. NGO logisticians hire fleets of trucks to carry food aid and coordinate or share transportation costs with other NGOs in the same areas or moving similar equipment. Large trailer trucks can increase in cost tenfold during an emergency, and depending on the local market, fuel costs can be extremely high or extremely low. Repairs, both replacement and spare parts, are often priced at incredibly high rates in the wake of an emergency because of a perception that international staff may be able to pay more, or because shortages make the goods more valuable. NGOs have shown a steady demand for collaboration in transportation sectors because this is often the most expensive and logistically challenging component of a relief operation. Keeping relief supplies or materials safe and stored properly, shipping them in a timely fashion, and then ensuring NGO Highlight: Air Serv International
(www.airserv.org)
that the supplies or materials are distributed properly is a difficult, especially when faced with obstacles such as civil strife, ruined infrastructure, disease, a shortage of fuel or replacement parts, and inclement weather. Transportation and shipments by air both local and international are significant topics because air freight costs can be prohibitively high for NGOs. Although very few NGOs actually own aircraft, airplanes and air services are used during emergencies for personnel and materiel. Of all the types and quantities of supplies harvested and delivered to needy populations during humanitarian emergencies, very little is transported by air. In fact, little trans-Atlantic or transcontinental cargo originates outside of emergency-affected regions receiving international assistance. Exceptions often exist, but for the most part relief and development supplies are purchased, stored, transported, and delivered within the same region.

Air Serv International is operational only
in Africa, but provides services completely
unique to the humanitarian NGO
community. It is a nonprofit organization
licensed by the U.S. FAA to serve as air
transport for humans and cargo. With 10
owned aircraft and 15 pilots, Air Serv flies
planes with various capacities in different
regions. The organization carries all forms
of cargo ranging from humanitarian
supplies (medicines, food, etc) to survey
personnel and equipment. It depends on
leasing agreements to increase its capacity
during periods of high demand. During
the Mozambique floods in 2000, Air Serv
was the primary personnel and cargo
transport with more than 25 planes under
its operational management. Most of the
planes were leased or on loan from other
relief organizations, companies or religious
agencies in the region.

UN-sponsored small and medium-sized aircraft are typically present in emergency settings to shuttle relief personnel and experts through regions for assessments and for immediate medicine deliveries. Medical teams are often the first people that enter disaster regions, transported with timesensitive or fragile medicines by small aircraft. NGOs like Air Serv or Mission Aviation Fellowship (MAF) will provide NGO, UN, government, and ICRC personnel daily access to sites inaccessible by roads or waterways.

Air Serv is a spin-off from Mission Aviation
Ministry and is currently moving its HQ to
Virginia from southern California. Founded in
Florida in 1985, Air Serv has a relatively small
operating budget. Most of its asset listings
are valued in terms of aircraft owned. Air
Serv operates in most parts of sub-Saharan
Africa, including the Horn of Africa and
northern parts of West Africa.

For isolated or remote regions unreachable by trucks, aircraft are used by NGOs to deliver food and supplies, often with the help of military aircraft, whether helicopters or cargo-drops from cargo planes (see figure 15.4). A range of planes sized from small Cesnas to larger Buffalo cargo planes are used not only for their flexible take-off and landing abilities, but also for the range of cargo they can carry. For smaller planes that carry fewer people and only a limited amount of emergency supplies, NGOs can turn to a few different sources. Air Serv International is an NGO that specializes in providing air transport during humanitarian emergencies. The number of aircraft Air Serv operates depends on the size of the demand in each region, and Fast leasing arrangements can supplement excess in demand if existing capacity is inadequate. Mission Aviation Fellowship (MAF) is a U.S.-based agency that owns and operates more than 70 small aircraft worldwide. They specialize in assisting Christian missions and projects, but service other NGOs when needed. For heavy-lift transport, the NGO community normally depends on one of four sources for aircraft, expertise, and funding. First, the UN provides large humanitarian cargo lifts when necessary with C-130s or IL-75s. The cost is covered by the participating UN agency, with normal backing from a donor government that has pledged funding for that specific activity. These are somewhat rare, because most food and material aid in large quantities are transported over ground. Second, NGOs can use donated aircraft and air-lift services that include cargo space among a shared transport, an entire airplane, or through contracts established by the NGO itself (often times with Air Serv). NGOs are often "given" an aircraft for specific time frame and can then use it for general programming purposes. Air Serv is constantly called on to operate these donated aircraft, because most NGOs do not have the technical capacity to maintain or operate aircraft. Third, military forces may offer air transport services to NGOs for personnel and supplies, but this is extremely rare because militaries are normally tasked with carrying out government policy. Military logistical and supply capacity is substantial, but normally excludes shared activities with private actors or entities. Exceptions can be seen in Albania, Kosovo, and Macedonia (19992001) where NATO forces established close relations with NGOs and supported NGO activity or more recently during the 2004 tsunami, the Katrina disaster, and even in Iraq and Afghanistan. Fourth, NGOs can enlist private-sector services for either renting aircraft or for shipping humanitarian relief material. Normal cargo services often provide transport of medicines and pharmaceutical supplies, but at relatively high costs per pound or kilo. During large emergencies, commercial airliners frequently donate cargo space and seats to NGOs to move material and personnel from their HQ country to the affected region. During the Balkan crisis Swiss Air provided numerous U.S.- and EU-based NGOs with seats for personnel and cargo space on international flights for time-sensitive medicines and other humanitarian goods. When an NGO or an air-transport specialist like Air Serv (see annex 1) needs aircraft, it can contact a series of brokers that specialize in maintaining worldwide contacts with private aircraft owners and companies that in turn manage fleets of aircraft for rental or lease use. To own an aircraft, however, requires technical capability, established supply and fuel lines, maintenance personnel, and a place to house it. These are all normally outside an individual NGO's budget and capacity.

## Distribution

Once relief material or equipment arrives in an emergency-affected area, it is put in queue for distribution.169 Food is stored and then redistributed with quick turnaround times to prevent spoilage and waste. Medical supplies that require cold-chain management (mainly immunizations) must be refrigerated, kept on ice, or distributed quickly to target populations. Customs or shipping delays can result in the expiration or spoilage of relief supplies, meaning the difference between timely delivery and loss of life. Figure 15.5 presents a simple schematic of the point-to-point process that NGOs manage during an emergency when delivering relief supplies and materials. The diagram highlights a few of the challenges that make a seemingly simple transfer of goods from a warehouse or staging location to a distribution point surprisingly difficult. By establishing feeding centers and distribution points, and using local health structures or community leadership as close as possible to food storage locations or access roads or points, NGOs can distribute needed food and relief supplies to populations in need more efficiently and avoid food spoilage or damage. For reconstruction or settlement activities, NGOs frequently work and center their storage capacities in program areas and encourage local inhabitants to participate in selecting sites and types of materials used.

NGO
local
warehouse
NGO
program
site
Rain, snow, bad roads, civil strife, road blocks, corrupt border
officials, flat tires, no spare truck parts, swollen rivers, land mines,
roadming bandits, malaria, lack of communication equipment or
reception, and other dangers tend to make a distibution process
difficult.

NGO logisticians are extremely involved in the distribution process. Depending on the type of distribution, logisticians may provide transportation, security or other services related to moving and storing materials and supplies. NGO program staff members are normally on the front-lines of distribution of health materials, food, water or building supplies, and are often trained in a specific sector. Within smaller NGOs it is harder to differentiate between logisticians and program staff because they may be the same person. Within larger NGOs, logisticians provide logistical support services to program staff, and program staff handle the actual the programming or sectoral activities while serving affected populations.

NGOs often request help from military and government agencies when delivering humanitarian assistance. Four frequently encountered conditions make outside help essential.
-
Extremely dangerous, unstable, or violent areas make military assistance a necessity for the NGO community. Convoy security, quelling civil strife, crowd control, and generally defending humanitarian personnel and assets from gangs, combatants, thieves, or violent crowds cannot be done by NGOs alone. Severe weather or terrain conditions may require the assistance of technical government or military agencies (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or the German aid agency GTZ). Damaged bridges, destroyed roads, impassable objects, snow, mud, or sand make ground transportation challenging for NGOs, and technical assistance can make some of these obstacles passable.
-
Most humanitarian assistance NGOs do not have landmine removal capacities and depend on militaries, UN agencies, or private companies to make suspect areas safe from landmines and UXOs.
-
Harsh and limiting political climates may prevent delivery of humanitarian aid to specific populations, and international or government engagements may create space for humanitarian operations to exist. When NGOs find themselves in trouble in a specific country they often depend on consular or political services offered by U.S. or EU embassies for intervention with the host government.
Other conditions that NGOs require assistance with surely can arise, but these are four areasconflict or violence, weather, landmines, and politicsare recurring themes. Military units in complex humanitarian emergencies will often receive requests for assistance from NGOs responding to the same situation, and should understand that NGOs will be unable to perform many of their essential humanitarian tasks without assistance.

## Logistical Management

When NGO decides to respond to an emergency, it must determine a few things immediately: the type of emergency, which assets it can to mobilize at once, the types of responses it can deploy, and funding sources. Once these major questions are addressed and a response is deemed adequate, an NGO can begin logistical planning. Figure 15.6 displays the intimate relationship between an NGO's HQ and field offices, the procurement process, and the distribution of the goods to affected populations at the end of the line.

United States
Field
communication
HQ
field office
procurement
management
shipping
local
shipping
points of
distribution
warehouse
port or
airport

Once on the ground, NGO staff members must establish a working location or space that is safe and
offers shelter from a variety of external conditions.170 Next, they must establish a working relationship
with local community members for translation, needs assessments, transportation, customs, cultural assistance, and other areas needed to navigate in a foreign country. The following elements typically move directly into logistical tasks that will either prepare the ground for other incoming NGO staff members, or enable immediate relief programming.
-
Translators and drivers for expat staff members are essential to NGOs in all operations because they serve not only as guides but also as community anchors, allowing an NGO to establish a network of local staff members and understand the moods and social structures of an emergency. Local staff members can expedite customs clearances, contracts, and further programming needs. They frequently become good friends and advisors to international staff members, and are a key element of successful NGO programming.
-
Warehouses and infrastructure are a necessity if an NGO will be procuring and storing materials from local or international sources on-site in an emergency-affected location. Logisticians usually set up contracts with local property owners for warehouse space, office space, and living quarters for incoming staff members. Warehousing is especially critical, because it needs to be secure and intact to prevent weather or pest effects on inventory, and located in a program-efficient area of the emergency-affected region. NGOs traditionally have to follow a rigid reporting and purchasing process for spending money, but local property owners may have a different method of doing business. (In dangerous regions or in the informal economy, written contracts are sought but are often violated by either party in some manner.) This often makes for a challenging mix of practices that may result in misunderstanding or problems if a logistician does not act carefully.
-
Trucks, fuel, and supplies may be required to move relief supplies, water, building materials, and equipment to and from locations in the emergency-affected area A truck can transport up to 30 metric tons, and is relatively cheap to maintain and fuel. Trucks are vital tools, which are leased rather than purchased about 98 percent of the time. Fleets of trucks can be organized quickly by NGO logisticians by offering cash payments to the drivers or owners. Fuel supplies are a constant concern for NGO logisticians, especially in remote areas. Even leased trucks require replacement parts. The local economy may not have any inventory or the appropriate supply chain for needed replacement parts. NGO truck tires in rough conditions can last between 10,000 and 15,000 miles before being replaced. Larger NGOs can take this into account in inventory supply requests, whereas smaller NGOs may have to operate at the mercy of the local economy to fix broken vehicles.
-
Importing materials frequently requires solid relationships with officials at ports, airports,
and border crossings within the emergency-affected area. Because relief supplies often come from external sources, NGO staff members must know how to navigate the customs process, taxing and duties, regulations, and the politics of importing goods. Whether through normal channels, a military operation, or the black market, logisticians must be able to receive imported goods and equipment, and then distribute it from the port and into field-based storage facilities.
-
Security for procurement and storage can be precarious in emergency settings because social, political, and economic structures collapse. High levels of crime, violence, and corruption may be rampant, requiring extra attention to security for international and local staff members and for the assets and commodities the NGO is using for its programs. Local security is most often hired to monitor expat housing compounds, warehouses, car or truck lots, and other equipment that may be exposed. Large levels of loss may be due to stealing and graft, so paperwork, inventory, redundancy and trust are all key considerations for logisticians when hiring local staff members and situating the components of a logistical system.
Advancements are being made in the logistical services front, and some NGOs are adopting new technologies that make logistics more easily managed. The Microsoft FACTS system, the SUMA system, and services provided by PICnet focus on providing technology solutions to many of the normal logistical challenges faced in humanitarian emergencies.171 SUMA is free, and FACTS and PICnet services require monthly hosting fees. In addition to online software, many NGOs use off-the-shelf (COTS) technologies to manage their logistics. Because communication is often the most essential factor of logistical operations, NGO staff members often use laptops, web-based e-mail, Twitter or blogging, and cell or satellite phones to coordinate activities and report to HQ. Microsoft Office is used extensively by thousands of NGO employees worldwide to manage flow of inventory, budgets, personnel, and other operations in the field.

COTS technology is cheap and efficient for smaller and medium-sized NGOs. For larger NGOs, specialized software is often developed to manage specific in-house logistical tasks. More on NGO communications and technology will be covered in chapter 16.

## Ngo Logistical Priorities

In the face of less than ideal conditions, NGOs must prioritize their activities quickly. For an NGO logisticians or first responders to an emergency, the priorities could look something like this.
-
Get equipment out of the port or airport area and through customs. Exchange currencies and find a taxi into town. Attempt to connect with other aid agencies, the UN information office or fellow NGO staffers.
-
Find a fixer or local employee that can drive and guide through urban, rural and emergency settings. Attempt to solidify semipermanent housing or work space and security for all NGO staff members.
-
Establish communication capabilities. If there are no telephones, set up satellite or cellular phone service and establish contact with HQ or regional office. Use the Internet (via Internet cafes, UN or other NGO offices, or satellite phone connection) to communicate initial information, findings, and needs. Coordinate times and places of additional staff member arrivals.
-
Contact or create an NGO coordination body and register with local ministry of health or other appropriate government body. Work with other NGOs to gather and consolidate data and knowledge of security and humanitarian conditions.
-
Begin liaising with donors and appropriate agencies about perceived needs. Potentially implement an assessment or survey of specific parts of the emergency-affected area. Find the area of responsibility (AOR) or area of specialty. Begin writing proposals and liaising with donors for specific needs of affected populations, individual aid agencies, and other NGOs. Establish communication lines with HQ about shipments and supply procurement.
-
Implement relief programs, including primary health care and immunizations, food aid distribution, and feeding center establishments.
Priorities may vary considerably, but this list makes it clear that providing relief does not begin immediately. Staff safety, communication, coordination, and information gathering are all essential items for an NGO to solidify before operations can move ahead smoothly. Conversely, many NGOs pride themselves on extremely rapid responses and immediate service provision. MSF, for example, often equips its staff members with survival equipment and enough medical supply materials to begin services immediatelywithout requiring lodging or other major coordination requirements.

## Un Logistics

The cluster approach was adopted by the IASC in September 2005 as a "mechanism for interagency coordination of humanitarian assistance" involving the United Nations and other humanitarian partners.172 The Logistics Cluster Working Group is led by the WFP, the so-called Marine Corps of the UN.173 Additional global partners include IOM (International Organization for Migration), WHO, UNHCR, UNICEF, OCHA, the UN Joint Logistic Center, UN Population Fund, ICRC, IFRC, World Vision International, CARE, Catholic Relief Services, Save the Children, and FAO. Logistics Cluster operations include information sharing, infrastructure assessment, and transportation coordinationserving as the provider of last resort. WFP also oversees the UNJLC, which "facilitates and supports the coordination of logistics capabilities among cooperating humanitarian partners" during large-scale and complex emergencies. UNJLC supports the Logistics Cluster by providing services that include information management, geographic information systems (GIS), commodities tracking, prioritized cargo, information compilation from multiple sources, and information sharing in various formats.174 With a goal of eliminating bottlenecks and avoiding wasteful competition, UNJLC facilitates movement of relief commodities in emergencyaffected areas. General guidance for global and field-based logistics, targeted at humanitarian personnel performing assessments or coordinating initial logistics, is available in the Logistics Operations Guide (LOG, 2007), which is available online.175

## Who Are Ngo Logisticians?

NGO logisticians are a varied group, often coming from military service. Many logisticians have been working in the humanitarian assistance field for most of their careers, and many have been trained in the government or private sector in shipping, trucking, communications, or commodity management. Many military personnel that have worked with NGOs in the field report that working with logisticians is easier than working with other NGO staff. Logisticians often speak the same language as military planners and managers because so much of what military managers do is logistical. NGO logisticians also serve as security advisors. Because they are responsible for moving material and keeping it safe, logisticians also have to ensure the right security procedures are being carried out by NGO staff members. By arranging contracts with local security companies or protection by military units, logisticians fill a large void for which smaller NGOs may lack the resources. Ex-military personnel are best suited for this, but all logisticians must take safety and security into consideration in all stages of planning and implementation.

Executive Summary
  NGOs use a vast array of technology and
communications systems to manage emergency operations.

  NGOs almost exclusively use commercial offthe-shelf (COTS) products that any civilian can readily obtain for a minimal outlay.
  NGOs implement field programs using
satellite and cell phones, and manage intricate Internet networks designed specifically for multisite applications.
  Software packages that specifically
assist NGOs in their work in their early development, with very few projects reaching scale.
  Although technology is an integral part of
daily operations for most NGOs, no two NGOs have the same communications and technology systems.
  Rarely do NGOs use true communications
systems. Most often they use whatever technology is readily available to communicate from emergency settings, and the development of systems often depends on field conditions and operational tempo.
Like any other actor in conflict settings, natural disasters, or resource-poor areas, NGOs place major emphasis on logistical activities. Whether an NGO classifies its activities as logistical is another matter. NGO logistics are easily summarized.
-
NGOs have extensive logistical capacities. They don't always classify their activities as such, but at almost all times are managing some form of logistical processes.
-
Medium-sized and large NGOs hire logisticians.
They
are
often
retired
military or government service experts and are tasked with the responsibility of managing equipment, material, food, tools, and personnel during humanitarian emergency responses.
-
NGO logisticiansin any given day handle
hundreds
of
tasks.
Dealing
with
contracts,
trucks,
warehousing,
communications, spare parts, staff safety, and other conditions, they play a vital role for any NGO that can afford specialized staff members.
-
NGO logistics are often managed with off-the-shelf technology, laptops, webbased e-mail, and paperwork. Much of a logistician's job is communication, and normal communication equipment can suffice.
-
Coordination with militaries, government, and UN agencies is essential because NGOs cannot manage the full spectrum of humanitarian assistance logistics unassisted. They do not have the capacity to maintain fleets of cargo vessels or use cargo planes on a regular basis. They must coordinate their activities for security, heavy lifting, and remote access.
-
Military personnel often find it difficult to understand NGO logistics because each NGO uses different logistical management systems. Some NGOs have no protocol whatsoever, but others have extensive manuals and procedures.
 resource: Logistics Websites
-
USAID/DELIVER Project
http://deliver.jsi.com/dhome/topics/supplychain/logistics

-
UNJLC Humanitarian Logistics Association www.humanitarianlogistics.org/news/adieu2019-and-welcome-unjlc
-
Humanitarian Logisitics www.palgrave.com/products/title.aspx?PID=295273
-
Fritz Institute, Key Parameters in Humanitarian Logistics www.fritzinstitute.org/PDFs/findings/XS_Davidson_Anne.pdf
-
Supply Chain and Logistics Institute www.scl.gatech.edu/research/humanitarian/projects.php

## Ngo Use Of Information And Communications Technology

Cynthia Barrigan and Ben Hemingway K
nowing NGO communication capabilities and how they collect and use information is essential to understanding how they operate in support of humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HA/
DR) emergencies. Communications are essential during emergencies. NGOs must be able to relay and receive information about constantly changing conditions, needs, operational challenges, and warnings. During emergency operations, information is not only extremely valuable but highly perishable. Timeliness, clarity, and effectiveness of communications are critical when lives are at stake. As a result, NGOs rely on technology to function and perform well. Within the international community, the collective technical infrastructure of hardware, software, and telecommunications is often referred to as *information and communications technology* or, more simply, ICT. Many NGOs perceive ICT as an important tool to optimize operations and conduct information exchanges. This chapter provides a basic overview of NGO information management techniques and constraints along with an inventory of ICT tools commonly used by NGOs. Overall, the intent is to bring about an increased awareness of an NGO's capacity for using technology to gather and share information and communicate during an emergency.

## Information Management

NGOs are independent entities that manage a variety of programs in emergency settings. They require a broad base of information to secure appropriate resources and carry out operations in harmony with many other organizations. They depend on a variety of information:
-
weather and geographical conditions
-
political, social, and economic developments in a region
-
market prices for commodities, transportation, and shipping
-
NGO and UN activity
-
military activity, plans, or violence
-
population activity, numbers, movement, and trends
-
internal logistical, security, and planning needs
NGOs collect data from a wide variety of sources including other NGOs, donor units in the field, military reports, newswires, local government officials, and even victims themselves. Because NGOs do not normally have the ability to obtain all the data necessary, they have an incentive to join into NGO associations to rapidly acquire additional information and facilitate information exchanges.

The quantity and complexity of information in many humanitarian operations can be overwhelming. This can make it difficult for NGO staff to digest, evaluate, and convert information into actionable data to ensure appropriate logistical, financial, programmatic, and personnel support. The information a particular NGO seeks depends on its area of focus. A food-aid NGO will need to know about roads, port and airport operations, commodity prices, warehouse security, and shipment information. A health-care NGO, in the same emergency, may need to know about population health, immunization programs, local health-care facilities, mortality rates, medical supply stockpiles, and so on. And both will likely want the most current information available on factors such as population movements, epidemics, food aid movement, violence and battles between combating parties, displacement, weather, and the like.

Information Flow and Decision-Making When an NGO enters an emergency, it must be able to exchange information internally as well as externally with the communities and countries involved in coordinating the relief effort. Also vital to any humanitarian operation is the need to communicate with donor agencies and the media to create public awareness of the humanitarian needs in a given area. On arrival, NGOs begin communicating with other NGOs, UN agencies, police, fire rescue, and others to understand what programs are already being implemented, what areas are being covered, and what needs still exist. In areas of armed conflict, they seek military reports to obtain security updates, information about safety zones, seek convoy protection, and request logistical support. Almost immediately, information begins flowing from the field up to regional or NGO headquarter offices to provide situational awareness of the location and movement of field staff as well as to provide information on needs. At the HQ level, NGOs normally post desk officers or program staff on specific emergencies to serve as the point of contact for field staff members. Field-based program officers often either report to the field-based management team (or person) or directly to the HQ desk officer. All communication coming from the field is often sorted through this one desk officer and then coordinated with appropriate personnel. HQ depends on field staff members to send updated information, lists of needs and conditions so managers can make the appropriate resource allocations and decisions regarding effective interventions. Accurate and timely information helps fine-tune interventions, avoid costly mistakes and inappropriate use of scarce resources. Likewise, information from HQ also flows down to the field. The HQ office can assist field personnel with research, procurement, shipping and commodity management, financial management, travel arrangements, coordination with other NGOs, and donor relations. Over time, coordination with private and individual in-country donors, private companies, diplomats and embassies (not donor agencies specifically), armed groups, rebel movements, citizen groups, civil society organizations (CSOs), and others often take up a large part of an NGO's communication activities. Given that communications between HQ and the field can be sporadic and the paramount need for swift and decisive field-level action, NGO management structures are designed to operate in a decentralized framework that empowers local decision-making. Country officers or other management personnel are trusted to act within the scope and capacity of the organization. Field staff armed with recent news and information, contextual knowledge, and program-specific strategies are believed to be best equipped to make fast decisions about where to move commodities, where to position personnel, who to partner with, and which grants to apply for. As a result, the most critical need for effective information and communication capabilities in the field. Although NGOs have the ability to communicate and share information with others, they are selective as to whom they will engageparticularly in an electronic format. Many prefer face-toface interaction, but also use e-mail, telephone, and fax to share information. Some will exchange information with military units but others will not out of concerns over the perception of real or perceived impartiality, neutrality, and independence. Preferences will need to be determined in the field on an NGO by NGO basis.

## Application Of Information & Communications Technology

A response to a humanitarian aid operation is characterized by a large number of unrelated organizations descending simultaneously on a given location. To operate safely and successfully carry out their mission, NGOs not only need to receive information from a wide variety of sources, but also must provide information to others as well. Ensuring both the internal and the external flow of such information depends on an NGO's ICT infrastructure. Hundreds of NGOs throughout the world focus on emergency relief operations. Most NGOs use some type of technology to manage information and communications in what are often remote, chaotic, and unsafe areas. The types of technology used in a relief scenario are generally dictated by the phase of the emergency, type of mission, remoteness of the location, availability of network infrastructure, and the internal capacity and capabilities of the NGO to use the technology. The following general examples of the types of information collected and how information and communications technologies are applied in the hours, weeks, and months of an NGO's engagement in an emergency are representative.176
-
At the onset of an emergency, the foremost requirement beyond rescuing and treating survivors is coordinating the relief effort. Relief organizations are busy conducting assessments and surveying damage. Descriptive information and pictures about conditions are transmitted to

headquarters. Local communications capabilities are almost always destroyed, inoperable, or nonexistent after a disaster strikes, making the need for rapid provisioning of both voice and data communications is urgent. This stage tends to be characterized by highly individualized, highly mobile, temporary and transient computing, communications, and alternate sources of power like solar, battery, and so on.
-
In the weeks ahead, as priorities shift from saving lives to preserving lives and additional personnel and supplies arrive, continuous infrastructure monitoring, disease reporting, comprehensive assessments, management of relief supplies, personnel security, applying and reporting donated funds, along with uploading case studies, pictures, and relief reports are all necessary. This stage tends to be characterized by mobile teams in conjunction with stationary
personnel collecting data and delivering services. These transient and temporary operations require a combination of mobile solutions along with compact easy-to-set-up and tear-down computing resources, additional software applications, increased bandwidth capacity, faster communications, and more substantial power solutions.
-
As further progress is made toward reconstruction and development, the focus is on delivering more services, building infrastructure, establishing warehouses to support supply and food distribution, water purification, and becoming a part of the community. At this stage, NGOs tend
to operate out of more permanent fixed facilities with an ability to install more robust full-scale ICT infrastructures and stable and faster broadband communications and power solutions.
Although this description of the phases of a typical emergency scenario is general, the variability in how these phases evolve and what technology NGOs actually use is tremendous.

## Types Of Technology Ngos Use

NGOs have been using technology since the earliest international humanitarian emergencies, have used the same types of equipment as host nations, and have often been on the forefront of technology when unique or especially challenging requirements have arisen. This continues today as NGOs become more sophisticated in accessing and leveraging technology and working collaboratively with other NGOs to achieve enhanced capabilities in specific regions. NGOs depend on technology that is rugged, reliable, and affordable. Given advancements in private sector technology development, NGOs have many options and can adopt the latest technology without having to develop internally or invest heavily in specialized equipment. An example of this is the use of high-frequency radios (HF), very-high-frequency radios (VHF), laptop and desktop computers, and cell phones, all of which are readily available worldwide and can be repaired and replaced locally. At field sites from Afghanistan to Somalia, NGOs rely heavily on local suppliers and expertise to establish, manage, and repair communications networks and equipment. During rapid onset emergencies and responses to resource insecure areas, NGOs bring most of the equipment needed to be self-sufficient for a limited period. Depending on the level of the emergency and proximity to cities with active commerce, NGOs may vary the amount of equipment they bring by procuring locally. Although some NGOs may use hardware and software similar to the military's, their equipment packages do not undergo stringent information assurance review or operate on military-grade secure networks. NGOs therefore do not have the capacity to keep communications confidential or secure. Whereas military communications systems are designed to keep information secret, NGO communication systems are meant simply to work well. Little attention is given to securing data and information sent over digital or analog lines. NGOs do value the protection of data, of ideas, of proposal leads or contacts, but typically no major technology systems are in place to keep information encrypted or secure. Passwords on computers, Internet e-mail accounts, log-in prompts for websites and e-mail accounts and the like are more common than any other form of information security. Depending on the type and severity of the emergency, various communications equipment will be deployed. For smaller NGOs, some communications equipment is prohibitively high in costs, whereas for larger NGOs, the newest and most advanced equipment can be procured and deployed.

Technology Inventory NGOs use a broad range of technologies to manage information, conduct operations, and deliver services (see table 16.1). At the field level, the laptop and HF/VHR radio and satphone or cell phone are by far the most popular tools during emergency relief efforts. Internally, e-mail through cell and satellite phones connections is the most common way of exchanging data between HQ and field offices and is quickly replacing voice communications in even the most dire emergencies.

With the appropriate connectivity, ICT users can communicate point to point (that is, cell phone to cell phone) or access the Internet to expand their options:
-
e-mail
-
VOIP applications (such as SKYPE)177
-
intranets
-
blogs
-
social networks
A more in-depth view of how NGOS use some of these technologies provides additional insight into current practice.

| Hardware                            | computers                            | desktop         |
|-------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|-----------------|
| laptop                              |                                      |                 |
| PDAs                                |                                      |                 |
| faxes                               | facsimilie (data)                    |                 |
| handsets                            | telephone (voice)                    |                 |
| radios (voice)                      |                                      |                 |
| satellite phones (voice-data)       |                                      |                 |
| mobilecell phone (voice-text)      |                                      |                 |
| smartphones (voice-text-data)       |                                      |                 |
| Software                            | general office                       | word processing |
| spreadsheet                         |                                      |                 |
| database                            |                                      |                 |
| information management              |                                      |                 |
| NGO-centric                         | census taking                        |                 |
| logistics management                |                                      |                 |
| epidemiology                        |                                      |                 |
| information gathering               |                                      |                 |
| other                               | geographic information systems (GIS) |                 |
| global positioning system (GPS)     |                                      |                 |
| Communications                      | landline telephone                   |                 |
| satellite                           | InMARSAT                             |                 |
| Thrane                              |                                      |                 |
| Iridium                             |                                      |                 |
| VSAT (Very Small Aperture Terminal) |                                      |                 |

Hardware NGO staff members carry significant data with them at all times. They also generally use laptops in the field to record assessment data, findings, survey analysis, and then to write reports or analysis about humanitarian conditions. Laptops are easily connected to the Internet and data lines with modems or network cards, and e-mails and documents then sent anywhere. This makes an NGO staff member a vital part of a global operation and allows different program managers to easily exchange information, updates, and plans. Laptops are relatively inexpensive, easy to procure, and adaptable to a number of uses and conditions. They can usually be repaired or purchased in local markets worldwide. With the exception of officially sanctioned countries, there are generally no problems entering a country with a laptop and other basic computer equipment. NGO personnel normally do not have difficulty moving such equipment within or out of an emergency-affected country or region. Over the past several years, humanitarian workers have begun using hand-held, personal digital accessories (PDAs) for data collection, storage, and communication needs. PDAs are inexpensive and offer relief workers in the field a highly mobile platform for word processing, spreadsheets, e-mail, and database management. Although they are now quickly evolving to a new level (smartphones), PDAs are still commonplace in the NGO community.

Handsets Radio. Despite advancements in global cellular service and satellite coverage, NGOs rely on legacy radio technologies to deliver much of the required connectivity. Radio services are extremely efficient and operational in all but a very few conditions. Radio communications are therefore often one of the first priorities in setting up communications infrastructure during an emergency. High-frequency (HF) and very-high-frequency (VHF) radio systems are used extensively by the NGO community during an emergency. HF radio systems are used for regional and local communication, often connecting a base camp with refugee camp operations, a regional field office and trucks or satellite locations. Codan is now the more popular of services for long-range and mobile voice communications. For shorter range communications, VHF radio systems are used. With line-of-site ranges of up to approximately 10 to 15 miles, NGO employees can carry small battery operated walkie-talkies. For extended distances in austere or remote locations, NGOs can extend radio reception with repeaters and relays that forward or strengthen signals. These are extremely useful during or following natural disasters, when existing communication infrastructure has typically been destroyed, and for regional communications. HF and VHF signals are not secure and generally do not enable NGOs to communicate with military radio systems. Local governments often provide a portion of bandwidth for what is often called amateur radio or for emergency radio services. Often the UN will set up service stations and then monitor and regulate which NGOs can use which frequency channels, and in what quantities. Depending on the type of emergency response efforts, the UN may limit radio frequency use at nighttime to allow emergency-only communication to have priority. If the UN or other coordinating body is managing the radio system for the humanitarian community, which is often the case, the UN and NGO community may use the radio to communicate new dangers, developments, meeting times, and other announcements along with the daily use of inter-NGO communications. Normally at least one channel is set aside for general announcement and monitoring purposes. Satellite phones. Satellite phones are now extremely common among the NGO community, typically used to communicate in emergency settings or austere environments when no other local or international communication is available. If an NGO employee has a satellite phone, he or she can establish a voice, data, or even video connection to almost any similar connection on earth. Generally, only extremely harsh weather, service failure, or limited line-of-site can restrict the reception of a satellite phone. Per-minute charges are somewhat high, ranging from $1 to $3 per minute, depending on the type of data being transmitted (voice versus data, specifically). Satellite phones are now (late 2009) extremely efficient and lightweight. The Thuraya is about half a pound and roughly equivalent to the size of a Blackberry. The Thuraya and similarly sized Iridium phones are used extensively throughout the NGO and UN community. The NGO price for a handset is about $1,000 and airtime services are available on a prepaid basis, further limiting the barrier to entry for these technologies. Because they can be used as phones and as data-forwarding devices, NGOs will use satphones for both voice communications and Internet use. NGO employees will often draft a series of e-mails while the satphone is offline and then send a burst once connected for short periods. Satellite phones, unlike laptops or other generic computer equipment, sometimes require local registration when brought into a country. Many countries make it illegal to import such technology and will confiscate satphones from NGO staff members at the airport or port. Still, NGO use of satphones is increasing, and their value to communications systems in the field is extremely high. Cellmobilesmart phones. The explosive spread of mobile networks across the world along with the increased functionality of cell phones and smartphones is offering more opportunities for NGO use of these mobile devices. A recent survey of 500 NGO workers found that 86 percent are using mobile technology to do their work. Workers mainly use cell phones for voice, short-message service (SMS) text messaging but also take advantage of the ability to collect and distribute photos and video and to collect data. The main benefits described included time savings, the ability to accelerate the mobilization of resources and extend their reach. Most viewed the cell phone as having a positive impact on their work. Some called it revolutionary. Seventy-six percent of workers indicated they would be increasing their use of the cell phone in the future. A rapid growth in mobile phone networks has been made possible by the proliferation of GSM (Global System for Mobile communications), now the global standard for mobile communications. According to the GSM Association, its networks currently cover 219 countries and territories serving more than 3 billion people. Most cell phones are an inexpensive and efficient alternative to satphones or weak local telephone infrastructure. Cell phones can often be procured within an emergency setting, or in cities nearby that NGOs pass through or use as a procurement and travel hub. Cell phones are often cheaper per minute, less difficult to get, and often have a significant range that covers areas affected by disasters. With advancements in open source smartphone technology, much of the initial promise of the PDA has now been passed on to these new more flexible handheld platforms. Smartphones such as the HTC G1 Android phone (Google Phone) and the Apple iPhone have great potential for providing an alwayson, flexible, powerful, and readily available handheld computing and communications platform for NGOs. Intense development is ongoing, with particular focus on open source systems, on which NGOs, universities, and private companies can develop the next generation of humanitarian applications for mobile use without excessive licensing, deployment, and maintenance costs.

Connectivity
In emergencies, local phone lines typically are destroyed or not reliable. In most cases, NGOs obtain their communications equipment and capacities from private vendors or organizations dedicated to offering such services. A number of vendors serve the NGO and humanitarian community.
-
A limited liability company (LLC) based in London, Inmarsat was the first and is now one of the largest providers of mobile satellite communications for individual and corporate use (www.inmarsat.com).
-
The Iridium satellite constellation is a large group of satellites used to provide voice and data coverage to satellite phones, pagers and integrated transceivers over the earth's entire surface. Iridium Satellite LLC owns and operates the constellation and sells equipment and access to its services (www.iridium.com).
-
Codan Limited is a manufacturer and supplier of communications, metal detection, broadcast and electronic equipment, headquartered in Adelaide, South Australia (www.codan.com.au).
-
The Open Mobile Consortium (OMC) is a thriving community of mobile technologists and practitioners working to drive open source mobile solutions for more effective and efficient humanitarian relief and global social development (www.open-mobile.org).
In terms of long-term more robust communication strategies that incorporate the use of VSAT equipmenta type of two-way satellite connectionNGOs are required to work with government authorities for approval of satellite licenses, customs waivers, and so on. At times, deployment of this equipment can be significantly delayed or denied by host nations.

Internet Some of the largest advancements in NGO technology have and will continue to be made online. With the increasing availability of high speed connections and the expansion of mobile-based services, mediarich, real-time data sharing, and voice-data communications will become easier and more reliable. By connecting to the Internet through satphones, local telephone lines, Internet cafes, or shared UN or specialized service connections, NGOs can manage e-mail, exchange documents, store data, and even carry on live communications. In many emergency settings (some famines, rural floods, or fire), urban area infrastructure remains functional enough to support these avenues of communication. And when other, more established systems don't exist, Hotmail, Yahoo!, and other browser-based free e-mail providers are available to fill the gap. If a city does not offer Internet connections over local telephone lines, NGOs must either use Internet cafes (if they exist), satellite connections, or long-distance connections to out-of-region ISPs that may provide service. In Kosovo, NGOs were using satphone data connections and dialing to Macedonia for Internet access much of the time until local ISPs cropped up within Kosovo. For most of Burundi's history until 2001, only one ISP existed within Burundi, and service was often down. On the other end of the spectrum, in Kenya, Sudan, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, 3G mobile networks are available widely and can provide mobile broadband access at affordable rates. Currently, Internet-based NGO management systems are in the works in a variety of forms. Microsoft and Google both have large teams developing applications and plug-ins for humanitarian use. Private sector technology consulting firms have also increasingly recognized the needs and market potential of the NGO sector. NGOs themselves have also begun to invest more heavily in in-house expertise and solutions for specific needs within the organization. Many NGOs create their own intranet that allows staff members to track e-mail, pay, job descriptions, pertinent intraoffice or organizational communications, and other information. Only a handful of the largest NGOs are using intranets that are truly functional for field-based employees. Although NGOs exchange most information and documents by e-mail, an emerging trend using blogs and online social networking sites to create and exchange content and engage in peer-to-peer conversations. These tools have also been used by global activists to relay information and pictures about humanitarian crises when government-controlled internet and telecommunications networks have been heavily monitored or shut down.

## Power Supplies

Power supplies are critical for relief workers and NGO operations. Without power, communications can't work. After a natural disaster or during a complex humanitarian emergency, NGOs are often faced with a lack of electricity or power sources to keep communications technology running and the lights and heaters working. Computer equipment and radio and satphone terminals can operate on battery power for some time but will soon require recharging. For temporary power needs that may exist on a survey outing or assessment field expedition, NGO staff members may be able to tap the battery power of their vehicle. With 12 volts of power in many trucks, this is enough to keep a computer, satphone, or radio system working for hours at a time. With the engine running or turned on in intervals, the vehicle's battery can stay charged and capable of powering other devices. For more permanent operations in areas with no electricity, NGOs need to use generator sets. Generators are considered a main part of an NGO's critical infrastructure for establishing and maintaining communications during an emergency. NGOs often attempt to procure power generators sets that run on diesel, and set them up near (but not too near because of noise and fumes) to their field office or facility. Portable generator sets can produce up to 3000 watts. Anything above this is too large to be considered mobile. Having more than one generator is a good idea for many NGOs because one is bound to fail. NGOs can normally keep generators running as long as fuel supplies are stable. Although gas-powered generators are lighter and cleaner, diesel can generally be found in more places within the developing world. Over the past decade use of solar panels for back-up power to support 24/7 communications has increased. As solar technology has improved and cost has declined, solar installations are becoming more commonplace in rural settings that have no access to a reliable power grid. Solar panels can be found at hospitals, clinics, police stations, community centers, and NGO offices to provide a constant supply of power during outages or when generators are turned off for refuel or repair.

Executive Summary

## Challenges In Ict Use

  NGOs have developed security
plans and manuals and have security officers.
  Security for the NGO requires a
perceived impartiality.

NGOs have varying capacities to use ICT based on costs and internal expertise. Given the lack of data standards and technical standardization of telecommunication packages, exchanging information efficiently is challenging.

  The legal basis for protection of
humanitarian workers in conflicts is contained in the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the related protocol of 1977.
ICT Investments Although nearly all relief NGOs use some form of low-cost, commercially available technology as an integral part of daily operations at both the central office and the field level, very few are in a position to procure, implement, and sustain more advanced systems on an organization-wide basis.

  Because NGO personnel do not
enjoy the same protected status provided to U.S. government personnel, they must approach safety and security differently.
  NGO personnel are extremely
sensitive in being seen as instruments of government foreign policy, even when they might share the same nationality or even mission as the military force.
Most of the larger international NGOs tend to use advanced technology more than their smaller locally based counterparts, though of course the degree varies considerably even across the largest organizations. This is in part because NGOs do not receive grants for infrastructure investment. Donors would rather see funding spent on direct aid to victims. Therefore, NGOs are under constant pressure to keep overhead costs down and generally spend less than 1% to 3% of operating revenues on ICT, which is below that of government agencies and other industry ICT investments. Underinvestment in ICT is also the result of decentralization, whereby NGOs often implement only what is necessary to keep field programs running. Given inadequate infrastructure, NGOs ultimately depend on other organizations for assistance with technology and communications. For example, most NGOs are unable to host their own Internet service in-country and sometimes cannot even manage their own area-wide radio networks. Assistance from the UN, militaries, private-sector telecommunications companies, and others is essential. In many cases, smaller NGOs are often stuck when the power goes out, when phone lines are down, satellite phones don't work, or local radio systems are inoperable or nonexistent. Without redundant communication systems such as those of the government or military units, NGOs are often challenged with changing conditions. This is not always the case, of course, but it can leave an operation isolated.

Lack of Standards Data standards for neither information exchange nor communication equipment within the humanitarian field have been established. Differences in data, systems, styles, and equipment often make communication one of the more challenging tasks during an emergency. Although many forms of communications technology are manufactured to industry specifications and standards, there is virtually no standardization among NGOs as to what types of ICT they use or how and when those technologies are used. As noted earlier, every NGO is an independent organization. ICT technology platforms are often influenced by many factors unrelated to technology, not the least of which is using affordable or donated systems and equipment. An ongoing dialogue within the humanitarian community focuses on information management and coordination practices between agencies. Although debate has been vigorous, little consensus has emerged on how to actually implement global standards and structures for communications and information management, especially because NGOs, UN agencies, and the like have vastly different management structures and capabilities. NGOs are ground-level operators that rely on fast, low-level staff decision-making, whereas UN and other donor agencies depend on a hierarchical structure of management with information coming from below and making its way upward for decision-making. NGOs thrive on the flexibility of using various types of equipment and by not being burdened by protocol or requirements during complex, changing emergencies. Over the past decade, some standardization has occurred within some applications. Examples include standard VHF and HF radio networks for voice traffic and mobile assets. With the emergence and spread of cell phone use and a heavy reliance on data networks, this gain in interoperability may be short lived. This is not to suggest that NGOs and other operators in emergencies would not benefit from standardized equipment and communications platforms, but only that it will be some time before they achieve it.

## Conclusion: Emerging Trends For Increased Use Of Ict

Although the humanitarian sector has lagged behind other industries in adopting technology, NGOs are increasingly becoming more sophisticated in their use of technologyparticularly wireless technology such as mobile phonesand are openly collaborating with a range of partners. To promote the expansion of technology and achieve uniformity of technology packages, some larger NGOs have formally joined consortiums such as NetHope. This type of organizing allows groups to pool resources and coordinate requirements in hopes of saving costs and maximizing benefits. Other NGOs are engaging in variety of partnerships with the private sector, academia, and other NGOs. In summary, communicating with NGOs during an emergency may be difficult at times. This may be due to the lack of technology or a reluctance to interact with the military. No assumptions or generalities can be made about how to communicate with an NGO in any given situation. An approach and strategy will need to be developed locally and in the context of each emergency.

## Ngos And Security

Gregg M. Nakano, Sarah Arnold, and Lynn Lawry T
hose working for NGOs have traditionally enjoyed both international legal protection and immunity from attack by belligerent parties. Attacks on humanitarian workers have become more frequent since the 1990s, however. This is attributed to a number of factors, including the increasing number of humanitarian workers deployed, better data collection, the increasingly unstable environments in which they work, and the erosion of the perception of neutrality and independence. NGO rely on impartiality as part of their credibility and security, any effort that gives an appearance of collaboration or coordination with the military undermines this impartiality and effectively eliminates a primary source of security.178
NGOs have to define what they mean by impartiality or even neutrality. It is difficult to reconcile being impartial and especially neutral if the organization supports democracy, social justice and civil society development, or peace-building initiatives in a country that is at war. It is particularly difficult if an organization provides aid but also documents abuses or advocates for human rights. This gives a perception, even if one hires or works with local partners, of not being impartial or neutral. Furthermore, it is also difficult to claim impartiality if it is obvious that aid is not allocated strictly on the basis of need but is instead driven by considerations of access, visibility, cost-effectiveness, agency interests, or expertise. What NGOs have been advised is to consider the following transparent position:179

-
Assistance is provided in response to unmet needs, but is also shaped by mandate, mission, expertise, capacity, and agreed policies, as well as by the access and acceptance obtained.
-
Assistance is provided to all noncombatants regardless of identity, age, gender, political affiliation, religious conviction, and so on.
-
The NGO states openly and otherwise makes clear that it values the basic rights and freedoms of all individuals, political democracy, and nonviolent ways of resolving conflict.
-
The NGO practices neutrality as an operational principle:
It will not take sides and work in the areas of all groups.

It will not comment on the reasons for taking up arms.

It may have an opinion about how the conflict can best be resolved (even if it chooses not to express it).

It will take a position on the treatment of civilians and noncombatants and the tactics of war, and will express that position.
Since 1994, 594 deaths of occurred among aid workers; only 10 percent of these were accidental; the rest were targeted.180 Of the 594, the vast majority (73 percent) were among local staff working for NGOs. And although no evidence-based statistics support or refute the notion that cooperation, coordination,, or association with the military is detrimental to the safety of an NGO, humanitarian aid worker deaths and kidnappings have gone up sharply with military involvement in FHA since 2001.181

## Legal Basis For Protection

The legal basis for protection of humanitarian workers in conflicts is contained in the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the related protocol of 1977.182 These treaties describe the category of civilian noncombatants (which includes local citizens and nationals of countries not party to the conflict) and outline the rights and obligations of noncombatants during conflict. These include the right to be treated humanely; to have access to food, water, shelter, medical treatment, and communications; to be free from violence to life and person, hostage taking, and humiliating or degrading treatment; and a prohibition against collective punishment or imprisonment. International humanitarian law provides protection for relief actions, in that parties to a conflict shall allow and facilitate rapid and unimpeded passage of all relief consignments, equipment and personnel (Additional Protocol I Article 70(2)). Governments or occupying forces may, if they wish, ban a relief agency from working in their area, as long as the ban is not arbitrary. In addition, international humanitarian law does require parties to a conflict to respect and protect personnel participating in relief actions (AP I, Art. 71(2)). The Geneva Conventions also do prohibit combatants from attacking noncombatants, and do require occupying forces to maintain general order.

## Security Environments

When thinking about safety and security, the military divides operating environments into

-
permissive environments, in which host country military and law enforcement agencies have control as well as the intent and capability to assist operations that a unit intends to conduct;
-
uncertain environments, in which host government forces, whether opposed to or receptive to operations a unit intends to conduct, do not have effective control of the territory and population in the intended operational area; and
-
hostile environments, in which hostile forces have control as well as the intent and capability to effectively oppose or react to the operations a unit intends to conduct.183
These distinctions are based on agreements between the United States and the host nation and help determine the force protection posture individual units take. A status-of-forces agreement (SOFA), which provides additional legal protection to service members, will usually be in place for permissive environments, whereas rules of engagement will delineate appropriate responses for uncertain and hostile environments.

UN Security Phases
1. *Precautionary*: Exercise caution. All travel into the area requires advance clearance. 2. *Restricted movement*: Staff and families remain at home. No travel into or within the country unless authorized. 3. *Relocation*: Staff and families are temporarily concentrated or relocated to specified sites or locations. Eligible dependants are relocated outside the country.

Humanitarian nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) differ from military forces in that they do not rely on national authorization to enter another country. Instead, they act on several beliefs:
-
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
-
Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.184

| 4.                                 | Emergency programs only   | . All                 |
|------------------------------------|---------------------------|-----------------------|
| staff not directly concerned with  |                           |                       |
| emergency or humanitarian relief   |                           |                       |
| operations or security matters are |                           |                       |
| relocated outside the country.     |                           |                       |
| 5.                                 | Evacuation                | . All remaining staff |
| leave according to the local UN    |                           |                       |
| security plan.                     |                           |                       |

To protect these values, NGO personnel respond to those in need anywhere in the world "without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status."185 Because NGO personnel do not enjoy the same protected status provided to U.S. government personnel, they must approach safety and security differently.

In general, safety and security risks can be divided into environmental and human threats. Environmental threats include factors like weather, geographic hazards, wildlife threats, and prevalence of disease and affect everyone who operates in the region. Environmental risks can usually reduced by staying healthy (getting proper nutrition, sleep, and exercise) and by avoiding or managing obvious risks (wearing sunscreen and insect repellent or avoiding intoxicants and excessive speed while driving). Human threats can be more challenging and may vary from common theft in peacetime environments to targeted assassination during times of war. In general, the three strategies for protecting personnel against human threats are risk avoidance, risk management, and risk reduction. Risk avoidance removes personnel from the source of danger. This is a common strategy for regional security officers at U.S. Embassies who ban travel to or recall staff from unstable areas. According to this strategy, activities and movement are increased or reduced according to perceived local support or threats. This strategy is focused on the who, the what, and the where of the threat, and thus relies on a strong and responsive surveillance capability.

## Risk Management

Risk management focuses on defeating the impact of potential threats or eliminating them altogether. This is a more common strategy for military planners who provide armor for vehicles and individuals as well as weapons to destroy potential attackers. Because conflict is usually taken as a given, operations will change their offensive and defensive posture rather than location or substance of their activities. A risk management strategy focuses more on the what and the how of the threat. Risk reduction focuses on transforming a potential assailant's perception of an individual or organization from meddling outsider to "one of us." In this strategy, the security of personnel is best ensured when the aid workers are integrated into the local community and valued for their contributions to local development. Interpersonal relationships with local authorities, partners, communities, and families become fundamental to accomplishing the NGO's humanitarian missions. This strategy focuses on neutralizing the why of the threat and often allows NGOs to work in areas that military planners would consider uncertain or hostile. Of course, no single approach will work for all situations, and humanitarian personnel rely on a combination of strategies to safely conduct their operations. To manage the threats and challenges, NGOs are encouraged to assess their readiness to deploy to or remain in an unstable environment with questions such as these that follow:
-
Do you have an adequate understanding of the context in which you operate?

-
Do you have a clear sense of your mission and of the position you want to adopt and the role you want to play in your environment?
-
Is your plan based on a systematic threat and risk assessment, and do you regularly review this assessment?
-
Is it supported by clear policies that spell out responsibilities of the agency and of individual staff?
-
Do you consider program choices and implementation approaches from a security point of view?
-
Do staff understand the rational behind your standard operating procedures?
-
Are staff disciplined about the observance of these procedures?
-
Have your staff been given guidance and preparedness training for incident survival?
-
Do you have crisis management guidelines for different incident scenarios?
-
Do you feel that the news of security incidents, also from others operating in your environment, reaches you quickly most of the time?
-
Do you feel that you as security manager have the required skill and competence to discharge that responsibility?186
Although aid personnel strive to provide humanitarian assistance even as the level of violence escalates, there are limits to how long personnel remain safely in the midst of conflict. The determination of whether to remain or evacuate is a complex balance of humanitarian need, resources, expertise, reputation within the region, and leadership personalities that is managed in most of the larger NGOs by a dedicated security section. For areas or countries of persistent conflict, the NGO may assign a dedicated security officer or team to evaluate changing local threats and risks. Often NGO security officers have military or police backgrounds and will have access to a wide variety of information sources and assessment tools. In addition to working with organizations like Interaction's Security Advisory Group (SAG), NGO security officers will stay abreast of the local military and police briefings. NGO security officers do not normally have access to classified material, but many times they do have more timely and granular information because of their access to reports directly from the field. And though NGO personnel will watch for changes in UN security phases they normally reserve the right to make independent determinations on whether to remain or stay. Those who chose to remain in country as the number of threats and level of risk increases must make the choices between how they balance risk management against risk reduction. The responsibility of each aid worker is to understand the host culture and behave in a manner respectful of cultural norms while remaining vigilant to any changes to the environment that may pose a threat to personal safety. These threats may include and aren't limited to theft, assault, violent conflict and acts of terror, vehicle targeting, and natural phenomena. Safety and security risks are an unavoidable aspect of humanitarian service. Lack of infrastructure and limitations of local institutions exacerbate these risks. It is not possible to eliminate all risks associated with these missions, but it is possible to manage them.

## Humanitarian Space

Civilian aid organizations often strive to defend their *humanitarian space*, by which they mean their ability to deliver assistance to populations in need without compromise by military or political forces. Many NGOs feel strongly that their access to local populations requires independence from armed forces, including peacekeeping and U.S. forces. Whether on the battlefield or in the ungoverned spaces of an internal state conflict, a need remains to provide food, water, shelter and protection to noncombatants. The Geneva Convention (IV), Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, states this:
Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.187
Where the Geneva Conventions are observed, the wounded and sick should be collected and cared for by an impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).  The ICRC's mission is, on the basis of the Geneva Conventions and protocols, to protect and assist victims of armed conflict and those affected by internal disturbances or tension. In complex humanitarian emergencies where the armed combatants do not honor their responsibilities and block the provision of humanitarian assistance to those in need, it becomes more challenging for NGOs to provide life-sustaining services without injury or loss of life. Thus, when warring parties fail to respect the humanitarian purpose of interventions, "the attempt to provide assistance in situations of conflict may potentially render civilians more vulnerable to attack, or may on occasion bring unintended advantage to one or more of the warring parties."188
This presents additional challenges to the humanitarian community who are committed to achieving "defined levels of service for people affected by calamity or armed conflict, and to promote the observance of fundamental humanitarian principles."189 To continue to provide assistance even when the armed parties have abdicated their responsibilities under the *Law of Land Warfare* (FM 27-10), NGOs must resort to ensuring their own protection a variety of ways.

## Information Gathering, Analysis, And Dissemination

NGOs that act on humanitarian principles and strive not to be or perceived as being instruments of government foreign policy can be viewed as a target or threat by power brokers in the region. In
187 ICRC, "Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949," www.

assessing the potential threat humanitarian programs might present, NGOs should ask themselves several questions:190

-
Can the national origin of your agency, your source of funding, or the way you operate (such as in the areas of certain actors only or under the umbrella of a peacekeeping force that is not perceived as neutral) cause you to be perceived as being associated with certain political interests or certain groups that are actors in the conflict?
-
Can certain public statements of your agency be construed as indicating a hidden political agenda?
-
Can your programs be perceived as strengthening the war economy or the political economy of somebody's enemy?
-
Are you undermining someone else's power base?
Once an assessment of the programmatic impact on the existing stakeholder relationships, NGOs need to examine the more concrete sources of risk. This can include asking questions like the following:
-
Do your programs put you in the path of military operations?
-
Are your operations too close to potential political or military targets?
-
Can your entry and exit routes be affected?
-
Do your programs put you in areas that are important to the war economy or the illegal trade transactions that are a part of it?
-
Do you have lootable resources in residences, offices, warehouses, programs, and the like?
-
Do your program activities take you into high crime areas?
-
If abuses and atrocities are committed can you be seen as an undesirable witness?

## Site Selection And Facilities Management

Answers to these questions will drive the selection of the NGO's operating base and field offices. Physical spaces should be conducive to a secure and productive work environment yet provide access to workers, beneficiaries, and colleagues and preventing intrusion and attack by undesirable individuals.  Over the years of operating in uncertain and hostile environments, the NGO community has designed checklists, to assist security officers in site selection.191 These can include a variety of questions.

Neighborhood -
Do you know at least one of your neighbors?
-
Do any NGO colleagues live in your area?
-
Do you live on a two-way paved and well-maintained street?
-
Do you live on a dead-end street?
-
Are there several roads into or out of the neighborhood?
-
Is your street a high-traffic or pedestrian route?
-
Is there a history of crime in your neighborhood?
-
Are the streets well lighted at night?
-
Is there a major transportation station across the street or near your house?
-
Is there a fire station within a 5-minute drive of your home?
-
Is there a police station in your neighborhood?
-
Are there any host government officials or ministers living in your area?
-
Are you located near a university, opposition party office, or newspaper?
Exterior -
Are all gates and doors kept locked and keys in your control?
-
Do you have a means to control access to your residence?
-
Do you employ trained guards?
-
Are guards' duties clearly defined and understood?
-
Is your residence enclosed by a solid perimeter wall?
-
Are there any trees, poles, or outbuildings close to the walls?
-
Is the compound kept free of brush and debris?
-
Are the premises and stairwells well lighted?
-
Do you have a dog?
Doors -
Are doors made of solid core (wood or metal) construction?
-
Are exterior locks cylinder type?
-
Are doors equipped with deadbolt locks?
-
Are all locks securely mounted?
-
Can all exterior doorsterrace, porch, balcony, basementbe securely locked?
-
Are there windows or soft door panels that when broken gain access to locks?
-
Does anyone besides your immediate family have keys to your residence?
-
Are unused doors permanently secured?
-
Do you hide a main door spare key under a mat or flower pot nearby?
-
Do you have a peephole, video monitor, or interview grille at main door?
-
Are padlocks locked in place when doors are unlocked?
-
Are padlock hasps securely installed so that screws cannot be removed?
Windows -
Are all first-floor windows protected with grilles?
-
Are any window grilles hinged so as to be opened from inside?
-
Are unused windows permanently secured and sealed?
-
Are all windows securely mounted?
-
Will breaking the glass give access to window locks?
-
Are sliding glass doors secured with a track lock?
-
Can upper story windows be easily accessed?
-
Do any windows offer view of main entrance or street?
Interior -
Is there a lockable, secure room to which you can retreat from danger?
-
Are tools and equipment kept in a secure place?
-
Do you keep your cash and valuables in a secure place?
-
Do you have a list of serial numbers for valuable appliances (VCR, stereo, TV)?
-
Do you maintain a property inventory?
-
Are valuables properly described or photographed?
-
Are valuables on display in common areas of the residence?
-
Do you receive mail or deliveries at home?
-
Have you developed procedures and guidance for family or workers in the event of break-in or burglary?
-
Have you posted the emergency contact information of police, fire, hospital, and so on?
-
Does your residence have an evacuation plan and outside meeting point?
-
Have you checked the references and health history of your domestic workers?
Security equipment -
Are fire extinguishers located around the residence?
-
Has the fire fighting equipment been inspected or charged in the last year?
-
Do all residents and workers know how to use fire fighting equipment?
-
Are smoke detectors installed throughout the residence?
-
Are batteries tested and changed regularly?
-
Do you have a cell phone or handheld radio and spare batteries in the bedroom?
-
Have you installed caller identification?
-
Have you installed an alarm system?
-
Do you shred all personal documents before discarding?
Serious consideration needs to be given to whether to highlight or downplay an NGO's presence in country. In general, where humanitarian space and the neutrality of NGO personnel are respected, the more likely the location of the headquarters will be openly advertised.

## Personnel

Personal safety starts with the individual aid worker. Because NGO personnel must work in very dynamic and semi-autonomous situations with few resources and little backup, they require a high level of initiative, resourcefulness, maturity and judgment. Successful missions require workers to adjust their habits and lifestyles to minimize exposure to risks. The SPHERE code of conduct states NGO personnel "will endeavor to respect the culture, structure, and customs of the communities and countries we are working in."192 To accomplish this, NGO personnel will adjust their physical appearance, living arrangements, modes of travel, venues for entertainment, accountability, and sources of companionship to the expectations of the local population. In addition to being a beneficial, nonthreatening member of society, the acceptance strategy requires personnel to establish and maintain broad-based relationships  and to sustain inclusive contacts with multiple authorities and powerbrokers while maintaining an image that is both respectful and respected.193 Unlike a military force, which commands respect through force of arms, humanitarian workers can rely only on their reputation, which may take years to build and be destroyed in an instant. As a result, NGO personnel are extremely sensitive with being seen as instruments of government foreign policy, even when they might share the same nationality or even mission as the military force.

## Communications

Appropriate technology, procedures, and training are necessary for clear, coordinated, and effective external and internal communications systems. Communications provide some unique challenges to NGOs that military personnel are unlikely to wrestle with, however. NGOs strive to provide assistance based on need rather than race, religion, political affiliation, or ability to pay. To avoid the perception of favoritism and operate in a neutral manner, NGO do not normally use any encryption devices and operate with the understanding that the local government will likely be monitoring all their communications. Because NGOs may provide assistance to all parties in the conflict, they will be exposed to sensitive information that could be used to assist the political or military objectives of either side. This requires that information be recorded and transmitted in a way that reduces rather than fuels conflict. Although modern communications equipment is essential for the NGO headquarters to remain in contact with field offices or mobile teams, the equipment might make NGO personnel a target of crime in areas where the technology is not commonly available. A satellite phone, which provides an NGO team global coverage, might represent the ability to tip the balance of power in a conflict. The same might apply for a vehicle outfitted with a communication suite of HF, UHF, or VHF radios. In some areas, simply carrying a cell phone or radio could be viewed as a threat by those who would like to keep their activities concealed. Thus even as NGO personnel must maintain communication between themselves and higher headquarters, they must be careful to select equipment that will not increase the risk to themselves or the mission. NGO communications specialists thus have an enormously challenging job of selecting equipment that will allow reliable communication without raising the NGO's profile or risk to aid personnel working unarmed in areas of high risk. Security officers must educate and train NGO personnel as to what should and cannot be transmitted by radio, cell phone, or e-mail. And, as noted earlier, it is the responsibility of individual NGO personnel to practice and master their respective communication protocols.

## Transportation

Reliable transportation is essential for NGO operations, but also poses the greatest risk of accidents, assault, injury, and death for aid workers. "At least half of all security incidents occur during travel."194
To minimize these risks, adequate resources for proper vehicle selection, maintenance, driver employment, protective equipment, and procedures all are necessary. Vehicle selection is perhaps the most critical first step. Understanding the environmental conditions of travel, the availability of fuel, parts, and trained mechanics will extend the lifespan of a vehicle. However, the NGO must balance the need for a completely reliable low mileage vehicle against raising the risk of becoming a target of carjacking in areas of conflict or crime. It is critical to follow a vehicle maintenance schedule, especially when operating in rough terrain or extreme climate conditions. Perhaps the second most important transportation safety factor is ensuring that drivers are properly trained and in the correct frame of mind when behind the wheel. Familiarizing personnel with the unique characteristics of environment will reduce surprise caused by sharing the road with animals, pushcarts, or unmarked sections of the under construction. Driving while tired or with the added stress in a conflict area can increase the chance of an accident for even the safest driver.

A
B
Sometimes NGOs mitigate these risks by hiring local drivers. Besides the basic requirements of a valid drivers license, driving experience, good eyesight, and maturity, the driver should have technical competence with the vehicle in question. The driver will have influence which routes are taken, how check points are negotiated, and over time become a de facto representative of the organization. The added benefit of having someone who knows their way around thus comes with its own risks. A driver from a disenfranchised group, whether religious, ethnic, racial, or caste, may engender prejudice against the NGO. The driver might also be part of a group intent on stealing the vehicle or committing a crime against the NGO. Background checks are useful but not always effective in areas without a criminal justice system or where people use many different personal names.

## Reporting And Responding To Security Incidents

Incident report data analysis and dissemination is critical to project management and decisionmaking, not only for an individual NGO, but also for all the other organizations involved in providing assistance in the same area. Patterns, trends, and events in the local culture and environment contribute to appropriate planning, training, and allocation of resources. If this is done openly and inclusively, developing a common operating picture can benefit to the host government, the military, and NGOs alike. That said, levels of information sharing will differ depending on the relationship with the reporting organization. Internally, there needs to be a incident report mechanism that immediately alerts all other members of the NGO of all environmental and mission changes with safety and security implications. This is usually the most important and difficult task because it depends on individual team members to record and share information that may not seem important or particularly useful at the time. At a minimum, the report should normally include who is reporting, what happened, where it happened, when it happened, who was involved, what the impact is on those affected, who perpetrated the incident, a summary of the current situation, and whether any problems arose, actions were proposed or taken, or decisions or actions requested of headquarters.195 In high tempo or stress environments, events such as looting a store or destroying a bridge may happen so frequently that they reset the threshold for a critical event. Thus, though it is important for NGO personnel to comprehensively understand the local environment, key actors, and pulse of daily life, becoming too familiar with violence and destruction can breed complacency about an everincreasing threat level. Other challenges to information sharing are compounded when members of a team have different experience levels or rotate on a regular basis. Without knowing the character and temperament of colleagues or respecting and trusting their judgment, the group dynamics of the team rapidly break down, opening information gaps that can lead to accidents or attacks. Sometimes local staff are not privy to certain information or are excluded from team meetings. This can erode trust and have fatal results given that the local staff often have a better understanding of the social undercurrents that can in turn affect the safety and security of the NGO's personnel or operations. Sometimes the field office may withhold information from headquarters in fear that headquarters might curtail operations, making a proper analysis of the need to evacuate difficult. Thus the planning and training before deployment and refresher training throughout the operation are critical to the long-term success of any operation.

## Security Planning

Security planning is an ongoing process that continually refines and reassesses the threat environment. By establishing and enforcing policies and procedures and providing guidance for possible contingencies NGOs can reduce the most obvious risks and mitigate the worst effects of accidents and attacks. Before the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, many NGOs operated in violent environments without developing a strong organizational culture of safety and security.196 Many times, aid personnel relied on the immunity provided by humanitarian space and did not view themselves as party to the conflict. A series of factors including, intermingling of NGO and U.S. government programming,

Executive Summary

specific targeting of NGO staff for kidnapping and execution by violent extremist groups, and the shift in U.S. military policy to begin engaging directly in reconstruction and stabilization activities all served in increase the risks of injury and death for NGO personnel.

  NGOs and military should not work against
each other in humanitarian emergencies if they want to maximize their utility and functionality.
  Each has a role that is complementarynot
detrimental or contraryto the other.
  Past examples of military-NGO collaboration
have shown that NGOs and the military can communicate.
  Some, but not all NGOs, will work,
coordinate, or interface with the military.
As a result, the many of the NGOs who remained in Afghanistan and Iraq have built more formal safety and security systems to meet the new threats. These changes include adding safety and security measures to grant proposals and providing safety and security education and training courses for deploying personnel. Perhaps one of the most important changes has been an increased recruitment of professional security officers with formal military, police, or intelligence experience.

## Ngos And Security Officers

Large NGOs such as CARE, Save the Children, and World Vision have full-time security officers and a small security department. They provide advice on field safety and security issues, conduct assessments for field offices, and are responsible for policy and procedure. Many of these departments are supplemented by contractors with varying security experience for short- and long-term field assignments. Although large NGOs have a headquarters security staff, headquarters itself often doesn't have control over all aspects of field safety and security. Field security staff may view directives as advisory, subject to interpretation. An established command structure, as found in the military is not present in NGOs. Each NGO country office usually has someone within senior management staff responsible for safety and security, but this individual is usually part of the logistics, administrative, or operations division, and not a dedicated security officer. Security officers are brought in to assist if the need arises. Some organizations are moving toward having security focal points in each of the field office that would report to the country office. Safety and security are not the primary functions of the field office, however, and personnel in these focal points tend to be local or national staff. Medium-sized NGOs may or may not have security staff. Security is usually assigned to someone as a secondary duty, typically someone overseeing program management. Small NGOs may have someone with an interest in security with past military or law enforcement experience, but typically have no established security functions.

## Security Coordination In The Field

The face of NGO security may change in the future with USAID calling for standardization of security policies and procedures for funded NGOs. InterAction, an organization that represents U.S. NGO interests, has called for minimum operating standards for security, as well.

Currently, coordination efforts follow one of three models:
-
funded bodies, such as ANSO in Afghanistan, which serves the entire humanitarian community in a location;
-
ad hoc, which is a cooperative effort staffed by security officers working in a location, usually larger NGOs in high threat environments; or
-
the United Nations, which dictates policy and procedures.
Although previously perceived by the military as lax about security, NGOs since the 1990s have created a plethora of security protocols, manuals, and guidelines to reflect the nature of what they do. Manuals, protocols, papers, and further reading can be found on all aspects of NGO security at a number of online resources.

##  Resource: Security-Related Reading

-
Security manuals http://ngosecurity.googlepages.com/safety%26securitymanuals
-
Papers, reports and studies www.patronusanalytical.com/page12/page12.html
-
InterAction www.interaction.org
-
European Commission Humanitarian Aid Development Office http://ec.europa.eu/echo/
-
International Security Assistance Force www.nato.int/isaf
-
NGO Security Blogspot http://ngosecurity.blogspot.com/2006/01/primary-readings.html
-
Koenraad Van Brabant, *Operational Security Management in Violent Environments*, Good Practice Review #8 (London: Overseas Development Institute, 2000) http://ngosecurity.googlepages.com/GPR8.pdf
NGOs and the Military N
GOs and military units each play essential roles in humanitarian emergencies. Both are able providers of humanitarian assistance in some of the worst places on earth, and millions of people worldwide have benefited from humanitarian services provided by either NGOs or militaries or both.

## History Of Ngo And Military Interaction

body or

In the 1990s, international NGOs and the world militaries worked collaboratively in Somalia, Bosnia, northern Iraq, Albania, and Kosovo, after the Indian Ocean tsunami, and in Pakistan, to name a few.197
Issues, however, arose when U.S. military forces became a belligerent to the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq and had a new mission of foreign humanitarian assistance (FHA) that included the term *heart and minds* as a way to describe providing aid.198 Most NGOs avoid close affiliation with any military, preferring to remain autonomous and impartial in how they distribute aid. As noted in chapter 17, because NGOs rely on impartiality as part of their credibility, any appearance of working with the military strips away this impartiality and is thus in some measure counterproductive.199

U.S.
military
U.S.
military

And though no evidence-based statistics support or refute the notion that cooperation, coordination, or association with the military is detrimental to the safety of an NGO, humanitarian aid worker deaths and kidnappings have gone up sharply with military involvement in FHA since 2001.200 The long-held views of both the humanitarian aid community and the military have hindered discussions and collaboration. The word *coordinate* continues to hinder or stop effective

June 1, 2009); Chris Seiple, *The U.S. Military/NGO Relationship in Humanitarian Interventions* (Carlisle, PA: U.S. Army
communication and dialogue. Complicating the dialogue are the differing definitions of the word that the military and NGOs use. It is not uncommon to hear the military state that they are required by doctrine to coordinate with NGOs nor to hear NGOs say that they not coordinate or be coordinated by the military. In fact, the UN and NGOs define the term as meeting or talking and sharing information, whereas the military uses it to mean command and control of a given situation. Furthermore, the military use the phrase *functional interdependence* to mean that one organization relies on another to attain the objective.201 Again, and though the end may be the same, NGOs do not necessarily have the same objective as the military when it comes to a village. As described in publication JP 3-08, this interdependence can form a strong and potentially lasting bond between agencies, departments, and organizations. A good example is when NGOs effectively conducted relief operations in Somalia and the early evolutions in the Balkans in the 1990s with the security provided by the armed forces of the United States. Another type of interdependence is called *resource interdependence*, and is based on one organization providing certain capabilities that another lacks and can include resources such as manpower, logistics, training augmentation, communication, and financial backing. In DODD 3000.05, the following instruction is given:
Integrated civilian and military efforts are key to successful stability operations. Whether conducting or supporting stability operations, the Department of Defense shall be prepared to work closely with relevant U.S. Departments and Agencies, foreign governments and security forces, global and regional international organizations (hereafter referred to as "International Organizations"), U.S. and foreign nongovernmental organizations (hereafter referred to as "NGOs"), and private sector individuals and for-profit companies (hereafter referred to as "Private Sector").202
"Be prepared to work closely with" is interpreted by many in the military as *coordination*. Even publications JP 3-08 and JP 3-29 use the terms *cooperate* and *coordinate* inconsistently, leaving interpretation to commanders on the ground.203 What all DOD documents state unequivocally, however, is within the context of DOD involvement, that interagency coordination occurs between elements of DOD and engaged U.S. government agencies to achieve an objective. But it is USAID that plays a major role in U.S. foreign assistance policy and a principal role in interagency coordination. The Department of State must ask DOD by an EXECSEC
memo to participate in a disaster. Coordination is then with USAID204, DART, and the response management team. Furthermore, DOD instructions also state that "the extent to which specific NGOs are willing to cooperate with the military can thus vary considerably."205

## Coordinating Ngos And Military

Coordinating and integrating efforts in a disaster between NGOs and the military should not be equated to the command and control of a military operation.206 Military operations depend on a command structure that is often quite different from that of civilian organizations and may present challenges to both groups. NGOs do not operate within military or governmental hierarchies. It is best to identify a military liaison within the NGO community to manage efforts.207
Mechanisms Larger NGOs will often have a military liaison staff member to manage military interface (see figure 18.1, sample A). World Vision, CARE, CRS, and other large NGOs will often employ specialists or retired military personnel to assist in managing relations and activities that require interface with U.S. or other military entities. These are important positions, because language and operational differences between NGO and militaries are often overwhelming for all parties involved. An NGO staff person who understands how to work with military personnel will make a working relationship much more productive and feasible. This is not to say that having a military expert or liaison expert on an NGO's staff is required. It is in fact not common, and more than likely an NGO will depend on an NGO coordinating body or regional association in the affected area or region to provide some framework or order to relationships between the military and the NGO community (see figure 18.1, sample B).

Coordinating with NGOs When military or government personnel coordinate or communicate with NGO representatives, they should understand that NGO staff members are a part of a larger organization but with a specific, sometimes autonomous and essential job function. When identifying who to refer to as the point person, special attention should be given to the type of coordination needed, the sector that this coordination will concern, and the scale of operation. To identify the appropriate person to coordinate with, these points may help:

-
Type. Do identify with NGO staff members what types of things you'll need to coordinate. Refugee movement? Water supply? Air transport? This will give you an idea of what NGO staff type and level you'll need to be coordinating with.
-
Sector. Do identify with NGO staff members the sector or area of service provision you'll need to coordinate within. Medical and health service sector coordination will require working with different NGO personnel than refugee protection or transportation coordination would.
-
Scale. For smaller coordination activities, military staff members may find it most useful and efficient to coordinate with lower-level NGO program officers and staff members dealing with specific tasks. For larger scale activities, NGOs will often appoint a military liaison staff member or office, or work with the UN to do establish either a CMOC or coordination mechanism like this.
In many cases, NGOs will allow USAID's Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) to serve as the broker for humanitarian coordination between the military and the NGO community. OFDA is often respected as a government agency and has resources to expend when operating in an emergency. Military officers have often given preference to dealing with one government agency rather than numerous independent NGOs. OFDA is not a direct representative for NGOs to the military or other entities, but OFDA staff members often secure places at coordination tables for NGO personnel, and in many instances advocate for them to be included or supported. OFDA funds many NGO activities during emergencies and can use its government and donor status combined with its existing relationship with military units to ensure that NGO needs, requests, and ideas are heard at the table. NGO-military relationships are now improving because of a good history of operational contact (now well over 10 years), and because both communities have taken lessons from failures and successes in the last decade. NGOs and military units both have significant incentives to coordinate and collaborate. As implied, NGOs need many things from the military: logistical assistance, communications, intelligence, and protection among them. The military, too, has found it valuable to coordinate with NGOs for understanding ground-level activity, to manage population movements, assistance projects, and general humanitarian activities. Both groupswhether or not originally desiredfind that coordination is essential. For more formal coordination, various organizational forumshumanitarian operations centers (HOCs), civilian military operations centers (CMOCs), on-site operations coordination centers (OSOCCs), and humanitarian affairs centers (HACs)have been formed in Haiti, Somalia and Rwanda, Albania, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and elsewhere to officially organize activities among the many organizations involved in humanitarian operations. For NGOs, these are places to liaise with UN and military operations staff members and to learn about pertinent political and military developments. For UN and donor agencies, they are a place to obtain ground-level information from NGOs and military units. Although not always extremely successful in coordinating humanitarian activities, such forums have been successful at developing an overall picture of the humanitarian crisis and coordinating funding, donor activity, and logistical and military operational support for such activities. If a situation does not lend itself to face-to-face contact, the UN's ReliefWeb Internet site is a useful hub for humanitarian exchange and information on complex emergencies and natural disasters. Several online resources are particularly valuable for the detailed information they offer on how best to interface with NGOs in conflict settings or nonconflict settings.

-
Interagency Standing Committee, "Civil Military Relationship in Complex Emergencies" (2004) www.humanitarianinfo.org/IMToolbox/10_Reference/Civil_Military_Relations/2004_Civil_ Military_Relationship_In_Complex_Emergencies.pdf
-
InterAction, "Interaction Guidelines of Civil-Military Relationships" (2007) www.interaction.org/document/interaction-us-civilian-military-guidelines-july-2007
-
UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Assistance: "Guidelines" (2005) http://ochaonline.un.org/AboutOCHA/Organigramme/EmergencyServicesBranchESB/ CivilMilitaryCoordinationSection/PolicyGuidelinesRelatedDocuments/tabid/4938/ language/en-US/Default.aspx
Where to Coordinate with NGOs NGOs can almost always be approached in person, by telephone, or by e-mail. In the field, NGO personnel can be spoken to directly and are often very friendly. Coordination centers or NGO association headquarters are valuable places to contact NGOs during a disaster. When no one physical location is designated, most NGO employees will be able to indicate where, when, or how they coordinate among themselves. Military personnel are also often guided to the NGO coordination body, which will typically have contact information for member NGOs, can indicate what NGOs are doing in the region, and can identify which NGOs are active in specific sectors. Military personnel or NGO outsiders can request the names and contact information for specific country directors, program officers, logistics officers, and other NGO staff. Program officers may be involved with numerous projects. Additionally, smaller NGOs often assign one person multiple tasks, so that, for example, a communications officer might also be a logistician or program specialist. Language barriers are not uncommon given the nature of humanitarian assistance, so it always pays to know at least a few greetings in a few languages and to be scrupulously polite in all circumstances.

-
Humanitarian information centers (HICs). The UN often sets up humanitarian information centers that also serve as central coordination points. Many times NGOs are either required or voluntarily register with an HIC to keep updated on meetings, regional news, and
developments. HICs are normally located in central activity areas, often close to UN offices or where the international community stakes out an unofficial headquarters.
-
Civil-military operations centers (CMOCs) or *humanitarian operations centers* (HOCs). HOCs are often established as the official coordinating center between NGOs, the UN, governments, IOs, and the military.
-
On-site operations coordination centers (OSOCC). The term *OSOCC* was used in Rwanda, and essentially fulfilled the same role as the HOCs did in Somalia. It was a place for official coordination between NGOs, the UN, donors, other IOs, and the military.
-
The Internet. Relief Web, HICs, and www.global-health.org are good starting points.

## How Ngos And The Military Relate

Many countries authorize their militaries to respond to international humanitarian crises. NGOs can respond to any they choose if they have the resources and capabilities. The U.S. and EU militaries are most commonly found in larger-scale humanitarian emergencies when specific strategic or political interests are involvedthe Balkans, Afghanistan, Somalia, and so on. U.S. Department of Defense efforts are guided by specific directives and doctrine that establish what types of humanitarian assistance can and should be deployed under specific circumstances.208 In countries affected by an emergency, the national military forces are often mobilized to maintain order and to assist in relief efforts, reconstruction, transport, communications, and coordination efforts. NGOs respond to almost all international humanitarian emergencies regardless of the possible associated political or strategic value. Because they often depend on donor funding, NGOs are often strapped by the priorities, strategies, funding cycles, and preferences of the donor agencies and countries. NGOs of concern in this manual, mostly western-based international relief organizations, often use their own capacity and resources during the initial stages of an emergency and can act independently of any donor for a time before needing to seek support from outside donors or agencies. NGOs are extremely operational, requiring little logistical support or supporting bureaucracy in making decisions. Because both NGOs and the military act as humanitarian actors, each can relate to a specific mission or objectives, and focus on a target when coordinating or communicating. Although an objective, or method for achieving that objective, may be different for NGOs and militaries, understanding that there is one is often enough to start dialogue between the two entities. NGOs and military units share geography and space. Each serve in settings that are victim to major disequilibrium of the political, social, or economic status quo (sometimes all three). Somalia, Haiti, Afghanistan, and Albania are examples of complex humanitarian crises that are largely man-made and not ideal for any type of mission. Such conditions are difficult to work in, and NGOs and militaries have adapted with different management structures, culture, and protocol. A military staff person may wear camouflage and an NGO person street clothing, but both are experiencing abnormal conditions under stress, fatigue, danger, and possibly depression or disgust. Although motivated for different reasons, each person or entity share the difficulty of being in a complex emergency setting. NGOs and militaries share the goal of changing a current condition. Military operationswhether with humanitarian intentions or notare often devoted to changing a specific condition, power, or problem. Militaries are becoming more involved in complex humanitarian emergencies and humanitarian action because population health and humanitarian conditions are important to the political side of operations or to establishing conditions for the departure of military forces (peace). NGOs, however, are devoted solely to changing humanitarian conditions. Both NGOs and militaries understand that their objectives may be different, but that movement is important. NGOs and military units both provide extremely valuable services during humanitarian emergencies and neither can replace the other completely. NGOs are nimble, quick, efficient, and focused on displaced populations (DP). They target their operations on ensuring that DP needs are met. Military units are forceful, capable and, supported by large organizational and physical infrastructure that can be used in a variety of ways. With more exposure to each other, many NGO personnel and military personnel are now somewhat comfortable with military humanitarian interventions and coordination with military units, or simply better understand each other's comfort zones and limits. Over the last decade, experiences suggest that NGOs and militaries can operate together but that challenges still exist. During the Kosovo crisis in 1999, NATO forces and NGOs worked closely together in many instances. Still, communication and expectations became skewed. A Watson Institute paper titled *NATO and Humanitarian Action in the Kosovo Crisis* suggested two themes.209 First, despite coordination efforts and extensive collaboration, NGOs often became frustrated with the idle capacity that military commanders left on reserve for emergency or contingency action. NGO managers thought it strange that thousands of troops and large logistical supply stores were left unused for long periods while NGOs were short staffed and the needs of the displaced were high. Second, NGO and military culture clashed, even in coordination settings. NGOs often wanted to make sure of a distinct line between military operations and NGO relief activities. At the time, NGOs felt intimidated or frustrated over the way military personnel operated.

For their part, some aid organizations sought to place a certain distance between themselves and the military. One reported a sharp exchange at a briefing for a senior KFOR officer.

"Gentlemen," said an NGO official with provocation aforethought, "I'm not in your chain of command." "Then you're out of control," shot back one of the officers. "No, I'm a humanitarian professional." That difference in viewpoint was reconfirmed in day-to-day experience. "Nobody can tell an NGO what to do," lamented a KFOR official.210
There is still much to learn in both the NGO and military communities, but experience thus far indicates that relationships are becoming easier to manage, and that ways to manage these relationships are well-known. NGOs and militaries play critical roles in humanitarian emergencies, different roles, but both critical.

## How Ngos Perceive The Military

The Kosovo example is a good one of the civil-military relationship in the 1990s and perhaps today. Although not always extremely apparent, some (but not all) NGO personnel have many feelings about the military: disdain, nervousness (around weapons, camouflage, saluting), ignorance (which often leads to nervousness or disdain), previous bad experiences (Kent State University, Somalia), or philosophical opposition. Regardless of the possible cause of ill feelings, cultural differences between NGOs and the military are significant. Because NGOs exist solely to deliver humanitarian assistance, many feel that they have a mandate for leading the charge in disasters. NGOs have learned, however, that they cannot take on large-scale disasters alone.

No official poll had tabulated NGO personnel feelings about working with or the place of militaries in humanitarian emergency responses. In numerous field cases, articles, and personal accounts, NGO staff members have displayed an array of emotions and feelings about military humanitarian interventions. Included here are some themes that often arise within the humanitarian community, but that are not necessarily true or representative.
-
Militaries are designed for fighting or defending, not for implementing humanitarian assistance operations.
-
Primary military motives are antihumanitarian and political.
-
Aid is conditional given that militaries are designed as combat organizations.211
-
Military personnel have no humanitarian training and little ability to understand the needs of the displaced.
-
Militaries pay too much attention to force protection and self-preservation to make them truly humanitarian agents.
-
Militaries have rigid and inflexible management structures that make coordinating with other organizations and responding to highly dynamic humanitarian conditions difficult.
Almost all these points are false. Such sentiments that can be found in various NGO personnel ranks and in vocalized sentiment in NGO-military coordination meetings, but are mostly generalizations and uneducated statements. Militaries now have extensive training facilities and programs dedicated to readying military personnel for a variety of situations. They are today extremely able, sensitive, and efficient in implementing humanitarian operations.

## Civil-Military Cooperation Lessons Learned

In northern Iraq in the early 1990s (Operation Provide Comfort), NGOs found it necessary to create a coordinating mechanism. At no time had military forces been so involved in international relief activities, nor had there been such a need to coordinate so many NGOs, donors, and IOs in the same region. NGOs formed the NGO Coordinating Committee for Northern Iraq (NCCNI), which then served as the NGO Emergency Coordinating Body shown in figure 18.2. It was the foundation for communications with a diverse set of donors, military units, government agencies, refugee and IDP councils, and IOs all in some way participating in HAOs.

| CRS              |
|------------------|
| World            |
| Vision           |
| NGO              |
|                  |
| emergency        |
| coordination     |
| body             |
| NGOs will        |
| often create a   |
| coordination     |
| body during      |
| an emergency     |
| to coordinate    |
| their activities |
| and consolidate  |
| points of        |
| contact for      |
| other entities   |
| within an HAO.   |
| U.S.             |
| military         |
| UNHCR            |
| national         |
| gov't            |

In late spring of 1999 in Kosovo, NGOs and NATO military officers spent considerable time coordinating and informing each other of various developments, needs, or experiences. For general coordination meetings, first daily and later weekly, NGOs would send representatives to meet with the various KFOR commanders or officers at specific locations, often hosted by UNHCR, UNDP or other larger agencies. Depending on the sector of military activity and the style or host of the meeting, NATO officers would give updates on de-mining activities, equipment or troop movements, violence or violent occurrences, and descriptions of safe areas, security protocol, and other issues relating to the movement and safety of IO and NGO personnel in specific areas. NGOs and IO personnel would also normally share their individual project developments, challenges, questions, plans, and vision.

A number of lessons about NGOs have been learned:
-
NGOs are generally capable organizations but lack communication and logistical capacities.
-
NGOs are civilian organizations that do not fall into a military-style command structure.
-
NGOs prefer to keep their programs, activities, and image as independent as possible.
-
NGOs can work effectively and efficiently during an emergency, often with a comparative advantage in specific sectors or regions.
-
Routine and informal meetings between the NGO community, UN agencies, and the military can cut through a lot of stress, tension, and misunderstanding.212
The military has taken note of the last of these lessons. Since the success in northern Iraq of Operation Provide Comfort and for ongoing coordination purposes, U.S. military doctrine now provides for the creation of civilian-military operation centers, or CMOCs. CMOCs are now a standard platform of interaction between the U.S. military and the humanitarian community in emergencies, emphasizing coordination activities before and during humanitarian emergencies between military units and specific NGOs and humanitarian agencies active in certain emergencies.213 CMOCs are valuable entities and have enjoyed large NGO support in many emergencies since 1991, and aim to provide coordination and support services to NGOs and other humanitarian organizations. NATO supports civil-military cooperation centers (CIMICs) that serve the same end as U.S. CMOCs.214

NGOs have in turn learned a great deal about the military, particularly operational lessons.
-
Military units can provide unprecedented and unequalled logistical and communication services for the humanitarian assistance community (military or not).
-
Military units normally have a monopoly on the use of force and normally are the only equipped entities capable of providing safe zones and stability in conflict regions.
-
During humanitarian emergencies, personnel in both the military and NGO camps are pressed to assist displaced in the best way possible.
-
Although the military may speak a different cultural or operational language, alleviating suffering and providing stability in emergency settings are goals of both communities.215
There have been other successful military run information-coordination centers in Afghanistan, Kuwait, and Indonesia. A humanitarian operations center, also called a civil-military operations center, run by the U.S. military, was indispensable in Kuwait during the 2003 Iraq invasion.216
Although coordination met with resistance from NGOs in the early stages of the war, ultimately more than 80 NGOs, the UN, and the military met within this center and worked together. Having a neutral and media-free space for close interaction and discussion allowed civil and military actors to consult without having to fight the usual issues of ownership and control. At the HOC-Kuwait, humanitarian information was collected and shared. The vast preponderance of cooperation and collaboration, interestingly, occurred informally over coffee after daily briefings. Lessons learned from this productive experience have been invaluable in easing the often times contentious civilmilitary relationship. Themes that recurred over the years are notable, and include simply agreeing on common definitions of important terms and avoiding use of confusing acronyms and potentially offensive phrases.217 NGOs, for example, agreed to avoid using the term *belligerent*, and the military agreed not to call the NGOs *force multipliers*. Pulled together, the various resources, skills, and capacities of both the NGO and military communities can create a viable and thorough humanitarian response to even extremely large emergencies. Successes in parts of the Middle East, the Balkans, East Africa, the Caribbean, and more recent natural disasters demonstrate this. When NGO and military personnel communicate closely and attempt to understand how the other works and what the other's needs are, operations can run extremely well. Working with the military does not necessarily mean sacrificing impartiality or transparency, and often the benefits of working with the military far outweigh the costs. NGOs have found that they too must heed some major lessons to make working with militaries more effective and efficient. Despite continuing to work to alleviate suffering and remain impartial, many NGOs feel that close collaboration with the military would compromise their impartiality, security, or humanitarian image. Many NGO personnel feel as if military objectives, goals, systems, and organizational direction are puzzling or not integrated with humanitarian principles. This situation is changing, but many NGO personnel still argue that militaries have little or no role in humanitarian assistance. Although the number of people who hold these opinions seems to be diminishing, it is still an important facet for military and government representatives to keep in mind when dealing with a diverse NGO staff body.

## Interdependence In Emergencies

Regardless of personality, culture or even systems clashing, NGOs and militaries are interdependent in many humanitarian emergencies. They are not the only actors, but are linked more closely together than with any other entity because of their focus on operational assistance. Scale, type, and intent may be different, but NGOs and militaries often help each other maximize utility. In a study completed in 1997, the Refugee Policy Group came up with a series of conclusions about comparative NGO- military advantages.

-
NGOs can obtain and manage humanitarian supplies faster and more efficiently than the military can. With more in-depth understanding of what displaced persons need during emergencies, NGOs are best suited to procure the right types of supplies.
-
NGOs are more efficient in providing medical care and supplies to displaced persons than militaries are. Militaries are often focused only on providing medical services to combatants and military personnel. Although the military does have more in-patient capabilities, NGOs use local medical infrastructure more efficiently and do not undermine local infrastructure.
-
NGOs are better at tapping local resources, feedback, and capacity. With staff members immersed in local populations, NGOs can absorb information faster than militaries can, often because militaries are isolated by force protection requirements.
-
NGOs are better at managing refugee camps and providing water and sanitation services because of their close relationships with UNHCR. NGO staff members are also often trained or specialized in various aspects of camp management.218
Militaries, too, have various comparative advantages. Without the military in many instances, NGOs would have been unable to provide humanitarian services or less efficient in their programming.
-
Militaries have a monopoly on security and the use of force. When a population is affected by conflict, external, noncombatant militaries can provide security for humanitarian operations, displaced persons, and both NGO and UN staff and infrastructure. NGOs, with strict neutrality and noncombatant policies and lack of capacity, cannot.
-
Militaries can provide extensive intelligence information about population movements, security conditions, road, river and bridge conditions, and other information pertinent to conducting humanitarian operations. NGOs do not have satellites, intelligence analysts, or other capacities to collect and digest complex and intricate information.
-
Militaries have by far the largest airlift capacity globally. Aside from the private sector, the combined load capacity of which is much greater than even the U.S. military, the US military is the largest single organization that can lift humanitarian supplies and materials in almost every condition and in very short notice. NGOs do use aircraft, but normally sporadically and in the worst scenarios for minimal periods.
-
Militaries have distinct advantages in large-scale communications infrastructure and communications capacities. NGOs often depend on communication capacities from militaries or UN agencies (or both) because large satellite stations, bandwidth, and other regional or global communications are not available at reasonable costs for NGOs.
-
Militaries can respond to maritime and/or chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and high yield explosives (CBRNE) emergencies. NGOs have almost no capacity.219

## Conclusion: Who Leads The Way In Humanitarian Emergencies?

Chris Seiple's study of four military operations that placed NGOs and military units into substantial contact is still one of the more valuable texts in understanding the interaction and challenges that arise from NGO-military collaboration. NGOs and military units operating in humanitarian emergencies share many goals, and should work together to make humanitarian operations efficient. In Seiple's case studies, detail is given that explains the intricacies of how NGO-U.S. military interaction worked well and not so well. Major themes were discerned: the results are perceived differently, and this difference is what may stand out as the largest operational and thematic difference between the two sectors. For NGOs, relief activities are part of a continuum of humanitarian service. HAOs are part of bringing a society to independent development, health, and empowerment, and the relief phase is only the introduction to longer-term development strategies. For the military, long interventions are dangerous, costly, and inefficient, and are not appropriate to the nature and mission of a military body. Militaries, whether self-perceived as such or not, are vital elements to humanitarian operations but must create an appropriate exit strategy and realize that NGOs are often in it for the long haul. To conclude, Seiple leaves a strong statement for contemplation:
The military can never be in charge. If it is in charge, it inevitably diminishes the humanitarian effort and, ironically, prevents its own departure. However, if the military conceives of its role from the beginning as a means to a declared political end, and acts to support civilian efforts, then civilians will remain responsible for the overall strategy and for the end-state that results. If the exigencies of military action are allowed to dominate, however, one of two things will happen: 1) the military will leave too quickly because it is afraid of getting involved in nationbuilding; or 2) the military will stay too long (because no one else can do it, the military will take on the task of nation-building). Ultimately, decisive socio-political results are the realm of the NGOs, other IOs and indigenous authorities. Logically, theirs is the dominant role, and the larger responsibility.220
The military and NGOs nevertheless should not assume mutual understanding, because cultural differences can be subtle as well as profound. Within medical ethics, distinct and characteristic lines in the sand can determine how the military or an NGO may respond on the ground. NGOs understand that the military, in accordance with the Geneva Conventions, must provide treatment to combatants but not necessarily extend that care to civilians. Furthermore, military hospitals are established to treat combat-wounded soldiers and combatants rather than for civilians to receive treatment. Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq saw military hospitals flooded by civilians seeking care. At the same time, NGOs were inundated with members of local host communities (some whom possibly combatants, such as the Hutu militia in Rwanda) requesting care in refugee and IDP camps. Under such circumstances, NGOs have decided that care must be given to all. Efforts have been made not only to assist in refugee camps, but also in local communities that may be hosting millions of refugees. NGOs and military units have a special relationship in emergency settings. Unlike almost any other actors in the field, both NGOs and militaries are almost fully operational. NGOs and the U.S. military are now also familiar with one another. In major operations, NGOs and the military have worked together and in coordination to maximize advantages, reduce confusion and parallel programs, and enhance the ability of both entities to work more efficiency. This has led to more familiar understandings between NGO and military sectors, but major technical gaps and large thematic differences still exist between NGO and military methods of operating in emergency settings. This is not surprising, but the relevance of attempting to understand these differences has never been more pertinent. In Chris Seiple's work, it is suggested that "old mindsets" of both the NGO and military communities are
"rarely appropriate" in today's responses to humanitarian emergencies.221 Both need to adopt new methods of working together:
The NGOs, for example, must comprehend the crying need for a comprehensive and integrated response, even if this sometimes requires subjugating their charter for the good of the overall effort. On the other hand, a linear military mindset is also insufficient. With no two crises exactly the same, the only way to address any given situation is to use a conceptual checklist only as a reference point, and to be fully prepared to throw it away if it does not work. Humanitarian intervention is not a matter of "X" amount of input, for "Y" amount of days, to achieve the definable and finite "Z".222
When NGOs and U.S. military units have met in the field, the experiences have ranged from positive to extremely difficult or frustrating for both sides. Military attitudes often hold that NGOs are whimsical, small, and lacking of capacity to act in a cohesive or independent manner. NGOs look at the military as cumbersome, risk-averse, and restricted by its geo-political policies or force protection needs. When working within a humanitarian emergency, it often appears that the military and NGOs speak different languages and have widely varying and potentially incompatible missions, capacities, and knowledge. This is not necessarily true, and opinions are changing on both sides.

##  Resource: Relevant Dod CivilMilitary Documents

-
Military Support for Stability, Security, Transition, and Reconstruction (SSTR) Operations, "Instruction: Stability Operations, no. 3000.05" (September 2009) www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/300005p.pdf
-
Stability Operations. FM 3-07 (October 2008) http://usacac.army.mil/cac2/repository/FM307/FM3-07.pdf
-
Interagency, Intergovernmental Organization, and Nongovernmental Organization Coordination During Joint Operations, vol. I, JP 3-08 (March 2006)
www.js.pentagon.mil/doctrine/jel/new_pubs/jp3_08v1.pdf

-
Interagency, Intergovernmental Organization, and Nongovernmental Organization Coordination During Joint Operations, vol. II, JP 3-08 (March 2006) www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/new_pubs/jp3_08v2.pdf
-
Foreign Humanitarian Assistance, JP 3-29 (March 2009) www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/new_pubs/jp3_29.pdf
-
Civil-Military Operations, JP 3-57 (July 2008) www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/new_pubs/jp3_57.pdf
-
Civil Affairs Operations, Field Manual No. 3-05.40 (September 2006) www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-05-40.pdf

##  Resource: Selected CivilMilitary Resources

-
Global Health NGO Database and Tools www.global-health.org
-
Center for Disaster and Humanitarian Assistance Medicine (CDHAM) www.cdham.org
-
Interagency Standing Committee. *Civil Military Relationship in Complex Emergencies* (June 2004) www.humanitarianinfo.org/IMToolbox/10_Reference/Civil_Military_Relations/2004_Civil_ Military_Relationship_In_Complex_Emergencies.pdf
-
Interaction. "Guidelines for Relationships Between U.S. Armed Forces and Non-Governmental Humanitarian Organizations in Hostile or Potentially Hostile Environments" www.interaction.org/sites/default/files/1/FACT%20SHEETS/InterAction%20US%20 Mil%20CivMil%20Guidelines%20July%2007%20flat.pdf
-
United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Assistance: "Policy, Guidelines and Related Documents" http://ochaonline.un.org/AboutOCHA/Organigramme/EmergencyServicesBranchESB/ CivilMilitaryCoordinationSection/PolicyGuidelinesRelatedDocuments/tabid/4938/ language/en-US/Default.aspx
-
Guidelines on the Use of Military and Civil Defence Assets to Support United Nations Humanitarian Activities in Complex Emergencies (March 2003)
www.icva.ch/mcdaversion801.pdf

-
Use of Military or Armed Escorts for Humanitarian Convoys (September 14, 2001) www.who.int/hac/network/interagency/GuidelinesonArmedEscorts_Sept2001.pdf
-
"General guidance for interaction between United Nations personnel and military and civilian representatives of the occupying power in Iraq" (May 8, 2003) www.coe-dmha.org/Media/Guidance/6GeneralGuidance.pdf
-
"Relationships with military forces in AfghanistanGuidelines for UNAMA area coordinators and other UN personnel" (2002) http://ochaonline.un.org/OchaLinkClick.aspx?link=ocha&docid=1001039
-
"Guidance on Use of Military Aircraft for UN Humanitarian Operations during the Current Conflict in Afghanistan IMTF" (November 7, 2001) http://ochaonline.un.org/OchaLinkClick.aspx?link=ocha&DocId=1001219

##  Resource: Selected Civil-Military References

Aall, Pamela, Daniel Miltenberger, and Thomas G. Weiss. Guide to IGOs, NGOs and the Military in Peace and Relief Operations (Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace, 2000). "Civil Military Relations." *Comparative Democratization Project*. Stanford University, http://democracy.

stanford.edu/civ_milit.html.

Center for Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance. CMO/CIMIC Reference Library for the Civilian and Military Practitioner. CD-Rom compilation (Bethesda, MD: CDHAM), www.cdmha.org. The Cuny Center. *Greater Efficiency in Humanitarian Assistance Operations*. (Arlington, VA: The Cuny Center, 2002). Danieli, Yael, ed. Sharing the Front Line and the Back Hills: Peacekeepers, Humanitarian Aid Workers & the Media in the Midst of Crisis (Amityville, NY: Baywood Publishing, 2002). Davidson, Lisa Witzig, Margaret Daly Hayes, and James J. Landon. Humanitarian and Peace Operations: NGOs and the Military in the Interagency Process (Washington, DC: National Defense University Press, 1996). Gallagher, Dennis, Michel Moussalli, and David Bosco. "Civilian and Military Means of Providing and Supporting Humanitarian Assistance during Conflict: A Comparative Analysis" (Washington, DC: Refugee Policy Group, March 1997).

Joint Chiefs of Staff. *Joint Doctrine for Civil-Military Operations*, JP 3-57 (Washington, DC: Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2003). Interagency, Intergovernmental Organization, and Nongovernmental Organization Coordination during Joint Operations, vol. I, JP 3-08 (Washington, DC: Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2006), www.js.pentagon.

mil/doctrine/jel/new_pubs/jp3_08v1.pdf.

Interagency, Intergovernmental Organization, and Nongovernmental Organization Coordination during Joint Operations, vol. II, JP 3-08 (Washington, DC: Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2006), www.dtic.mil/
doctrine/jel/new_pubs/jp3_08v2.pdf. Foreign Humanitarian Assistance, JP 3-29 (Washington, DC: Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2009), www.dtic.mil/ doctrine/jel/new_pubs/jp3_29.pdf. Mack, A. "The Humanitarian Operation Center, Kuwait: Operation Iraqi Freedom, 2003." International Peacekeeping 11(4): 68396.

Minear, Larry, Ted van Baarda, and Marc Sommers. "NATO and Humanitarian Action in the Kosovo Crisis." Watson Institute Occasional Paper #36 (Providence, RI: Brown University, 2000). Seiple, Chris. *The U.S. Military/NGO Relationship in Humanitarian Intervention* (Carlisle, PA: U.S. Army War College, 1996). U.S. Department of the Army. *Civil Affairs Operations*. Field Manual No. 3-05.40 (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Army, Headquarters, September 29, 2006), www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3- 05-40.pdf. U.S. Department of Defense. "Instruction: Stability Operations, no. 3000.05" (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Defense, September 16, 2009), www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/300005p. pdf.

## Part 4. Annexes Annex 1. Selected Ngos

Academy for Educational Development
1825 Connecticut Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20009-5721, USA t: 202-884-8000 f: 202-884-8400 e: web@aed.org w: www.aed.org Regions Africa, Asia, Caribbean, Eurasia, Europe, Latin America, Middle East, North America, Pacific Functions/Sectors Education, health, microfinance Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $335,035,631 Revenue source breakdown Studies and projects: $328,642,824 Investments: $2,059,824 Restricted contributions: $4,332,983 Expenses breakdown Program services: $328,642,824 Management and administration: $26,278,020 Program development: $7,039,294 Total expenses: $325,617,629
Summary AED is a nonprofit organization working globally to improve education, health, civil society and economic developmentthe foundation of thriving societies. In collaboration with local and national partners, AED fosters sustainable results through practical, comprehensive approaches to social and economic challenges. AED implements more than 250 programs serving people in all 50 U.S. states and more than 150 countries.

Vision and Mission AED envisions a world in which all individuals have the opportunity to reach their full potential and contribute to the well-being of their family, community, country, and world. AED's mission is to make a positive difference in people's lives by working in partnership to create and implement innovative solutions to critical social and economic problems.

Action Against Hunger (USA)
247 West 37th Street, 10th Fl., New York, NY 10018, USA t: 212-967-7800, Toll free: 877-777-1420 f: 212-967-5480 e: info@actionagainsthunger.org w: www.actionagainsthunger.org Regions Africa, Americas, Asia, Europe, Middle East Functions/Sectors Food distribution and nutrition, health, water and sanitation Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $26,263,060 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $2,445,543 Grants (U.S. government): $5,218,910 Grants (non-U.S. government): $18,525,269 Interest: $39,127 Other: $34,211 Expenses Program services: $18,696,553 Supporting services (management and general): $2,168,593 Supporting services (fundraising): $239,660 Total expenses: $21,104,806
Summary Action Against Hunger-USA is part of the ACF International Network (ACF-IN), an agency established specifically to combat global hunger. Recognized as a world leader in the fight against hunger and malnutrition, the ACF International Network has pursued its vision of a world without hunger for nearly three decades, combating hunger in emergency situations of conflict, natural disaster, and chronic food insecurity.

Mission The mission of Action Against Hunger is to save lives by eliminating hunger through the prevention, detection, and treatment of malnutrition, especially during and after emergency situations of conflict, war and natural disaster. From crisis to sustainability, we tackle the underlying causes of malnutrition and its effects by using our expertise in nutrition, food security, water and sanitation, health and advocacy. By integrating our programs with local and national systems we further ensure that shortterm interventions become long-term solutions.

ActionAid International (USA)
1420 K Street NW, Ste. 900, Washington, DC 20005, USA t: 202-835-1240 e: info@actionaid.org w: www.actionaidusa.org Regions Africa, Americas, Asia, Europe Functions/Sectors Education, emergency response, food distribution and nutrition, gender, health Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $4,646,079 Revenue source breakdown Grants: $4,242,005 Contributions: $390,518 Other: $13,556 Expenses Program expenses: $3,833,843 Fundraising: $287,441 General and administrative: $387,906 Total expenses: $4,509,190
Summary ActionAid fights poverty by helping the world's poorest people speak to the world's most powerful. ActionAid helps people take control of their own lives. So they can tell their leaders what needs to change, and see it happen. This is the most effective way to end their poverty for good.

Mission and Vision ActionAid's mission is to work with poor and marginalized people to eradicate poverty by overcoming the injustice and inequality that cause it. A world without poverty in which every person can exercise his or her right to a life of dignity.

Adventist Development and Relief Agency International
12501 Old Columbia Pike, Silver Spring, MD 20904, USA t: 800-424-2372 w: www.adra.org Regions Africa, Caribbean, Central America, East Asia, Europe, South America, South Asia, South Pacific Functions/Sectors Education, emergency response, food distribution and nutrition, health, microfinance Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $143,936,174 Expenses Program services: $134,670,342 Management and general: $4,855,217 Fundraising: $1,179,711 Total expenses: $140, 705,270
Summary The Adventist Development and Relief Agency is a global humanitarian organization of the Seventhday Adventist Church that demonstrates God's love and compassion.

Mission and Vision ADRA works with people in poverty and distress to create positive change and justness through empowering partnerships and responsible action. ADRA is a professional, learning and efficient network that embodies integrity and transparency. ADRA reaches across boundaries empowering and speaking out for the at-risk and forgotten to achieve measurable, documented and durable changes in lives and society.

African Medical & Research Foundation
4 West 43rd Street, New York, NY 10036, USA t: 212-768-2440 f: 212-786-4230 e: amrefusa@amrefusa.org w: www.amref.org Regions Africa Functions/Sectors Disaster and emergency relief, education, HIV/AIDS, information and communication, nutrition, policy research and analysis, population and family planning, refugees and displacement Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $44,074 Revenue source breakdown Grantsrestricted: $39,569 Grantsunrestricted: $1,320 Other income: $2,761 Net financing income: $424
Summary AMREF's mission is to empower disadvantaged people of Africa to improve their lives and health by: strengthening local capabilities through training and education; delivering clinical and surgical outreach to remote rural areas where services do not exist; investigating and evaluating innovative methods of preventive and curative health-care delivery through operational research; promoting the use of identified, best practices in solving health problems; and working with government ministries of health to jointly solve long-term health problems. AMREF is committed to the principle that sustainable health development can only be effected by building and supporting indigenous capabilities. Over 95 percent of AMREF's staff is African.

African Methodist Episcopal Service and Development Agency (AME-SADA)
1134 11th Street NW, Washington, DC 20001, USA t: 202-371-8722 f: 202-371-0981 e: admin@ame-sada.org w: www.ame-sada.org Regions Haiti, South Africa Functions/Sectors Education and nutrition, population and family planning, public policy and advocacy, rural development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $1,899,227 Revenue source breakdown Contributions and grants: $1,535,634 Program service revenue, including government fees and contracts: $282,857 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $1,224 Other revenue: $79,512
Summary Service and Development Agency, Inc., the international humanitarian relief and development agency of the African Methodist Episcopal Church, is committed to helping people help themselves, providing essential assistance to those in need through health, education and micro-enterprise programs; because we are our brother's keeper.

Africare
440 R Street NW, Washington, DC 20001, USA t: 202-462-3614 f: 202-387-1034 e: info@africare.org w: www.africare.org Regions Africa Functions/Sectors Emergency response, environment, food distribution and nutrition, gender, health, microfinance, orphans and vulnerable children, water and sanitation Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $50,599,293 Revenue source breakdown Foundations/Trusts: $1,351,400 Grants: $7,545,233 Special events: $819,820 CFC: $198,439 Donations: $8,980,098 Governments: $26,917,238 Investment and other: $4,787,065 Expenses Program services: $45,949,508 Support services: $4,279,269 Total expenses: $50,228,777
Summary Africare helps Africa. A leader among private, charitable U.S. organizations assisting Africa, Africare is also the oldest and largest African-American led organization in the field - and Africa is Africare's specialty.

Mission and Vision Africare works to improve the quality of life in Africa. Africare works in partnership with African communities to promote health and productivity. Africare places communities at the center of developmentin the belief that only through strong communities can Africa feed itself, develop and manage its natural resources, provide adequate education and vocational training, address people's needs for health care and disease prevention, achieve economic well-being and live in peace.

Aga Khan Foundation (USA)
1825 K Street NW, Ste. 901, Washington, DC 20006, USA t: 202-293-2537 f: 202-785-1752 w: www.akdn.org/akf Regions Africa, Asia, Europe, Middle East, North America Functions/Sectors Education, food distribution and nutrition, health, shelter, water and sanitation Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $253,700,000 Revenue source breakdown Grants and donations: $196,600,000 Investments: $52,000,000 Properties: $3,400,000 Other: $1,700,000 Expenses Program services: $120,100,000 Administration: $20,900,000 Properties: $21,.900,000 Other: $22,100,000 Total expenses: $184,900,000
Summary The Aga Khan Foundation (AKF) is a nondenominational, international development agency established in 1967 by His Highness the Aga Khan. Its mission is to develop and promote creative solutions to problems that impede social development, primarily in Asia and East Africa. Created as a private, nonprofit foundation under Swiss law, it has branches and independent affiliates in 15 countries. It is a modern vehicle for traditional philanthropy in the Ismaili Muslim community under the leadership of the Aga Khan.

Aid to Artisans
1030 New Britain Avenue, Ste. 102, West Hartford, CT 06110, USA t: 860-756-5550 f: 860-756-5558 e: info@aidtoartisans.org w: www.aidtoartisans.org Regions Bosnia, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Georgia, Ghana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Malaysia, Mali, Mexico, Mozambique, Oman, Peru, Romania, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vietnam Functions/Sectors Product development, business training, market access, small grants Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $5,548,133 Revenue source breakdown Contributions and grants: $3,340,487 Program service revenue, including government fees and contracts: $1,868,102 Dividends and interest from securities: $24,009 Other revenue: $315,535
Summary Aid to Artisans, a nonprofit organization, offers practical assistance to artisan groups worldwide, working in partnerships to foster artistic traditions, cultural vitality, improved livelihoods and community well-being. Through collaboration in product development, business skills training and development of new markets, Aid to Artisans provides sustainable economic and social benefits for craftspeople in an environmentally sensitive and culturally respectful manner.

Air Serv International
410 Rosedale Court, Ste. 190, Warrenton, VA 20186, USA t: 540-428-2323 f: 540-428-2326 e: asi@airserv.org w: www.airserv.org Regions Africa, Asia Middle East Functions/Sectors Emergency response Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $29,106,984 Expenses Program services: $24,007,407 Management and general: $4,320,580 Fundraising: $410,132 Total expenses: $28,738,119
Summary In times of war and natural disaster, the world's most respected humanitarian relief and development agencies and organizations rely on Air Serv International. Whenever ground transportation is impossible due to destroyed, damaged or nonexistent infrastructure, Air Serv planes provide vital access for humanitarian aid organizations.

Vision Our flights save lives and bring hope to a suffering world.

Mission Air Serv International is a not-for-profit aviation organization that supports humanitarian programs worldwide.

Alliance for Peacebuilding
1320 19th Street NW, Ste. 410, Washington, DC 20036, USA t: 202-822-2047 f: 202-822-2049 e: afp-info@allianceforpeacebuilding.org w: www.allianceforpeacebuilding.org Functions/Sectors Collaboration for conflict preventionMeetings and seminars among civil society and government agencies to coordinate initiatives in conflict environments. Peace gamingA program designed to help civilian and military actors determine appropriate actions to foster peace and stability in preconflict, conflict, or transitional environments. International Peace and Prosperity ProjectA pilot program designed to prevent impending conflict in Guinea-Bissau through collaborative, holistic action. Publications and collaborative communications initiatives to inform peace building organizations about best practices and to inform policy makers about effective options to end violence.

Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $652,715 Revenue source breakdown Government contributions: $648,719 Dividends and interest from securities: $1,129 Other revenue: $2,867
Summary To build sustainable peace and security worldwide. Goals: Initiate, develop and support collaborative action among governmental, nongovernmental, and intergovernmental organizations to prevent and resolve destructive conflicts. Build understanding of and support for peace building policies and programs among leaders in government, business, media, philanthropy, religion, and other sectors of civil society. Increase the effectiveness of the peace building field by developing networks, disseminating best practices, and enhancing organizational capacities and professional skills.

Alliance to End Hunger
50 F Street NW, Ste. 500 Washington, DC 20001, USA t: 202-639-9400 f: 202-639-9401 e: glaizer@alliancetoendhunger.org w: www.alliancetoendhunger.org Functions/Sectors Agriculture, food, nutrition, food service, free food distribution programs Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $498,076 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $496,076 Other revenue: $2,000
Summary The Alliance to End Hunger engages diverse institutions in building the public and political will to end hunger, in our country and around the world. They do so by building strategic partnerships to create a world free of hunger. They build political commitment to ensure that leaders do what it takes to end hunger. They also support the International Alliance Against Hunger to build global connections to achieve the United Nations first Millennium Development Goal of cutting the number of hungry people in half by 2015.

America's Development Foundation
101 North Union Street, Ste. 200, Alexandria, VA 22314, USA t: 703-836-2717 f: 703-836-3379 e: mmiller@adfusa.org (Michael D. Miller, president) w: www.adfusa.org Regions Africa, Asia, Caribbean, Central America, Europe, Middle East Functions/Sectors Food distribution and nutrition Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $17,728,673 Revenue source breakdown Government contributions: $17,573,499 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $58,685 Other revenue: $96,489
Summary America's Development Foundation is dedicated to assisting the international development of democracy. Guided by the belief that a vibrant civil society is the indispensable foundation of democracy, ADF works in partnership with communities and NGOs committed to building civil societies. ADF conducts programs that provide targeted technical assistance, training and grants to enhance the institutional development of various stakeholders and to support program activities in social, economic and civil society development. ADF has experience in supporting program activities in over thirty countries in Eastern and Central Europe, Central Asia, the Middle East, Africa, the Caribbean, and Central America.

American Friends Service Committee
1501 Cherry Street Philadelphia, PA 19102, USA t: 215-241-7000 f: 215-241-7275 e: afscinfo@afsc.org w: www.afsc.org Regions Angola, Bosnia, Brazil, Cambodia, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Korea, Kosovo, Laos, Lebanon, Mali, Mexico, Mozambique, North Korea, Palestine, Peru, Somalia, South Africa, Thailand, Vietnam, Zimbabwe Functions/Sectors Agriculture, strengthening civil society, disaster and emergency relief, education, policy research and analysis, public policy and advocacy, refugees and displacement, rural development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $40,379,497 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $35,876,100 Investments: $3,515,694 Government grants: $189,092 Other: $798,612
Summary AFSC upholds the principle of meeting human needs without regard to politics, religion or nationality. It promotes self-help and independence, and the improvement of people's physical, economic and social well-being, out of Quaker concern for reconciliation and the relief of suffering. AFSC focuses on promoting mutual understanding of people.

American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA t: 212-687-6200 e: info@jdc.org w: www.jdc.org Regions Albania, Algeria, Argentina, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, France, Gaza, Georgia, Greece, Guatemala, Herzegovina, Hungary, India, Israel, Italy, Kosovo, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Mexico, Montenegro, Morocco, Myanmar, Oman, Peru, Poland, Romania, Russia, Rwanda, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, West Bank, Yemen, Yugoslavia Functions/Sectors Strengthening civil society, disaster and emergency relief, education, policy research and analysis, refugees and displacement, shelter/housing, social development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $271,751,473 Revenue source breakdown Contributions to donor advised funds: $540,000 Direct public support: $142,621,563 Indirect public support: $98,469,806 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $317,220 Dividends and interest from securities: $4,963,877
Summary AJJDC works on behalf of the American Jewish community in over 50 countries outside of North America. The mission includes the rescue, relief and reconstruction of Jewish communities worldwide. Through its International Development Program, AJJDC conducts development and disaster relief activities on a nonsectarian basis.

American Jewish World Service
1001 Connecticut Avenue NW, Ste. 1200, Washington, DC 20036, USA t: 202-379-4300 f: 202-379-4310 w: www.ajws.org Regions Africa, sub-Saharan, East Asia and Pacific, Latin America and Caribbean Functions/Sectors Agriculture, strengthening civil society, disaster and emergency relief, economic growth and development, education, HIV/AIDS
Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $30,929,024 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $29,948,675 Investments: $562,861 Other: $417,488
Summary American Jewish World Service (AJWS) is an international development organization dedicated to alleviating poverty, hunger and disease among the people of the developing world regardless of race, religion or nationality. Motivated by Judaism's imperative to pursue economic and social justice, AJWS helps people in Africa, Asia and the Americas realize their basic human rights by empowering grassroots nongovernmental organizations. Through grant making, volunteer service, advocacy and education, AJWS works to build civil society, foster sustainable development and promote human dignity for all people.

American Near East Refugee Aid
1522 K Street NW, Ste. 600 Washington, DC 20005, USA t: 202-842-2766 e: pmallan@anera.org w: www.anera.org Regions Gaza, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, West Bank Functions/Sectors Agriculture, disaster and emergency relief, education, rural development, social development, urban development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $75,819,792 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $45,053,122 Other: $15,595,643
Summary American Near East Refugee Aid (ANERA) reduces poverty and relieves suffering, thereby improving the lives of people in the Middle East.

American Red Cross International Services National Headquarters, 2025 E Street NW, Washington, DC 20006, USA t: 800-733-2767 w: www.redcross.org Regions Africa, Americas, East Asia and Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, Latin American and Caribbean, Middle East and North Africa, North America, South Asia Functions/Sectors Disaster services, international development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $3,183,957,741 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $534,243,563 Indirect public support: $141,700,450 Government contributions (grants): $51,312,673 Program service revenue, including government fees and contracts: $2,320,598,168 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $1,524,365 Dividends and interest from securities: $82,876,801 Net rental income: $2,649,023 Net gain from sales of assets: $7,780,322 Special events and activities: $36,923,476 Other revenue: $4,348,900
Summary American Red Cross focuses its relief and development efforts in six core programmatic areas: emergency preparedness and response, primary health care, food programming, organization development, tracing and Red Cross messages, and dissemination of International Humanitarian Law.

American Refugee Committee
430 Oak Grove Street, Ste. 204, Minneapolis, MN 55403, USA t: 612-872-7060, 800-875-7060 f: 612-607-6499 e: archq@archq.org w: www.archq.org Regions Africa, Asia, Europe Functions/Sectors Agriculture, strengthening civil society, disaster and emergency relief, education, HIV/AIDS, information and communication, population and family planning, public policy and advocacy, refugees and displacement, shelter/housing Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $29,355,469 Revenue source breakdown U.S. government grants: $17,802,803 UN grants: $5,297,669 Foreign government grants: $26,367 Private support contributions: $2,965,091 Interest: $35,311 Micro-credit interest and fees: $645,847 Other: $538,531 Net assets released from restrictions: $2,043,850 Expenses $28,740,497 International programs: $26,022,935 General and administrative: $2,164,510 Fundraising: $553,052
Summary ARC works with its partners and constituencies to provide opportunities and expertise to refugees, displaced people and host communities. We help people survive conflict and crisis and rebuild lives of dignity, health, security and self-sufficiency. ARC is committed to the delivery of programs that ensure measurable quality and lasting impact for the people we serve.

AmeriCares
AmeriCares, 88 Hamilton Avenue, Stamford, CT 06902, USA t: 800-486-4357 w: www.americares.org
Regions
Africa, Asia and Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and Caribbean, Middle East, North America
Functions/Sectors
Disaster response, humanitarian policy and practice, strategic impact
Budget
Annual revenue (FY 2006): $892,993,784 Revenue source breakdown Public support Cash contributions: $48,508,608 Securities contributions: $796,905 Donated medical and disaster supplies: $839,059,248 Contributed services and facilities: $2,358,204 Interest and dividend income: $2,867,348 Net gain on sale of securities: $321,467 Unrealized loss on securities: $1,293,882 Other: $305,439 Change in value of split interest agreements: $70,447 Expenses $1,006,460,693 Program related expenses: $18,956,716 Grants and awards: $979,046,503 Management and general: $3,194,309 Fundraising: $5,263,165
Summary
AmeriCares is a nonprofit disaster relief and humanitarian aid organization, which provides immediate response to emergency medical needsand supports long-term humanitarian assistance programs- for people around the world, irrespective of race, creed or political persuasion.

Amigos de las Americas
5618 Star Lane Houston, TX 77057, USA t: 713-782-5290, 800-231-7796 f: 713-782-9267 e: info@amigoslink.org w: www.amigoslink.org Regions Latin America and Caribbean Functions/Sectors Education, rural development, shelter/housing, social development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $3,048,800 Revenue source breakdown Volunteer contributions: $2,359,273 Other contributions: $394,601 Special events: $203,435 Interest and other income: $58,852 Net unrealized gains on investments: $28,615 Net realized gains on investments: $4,024 Expenses $2,922,966 Operating programs: $2,383,585 General and administrative: $118,595 Fundraising: $420,787
Summary Amigos de las Americas builds partnerships to empower young leaders, advance community development and strengthen multicultural understanding in the Americas Amnesty International
5 Penn Plaza, New York, NY 10001, USA t: 212-807-8400 f: 212-627-1451 e: aimember@aiusa.org w: www.amnestyusa.org Regions North America, Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, Africa, Middle East, Asia and Pacific Functions/Sectors Other, human rights Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $44,556,686 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $43,198,034 (97 percent) Other: $1,358,652 (3 percent)
Summary We are people from across the world standing up for humanity and human rights. Our purpose is to protect people wherever justice, freedom, truth and dignity are denied. We investigate and expose abuses, educate and mobilize the public, and help transform societies to create a safer, more just world. We received the Nobel Peace Prize for our life-saving work. With more than 2.2 million supporters, activists and volunteers in over 150 countries, and complete independence from government, corporate or national interests, we work to protect human rights worldwide. Our vision is of a world in which every personregardless of race, religion, gender, or ethnicityenjoys all of the human rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights standards.

Ananda Marga Universal Relief Team
2502 Lindley Terrace Rockville MD 20850, USA t: 301-738-7122 f: 301-738-7123 e: info@amurt.net w: www.amurt.net Regions Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin American and Caribbean, Middle East Functions/Sectors Agriculture, disaster and emergency relief, education, gender equality, rural development, social development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $2,126,936 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $2,007,641 Indirect public support: $6,878 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $7,314 Sales of inventory: $35,103
Summary AMURT aims to help improve the quality of life for poor and under-privileged people of the world and to assist the victims of natural and man-made disasters. AMURT offers assistance which encourages and enables people to develop themselves, harnessing their own resources for securing the basic necessities of life and gaining greater socio-economic independence.

Its community development projects provide funds and technical assistance for irrigation, food cooperatives, reforestation, medical care and road construction. Food and agricultural projects assist experimental farms and nurseries, and work to focus attention on increased agriculture opportunities to counterbalance growing urban migration and depleting food source production.

Baptist World Alliance
405 North Washington Street Falls Church, VA 22046, USA t: 703-790-8980 f: 703-893-5160 e: bwa@bwanet.org w: www.bwanet.org Regions Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bermuda, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Central African Republic, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cote d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hong Kong, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Korea, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Lithuania, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mexico, Moldova, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Rwanda, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Taiwan, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Zambia, Zimbabwe Functions/Sectors Agriculture, disaster and emergency relief, education, HIV/AIDS, information and communication, nutrition, rural development, shelter/housing, social development Budget Annual Revenue (FY 2007): $4,230,257
Summary Baptist World Aid (BWAid) works through Baptist communities around the world, mitigating suffering and providing long-range help for persons in need regardless of religion, nationality, tribe or class. BWAid also helps poor people avoid situations of famine and malnourishment and improve their capacity for self-help and wage earning.

BRAC USA
11 East 44th Street, Ste. 1600, New York, NY 10017, USA t: 212-808-5615 f: 212-808-0203 w: www.brac.net Regions AfricaSouthern Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Liberia, Sierra Leonne; AsiaBangladesh, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Sri Lanka Functions/Sectors Health, education, microfinance, human rights, social development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $6,009,945 Revenue source breakdown Public contributions: $6,007,149 Investments: $2,796
Summary BRAC USA seeks to improve the well being of the poorest in Africa and Asia, particularly its women and children. To do so, BRAC USA will support BRAC in its work to build scalable, sustainable institutions that, over time, are indigenously led to create wealth for the poor, promote health and social development and advance education and entrepreneurship. BRAC's vision of success is to increase its visibility in the United States, harness the power of its friends, and ensure that it mobilizes at least US$250 million in support of new BRAC organizations in Africa and Asia to unleash the potential of millions of poor households to create better futures for themselves and communities.

Bread for the World
50 F Street NW, Ste. 500, Washington, DC 20001, USA t: 202-639-9400, 800-82-BREAD f: 202-639-9401 e: bread@bread.org w: www.bread.org Regions Worldwide Functions/Sectors Agriculture, HIV/AIDS, public policy and advocacy, rural development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $5,256,750 Revenue source breakdown Contributions and membership: $4,117,640 Church and denominational support: $920,515 Other income: $81,146 Investment income: $137,449
Summary Bread for the World is a collective Christian voice urging our nation's decision makers to end hunger at home and abroad.

Bread for the World Institute
50 F Street NW, Ste. 500, Washington, DC 20001, USA t: 202-639-9400, 800-82-BREAD f: 202-639-9401 e: institute@bread.org w: www.bread.org/BFW-Institute Regions Worldwide Functions/Sectors Agriculture, strengthening civil society, policy research and analysis, rural development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $4,130,946 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $3,079,868 Foundation grants: $613,799 Conferences and special events: $257,676 Other income (loss): $41,186 Investment income: $138,417
Summary Bread for the World Institute provides policy analysis on hunger and strategies to end it. The Institute educates its advocacy network, opinion leaders, policy makers and the public about hunger in the United States and abroad. We believe that a well educated and motivated U.S. constituency who care for hungry people will ultimately change the politics of hunger. Bread for the World Institute helps U.S. citizens tell the story of hungry people in their communities and see the connections we all have to hungry people around the world. We know that empowering people with information and a clear sense of the policy choices facing U.S. decision-makers will result in real progress toward ending hunger. Bread for the World Institute (BFWI) is the research and educational partner of Bread for the World. BFWI generates studies on hunger issues and vital educational resources. Look through our resources, become informed, and learn how to be a force that will improve the lives of hungry people.

Brother's Brother Foundation
1200 Galveston Avenue, Pittsburgh PA 15233, USA t: 412-321-3160 f: 412-321-3325 e: mail@brothersbrother.org w: www.brothersbrother.org Regions Armenia, Belize, Brazil, Cuba, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Iraq, Jamaica, Mali, Moldova, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Poland, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, Street Lucia, Uganda, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Vietnam Functions/Sectors Agriculture, disaster and emergency relief, education Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $331,025,239 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $329,701,348 Indirect public support: $125,433 Government contributions: $342,929 Program service revenue, including government fees and contracts: $608,207 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $48,244 Dividends and interest from securities: $190,127 Other income: $8,951
Summary Our mission is to promote international health and education through efficient and effective distribution of donated pharmaceuticals, medical supplies, textbooks, educational supplies, food, clothing, seed and other resources. The BBF motto, "connecting people's resources with people's needs" is accomplished through gift-in-kind contributions that are distributed upon request and identification of need within less developed and developing countries in partnership with US-based and in-country NGOs. BBF assists people without regard to race, creed, religion, or politics.

B'nai B'rith International
2020 K Street NW, 7th Fl., Washington, DC 20006, USA t: 202-857-6600, 888-388-4224 e: cca@bnaibrith.org w: www.bnaibrith.org Regions Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mexico, Moldova, Netherlands, Netherlands Antilles, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Singapore, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Venezuela Functions/Sectors Strengthening civil society, disaster and emergency relief, education, information and communication, membership services, nutrition, policy research and analysis, public policy and advocacy, shelter/ housing, social development, urban development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $25,526 Revenue source breakdown Contributions and other support: $16,829 Member dues: $1,873 Camp revenues: $3,614 Other program revenues: $1,210 Investment income: $2,000
Summary B'nai B'rith is an international Jewish organization committed to the security and continuity of the Jewish people and the State of Israel, defending human rights, combating anti-Semitism, bigotry and ignorance, and providing service to the community on the broadest principles of humanity. Its mission is to unite persons of the Jewish faith and to enhance Jewish identity through strengthening Jewish family life and the education and training of youth, broad-based services for the benefit of senior citizens, and advocacy and action on behalf of Jews throughout the world.

Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict (CIVIC)
1700 Connecticut Ave NW, 3rd Fl., Washington, DC 20009, USA t: 202-558-6958 f: 623-321-7076 e: info@civicworldwide.org w: www.civicworldwide.org Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $336,951
Revenue source breakdown Interest income: $2,535 Grants: $231,000 Contributions: $103,415
Summary Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict (CIVIC) advocates on behalf of victims of armed conflict, working to ensure they receive recognition and assistance from warring parties. CIVIC persuaded the US Congress to establish programs for war victims in Afghanistan and Iraq, guides victims to assistance, brings the human cost of war to the attention of policymakers and the public, and is advocating a new global standard of conduct that warring parties should help where they have hurt. In 2005, CIVIC's founder Marla Ruzicka was killed in Iraq by a suicide bomber while advocating for families injured and killed in the crossfire. CIVIC honors her legacy and strives to sustain her vision.

CARE
151 Ellis Street NE, Atlanta, GA 30303, USA t: 404-681-2552 e: info@care.org w: www.care.org Regions Worldwide Functions/Sectors Agriculture, strengthening of civil society, disaster and emergency relief, education, HIV/AIDS, information and communication, nutrition, policy research and analysis, population and family planning, public policy and advocacy, rural development, shelter/housing, urban development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $655,481,000 Revenue source breakdown Public support: $63,299,000 Temporarily restricted: $39,237,000 Addition to endowment : $2,204,000 Care international: $137,603,000 Interest and dividends on restricted net assets: $8,002,000 Net assets released from restrictions: $37,345,000 Satisfaction of program restrictions: $37,345,000 U.S. government: $298,028,000 Host governments: 26,470,000 Others: $71,783,000 Interest and dividends on unrestricted net assets: $4,412,000 Rent and miscellaneous: $4,443,000 Expenses $645,623,000 Personnel costs: $166,336,000 Professional services: $25,045,000 Equipment: $12,236,000 Materials and services: $140,972,000 Travel and transportation: $51,468,000 Occupancy: $17,545,000 Financing/depn/misc: $28,219,000 Grants/subgrants: $118,645,000 Agcommodities/ciks: $85,157,000
Summary CARE International's mission is to serve individuals and families in the poorest communities in the world. Drawing strength from our global diversity, resources and experiences, we promote innovative solutions and are advocates for global responsibility. We facilitate lasting change by: strengthening capacity for self help; providing economic opportunity; delivering relief in emergencies; influencing policy decisions at all levels; and addressing discrimination in all its forms. Guided by the aspirations of local communities, we pursue our mission with both excellence and compassion because the people whom we serve deserve nothing less.

Catholic Medical Mission Board
10 West 17th Street, New York, NY 10011-5765 t: 212-242-7757, 800-678-5659 f: 212-807-9161 e: info@cmmb.org w: www.cmmb.org Regions Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America and Caribbean, Middle East Functions/Sectors Disaster and emergency relief, education, HIV/AIDS, nutrition Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $161,402,078 Revenue source breakdown Donated goods and services: $148,154,045 Cash contributions: $12,762,808 Income from dividends, interest and Sales of investments : $485,225 Allocations Global aid: $143,280,642 Fundraising and administration: $6,358,138 Total allocations: $149,638,780
Summary Founded in 1928 and rooted in the healing ministry of Jesus, Catholic Medical Mission Board works collaboratively to provide quality health-care programs and services, without discrimination, to people in need around the world.

Catholic Relief Services
228 W. Lexington Street, Baltimore, MD 21201-3413, USA t: 888-277-7575 e: info@crs.org w: www.crs.org Regions Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin American and Caribbean, Middle East and North Africa, United States Functions/Sectors Agriculture, disaster and emergency relief, education, HIV/AIDS, nutrition, public policy and advocacy, refugees and displacement, rural development, shelter/housing, social development, strengthening civil society Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $558,416,000 Revenue source breakdown Operating Revenue Private donor, foundation and corporate contributions: $171,466,000 Donated agricultural, other commodities and ocean freight: $148,946,000 Cash grants from USG: $204,022,000 All Other Support: $33,982,000 Operating expenses Agriculture: $94,023,000 Education: $45,413,000 Emergency: $205,010,000 Small enterprise: $12,437,000 Health: $45,234,000 HIV/AIDS: $113,685,000 Peace and justice: $22,265,000 Welfare: $23,290,000 Program services: $561,357,000 Management and general: $12,548,000 Public awareness: $5,752,000 Fundraising: $17,380,000 Totals: $597,037,000
Summary Catholic Relief Services (CRS) carries out relief and development programs in more than 100 countries and territories around the world. Founded in 1943, CRS is the official international relief and development organization of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). CRS provides assistance on the basis of need, regardless of nationality, race or religion. CRS responds to victims of natural and human-made disasters; provides assistance to the poor to alleviate their immediate needs; supports self-help programs that involve communities in their own development; helps people restore and preserve their dignity and realize their potential; and helps educate Americans to fulfill their moral responsibilities to alleviate human suffering, remove its causes and promote social justice.

Center for International Health and Cooperation
850 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA t: 212-636-6294 f: 212-636-7060 w: www.cihc.org Regions Worldwide Functions/Sectors Education, human rights, information and communication, public policy and advocacy Summary The Center for International Health and Cooperation (CIHC) was founded in 1992 to promote healing and peace in countries shattered by war, ethnic violence or natural disasters. The CIHC, in all its activities, emphasizes that health and humanitarian endeavors can provide common ground for initiating dialogue, understanding and cooperation among people and nations. The CIHC promotes the concept that health, human rights and humanitarian issues should be central, not peripheral concerns in foreign policy debates. The CIHC tries to identify fundamental needs, and use its talents, contacts, and resources to define practical solutions. With offices in New York, Geneva, London and Dublin, and now affiliated, through its Institute of International Humanitarian Affairs (IIHA), with Fordham University, it has concentrated on four areas of expertise: Education, Publications, Symposia and Field Operations.

Center for Health and Gender Equity
1317 F Street NW, Ste. 400, Washington, DC 20004 USA t: 202-393-5930 f: 202-393-5937 e: change@genderhealth.org w: www.genderhealth.org Regions Worldwide Functions/Sectors Family planning, HIV/AIDS, gender-based violence, health sector reform Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $1,378,263 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $1,365,172 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $13,091
Summary CHANGE is a U.S.-based NGO focused on the effects of U.S. international policies on the health and rights of women, girls, and other vulnerable populations in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. We believe that every individual has the right to basic information, technologies, and services needed to enjoy a health and safe sexual and reproductive life free from coercion and preventable illness. Our overarching goal therefore is to ensure that US international policies and programs promote sexual and reproductive rights through effective, evidence-based approaches to prevention and treatment of critical reproductive and sexual health concerns, and through increased funding for critical programs.

Centre for Development and Population Activities
1133 21st Street NW, Ste. 800, Washington, DC 20036 USA t: 202-667-1142 f: 202-332-4496 w: www.cedpa.org Regions Africa, Asia, Middle East, North America Functions/Sectors Education, HIV/AIDS, information and communication, nutrition, population and family planning, public policy and advocacy, strengthening civil society Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $17,416,821 Revenue source breakdown Foundations, multilateral and other: $4,270,300 U.S. government grants and contracts: $12,558,785 Contributions: $125,476 Investment income: $461,153 Other revenue: $1,107 Expenses $17,232,607 Program services: $12,966,106 Management and general: $3,982,149 Fundraising: $284,352
Summary The Centre for Development and Population Activities (CEDPA) is a women-focused nonprofit international development organization founded in 1975. CEDPA's mission is to empower women at all levels of society to be full partners in development. Toward this end, CEDPA's strategies include building the capacities of development institutions and networks; mobilizing women's advocacy and participation at the policy level; linking reproductive health services and women's empowerment; and making youth an integral part of the development agenda. All CEDPA activities are designed to advance gender equity. HIV/AIDS awareness and prevention activities are integrated into all programs CHF International
8601 Georgia Avenue, Ste. 800, Silver Spring, MD 20910, USA t: 301-587-4700 f: 301-587-7315 w: www.chfinternational.org Regions Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, Rwanda, Sudan, Afghanistan, India, Indonesia, Mongolia, Philippines, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia, Georgia, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Colombia, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Peru, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, West Bank and Gaza, Yemen.

Functions/Sectors Economic development, emergency response and transition, health, governance, urban development, infrastructure and housing Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $416,137,529 Revenue source breakdown Grants: $346,039,570 Contracts: $4,296,915 In-kind contributions: $16,323,291 Interest and investment income: $10,048,801 Contributed services and goods: $39,202,495
Summary CHF International's mission is to be a catalyst for long-lasting positive change in low- and moderateincome communities around the world, helping them to improve their social, economic and environmental conditions.

Christian Blind Mission USA
PO Box 19000, 450 East Park Avenue, Greenville, SC 29601, USA t: 864-239-0065 f: 864-239-0069 e: info@cbmus.org w: www.cbmus.org Regions Afghanistan, Angola, Argentina, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cote d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, East Timor, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Laos, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Lithuania, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Palestine, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Russia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Somalia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad & Tobago, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Vietnam, Zambia, Zimbabwe Functions/Sectors Capacity strengthening, health, human rights, microfinance/microenterprise, public policy and advocacy, trade Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $54,798,677 Revenue source breakdown Cash contributions: $1,610,462 Investment income: $99,369 Gift-in-kind contributions: $51,786,420 Misc. Revenues: $1,302,426
Summary CBM (Christian Blind Mission) is the oldest and largest ministry with the primary purpose of improving the quality of life for the blind and disabled living in the world's most disadvantaged societies. They provide preventative, medical, rehabilitative and educational services to millions of people each year. CBM supports more than 1,000 projects in 113 countries, and their aid is available to all people regardless of religion, nationality, race, or gender. CBM's goal is to find, rescue, and rehabilitate these forgotten peoplegiving children hope, taking whole families and communities out of grinding poverty, and building bridges between them and their communities.

ChildFund International
2821 Emerywood Parkway, Richmond VA 23294, USA t: 800-776-6767 e: questions@childfund.org w: www.childfund.org Regions Africa sub-Saharan, East Asia and Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and Caribbean, Middle East and North Africa, North America, South Asia, Afghanistan, Angola, Belarus, Bolivia, Brazil, Chad, Dominica, East Timor, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guatemala, Guinea, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Liberia, Mexico, Mozambique, Philippines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Street Vincent, Thailand, Togo, Uganda, United States of America, Vietnam, Zambia Functions/Sectors Strengthening civil society, cultural preservation, disaster and emergency relief, education, gender & diversity, HIV/AIDS, human rights, information and communication, nutrition, refugees and displacement, shelter/housing, social development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $229,809,289 Revenue source breakdown Sponsorships: $172,319,808 Contributions: $28,218,505 Grants: $27,021,698 Other revenue: $2,249,278
Summary Too many of the world's children suffer the debilitating effects of poverty and violence. Children have the right to experience life with as much joy and hope as humanly possible. Christian Children's Fund creates an environment of hope and respect for deprived, excluded and vulnerable children of all cultures and beliefs in which they have opportunities to achieve their full potential, and provides practical tools for positive change - to children, families and communities.

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee
2850 Kalamazoo Ave SE, Grand Rapids, MI 49560, USA t: 800-55-CRWRC (27972), 616-241-1691 e: aryskamp@crwrc.org, Andrew Ryskamp (Director) w: www.crwrc.org Regions Africa sub-Saharan, Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and Caribbean, Middle East and North Africa, North America, South Asia Functions/Sectors Agriculture, strengthening civil society, disaster and emergency relief, education, environment, energy and natural, gender and diversity, HIV/AIDS, human rights, information and communication, nutrition, poverty, public policy and advocacy, rural development, urban development Budget Annual Revenue (FY 2008): $37,980,440 (combined U.S. and Canada) Revenue source breakdown Churches and individuals: $20,477,216 Government grants: $2,489,765 Other grants: $14,231,164 Investments & other income: $782,295
Summary CRWRC envisions a world where people experience and extend Christ's compassion and live together in hope as God's community. CRWRC's mission flows from this vision. CRWRC's mission is to engage God's people in redeeming resources and developing gifts in collaborative activities of love, mercy, justice, and compassion.

Church World Service Main Offices 28606 Phillips Street, P.O. Box 968 Elkhart, IN 46515, USA t: 574-264-3102; 800-297-1516 f: 574-262-0966 e: info@churchworldservice.org w: www.churchworldservice.org Regions Africa, Asia and Pacific, Eastern Europe, Latin American and Caribbean, Middle East, North America Functions/Sectors Agriculture, disaster and emergency relief, education, HIV/AIDS, information and communication, nutrition, policy research and analysis, public policy and advocacy, refugees and displacement, rural development, shelter/housing, social development, strengthening civil society Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $71,743,894 Revenue source breakdown Community/public appeals: $29,853,353 Us government support: $25,458,107 Member communions: $10,174,369 Donated materials: $3,779,123 Investments and other income: $2,478,942 Expenses Refugee resettlement and assistance: $26,631,305 Disaster relief and recovery: $13,772,488 Social and economic development: $9,049,468 Fund raising and information: $9,019,135 U.S. hunger and development: $5,442,397 Administration: $3,266,774 Education and advocacy: $2,627,960 Mission relationships and witness: $1,207,286
Summary Church World Service works with partners to eradicate hunger and poverty and promote peace and justice among the world's most vulnerable people. Founded in 1946, CWS works with partners to meet disaster relief and recovery needs, facilitate sustainable social and economic development, provide assistance and resettlement services to refugees, and help address the root causes of poverty. CWS is the humanitarian agency of 35 Protestant, Orthodox, and Anglican denominations that serves to provide nonsectarian relief and development programs for people in need.

Citizens Network for Foreign Affairs
1828 L Street NW, Ste. 710, Washington, DC 20036, USA t: 202-296-3920 f: 202-296-3948 e: info@cnfa.org w: www.cnfa.org Regions Belarus, Moldova, Mozambique, Russia, Ukraine, Zimbabwe Functions/Sectors Agriculture Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $10,957,125 Revenue source breakdown Federal grant income: $9,229,306 Non-federal grant income: $683,719 Interest income: $34,692 Other income: $85,917 In-kind contributions: $923,491 Subcontractor matching contributions: $964,513
Summary The Citizens Network for Foreign Affairs is a nonprofit group dedicated to stimulating international growth and development. CNFA works with US companies, entrepreneurs, farm groups, business alliances and other organizations to create lasting and effective opportunities in international markets.

Communications Consortium Media Center
401 Ninth St NW, Ste. 450, Washington DC 20004-2142, USA t: 202-326-8700 f: 202-682-2154 e: info@ccmc.org w: www.ccmc.org Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $3,572,525 Direct public support: $3,501,663 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $44,818 Other revenue: $26,044
Summary Our overarching mission is to develop communications strategies for policy change on a cluster of misses related to equality, fairness, global population and development, children, families, work and healthy communities.

Concern America P.O. Box 1790 Santa Ana, CA 92702, USA t: 714-953-8575 f: 714-953-1242 e: concamerinc@earthlink.net w: www.concernamerica.org Regions Africa, North and South America Functions/Sectors Agriculture, education, HIV/AIDS, nutrition, refugees and displacement, rural development, strengthening civil society Budget Annual revenue (FY 2005): $1,088,979 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $100,868 Indirect public support: $2,556 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $1,628 Dividends and interest from securities: $501 Sales of inventory: $72,006 Other revenue: $3,600
Summary Concern America is a small nonprofit, nonsectarian, nongovernmental development and refugee aid organization that partners with materially poor communities living in impoverished regions of "developing" countries or in refuge outside of their homeland. The organization's main objective is to provide training and technical assistance. Concern America trains local populations in health, education, agriculture, and/or appropriate technology.

CONCERN Worldwide US Inc.

104 East 40th Street, Ste. 903, New York, NY 10016, USA t: 212-557-8000 f: 212-557-8004 w: www.concernusa.org Regions Africa, East Asia and Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and Caribbean, Middle East and North Africa, South Asia Functions/Sectors Agriculture, development education, disaster and emergency relief, education, HIV/AIDS, nutrition, rural development, shelter/housing, strengthening civil society Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $11,343,517 Revenue source breakdown Contributions & nongovernment grants: $2,791,131 Support from concern worldwide: $1,266,097 Government grants: $6,089,499 Special eventsnet: $1,181,608 Investment income: $15,182 Expenses $10,285,140 Program activities: $9,372,650 General and administrative: $457,593 Fundraising: $454,897
Summary CONCERN Worldwide is a nondenominational, humanitarian organization dedicated to the relief, assistance and advancement of people in need in less developed areas of the world while concentrating on the poorest people in its 30 countries of operation throughout Africa, Asia and Latin America. Established in 1968 in response to the Biafra Famine, CONCERN believes in a world where no one lives in poverty, fear or oppression; where all have access to a decent standard of living and the opportunities and choices essential to a long, healthy and creative life; where everyone is treated with dignity and respect.

Congressional Hunger Center Hall of the States Building, 400 North Capitol Street NW, Ste. G100, Washington, DC 20001, USA t: 202-547-7022 f: 202-547-7575 w: www.hungercenter.org Regions Bangladesh, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Kenya, Peru, Uganda Functions/Sectors Agriculture, strengthening civil society, disaster and emergency relief, education, policy research and analysis, rural development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $3,166,203 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $545,644 Government contributions (grants): $2,524,243 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $96,316
Summary The Congressional Hunger Center (CHC) is a bi-partisan, nonprofit organization founded by Congressman Tony Hall and former Congressman Bill Emerson in 1993. Its mission is to lead, speak, and act on behalf of the hungry, the poor, and the victims of humanitarian crisis, both domestic and international. The Center accomplishes this mission through leadership development programs to establish a new generation of citizens committed to ending hunger in their communities, their nations, and across the globe. CHC works in partnership with other grassroots organizations to inform policy makers in Washington, DC, about hunger and humanitarian need in America and overseas.

Counterpart International, Inc
2345 Crystal Drive, Ste. 301, Arlington, VA 22202, USA t: 703-236-1200 f: 703-412-5035 e: communications@counterpart.org w: www.counterpart.org

Regions
Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia, Brazil, Canada, Fiji, France, Georgia, Germany, Guinea, Herzegovina, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Russia, Samoa, Senegal, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Vietnam, Zimbabwe
Functions/Sectors
Agriculture, strengthening civil society, disaster and emergency relief, education, HIV/AIDS, information and communication, nutrition, population and family planning, public policy and advocacy, refugees and displacement, rural development, shelter/housing, social development, urban development
Budget
Annual revenue (FY 2008): $109,408,937 Revenue source breakdown U.S. government grants: $23,936,521 Nonfederal grants 1,445,366 Contributions 230,238 451,036 Contributed services and materials 83,030,830 Investment income (32,149) Miscellaneous income 798,131
Summary
Building a just world through service and partnership. y To continue building on our thirty-six years of experience as a leading multidimensional organization
delivering integrated development programs to individuals, their communities and their nations.
 y Counterpart helps local communities of societies in transition build their own institutions to
manage their own resources for their own social, environmental, economic, health and educational advancement. In so doing, Counterpart brings local solutions to global problems.
 y Counterpart is flexible, responsive, agile, and quick off the mark, and brings these qualities to its
global multidimensional integrated development programs.
 y Counterpart brings these same qualities to its humanitarian assistance, disaster-response and food
security programs where its logistical capability can track a single bottle of medication among a million from a manufacturer in the U.S. or Europe to a remote clinic in Kazakhstan.
 y Counterpart has a demonstrated ease in adapting to diverse culturesfrom Polynesians in Samoa
and Uzbeks on the Silk Road in Samarkand to Africans in Zimbabwe.
 y Counterpart has special expertise in island nations and the Former Soviet Union.
Danish Demining Group Borgergade 10, 3rd Fl., 1300 Copenhagen K t: +45 3373 5000 f: +45 3332 8448 e: drc@drc.dk w: www.danishdemininggroup.dk Regions Middle East, Africa Functions/Sectors Land mine removal and aid Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $95,300
Summary Danish Demining Group (DDG) was established in 1997 as an independent organization. It has since merged with the Danish Refugee Council (DRC) in order to create a Humanitarian Mine Action unit within the organization, hence benefiting from synergies in cooperation but not being limited at the same. The vision of Danish Demining Group is to be the preferred strategic and operational partner working to reduce t-he humanitarian and socio-economic threats caused by landmines and Explosive Remnants of War (ERW).

Direct Relief International
27 S. La Patera Lane, Santa Barbara, CA 93117, USA t: 805-964-4767 f: 805-681-4838 w: www.directrelief.org Regions Africa, Asia and the Pacific, Eastern and Central Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, Middle East Functions/Sectors Disaster and emergency relief Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $244,399,000 Revenue source breakdown Public support from cash and securities: $40,740,000 Donated goods and services: $201,823,000 Investment revenues: $1,776,000 Expenses $156,861,000 Program expenses: $154,659,000 Supporting services: $2,202,000
Summary The mission of Direct Relief International is to provide appropriate ongoing medical assistance to health institutions and projects worldwide which serve the poor and victims of natural and civil disasters, without regard to political affiliation, religious belief, ethnic identity or ability to pay.

## Doctors Of The World, Inc. See Health Right International

Educational Concerns for Hunger Organization (ECHO)
17391 Durrance Road North, Fort Myers, FL 33917, USA t: 239-543-3246 f: 239-543-5317 e: echo@echonet.org w: www.echonet.org Functions/Sectors Agriculture, education and training, networking, problem solving Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $2,959,129 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $2,386,869 Gift annuities: $48,416 Sale of merchandise: $343,321 Interest and dividends: $57,936 Net realized and unrealized gains ($32,924) Other: $155,511
Summary ECHO exists for one major reason, to help those working internationally with the poor be more effective, especially in the area of agriculture! We are a technical support organization helping community development organizations and workers do what they do...better.

Episcopal Relief and Development
815 Second Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA t: 800-334-7626 ext. 5129 f: 212-687-5302 e: er-d@er-d.org w: www.er-d.org Regions Africa, Asia and the Pacific, Latin American and the Caribbean, North America Functions/Sectors Agriculture, disaster and emergency relief, education, HIV/AIDS, nutrition, refugees and displacement, rural development, shelter/housing, social development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $22,680,525 Revenue source breakdown: Contributions, bequests, grants and other: $17,831,415 Investment return: $3,585,721 Grantdfms: $200,000 Contributed services: $1,063,389 Expenses Expenses $22,933,984 Food security: $2,261,377 Primary health: $4,476,027 Emergency relief and rebuilding 12,523,280 Fundraising: $1,784,214 Administration: $1,889,086
Summary Episcopal Relief & Development is a major response of the Episcopal Church to God's call to serve Christ in all persons, to love our neighbors, and to respect the dignity of every human being. Episcopal Relief & Development raises, receives, and disburses money and other resources for the relief of human suffering. Episcopal Relief & Development provides emergency relief in times of disaster; it assists in the rehabilitation of lives, property, and organizations; it initiates and joins in partnership with those who identify and address root causes of suffering; and it supports and extends the social ministry of the church.

Ethiopian Community Development Council
901 South Highland Street, Arlington, VA 22204, USA t: 703-685-0510 f: 703-685-0529 e: info@ecdcinternational.org w: www.ecdcinternational.org Regions Ethiopia Functions/Sectors Education, HIV/AIDS, public policy and advocacy, refugees and displacement, shelter/housing, social development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $11,763,593 Revenue source breakdown Contributions to donor advised funds: $3,612,801 Indirect public support: $287,220 Government contributions (grants): $7,340,168 Program service revenue, including government fees and contracts: $360,249 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $63,631 Net rental income: $231,308
Summary The Ethiopian Community Development Council, Inc. (ECDC) is a nonprofit, community-based organization. ECDC was established in 1983 by concerned community leaders to respond to the needs of a growing Ethiopian community in the Washington, DC, metropolitan area. While initially concentrating on that community, ECDC has from its inception been serving immigrants and refugees from diverse cultural backgrounds while maintaining a focus on the African community. ECDC's mission is to resettle refugees; promote cultural, educational and socio-economic development programs in the immigrant and refugee community in the United States; and conduct humanitarian and socio-economic development programs in the Horn of Africa. ECDC provides a wide range of programs at the local, regional and national levels, including economic development, public education and advocacy, refugee resettlement, and culturally and linguistically appropriate social services.

Family Care International
588 Broadway, Ste. 503, New York, NY 10012, USA t: 212-941-5300 f: 212-941-5563 e: contact@familycareintl.org w: www.familycareintl.org Regions Africa, Latin America and Caribbean Functions/Sectors Maternal health, global sexual and reproductive health, youth health and rights, HIV/AIDS, genderbased violence Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $10,489,843 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $7,560,017 Government contributions (grants): $2,573,257 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $91,671 Dividends and interest from securities: $5,831 Other revenue: $20,561
Summary FCI is dedicated to making pregnancy and childbirth safer around the world. We work to: y Ensure access to quality maternal and newborn health care;
 y Help women and girls to prevent and manage unintended pregnancy;
 y Promote the sexual and reproductive health and rights of young people and other underserved groups;
 y Reduce the spread of HIV, especially among women and young people Floresta USA, Inc
4903 Morena Blvd, Ste. 1215, San Diego, CA 92117, USA t: 858-274-3718 toll-free: 800-633-5319 f: 858-274-3728 e: info@floresta.org w: www.floresta.org Regions Dominican Republic, Haiti, Mexico Functions/Sectors Agriculture, education, rural development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $1,476,973 Revenue source breakdown General donations: $1,463,656 Interest and dividend income: $13,317
Summary Floresta, a Christian nonprofit organization, reverses deforestation and poverty in the world, by transforming the lives of the rural poor.  We plant, we teach, we create enterprise, and we share the gospel.

Florida Association of Volunteer Action in the Caribbean and the Americas
7220 NW 36th Street, Ste. 608 Miami, Fl 33166, USA t: 305-470-5070 f: 305-470-5060 e: favaca@favaca.org w: www.favaca.org Regions Haiti Functions/Sectors Capacity strengthening, disaster and emergency relief, economic growth and development, education, health, HIV/AIDS, sustainable development, training Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $3,270,435 Revenue source breakdown State: $1,632,350 Federal: $119,938 Private: $1,518,147
Summary FAVACA promotes social and economic development in the Caribbean and the Americas through volunteer service.

Food for the Hungry
1224 E. Washington Street, Phoenix, AZ 85034-1102 t: 480-998-3100, 800-248-6437 w: www.fh.org Regions Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, Middle East, North America Functions/Sectors Agriculture, disaster and emergency relief, education, HIV/AIDS, information and communication, refugees and displacement, rural development, urban development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $73,209,557 Revenue source breakdown Contributions:$19,909,755 Government grants: $21,825,870 Government donated commodities: $12,070,823 Private gifts-in-kind: $18,943,217 Investment income: $295,717 Change in value of trusts and annuities: $576 Other income: $163,599 Expenses $74,707,655 Grants to food for the hungry international: $39,042,258 Gifts-in-kind to other organizations: $18,593,569 Other programs: $8,598,291 Information and education: $596,200 Fundraising: $4,719,322 General and administrative: $3,158,015
Summary Food for the Hungry is meeting physical and spiritual hungers in 26 countries worldwide through programs such as child sponsorship, food production, water and sanitation, health care, agriculture, relief and church development.

Freedom from Hunger
1644 Da Vinci Court Davis, CA 95618, USA t: 530-758-6200 ext. 1042 f: 530-758-6241 e: info@freedomfromhunger.org w: www.freedomfromhunger.org Regions Benin, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Ecuador, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Philippines, Togo, Uganda Functions/Sectors Strengthening civil society, education, HIV/AIDS, population and family planning, rural development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $7,769,574 Revenue source breakdown Individuals and planned gifts: $4,123,301 Corporate and foundation grants and gifts 2,854,046 Public sector/NGOs/other sources 705,938 Contributed in-kind materials and services 177,465 Net assets released from restrictions 67,835 Other income (investment and miscellaneous) (159,011)
Summary Freedom from Hunger brings innovative and sustainable self-help solutions to the fight against chronic hunger and poverty. Together with local partners, we equip families with resources they need to build futures of health, hope and dignity.

Friends of Liberia
4300 16th Street NW, Washington DC 20011, USA t: 202-545-0139 e: liberia@fol.org w: www.fol.org Regions Liberia Functions/Sectors Disaster and emergency relief, education, membership services Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $48,702 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $46,103 Investment income: $2,599
Summary FOL is a nongovernmental, nonprofit organization that seeks to positively affect Liberia by supporting education, social, economic and humanitarian programs and through advocacy Friends of the World Food Program
1819 L Street NW, Ste. 900, Washington, DC 20036, USA t: 202-530-1694, 866-929-1694 f: 202-530 1698 e: info@friendsofwfp.org w: www.friendsofwfp.org Regions Africa sub-Saharan, East Asia and Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and Caribbean, Middle East and North Africa, South Asia Functions/Sectors Disaster and emergency relief, HIV/AIDS, information and communication, nutrition, public policy and advocacy, refugees and displacement Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $13,006,689 Revenue source breakdown Donations: $12,808,860 Special events: $81,741 Interest income: $113,261 Investment income: $2,427 Honorarium: $400 Expenses $10,944,130 Grants to UN world food program: $9,161,951 Other program expenses: $988,002 General and administrative: $270,868 Fundraising: $523,491
Summary Friends of the World Food Program is dedicated to building support for the United Nations World Food Program (WFP) and other hunger relief efforts. WFP is the world's largest humanitarian organization. Every year, WFP feeds an average of 90 million people, two-thirds of them children, in 80 countries.

Mission Our mission is to increase awareness about global hunger issues; mobilize support for hunger relief programs and activities; and generate resources for WFP operations and other activities that alleviate hunger.

Gifts In Kind International
333 North Fairfax Street, Alexandria, VA 22314, USA t: 703-836-2121 f: 877-798-3192 w: www.giftsinkind.org Regions Africa sub-Saharan, East Asia and Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and Caribbean, North America, South Asia Functions/Sectors Disaster and emergency relief, education, information and communication, shelter/housing Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $597,440,830 Revenue source breakdown Product inventory and equipment contributions: $590,383,288 Administrative fees: $3,466,459 Contributions: $2,219,963 Donated services: $694,444 Registration fees: $631,626 Interest and other income: $45,050 Expenses $628,267,653 Product distribution program: $620,309,745 Product distribution program: $6,704,331 Management and general: $1,060,159 Marketing and fundraising: $193,418
Summary Gifts In Kind International is dedicated to linking product donors' resources to enhance, empower, and restore the lives of people and communities in need.

Giving Children Hope
8332 Commonwealth Avenue, Buena Park, CA 90621, USA t: 714-523-4454 f: 714-523-4474 e: info@godaid.org w: www.gchope.org Regions Bangladesh, Bosnia, Cameroon, Dominican Republic, Ghana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Lebanon, Liberia, Malawi, Mexico, Pakistan, Peru, Russia, South Africa, South Korea, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Uganda, Ukraine, Zambia, Zimbabwe Functions/Sectors Children and youth, disaster and emergency relief, economic growth and development, food aid, logistics, nutrition, partnership, poverty, procurement, reconstruction, USAID
Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $32,582,974 Revenue source breakdown Cash: $1,716,442 In-kind donation: $30,711,012 Other: $155,520
Summary Giving Children Hope is a faith-based nonprofit organization dedicated to alleviating poverty (domestically and abroad) through disaster relief, health and community development, vocational training and advocacy.

Global Health Council
1111 19th Street NW, Ste. 1120, Washington, DC 20036, USA t: 202-833-5900 f: 202-833-0075 e: advocacy@globalhealth.org w: www.globalhealth.org Regions Worldwide Functions/Sectors HIV/AIDS, membership services, population and family planning, public policy and advocacy Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $6,862,263 Revenue source breakdown Grants & cooperative agreements: $4,725,970 Membership: $639,240 Conference revenue:$487,406 Event sponsorship & contributions: $446,835 Investment & other revenue: $210,520 Contracts: $167,439 Publication sales: $17,392 In-kind donations: $167,461 Expenses $6,523,520 Policy, research and advocacy: $2,022,134 Membership resources: $2,925,798 Fundraising: $437,669 Operations: $1,137,919
Summary The Global Health Council's mission is to promote better health around the world by assisting all who work for improvement and equity in global health to secure the information and resources they need to work effectively. Toward this end, we will serve our members through our work in advocacy, building alliances, and communicating experiences and best practices.

Global Links
4809 Penn Avenue, 2nd Fl., Pittsburgh, PA 15224, USA t: 412-361-3424 f: 412-361-4950 e: info@globallinks.org w: www.globallinks.org Regions Latin America and Caribbean Functions/Sectors Health sector Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $4,290,692 Revenue source breakdown Donated materials and supplies: $2,441,884 Donated pharmaceuticals: $4,071,319 Materials and supplies contributed to other organizations: ($3,138,029) Contributions and support: $524,729 Grant income: $208,124 Management fees: $84,764 Miscellaneous sales and other: $26,367 Special events: $3,783 In-kind contributions: $7,093 Interest and dividends: $58,644 Net unrealized appreciation of investments: $2,014 Expenses $4,204,261 Materials, supplies and equipment shipped: $2,606,460 Pharmaceuticals shipped: $933,290 Personnel and other operating expenses: $230,099 Shipping costs: $94,083 Warehouse expenses: $72,465 Travel and conference expenses: $13,125 Equipment repair expenses: $9,715 Management and general: $173,133 Fundraising: $71,891
Summary Global Links is dedicated to recycling surplus medical supplies and equipment, for use by health-care institutions in developing countries. To achieve this mission, Global Links collects batch and single item supplies and equipment that are still valuable but are no longer in demand in the United States due to procedural excess, technological change, regulatory requirements, or production overage, and distributes them to selected health-care facilities in developing countries.

Global Resource Services
2870 Peachtree Road, #229, Atlanta, GA 30305 USA t: 888-854-5250 e: info@grsworld.org w: www.grsworld.org Regions Asia and the Pacific, North America Functions/Sectors Disaster response, humanitarian policy and practice, strategic impact Summary Our mission is to go to regions challenged by conflict, looking beyond charity to find real solutions where peace and security are in jeopardy. This mission is driven by an end vision of reconciliation. Relationships, respect and reconciliation are the common threads that empower our cause.

GOAL USA
41 Union Square, Ste. 1027, New York, NY 10003, USA t: 212-831-7420 f: 646-496-9186 e: info@goalusa.org w: www.goalusa.org Regions Africa, Asia and the Pacific, Latin America, Middle East Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $44,273,990 Revenue source breakdown Grant income from governments, trusts or other grant making institutions: $36,639,151 Donations-in-kind: $7,634,839 Expenses $62,239,267 Overseas relief and development: $58,640,807 Support and administration: $3,598,460
Summary GOAL works towards ensuring that those poorest and most vulnerable in our world, and / or those who are affected by humanitarian crises, have access to the fundamental needs and rights of life, that is, to food, water, shelter, medical attention and primary education. It is non denominational, nongovernmental and non political.

Goodwill Industries International, Inc.

15810 Indianola Drive, Rockville, MD 20855, USA t: 800-741-0186 e: contactus@goodwill.org w: www.goodwill.org Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $28,479,450 Revenue source breakdown Membership dues: $14,975,685 Grants from government agencies: $10,465,066 Contributions: $639,370 Program services fees: $1,463,677 Investment and other: $587,950 Rental: $297,232 Legacies and bequests: $50,470
Summary Goodwill Industries will enhance the quality and dignity of life for individuals, families and communities on a global basis, through the power of work, by eliminating barriers to opportunity for people with special needs, and by facilitating empowerment, self-help, and service through dedicated, autonomous local organizations.

Habitat for Humanity International Operational HQ 121 Habitat Street, Americus, GA 31709 USA t: 800-422-4828 f: 229-924-0577 e: publicinfo@hfhi.org w: www.habitat.org Regions Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Bangladesh, Belize, Bermuda, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Central African Republic, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cote d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Dominican Republic, East Timor, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Korea, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mexico, Mongolia, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Samoa, Singapore, Slovakia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Thailand, Trinidad & Tobago, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States of America, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Vietnam, Zambia, Zimbabwe Functions/Sectors Conflict, disaster and emergency relief Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $249,401,167 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $188,692,549 Donations in-kind: $16,520,127 Government grants: $20,074,439 Other income: $24,114,052
Summary Habitat for Humanity works in partnership with God and people everywhere, from all walks of life, to develop communities with people in need by building and renovating houses so that there are decent houses in decent communities in which every person can experience God's love and can live and grow into all that God intends. The ultimate goal of Habitat for Humanity International is to eliminate poverty housing and homelessness from the face of the earth by building adequate and basic housing. Furthermore, all of our words and actions are for the ultimate purpose of putting shelter on the hearts and minds of people in such a powerful way that poverty housing and homelessness become socially, politically and religiously unacceptable in our nations and the world. While many organizations provide immediate relief and temporary shelter to victims of disasters or conflicts, Habitat for Humanity International is among the few that address the need to provide permanent housing solutions to families that are seeking to rebuild their lives. The Disaster Response Office also provides support and informational resources to mitigate and prepare for future threats in disaster-prone areas.

Handicap International USA
6930 Carroll Avenue, Ste. 240, Takoma Park, MD 20912-4468, USA t: 301-891-2138 f: 301-891-9193 e: info@handicap-international.us w: www.handicap-international.us Regions Russian Federation (incl. North Caucasus),Uzbekistan, Albania, Germany, Bosnia-Herzegovina, France, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Togo, Brazil, Colombia, Cuba, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Angola, Burundi, Ethiopia, Kenya, Mozambique, Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda, Somaliland, Sudan3, Madagascar, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestinian Territories, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Maldives, China, North Korea Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $1,367,209 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $1,361,945 Investments: $5,227 Other: $37
Summary Handicap International works to improve the living conditions of people living in disabling situations in post-conflict and low income countries around the world. They work with local partners to develop programs in health and rehabilitation and social and economic integration. They work with local authorities to clear landmines and other war debris and to prevent mine-related accidents through education. They respond fast and effectively to natural and civil disasters in order to limit serious and permanent injuries and to assist survivors' recovery and reintegration. They advocate for the universal recognition of the rights of the disabled through national planning and advocacy.

Hands on Disaster Response P.O. Box 546, Carlisle MA, 01741, USA t: 781-570-9412 f: 586-314-2999 e: info@HODR.org w: www.hodr.org Functions/Sectors Disaster and emergency relief Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $502,947 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $502,947
Summary Hands On Worldwide, DBA Hands On Disaster Response, is a US-based, volunteer-driven, 501(c)3 certified NGO dedicated to timely disaster response and relief, with a mission to apply volunteer resources to aid survivors of natural disasters. It was founded by a group of people who came together in Thailand to help the survivors of the December 26, 2004 tsunami. HODR has since responded to 9 natural disasters around the world.

HealthRight International (was Doctors of the World-USA)
80 Maiden Lane, New York, NY 10038, USA t: 212-226-9890 f: 212-226-7026 e: info@healthright.org w: www.healthright.org Regions Kenya, Mexico, Nepal, Russia, Ukraine, United States, Vietnam Functions/Sectors Agriculture, health, HIV/AIDS, human rights, nutrition, refugees and displacement Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $5,198,578 Revenue source breakdown United States government: $1,445,115 International organizations: $70,395 Foundations and corporations: $2,343,236 Individuals: $371,629 In-kind medical / legal services: $624,568 Special events (net of expenses): $298,271 Other income: $45,364
Summary HealthRight International is a global health and human rights organization working to build lasting access to health for excluded communities. We work closely with communities and establish local partnerships to deliver health services. At the same time, we provide training and equipment and improve systems to enable our partners to deliver services on their own. Our goal is to build lasting access to health, thereby helping to protect and fulfill the rights of excluded communities.Our projects address health and social crises made worse by human rights violations, with a particular focus and expertise on: y HIV/AIDS, TB, and Malaria, including the rights of people living with these diseases to care, and protection from stigma and discrimination y Women's health, including women's right to safe and effective maternal reproductive health care, as well as equal access to information and quality health services.

 y The health and welfare of orphans and other at-risk children and youth, whose wellbeing is endangered when they lack supportive families or are institutionalized.

 y Care and support for survivors of human rights violations such as torture, trafficking, and domestic and gender-based violence.

Heart to Heart International
401 South Clairborne, Ste. 302, Olathe, KS 66062, USA t: 913-764-5200 f: 913-764-0809 w: www.hearttoheart.org Regions Albania, Argentina, Armenia, Belarus, Belize, Bolivia, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, China, Croatia, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Gambia, Gaza, Georgia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Korea, Kyrgyzstan, Liberia, Mexico, Moldova, Montenegro, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, North Korea, Oman, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Romania, Russia, South Africa, Sudan, Taiwan, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Yemen, Zimbabwe Functions/Sectors Agriculture, disaster and emergency relief, education, nutrition Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $119,191,271 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $118,853,212 Indirect public support: $45,103 Government contributions (grants): $200,000 Program service revenue, including government fees and contracts: $175,234 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $10,742 Dividends and interest from securities: $1,127 Sales of assets: $2,578 Sales of inventory: $1,904
Summary Heart to Heart International is a global humanitarian organization that inspires, empowers and mobilizes the individual to serve the needs of the poor in their community and around the world. Heart to Heart accomplishes this mission through partnerships that promote health, alleviate hunger, deliver resources, education and hope, and provide opportunities for meaningful service.

Heartland Alliance
208 S. LaSalle Street, Ste. 1818, Chicago, IL 60604, USA t: 312-660-1300 f: 312-660-1500 w: www.heartlandalliance.org Regions Guatemala, Haiti, United States Functions/Sectors Refugees and displacement Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $53,380,652 Revenue source breakdown Grants and contracts: $38,220,547 Contributions: $8,594,285 Program service fees and third-party revenue: $3,683,264 Rental and related revenue: $1,868,323 United Way: $640,568 Miscellaneous income: $373,664
Summary Heartland Alliance's mission is to advance the human rights and respond to the human needs of endangered populationsparticularly the poor, the isolated, and the displaced -through the provision of comprehensive and respectful services and the promotion of permanent solutions leading to a more just global society.

Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society
333 Seventh Avenue, 16th Fl., New York, NY 10001-5004, USA t: 212-967-4100 f: 212-967-4483 w: www.hias.org Regions Argentina, Austria, Colombia, Israel, Italy, Russia, Switzerland, Ukraine Functions/Sectors Strengthening civil society, education, information and communication, membership services, policy research and analysis, public policy and advocacy, refugees and displacement Summary HIAS is the international migration arm of the organized American Jewish community. It is dedicated to rescuing persecuted and oppressed people around the world and delivering them to countries of safe haven. HIAS helps tens of thousands of refugees annually reunite with their families and resettle in the United States. It also advocates for fair and just policies affecting refugees and immigrants. Since its founding in 1881, the agency has assisted more than four million people around the world.

Heifer International
1 World Avenue, Little Rock, AR 72202, USA t: 800-422-0474 f: 501-907-2902 e: info@heifer.org w: www.heifer.org Regions Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Peru, United States, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Albania, Armenia, Estonia, Georgia, Kosovo, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Ukraine, Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Viet Nam Functions/Sectors Agriculture, education, rural development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $130,863,266 Revenue source breakdown Individuals: $82,836,447 Foundation and corporate grants: $17,797,404 Business and organizations: $16,096,181 Congregations: $11,254,241 Government support: $523,453 Educational programs: $1,046,906 Other: $1,308,633
Summary Heifer International, working in partnership with others, alleviates hunger, poverty and environmental degradation by helping families to become self-reliant for food and income. Heifer development work provides animals, training and technical assistance to low-income families in 48 countries and 15 states. Heifer provides more than 25 kinds of food and income-producing animals, as well as intensive training in animal husbandry, community development and environmentally sound, sustainable agricultural methods.

Helen Keller International
352 Park Avenue South, 12th Fl., New York, NY 10010, USA t: 212-532-0544, 877/KELLER-4 (877-535-5374) f: 212-532-6014 e: info@hki.org w: www.hki.org Regions Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, China, Cote d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Guinea, Indonesia, Madagascar, Mali, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Philippines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tanzania, United States of America, Vietnam, Zimbabwe Functions/Sectors Education, nutrition Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $90,999,651 Revenue source breakdown Contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations: $18,662,314 Grants from U.S. government agencies: $11,016,090 Gifts in kind: $60,318,950 Program revenue: $35,940 Legacies and trusts: $769,770 Dividends, interest and miscellaneous income: $242,394 Gain on investments: $45,807
Summary The mission of Helen Keller International is to save the sight and lives of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged. We combat the causes and consequences of blindness and malnutrition by establishing programs based on evidence and research in vision, health and nutrition. Our vision is to strive to be the most scientifically competent organization in improving vision and nutrition throughout the world.

Hesperian Foundation
1919 Addison Street, Ste. 304, Berkeley CA 94704, USA t: 510-845-1447, 888-729-1796 f: 510-845-0539 e: hesperian@hesperian.org w: www.hesperian.org Regions Africa, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, Middle East, North America Functions/Sectors Children and youth, education, health, HIV/AIDS
Holt International Children's Services P.O. Box 2880, 1195 City View, Eugene, OR 97402, USA t: 541-687-2202 f: 541-683-6175 e: info@holtinternational.org w: www.holtintl.org Regions China, Ecuador, Guatemala, India, Korea, Mexico, Mongolia, North Korea, Oman, Philippines, Romania, Russia, South Korea, Thailand, Vietnam Functions/Sectors HIV/AIDS, public policy and advocacy, social development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $19,178,415 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $8,019,714 Indirect public support: $109,087 Government contributions (grants): $782,935 Program service revenues, including government fees and contracts: $9,680,672 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $119,034 Dividends and interest from securities: $112,292 Sales of assets: $152,957 Special events: $177,248 Sales of inventory: $7,711 Other revenue: $16,765
Summary Holt International Children's Services is dedicated to carrying out God's plan for every child to have a permanent loving home through family preservation, in-country adoption, and international adoption.

Humane Society International
2100 L Street NW, Washington, DC 20037, USA t: 202-452-1100 w: www.hsus.org/hsi Regions Programs worldwide, offices in Asia, Australia, Canada, Costa Rica, UK, United States Functions/Sectors Developing trade capacity building programs, helping to humanely control companion animal populations, advocating the humane care, transport and slaughter for farm animals, bringing veterinary care to companion and working animals, stemming the illegal trade in wildlife, protecting endangered species and marine mammals and their habitats, educating children and adults and providing training for animal protection organizations and governmental and international agencies, influencing international laws and policies to effect global change, conducting international campaigns to reduce animal suffering caused by various activities Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $2,528,080 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $2,281,184 Indirect public support: $40,044 Program service revenue, including government fees and contracts: $135 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $45,175 Other revenue: $161,542
Summary Humane Society International's (HSI) purpose is to work with national and jurisdictional governments, international treaty and trade agreement representatives, and humane organizations to find practical, culturally sensitive, and long-term solutions to common animal welfare problems. Disasters highlight the important relationship between people and their animals. HSI participates in international disaster relief to reduce the suffering of all victims, including a recognition that people's welfare and livelihood often depend on their animals. As the international arm of the Humane Society of the United States, HSI collaborates with local, regional and international organizations concerned about the living conditions and welfare of companion and farm animals as well as wildlife. HSI promotes local capacity building activities to counter illegal trade in wildlife, threats to endangered species, slaughter of marine mammals, and the use of animals in research and testing.

Human Rights Watch
350 Fifth Avenue, 34th Fl., New York, NY 10118-3299, USA t: 212-290-4700 f: 212-736-1300 e: hrwnyc@hrw.org w: www.hrw.org Regions North America, Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, Africa, Middle East, Asia, Pacific Functions/Sectors Human rights advocacy Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $39,807,458 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $31,525,574 (%) Investments: $7,956,612 (20 percent) Other: $325,272 (1 percent)
Summary Human Rights Watch is dedicated to protecting the human rights of people around the world. We stand with victims and activists to prevent discrimination, to uphold political freedom, to protect people from inhumane conduct in wartime, and to bring offenders to justice. We investigate and expose human rights violations and hold abusers accountable. We challenge governments and those who hold power to end abusive practices and respect international human rights law. We enlist the public and the international community to support the cause of human rights for all.

The Hunger Project
5 Union Square West, New York, NY 10003, USA t: 212-251-9100 f: 212-532-9785 w: www.thp.org Regions Africa, Latin America, South Asia Functions/Sectors Agriculture, HIV/AIDS, information and communication, policy research and analysis, public policy and advocacy, rural development, social development, strengthening of education civil society Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $13,602,409 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $13,022,749 Investment income: $269,647 Foreign currency gains and other: $310,013 Expenses $10,653,632 Education and advocacy: $1,495,938 Africa: $4,323,388 Asia: $2,165,986 Latin America: $592,281 Management and general: $1,418,545 Fundraising: $657,494
Summary The Hunger Project is a strategic organization and global movement committed to the sustainable end of world hunger. In Africa, Asia and Latin America, we empower local people to create lasting society-wide progress in health, education, nutrition and family incomes.

Information Management and Mine Action Programs
1400 16th Street NW, Ste. 210, Washington, DC 20036, USA t: 703-403-0427 f: 202-483-9312 e: info@immap.org w: www.immap.org Regions Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, Middle East, North America Functions/Sectors Humanitarian information management, landmine impact survey, information management system for mine action, landmine and unexploded ordnance safety training Summary iMMAP coordinates, supports, and implements humanitarian information management activities and landmineunexploded ordnance (UXO) surveys in postconflict and developing countries around the world. iMMAP's work in the field forms the basis for setting priorities for humanitarian relief and development, economic recovery, landmine clearance and victim assistance.

INMED Partnerships for Children
20110 Ashbrook Place, Ste. 260, Ashburn, VA 20147, USA t: 703-729-4951 f: 703-858-7253 e: contact@inmed.org w: www.inmed.org Regions Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, North America Functions/Sectors Disaster and emergency relief, education, nutrition, social development, strengthening civil society Budget Annual Revenue (FY 2007): $11,430,959 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $10,268,410 Government contributions (grants): $1,038,096 Program service revenue, including government fees and contracts: $116,977 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $249 Other revenue: $7,277
Summary INMED's mission is to strengthen families and communities, working as a catalyst to improve health and create an environment that enables children to reach their full potential.

Inside NGO
1828 L Street NW, Ste. 300, Washington, DC 20036, USA t: 202-684-3680 e: info@insidengo.org w: www.insidengo.org Functions/Sectors Training Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $1,259,646 Revenue source breakdown Program service revenue, including government fees and contracts: $1,074,542 Membership dues and assessments: $95,006 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $90,098
Summary InsideNGO's mission is to strengthen the financial management of the international development nonprofit community by sharing knowledge, improving professional skills, acting as a resource for information exchange, and working as an advocate on behalf of the community.

Institute for Sustainable Communities
535 Stone Cutters Way, Montpelier, VT 05602, USA t: 802-229-2900 f: 802-229-2919 e: isc@iscvt.org w: www.iscvt.org Regions Europe, Central Asia, North America Functions/Sectors Agriculture, capacity strengthening,, disaster and emergency relief, environment, energy and natural, food security, HIV/AIDS, media, policy research and analysis, rural development, strengthening civil society Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $11,370,638 Revenue source breakdown Individuals: $85,808 U.S. government: $7,898,708 Private foundations: $1,710,111 Donated services: 1,474,116 Contract income: 187,450 Other income: $14,445 Expenses $10,297,216 Central and Eastern Europe: $1,608,381 Eurasia: $6,912,676 Special projects: $283,615 Fundraising: $59,513 Administration: $1,433,031
Summary The Institute for Sustainable Communities (ISC) is a nonprofit organization that helps communities in existing and emerging democracies solve problems while building a better future for themselves and the world. We give communitiesand the organizations that support themthe training, technical assistance, and grants they need to solve their own problems and shape their own destiny long after our work with them is finished.

Institute of Cultural Affairs
555 Rene-Levesque Blvd. West, Ste. 500, Montreal, Quebec H2Z 1B1 CA t: 514-875-7111 f: 514-287-9687 e: info@ica-international.org w: www.ica-international.org Regions Australia, Belgium, Bosnia, Brazil, Canada, China, Croatia, Egypt, Ghana, Guatemala, Herzegovina, India, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, Mexico, Nepal, Netherlands, Niger, Nigeria, Peru, Philippines, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Tajikistan, United Kingdom, Venezuela, Zambia, Zimbabwe Functions/Sectors Agriculture, strengthening civil society, education, rural development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $347,116 Revenue source breakdown Membership dues: $35,432 Individual/family support: $83,783 Relocation program: $75,000 Institutional support: $133,569 Fiscal sponsorship: $13,462 Working gifts program: $4,494 Others: $1,376
Summary ICA's mission is to promote social innovation through participation and community-building. It achieves this through research, training and demonstration that empower the human factor in the development process. The Institute functions as a federation of nonprofit, nationally autonomous units in 29 nations, including the United States. ICA staff work with partner organizations and program associates to implement projects and provide consulting services in the following areas: civil society development, capacity building, institutional development, training of trainers and facilitators, conference design and facilitation, project design and implementation, and program monitoring and evaluation.

InterAction: American Council for Voluntary International Action
1400 16th Street NW, Ste. 210, Washington, DC 20036, USA t: 202-667-8227 e: ia@interaction.org w: www.interaction.org
Regions
Worldwide
Functions/Sectors
All
Budget
Annual revenue (FY 2006): $5,407,345 Revenue source breakdown Grants from U.S. government: $1,690,066 Foundation awards: $1,544,785 Member contributions: $102,695 Membership dues: $1,555,880 Publications: $228,654 Forum, meetings and workshops: $185,415 Interest and investment income: $76,148 Other income: $23,702 Expenses $4,916,753 Member services: $1,261,598 Federal and nonfederal awards: $2,499,972 Legislative activities: $167,066 General and administrative: $860,917 Fundraising: $127,200
Summary
InterAction is the largest coalition of U.S.-based international nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) focused on the world's poor and most vulnerable people.

International Aid
17011 Hickory Street, Spring Lake, MI 49456-9712, USA t: 616-846.7490 f: 616-846.3842 e: events@internationalaid.org w: www.internationalaid.org Regions Ghana, Honduras, Korea, Kosovo, North Korea, Oman, Philippines, Romania Functions/Sectors Disaster and emergency relief, education, HIV/AIDS, nutrition Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $83,451,015 Revenue source breakdown Gifts-in-kind: $69,145,723 Monetary contributions: $8,495,489 Distribution service fees: $2,710,571 Medical equipment services revenue: $1,154,228 Missionary service fees: $371,496 Reimbursements: $418,117 Contributed services: $542,710 Government grants: $309,648 Interest income: $160,892 Other: $142,141 Expenses $81,145,579 Relief: $61,014,230 Missionary resources: $8,250,701 Health and development: 9,663,056 General and administrative: $1,096,233 Fundraising: $1,121,359
Summary International Aid is a Christian relief and development agency that responds to Biblical Mandates by providing and supporting solutions in health care worldwide. International Aid is committed to a comprehensive approach to health in developing countries by embracing both preventive and curative care as complementary in improving the health of populations through the provision of training, material resources, and logistical and financial support.

International Catholic Migration Commission Rue Varembe 1 Case postale 96 1211, Geneve 20, Switzerland t: + 41 0 22 919 10 20 f: + 41 0 22 919 10 48 e: icmc@icmc.net w: www.icmc.net Regions Albania, Belgium, Bosnia, Colombia, Congo, Croatia, East Timor, Eritrea, Herzegovina, India, Indonesia, Italy, Jordan, Kosovo, Lebanon, Montenegro, Pakistan, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Thailand, Togo, Turkey, United States of America, Yugoslavia, Zimbabwe Functions/Sectors Disaster and emergency relief, education, public policy and advocacy, refugees and displacement, shelter/housing, social development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $19,908,000 Revenue source breakdown U.S. government grants: $7,923,000 UN institutions: $5,188,000 European commission: $907,000 Other grants and contributions: $3,002,000 Administrative support and management fees: $2,888,000
Summary The International Catholic Migration Commission serves and protects the needs of uprooted people, refugees, internally displaced persons and migrants, with operations in 30 countries of the world, including Indonesia, Jordan, Lebanon, Pakistan and Turkey. ICMC advocates for durable solutions and rights-based policies directly and through a worldwide network of 172 member organizations. ICMC's expertise and core programming consists of refugee resettlement, return and reintegration, local integration, work with extremely vulnerable individuals, counter-trafficking and rescue, NGO capacity-building, technical cooperation and government institution-building, emergency response and advocacy. Today migration has become a present and pressing reality that deeply affects societies in developed and developing countries, in wealth and in poverty. While the global economy facilitates, and to some extent provokes new migration movements, the political process in many parts of the world tends to react with strategies that are both defensive and protective. ICMC firmly believes that migrants are agents of the future and that migration must be measured for the benefits it offers to communities and states, as well as to the migrants themselves. ICMC will, therefore, continue to serve the needs of uprooted people, regardless of faith, race, nationality or ethnic origin, giving priority to the most vulnerable and marginalized amongst them.

ICMC will continue to contribute: to protecting lives and those who are persecuted; to strengthening legal systems that provide protection, stimulate integration and foster overall equality; to helping develop and manage sustainable solutions; to working for greater respect for fundamental human rights, including the legitimate demand for a life in dignity; to developing communities and overall quality of life to help provide people with options other than migration; to nurturing intercultural dialogue, especially inter-religious dialogue; and to building a better understanding of migration, as well as to bring about a shift in the collective social conscience. ICMC is hopeful that this approach, based on respect for the migrant as an individual and as  valued member of society, will contribute to a culture of global solidarity with a greater sense of empathy and commitment.

International Center for Religion and Diplomacy
1156 15th Street NW, Ste. 910, Washington, DC 20005, USA t: 202-331-9404 f: 202-872-9137 w: www.icrd.org Regions Worldwide Functions/Sectors Serves as a bridge between religion and politics in support of peacemaking, deploys inter-religious action teams to trouble spots where conflict threatens or has already erupted, trains religious leaders and laity in the tasks of peacemaking, provides feedback to theologians and clergy on interpretations of their teachings that may be contributing to strife and misunderstanding Summary The mission of the International Center for Religion and Diplomacy (ICRD)is to address identitybased conflicts that exceed the reach of traditional diplomacy by incorporating religion as part of the solution.

International Center for Research on Women
1120 20th Street NW, Ste. 500 North, Washington, DC 20036, USA t: 202-797-0007 f: 202-797-0020 e: info@icrw.org w: www.icrw.org Regions Africa, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, Latin American and the Caribbean, Middle East Functions/Sectors Agriculture, HIV/AIDS, information and communication, population and family planning, public policy and advocacy Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $9,847,934 Revenue source breakdown Foundation and other donations: $798,703 Investment income and unrealized gain: $497,329 Other revenue: $138,957 Net assets released from donor restrictions: $8,412,945 Expenses $8,970,153 Health and development: $3,608,926 Social and economic development: $1,547,985 Policy, communications and other programs: $1,571,627 Total program services: $6,728,538 General and administrative: $1,822,500 Fundraising: $419,115
Summary To improve the lives of women in poverty, advance women's equality and human rights, and contribute to the broader economic and social well-being. ICRW accomplishes this, in partnership with others, through research, capacity building and advocacy on issues affecting women's economic, health and social status in low and middle income countries.

International Crisis Group
420 Lexington Avenue, Ste. 2640, New York, NY 10170, USA t: 212-813-0820 f: 212-813-0825 w: www.crisisgroup.org Regions Worldwide Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $20,477,569 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $20,175,260 Investment income: $272,309 Expenses $13,045,671 Africa program: $2,591,008 Asia program: $2,000,107 Europe program: $1,007,945 Middle East/North Africa program: $1,369,213 Latin America program: $451,412 Partner share income: $8,061,386 Advocacy: $3,279,052 Administration: $1,705,233
Summary The International Crisis Group (ICG) is an independent, nonprofit, multinational organization, with over 100 staff members on five continents, working through field-based analysis and high-level advocacy to prevent and resolve deadly conflict.

International Foundation for Electoral Systems
1101 15th Street NW, Third Fl., Washington, DC 20005, USA t: 202-350-6700 f: 202-452-0804 e: info.communications@ifes.org w: www.ifes.org Regions Africa sub-Saharan, Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and Caribbean, Middle East and North Africa, South Asia, Southeast Asia, Afghanistan, Angola, Armenia/Nagorno-Karabakh, Bangladesh, Burundi, Ecuador, Egypt, Georgia, Guinea, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Liberia, Malawi, Mexico, Moldova, Nepal, Nigeria, Pakistan, Palestine, Philippines, Sudan, Ukraine, Yemen Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $58,990,822 Revenue source breakdown Federal awards: $53,161,687 Non-federal awards and private grants: $5,602,943 Investment income: $117,438 Contributions: $91,594 Gain on disposal of property and equipment: $17,160
Summary The International Foundation for Electoral Systems is an independent, nongovernmental organization providing professional support to electoral democracy. Through field work, applied research and advocacy, we strive to promote citizen participation, transparency, and accountability in political life and civil society.

International Fund for Animal Welfare
290 Summer Street, Yarmouth Port, MA 02675, USA t: 508-744-2000, 800-932-4329 f: 508-744-2009 e: info@ifaw.org w: www.ifaw.org Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $111,067 Revenue source breakdown Supporter contributions: $80,423 Bequests: $24,459 Other income: $6,185
Summary The International Fund for Animal Welfare works to improve animal welfare, prevent animal cruelty and abuse, protect wildlife and provide animal rescue around the world. From stopping the elephant ivory trade, to ending the Canadian seal hunt and saving the whales from extinction, IFAW works to create solutions that benefit both animals and people.

International Housing Coalition
10 G Street NE, Ste. 710, Washington, DC 20002, USA t: 202-408-8506 f: 202-248-5099 e: info@Intlhc.org w: www.intlhc.org Regions Africa sub-Saharan, East Asia and Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and Caribbean, Middle East and North Africa, South Asia, Southeast Asia Functions/Sectors Capacity strengthening, governance, media, microfinance/microenterprise, partnership, policy research and analysis, public policy and advocacy, reconstruction, rehabilitation/vocational service, shelter/housing, urban development Summary The International Housing Coalition (IHC) was organized by the National Association of REALTORS (NAR), the Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA) and Habitat for Humanity International (HFHI) to promote the goal of "HOUSING FOR ALL" as an essential element to ending poverty worldwide. Recognizing the worldwide housing problem and the lack of priority being given to housing issues, the IHC was organized for the purpose of restoring housing to a position of importance and priority on the world development agenda.

International Institute of Rural Reconstruction
40 Exchange Place, Ste. 1111, New York, NY 10005 USA t: 212-880-9147 f: 212-880-9148 e: leslie.enright@iirr.org, us.office@iirr.org w: www.iirr.org Regions Africa, Asia, Latin America Functions/Sectors Agriculture, HIV/AIDS, information and communication, nutrition, population and family planning, rural development, strengthening civil society, education Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $3,264,695 Revenue source breakdown Foundations: $893,390 Corporations: $3,340 Individuals: $176,370 Governments: $734,493 Training courses: $647,406 Workshops: $172,407 Technical assistance: $343,202 Study programs: $44,454 Use of campus facilities: $87,482 Publication sales: $20,693 Others: $141,458 Expenses $3,251,914 Learning community: $1,566,318 Education and training: $908,824 Publication and communication: $243,908 Management and general: $413,241 Fundraising: $119,623
Summary IIRR's mission is to: work with the poor and their communities as their partner, enabling them to improve their lives and achieve their full potential; learn and document from our work both practical and innovative solutions to the challenges facing the poor, their communities and the natural environment; share our learning and field-based experience through education, training and communication; and join with partners in global development to promote and achieve equality, justice and peace for all.

International Medical Corps
1919 Santa Monica Boulevard, Ste. 400, Santa Monica, CA 90404, USA t: 310-826-7800 f: 310-442-6622 e: imc@imcworldwide.org w: www.imcworldwide.org Regions Africa, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, Middle East Functions/Sectors Disaster and emergency relief, education, HIV/AIDS, nutrition, population and family planning, shelter/housing, strengthening civil society Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $102,201,023 Revenue source breakdown Contracts and grant support: $55,879,518 Contributions: $3,449,736 Donated medical supplies: $42,301,919 Donated medical services: $468,900 Interest and dividend income: $95,755 Realized and unrealized gain on investments: $5,195 Expenses $99,344,956 Africa: $39,422,523 Asia: $23,010,579 Caucasus: $3,561,421 Middle East: $23,357,484 United States: $1,459,912 Program management and evaluation: $2,821,718 Management and general administration: $5,471,714 Fundraising: $239,605
Summary International Medical Corps (IMC) is a global humanitarian nonprofit organization dedicated to saving lives and relieving suffering through health-care training and medical relief programs. Established in 1984 by volunteer United States doctors and nurses, IMC is a private, voluntary, nonpolitical, nonsectarian organization. Its mission is to improve quality of life through health interventions and related activities that build local capacity in areas worldwide where few organizations dare to serve. By offering training and health care to local populations and medical assistance to people at highest risk, and with the flexibility to respond rapidly to emergency situations, IMC rehabilitates devastated health-care systems and helps bring them back to self-reliance.

International Orthodox Christian Charities
110 West Road, Ste. 360 Baltimore, MD 21204 USA t: 410-243-9820 f: 410-243-9824 e: relief@iocc.org w: www.iocc.org Regions Albania, Bosnia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Greece, Lebanon, Romania, Russia, West Bank Functions/Sectors Agriculture, strengthening civil society, disaster and emergency relief, education, HIV/AIDS, nutrition, refugees and displacement, rural development, shelter/housing, social development, urban development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $43,036,602 Revenue source breakdown Grants: Federal: $6,776,175 International agencies: $1,302,188 Contributions: In-kinds: $27,365,392 Orthodox Church institutions: $3,534,890 Individual: $2,496,246 Foundations: $288,416 Metropolitan committee events: $592,633 Micro-credit loan collections: $544,070 CFC/United Way: $201,320 Other: $69,433
Summary International Orthodox Christian Charities, Inc. (IOCC) was established by the Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in the Americas (SCOBA) as an official humanitarian aid agency of Orthodox Christians to work in cooperation with the Orthodox Churches worldwide. The Mission of IOCC is to respond to the call of our Lord Jesus Christ, to minister to those who are suffering and are in need throughout the world, sharing with them God's gifts of food, shelter, economic self-sufficiency and hope. In carrying out this mission, IOCC assumes the highest professional standards and renders itself fully accountable to the public and its donors. Assistance is provided solely on the basis of need.

International Reading Association
444 North Capitol Street NW Ste. 523, Washington, DC 20001 USA t: 202-624-8800 f: 202-624-8826 e: pubinfo@reading.org w: www.reading.org Regions Worldwide Functions/Sectors Education, information and communication, public policy and advocacy Summary The International Reading Association seeks to promote high levels of literacy for all by improving the reading process and teaching techniques; serving as a clearinghouse for the dissemination of reading research through conferences, journals, and other publications; and actively encouraging the lifetime reading habit.

International Relief and Development
1621 North Kent Street, Fourth Fl., Arlington, VA 22209 USA t: 703-248-0161 f: 703-248-0194 e: ird@ird-dc.org w: www.ird-dc.org Regions Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America, Middle East Functions/Sectors Agriculture, strengthening civil society, disaster and emergency relief, education, HIV/AIDS, information and communication, public policy and advocacy, refugees and displacement, rural development, shelter/housing, social development, urban development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $130,519,252 Contract and grant revenue: $91,058,649 Contributed goods: $39,148,099 Contributions: $231,502 Interest income: $81,002 Expenses $130,516,613 Economic development/civil society: $60,705,136 Health: $34,399,383 Special projects: $9,765,298 Relief: $13,342,702 Food security: $2,123,476 Infrastructure: $2,873,304 Management and general: $7,065,244 Fundraising: $242,070
Summary IRD seeks to reduce the suffering of the world's most vulnerable groups by providing them with the tools and/or resources needed to become self-reliant. IRD's strategic goal is to match our technical and management strength with public and private donor grant and in-kind resources in the implementation of cost-effective programs for the world's most vulnerable groups, primarily refugee and displaced populations (particularly women, children, and the elderly), as well as other vulnerable groups.

International Relief Teams
4560 Alvarado Canyon Road, Ste. 2G, San Diego, CA 92120-4309 USA t: 619-284-7979 f: 619-284-7938 e: info@irteams.org w: www.irteams.org Regions Africa, Asia, Central America, Europe, North America, South America Functions/Sectors Education, health Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $26,969,975 Revenue source breakdown Public contributions: $758,572 Grants: $111,869 Gifts in kind: $25,773,230 Fundraising special events: $247,466 Investment income: $67,079 Expenses breakdown Program services: $26,603,785 Supporting services: $376,382 Total expenses: $26,980,167
Summary Mission International Relief Team alleviates human suffering by providing health services and humanitarian assistance to victims of disaster, neglect and profound poverty worldwide.

International Rescue Committee
122 East 42nd Street, New York, NY 10168-1289 USA t: 212-551-3000 f: 212-551-3179 e: advocacy@theirc.org w: www.theirc.org Regions Africa, Asia, Caucasus, Middle East, Near East, South America Functions/Sectors Camp coordination and management, education, food distribution and nutrition, health, protection, water and sanitation Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $250,712 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $55,914 Grants and contracts: $185,630 Contributed goods and services: $4,749 Loan administration fees and other: $1,325 Investment return used for operations: $3,094 Expenses breakdown Program services: $216,059 Supporting services: $23,111 Total expenses: $239,170
Summary One of the first to respond, one of the last to leAvenue For 75 years, the International Rescue Committee has been a leader in humanitarian relief. We mobilize quickly, bringing sustained support to regions torn apart by violence and deprivation. We provide a fresh start in the United States for refugees. And we advocate tirelessly on behalf of the displaced, addressing the root causes of violence and standing up for the world's most vulnerable populations.

International Social ServiceUnited States of America Branch, Inc.

200 E. Lexington Street Ste. 1700 Baltimore, MD 21202, USA t: 443-451-1200 f: 443-451-1220 e: iss-usa@iss-usa.org w: www.iss-usa.org Regions Africa sub-Saharan, East Asia and Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and Caribbean, Middle East and North Africa, North America, South Asia, worldwide Functions/Sectors Children and youth, strengthening civil society, disaster and emergency relief, education, gender & diversity, health, human rights, information and communication, policy research and analysis, public policy and advocacy, refugees and displacement, volunteer/students abroad Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $1,117,137 Revenue source breakdown Contributions Foundations and agencies: $85,930 Individuals and corporations: $8,750 In-kind contributions: $24,000 Services provided U.S. government: $704,569 State governments: $199,732 Other: $80,384 Other revenue: $13,772
Summary International Social Service-united States of America Branch, Inc., (ISS-USA) is an international social work agency. Its Geneva-based General Secretariat serves as the hub for a worldwide network of more than 150 national units in countries spanning all continents. Our professional case managers help agencies and individuals resolve social work problems that cross national borders. We envision a world in which children are protected and flourish, and individuals and families are supported and assisted to overcome difficulties resulting from forced or voluntary migration, humanitarian disasters, human rights crises and conflict situations.

Mission To improve the lives of children, adults and families affected by migration, and international and humanitarian crises by providing high quality social services, promoting advances in service and knowledge, and advocating for laws and policies that guarantee their rights and ensure their protection.

International Youth Foundation
32 South Street, Ste. 500, Baltimore, MD 21202, USA t: 410-951-1500 f: 410-347-1188 e: youth@iyfnet.org w: www.iyfnet.org Regions Africa, Asia, Australia, Central America, Europe, Middle East, North America, South America Functions/Sectors Education, food distribution and nutrition, health, water and sanitation Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $23,479,245 Revenue source breakdown Grants and contributions: $22,164,126 Investment income: $1,297,823 Other income: $17,296 Expenses breakdown Programs: $18,728,856 Fundraising: $213,200 General and administrative: $3,228,257 Total expenses: $22,170,313
Summary To positively impact the greatest number of young people, in as many places as possible, in the shortest amount of time, with programs that are effective, and sustainable.

Interplast
857 Maude Avenue, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA t: 650-962-0123 e: info@interplast.org Web: www.interplast.org Regions Africa sub-Saharan, East Asia and Pacific, Latin America and Caribbean, South Asia, Southeast Asia Functions/Sectors Education, health Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $8,672,046 Revenue source breakdown Support: $8,706,368 Revenue: $34,322 Expenses breakdown Program services: $8,832,604 Supporting services: $1,224,131 Total expenses: $10,056,735
Summary Interplastthe first humanitarian organization to provide free reconstructive surgery for children and adults with clefts, disabling burns and hand injurieshas provided 68,000 life-changing surgeries for those who have no other access to care. Working in underserved regions of 16 countries throughout Africa, Asia and Latin America, Interplast teaches, empowers and partners with volunteers and overseas medical professionals so every child living in poverty has free access to the safest and highest quality carenow and in the future.

Islamic Relief USA
6131 Orangethorpe Ave Ste 450 Buena Park, CA 90620, USA t: 714-676-1300,  888-479-4968 f: 714-676-1301 e: info@irw.org w: www.islamicreliefusa.org Regions Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Bangladesh, Bosnia, Cambodia, Chad, Chechnya, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Jordan, Kenya, Kosovo, Lebanon, Malawi, Mali, Morocco, Niger, Pakistan, Palestine, Somalia, South Africa, Sudan, Turkey, Yemen Functions/Sectors Education and training, water and sanitation, income generation, orphan support, health and nutrition, emergency relief Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $60,615,725 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $372,186 Special event: $40,882,847 In-kind contributions: $60,611,813 Interest and dividends: $2,746 Unrealized gain on investments: $423 Other income: $743
Summary Islamic Relief strives to alleviate suffering, hunger, illiteracy, and diseases worldwide regardless of color, race, religion, or creed, and to provide aid in a compassionate and dignified manner. Islamic Relief aims to provide rapid relief in the event of human and natural disasters and to establish sustainable local development projects allowing communities to better help themselves.

Jesuit Refugee Service USA
1016 16th Street NW, Ste. 500, Washington, DC 20036, USA t: 202-462 - 0400 f: 202-328 - 9212 e: jrsusa@jesuit.org w: www.jrsusa.org Regions Asia and Pacific, Easter Africa, Europe, Grands Lacs, Latin America and the Caribbean, South Asia, Southern Africa, Western Africa Functions/Sectors Education, food distribution and nutrition, health, protection, shelter, water and sanitation Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $2,229,048 Revenue source breakdown US Jesuit assistancy: $290,000 Contracts: $1,167,112 Gifts: $485,419 Investments: $272,534 Other: $13,983 Expenses breakdown Advocacy: $192,162 Detention chaplaincy and education program in South Sudan: $1,064,798 JRS International: $725,483 Supporting services: $280,262 Total expenses: $2,262,705
Summary JRS has a threefold mission of accompaniment, service and advocacy on behalf of refugees and forcibly displaced persons. With a priority to working wherever the needs of forcibly displaced people are urgent and unattended by others, JRS offers a human and pastoral service to the refugees and displaced people and to the communities which host them through a wide variety of rehabilitation and relief activities. JRS advocates the cause of the forcibly displaced and facilitates the response of local churches, Jesuit institutions and other communities and organizations to the needs of refugees.

Joint Aid Management
900 19th street NW, Ste. 400 Washington DC20006, USA t: 202-380 3566 f: 202-380 3627 w: www.jamint.com Regions Africa Functions/Sectors Nutrition, water, HIV/AIDS, orphans and vulnerable children, agriculture, emergency relief Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $14,351,838 Revenue source breakdown Private contributions: $10,060,785 Gifts in kind (GIK): $914,580 Grants & contracts: $2,820,675 Other income: $555,798
Summary To help Africa help itself by contributing toward the alleviation of poverty through sustainable aid programs that express the compassionate heart of God. Joint Aid Management (JAM) is a nonprofit, Christian, international humanitarian relief and development organization with 25 years of experience in sustainable development.

Keystone Human Services International
124 Pine Street Harrisburg, PA, 17101, USA t: 717-232-7509, Toll-Free 888-377-6504 f: 717-232-4597 e: mdehart@keystonehumanservices.org w: www.keystonehumanservices.org Regions North America, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Russia Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $93,905,417 Revenue source breakdown County programs: $53,071,765 State revenues: $17,861,997 Federal grants/awards: $5,623,061 Service fees: $6,955,163 Health choices: $6,201,344 Grants: $2,425,700 Investment income, including unrealized gains/losses: $509,377 Contributions: $27,002 Special events: $128,523 Other: $943,716
Summary Keystone Human Services is a family of nonprofit organizations working together to serve the community. Keystone is committed to creating an environment where all people can grow, make choices, and be valued and contributing members of society. Keystone provides comprehensive community-based services for children, young people, adults and families in the areas of intellectual disabilities (mental retardation), autism, mental health, early intervention and children and family services. Keystone serves individuals and families in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware and Connecticut. Keystone Human Services is also engaged in initiatives in Russia and Moldova.

Korean American Sharing Movement
7004 Little River Turnpike, Ste. O, Annandale, VA 22003, USA t: 703-867-0846 f: 703-354-0427 e: office@kasm.org w: www.kasm.org Regions Iraq, Korea, North Korea, South Korea, United States Functions/Sectors Children and youth, refugees and displacement Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $74,404 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $11,348 Indirect public support: $1,730 Program service revenue, including government fees and contracts: $61,214 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $112
Summary KASM serves as an outlet for Korean-American communities to help those in need, both in the United States and abroad, as well as to lay the cornerstone for the future through youth and other education programs.

Latter Day Saint Charities
50 East North Temple Street, Fl., 7, Salt Lake City, UT 84150, USA t: 801-240-1201 e: LDS-Charities@LDSChurch.org w: www.providentliving.org Regions Afghanistan, Albania, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belize, Bolivia, Bosnia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Canada, Chile, China, Congo, Croatia, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, East Timor, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Herzegovina, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Korea, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Lithuania, Madagascar, Malawi, Mexico, Moldova, Mongolia, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, North Korea, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Russia, Samoa, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Taiwan, Tajikistan, Thailand, Tibet, Tonga, Trinidad & Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Vietnam, Zimbabwe Functions/Sectors Agriculture, disaster and emergency relief, education Summary Latter-day Saint Charities is a voluntary organization sponsored by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, regardless of faith or nationality. Latter-day Saint Charities provides life-sustaining resources to people in emergencies, helps strengthen families to become self-reliant, and offers opportunities for giving service.  Unique in its support structure, Latter-day Saint Charities has access to the developed resources of the church, which include food production and processing, grain storage, vocational rehabilitation and employment, donated used clothing and social services. Latterday Saint Charities works both independently and in cooperation with other charitable relief and development organizations (international and indigenous) in meeting the relief and self-reliance needs of deprived populations.

Life for Relief and Development
17300 W 10 Mile Road, Southfield, MI 48075, USA t: 248-424-7493 f: 248-424-8325 e: life@lifeusa.org w: www.lifeusa.org Regions Middle East, Africa Functions/Sectors Health, education, water and sanitation, disaster relief Budget Annual revenue (FY 2004): $10,632,092 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $10,631,667 (>99 percent) Investments: $435 (<1 percent)
Summary Life for Relief and Development (LIFE) is a nonprofit organization deeply rooted in the belief that saving lives should be a priority of all mankind. For this reason, we are dedicated to alleviating human suffering regardless of race, color, religion, or cultural background. LIFE works to provide assistance to people across the globe by offering humanitarian services such as health care and education, as well as catering to casualties of social and economic turmoil, victims of hunger, natural disasters, war, and other catastrophes.

Lutheran World Relief
700 Light Street, Baltimore, MD 21230, USA t: 410-230-2800 f: 410-230-2882 e: lwr@lwr.org w: www.lwr.org Regions Latin America and Caribbean, Africa, Middle East, Asia and Pacific Functions/Sectors Microfinance, health, water and sanitation, disaster response Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $34,633,123 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $31,114,901 (90 percent) Government grants: $3,441,126 (10 percent) Other: $77,096 (<1 percent)
Summary Every day in 35 countries, Lutheran World Relief works to combat the causes of poverty and the dignity it robs from people's lives. We advocate for Fair Trade that helps farming families and artisans earn a better income. We teach people to better care for themselves, their communities and the environment. We teach people how to be less vulnerable to natural disasters. We advocate with and for them for policy change that more fairly represents them. We counsel them after manmade and natural disasters, and help them recover with material aid. We do all of this exclusively with partners from the communities we serve.

Management Sciences for Health
784 Memorial Drive, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA t: 617-250-9500 f: 617-250-9090 e: communications@msh.org w: www.msh.org Regions North America, Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, Africa, Middle East, Asia and Pacific Functions/Sectors Health Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $169,746,036 Revenue source breakdown Government grants: $169,416,011 (99.8 percent) Investments: $330,025 (<1 percent)
Summary MSH works collaboratively with health-care policymakers, managers, providers, and consumers to help close the gap between what is known about public health problems and what is done to solve them. MSH seeks to increase the effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of health services by improving management systems, promoting access to services, and influencing public policy.

MAP International
2200 Glynco Parkway, Brunswick, GA 31525-6800 t: 800-225-8550 w: www.map.org Regions Africa, Asia and Pacific, Latin America and Caribbean Functions/Sectors Health Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $253,926,754 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $250,074,183 (98 percent) Government grants: $199,868 (<1 percent) Investments: $372,802 (<1 percent) Other: $3,279,901 (1 percent)
Summary MAP International promotes the total health of people living in the world's poorest communities by partnering in the provision of Essential Medicines, the promotion of Community Health Development, and prevention and mitigation of disease, disaster and other health threats.

Medecins Sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders)
Rue de Lausanne 78, CP 116-1211, Geneva 21, Switzerland t: +41 (22) 849.84 f: +41 (22) 849.84.04 w: www.msf.org Regions North America, Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, Africa, Middle East, Asia and Pacific Functions/Sectors Health Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $891,038 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $862,052 (97 percent) Other: $28,986 (3 percent)
Summary MSF is an independent humanitarian medical aid agency committed to two objectives: providing medial aid wherever needed, regardless of race, religion, politics or sex and raising awareness of the plight of the people we help.

Medical Care Development International
8401 Colesville Road, Ste. 425, Silver Spring, MD, 20910, USA t: 301-562-1920 f: 301-562-1921 e: mcdi@mcd.org w: www.mcdi.mcd.org Regions Africa, Asia and Pacific, Europe, Latin America and Caribbean Functions/Sectors Health, gender, water and sanitation Budget Annual revenue (FY 2005): $30,634,630 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $38,951 (<1 percent) Government grants: $23,883,524 (78 percent) Investments: $385,170 (1 percent) Other: $6,326,985 (20 percent)
Summary The mission of MCDI is to enhance the well-being of peoples and communities in developing nations through superior technical assistance in health and socio-economic development. We will seek to empower families with the knowledge and behavior needed to improve infant and child survival and maternal health and care. We develop and disseminate tools, mechanisms and strategies that improve access and management of sustainable levels of health-care services. We work with a full spectrum of organizations, from grassroots community groups to multilateral donor institutions, to enable continuing and progressive improvement in the quantity and quality of care available and affordable to the neediest people on earth, and seek to enhance their financial ability to benefit from these improvements.

Medical Teams International
14150 SW Milton Court, Tigard, OR 97224, USA t: 503-624-1000 f: 503-624-1001 e: info@medicalteams.org w: www.nwmedicalteams.org
Regions
North America, Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, Africa, Asia and Pacific
Functions/Sectors
Health, disaster response
Budget
Annual revenue (FY 2007): $92,605,022 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $88,746,484 (95.5 percent) Government grants: $167,525 (.5 percent) Other: $3,736,013 (4 percent)
Summary
The mission of Medical Teams International is to demonstrate the love of Christ to people affected by disaster, conflict and poverty around the world. We seek to achieve our vision by: y Addressing root causes and effects of poverty and poor health.
 y Increasing and improving access to sustainable, quality health care.
 y Providing emergency preparedness, relief, and rehabilitation in disasters.
 y Supporting local partners through training and cash resources to implement holistic programs.
 y Contributing high quality essential medicines and medical supplies to partners and projects.
 y Enabling volunteers and partners to use their skills, exchange knowledge and advocate on behalf
of the poor.
Mental Disability Rights International
1156 15th Street NW, Ste. 1001, Washington, DC 20005, USA t: 202-296-0800 f: 202-728-3053 e: mdri@mdri.org w: www.mdri.org Regions North America, Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, Africa, Asia and Pacific Functions/Sectors Disability advocacy Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007):$891,044 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $795,381 Indirect public support: $1,696 Government contributions (grants): $84,546 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $9,421
Summary Mental Disability Rights International (MDRI) is dedicated to promoting the human rights and full participation in society of people with mental disabilities worldwide.

Mercy Corps Dept. W, 3015 SW 1st Avenue, Portland, OR 97201, USA t: 800-292-3355 w: www.mercycorps.org Regions North America, Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, Africa, Asia and Pacific Functions/Sectors Education, health, microfinance, gender, food distribution/nutrition, water and sanitation Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $197,361,387 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $71,144,239 (36 percent) Government grants: $85,297,654 (43 percent) Other: $40,919,494 (21 percent)
Summary Mercy Corps exists to alleviate suffering, poverty and oppression by helping people build secure, productive and just communities. Mercy Corps works amid disasters, conflicts, chronic poverty and instability to unleash the potential of people who can win against nearly impossible odds.

Mercy-USA for Aid and Development, Inc.

44450 Pinetree Drive, Ste. 201, Plymouth, MI 48170, USA t: 734-454-0011 f: 734-454-0303 e: info@mercyusa.org w: www.mercyusa.org Regions Europe, Middle East, Africa, Asia and Pacific Functions/Sectors Water and sanitation, food distribution/nutrition, health, education Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $2,295,486 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $2,075,135 (90 percent) Government grants: $146,147 (6 percent) Investments: $74,204 (4 percent)
Summary Mercy-USA for Aid and Development (M-USA) is dedicated to alleviating human suffering and supporting individuals and their communities in their efforts to become more self-sufficient. Founded in 1986, M-USA is a nonprofit relief and development organization. Our projects focus on improving health and promoting economic and educational growth around the world.

Minnesota International Health Volunteers
122 West Franklin Avenue, Ste. 510, Minneapolis, MN 55404, USA t: 612-871-3759 f: 612-230-3257 w: www.mihv.org Regions North America, Africa Functions/Sectors Gender, health, food distribution/nutrition Budget Annual Revenue (FY 2007): $1,267,699 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $112,765 (9 percent) Government Grants: $373,424 (29 percent) Investments: $1,254 (1 percent) Other: $780,256 (61 percent)
Mission and Summary To improve the health of women, children and their communities around the world. Vision We envision a world in which communities are organized to improve their own health. MIHV will be recognized as a center of excellence for community organized health care. In our work, we will be seen as a trusted partner who honors the strengths and assets of the communities with whom we work.

Mobility International USA
132 E. Broadway, Ste. 343, Eugene, OR 97401, USA t: 541-343-1284 f: 541-343-6812 w: www.miusa.org Regions North America, Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, Africa, Asia and Pacific Functions/Sectors Advocacy for those with disabilities Budget Annual revenue (fy2007): $1,394,775 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $385,210 Government contributions (grants): $942,000 Program service revenue, including government fees and contracts: $23,549 Dividends and interest from securities: $32,916 Special events: $10,440 Other revenue: $660
Mission and Summary To empower people with disabilities around the world to achieve their human rights through international exchange and international development. Mobility International USA is a national nonprofit organization based in Eugene, Oregon and was co-founded in 1981 by Susan Sygall and Barbara Williams. MIUSA is a cross-disability organization serving those with cognitive, hearing, learning, psychiatric, physical, systemic, vision and other disabilities.

National Association of Social Workers
750 First Street NE, Ste. 700, Washington, DC 20002, USA t: 202-408-8600 w: www.naswdc.org Regions North America Functions/Sectors Advancement of social work practice, advocacy, continuing education, ethics Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $2,415,467 Revenue source breakdown Grants & contracts: $641,495 (26.56 percent) Contributions: $1,444,589 (59.81 percent) Investment income: $327,211 (13.55 percent) Other: $2,172 (0.09 percent)
Programs NASW addresses its mission by advancing the professional knowledge base with the publication of scholarly journals, textbooks and practice guides; formulation and advocacy of sound public policy; enforcement of its professional Code of Ethics; developing professional capacity through its credentials and continuing education programs; and establishing standards for social work practice.

Summary NASW is a membership organization that seeks to enhance the effective functioning and well being of individuals, families and communities through its work and through its advocacy. NASW also promotes, develops and protects the practice of social work and social workers.

National Council of Negro Women
633 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004, USA t: 202-737-0120 f: 202-737-0476 e: ncnwinfo@ncnw.org w: www.ncnw.org Regions North America, Africa Functions/Sectors Research, Advocacy, health, education, economic empowerment services Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): 6,533,894 Revenue source breakdown Grants and contracts: $2,716,690 Contributions: $2,112,865 Membership dues 523,354 Rent revenue 717,658 In-kind donations 422,328 Miscellaneous 40,999
Summary NCNW is a nonprofit membership organization founded in 1935 by Mary McLeod Bethune, a child of slave parents, distinguished educator and government consultant. With a mission to lead, develop and advocate for women of African descent as they support their families and communities, NCNW addresses issues of human welfare and rights through public education, community service and advocacy.

National Peace Corps Association
1900 L Street NW, Ste. 404, Washington, DC 20036, USA w: www.peacecorpsconnect.org Functions/Sectors Disaster and emergency relief, education, information and communication, membership services, public policy and advocacy Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $1,334,962 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $387,139 Grants: $307,041 Membership: $213,594 Advertising: $226,943 Earned income:$120,146 Donated goods and services: $80,097
Summary The NPCA is a national network of Returned Peace Corps Volunteers (RPCVs), former Peace Corps staff, and friends of the Peace Corps community that continues to work for world peace, understanding, and well-being, with an emphasis on bringing the world back home. Our goals are: educate the public about other countries and cultures; support the network of Peace Corps alumni and groups; promote domestic and international community service; advance policies and programs consistent with the Peace Corps experience; ensure the continued success of the Peace Corps; mobilize the Peace Corps community to make a significant contribution toward world peace; and strengthen the NPCA's financial capacity to achieve its mission.

National Wildlife Federation
11100 Wildlife Center Drive, Reston, VA 20190-5362, USA t: 800-822-9919 w: www.nwf.org Functions/Sectors Agriculture, environment, energy and natural, millennium development goals, poverty, sustainable development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $88,102 Revenue source breakdown Contributions from individuals: $48,129 Contributions from foundations and corporations: $16,436 Publications: $22,248 Other: $1,289
Summary The mission of the National Wildlife Federation (NFW), the nation's largest environmental education and advocacy organization, is to inspire Americans to protect wildlife for our children's future. NWF recognizes that to truly conserve our planet's land, water and wildlife, we must consider natural resources and the realities of development, poverty and other challenges from a global perspective. Through NWF's U.S.- based activism, and team outreach across the globe NWF is educating, inspiring and mobilizing grassroots activists to conserve their world for people and wildlife and to help achieve sustainable development worldwide.

Near East Foundation
90 Broad Street, 15th Fl., New York, NY 10004, USA t: 212-425-2205 f: 212-425-2350 w: www.neareast.org Regions Europe, Africa, Middle East Functions/Sectors Water and sanitation, food distribution/nutrition, health Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $5,969,486 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $1,892,250 (31 percent) Government grants: $1,293,475 (21 percent) Investments: $13,786 (2 percent) Other: $2,769,975 (46 percent)
Summary Conflict, poverty and climate change afflict many communities in northern Africa and the Middle East; for some, they threaten their very survival. Such communities in peril include newly formed settlements of refugeesIraqis in Jordan and Darfurians in central Sudanand villages isolated by their environmentBerbers in Morocco's Atlas Mountains and Egyptian farmers relocated from the Nile Delta to the desert near the Aswan Dam. The Near East Foundation, founded in 1915, identifies such communities and mobilizes them into grassroots civil society organizations that find homegrown solutions to community problems. These health committees, parent-teacher councils and farmers associationsadvised by NEFlaunch programs that precede any government intervention and outlast outside assistance. Local and national authorities often adopt NEF's community-based programs as development models.

The ONE Campaign
1400 Eye Street NW, Ste. 601, Washington, DC 20005, USA t: 202-552-4990 w: www.one.org Regions Worldwide Functions/Sectors Health, extreme poverty Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $16,985,374 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $16,866,457 Membership dues and assessments: $1,881 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $117,036 Note: Donations to ONE go directly to our awareness raising and advocacy campaign. ONE does not conduct relief and development work in poor countries.

Summary ONE is Americans of all beliefs and every walk of life - united as ONE - to help make poverty history. We are a campaign of over 2.4 million people and growing from all 50 states and over 100 of America's most well-known and respected nonprofit, advocacy and humanitarian organizations. As ONE, we are raising public awareness about the issues of global poverty, hunger, disease and efforts to fight such problems in the world's poorest countries. As ONE, we are asking our leaders to do more to fight the emergency of global AIDS and extreme poverty. ONE believes that allocating more of the U.S. budget toward providing basic needs like health, education, clean water and food would transform the futures and hopes of an entire generation in the world's poorest countries.

ONE is nonpartisan; there's only one side in the fight against global AIDS and extreme poverty.

Working on the ground in communities, colleges and churches across the United States, ONE members both educate and ask America's leaders to increase efforts to fight global AIDS and extreme poverty, from the U.S. budget and presidential elections to specific legislation on debt cancellation, increasing effective international assistance, making trade fair, and fighting corruption. Everyone can join the fight. The goal of ending poverty may seem lofty, but it is within our reach if we take action together as one. You can start now by joining the ONE Campaign and pledging your voice to the fight against extreme poverty and global AIDS.

Operation USA
3617 Hayden Avenue, Ste. A, Culver City, CA 90232, USA t: 310-838-3455 f: 310-838-3477 e: info@opusa.org w: www.opusa.org Regions North America, Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, Africa, Asia and Pacific Functions/Sectors Disaster response Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $21,937,368 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $21,730,817 (99 percent) Investments: $204,559 (<1 percent) Other: $1,992 (<1 percent)
Summary Operation USA helps communities alleviate the effects of disasters, disease and endemic poverty throughout the world by providing privately-funded relief, reconstruction and development aid. We provide material and financial assistance to grassroots organizations that promote sustainable development, leadership and capacity building, income generating activities, provide education and health services, and advocate on behalf of vulnerable people.

Opportunity International
2122 York Road, Ste. 150, Oak Brook, IL 60523, USA t: 630-642-4100 f: 630-645-1458 e: getinfo@opportunity.org w: www.opportunity.org Regions Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, Asia and Pacific, Africa Functions/Sectors Microfinance Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $128,074,353 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $58,761,307 Government contributions (grants): $1,340,504 Program service revenue, including government fees and contracts: $69,782,571 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $896,689 Dividends and interest from securities: $140,606 Sales of assets: $41,484
Summary Our mission is to provide opportunities for people in chronic poverty to transform their lives. Our strategy is to create jobs, stimulate small businesses, and strengthen communities among the poor. Our method is to work through indigenous partner organizations that provide small business loans, other financial services, training, and counsel. Our commitment is motivated by Jesus Christ's call to serve the poor. Our core values are respect, commitment to the poor, integrity, and stewardship.

Oxfam America
226 Causeway Street, 5th Fl., Boston, MA 02114, USA t: 800-776-9326 f: 617-728-2594 e: info@oxfamamerica.org w: www.oxfamamerica.org Regions North America, Latin America and Caribbean, Africa, Asia Functions/Sectors Gender, microfinance, protection Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $68,303,000 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $64,291,000 (94 percent) Investments: $3,744,000 (5 percent) Other: $268,000 (1 percent)
Summary Oxfam America is an international relief and development organization that creates lasting solutions to poverty, hunger, and injustice. Together with individuals and local groups in more than 120 countries, Oxfam saves lives, helps people overcome poverty, and fights for social justice. We are an affiliate of Oxfam International.

Pact
1200 18th Street NW, Ste. 350, Washington, DC 20036, USA t: 202-466-5666 f: 202-466-5669 e: pact@pacthq.org w: www.pactworld.org Regions Latin America and Caribbean, Africa, Asia and Pacific Functions/Sectors Health, microfinance Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $79,883,452 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $30,139 (<1 percent) Government Grants: $78,982,969 (99 percent) Investments: $378,186 (<1 percent) Other: $492,158 (<1 percent)
Mission To build empowered communities, effective governments and responsible private institutions that give people an opportunity for a better life. We do this by strengthening the capacity of organizations and institutions to be good service providers, represent their stakeholders, network with others for learning and knowledge sharing, and advocate for social, economic and environmental justice. Interdependence, responsible stewardship, inclusion of vulnerable groups, and respect for local ownership and knowledge are core values across all of our programs.

Pan American Development Foundation
1889 F Street NW, 2nd Fl., Washington, DC 20006, USA t: 202-458-3969 f: 202-458-6316 e: padf-dc@padf.org w: www.padf.org Regions Latin America and Caribbean Functions/Sectors Microfinance, health, disaster response Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $40,577,173 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $5,049,510 (12 percent) Government Grants: $33,602,561 (83 percent) Other: $1,925,102 (5 percent)
Summary The Pan American Development Foundation empowers disadvantaged people and communities in Latin America and the Caribbean to achieve sustainable economic and social progress, strengthen their communities and civil society, and prepare for and respond to natural disasters and other humanitarian crises, thereby advancing the principles of the Organization of the American States.

PATH
1455 NW Leary Way, Seattle, WA 98107, USA t: 206-285-3500 f: 206-285-6619 e: info@path.org w: www.path.org Regions North America, Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, Africa, Asia and Pacific Functions/Sectors Health, gender Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $130,267,329 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $99,451,027 (76 percent) Government grants: $28,200,820 (22 percent) Investments: $2,615,482 (2 percent)
Mission To improve the health of people around the world by advancing technologies, strengthening systems, and encouraging healthy behaviors. We meet the complex health needs of an expanding world with this multipronged approach that moves solutions from innovation to impact: supporting new ideas through inception, development, and testing; paving the way for introduction in low-resource countries; and working with governments and communities to integrate and expand the most successful ideas.

Pathfinder International
9 Galen Street, Ste. 217, Watertown, MA 02472, USA t: 617-924-7200 f: 617-924-3833 w: www.pathfind.org Regions Africa, Asia and Pacific, Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, Middle East Functions/Sectors Health, gender Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $107,939,887 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $18,667,669 (17 percent) Government grants: $89,011,594 (82 percent) Investments: $260,624 (1 percent)
Summary Pathfinder International believes that reproductive health is a basic human right. When parents can choose the timing of pregnancies and the size of their families, women's lives are improved and children grow up healthier. Pathfinder International provides women, men, and adolescents throughout the developing world with access to quality family planning and reproductive health information and services. Pathfinder works to halt the spread of HIV/AIDS, to provide care to women suffering from the complications of unsafe abortion, and to advocate for sound reproductive health policies.

PCI-Media Impact
777 United Nations Plaza, 5th Fl., New York, NY 10017, USA t: 212-687-3366 f: 212-661-4188 e: info@pci-mediaimpact.org w: www.population.org Regions Asia and Pacific, Latin America and Caribbean Functions/Sectors Telecommunications Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $997,994 Revenue source breakdown Contributions and grants: $869,219 (87 percent) Investments: $62,945 (6 percent) Other: $65,830 (7 percent)
Mission Improve health, promote human rights and bring social advancement through the use of creative media.

Perkins International
175 North Beacon Street, Watertown, MA 02472, USA t: 617-924-3434 e: info@perkins.org w: www.perkins.org/international Regions Asia, Africa, North America, Latin America and Caribbean, Central and Eastern Europe, Middle East Functions/Sectors Advocacy, education Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $58,599,514 Revenue source breakdown Tuition: $27,970,511 (47.7 percent) Investment income: $2,733,045 (4.7 percent) Sale of materials for the blind: $5,883,807 (10.0 percent) Unrestricted contributions: $3,502,816 (6.0 percent) Net assets released from restriction: $2,939,239 (5.0 percent) Library services: $2,354,208 (4.0 percent) Government grants and resources: $1,958,319 (3.3 percent) Private grants and resources: $1,434,393 (2.4 percent) Unrestricted gifts and legacies: $639,232 (1.1 percent) Other private resources: $774,313 (1.3 percent) Other government grants and resources*: $1,746,223 (3.0 percent) Other non-operating resources: $6,309,185 (10.8 percent) Income from outside trusts: $354,223 (0.7 percent)
Summary Perkins International is committed to providing education and services that build productive, meaningful lives for children and adults around the world who are blind, deaf blind or visually impaired with or without other disabilities.

Physicians for Human Rights
2 Arrow Street, Ste. 301, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA t: 617-301-4200 f: 617-301-4250 w: www.physiciansforhumanrights.org Regions Latin America and Caribbean, Africa Functions/Sectors Health Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $4,173,452 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $928,265 (22 percent) Government grants: $2,919,349 (70 percent) Investments: $227,211 (5 percent) Other: $98,627 (3 percent)
Summary Physicians for Human Rights mobilizes health professionals to advance health, dignity, and justice and promotes the right to health for all. Harnessing the specialized skills, rigor, and passion of doctors, nurses, public health specialists, and scientists, PHR investigates human rights abuses and works to stop them.

Physicians for Peace
229 W. Bute Street, Ste. 200, Norfolk, VA 23510, USA t: 757-625-7569 f: 757-625-7680 e: info@physiciansforpeace.org w: www.physiciansforpeace.org Regions Africa, Asia and Pacific, Europe, Middle East, Latin America and Caribbean Functions/Sectors Health, education Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $23,043,257 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $21,066,304 (91 percent) Investments: $1,529,627 (7 percent) Other: $447,326 (2 percent)
Summary The developing world carries 90 percent of the global disease burden yet has only 10 percent of the medical resources, according to the United Nations Foundation. Physicians for Peace provides medical education and training, clinical care, and donated medical supplies to developing countries with unmet needs and scarce resources.

Physicians for Peace holds no religious or political affiliations, showing compassion and respect to members of all nations. Physicians for Peace fully embraces the United Nations Millennium Development Goals to meet the needs of the world's poorest by 2015 and advance international development.

Plan USA
1730 Rhode Island Avenue NW, 11th Fl., Washington, DC 20036, USA t: 202-223-8325 e: DonorRelations@planusa.org w: www.planusa.org Regions Latin America and Caribbean, Africa, Asia and Pacific, Europe Functions/Sectors Food distribution/nutrition, education, health Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $51,791,532 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $30,299,095 (58.5 percent) Government grants: $19,123,690 (37 percent) Investments: $1,626,181 (3 percent) Other: $742,566 (1.5 percent)
Summary Plan is a child-centered organization. We work at the grassroots level with the active participation of children, their families and their communities. We involve children in all aspects of our programs. Projects are planned, implemented, and their results are evaluated at the level of the child. Families and communities contribute as much as they can of their time, labor, and their fundsa value that can amount to more than half of project costs. Designing programs at the level of the child, we can better see the complex web of causes and effects that impact a child's life, and respond with programs in five interrelated areasGrowing Up Healthy, Learning, Habitat, Livelihood, and Building Relationships.

Population Action International
1300 19th Street NW Ste. 200, Washington, DC 20036, USA t: 202-557-3400 f: 202-728-4177 e: pai@popact.org w: www.populationaction.org Regions Latin America and Caribbean, Africa, Asia and Pacific, Europe Functions/Sectors Health, gender Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $4,882,976 Revenue source breakdown Contributions and grants: $4,130,009 (84.5 percent) Investments: $735,105 (15 percent) Other: $17,862 (.5 percent)
Summary Population Action International (PAI) is an independent policy advocacy group working to strengthen political and financial support worldwide for population programs grounded in individual rights. Founded in 1965, PAI is a private, nonprofit group and accepts no government funds.

Population Action International works to improve individual well-being and preserve global resources by mobilizing political and financial support for population, family planning and reproductive health policies and programs.

Population Communication International
1250 E Walnut St., Ste. 220 Pasadena, CA 91106 USA t: 626-793-4750 f: 626-793-4791 e: popcommla@aol.com Regions Bangladesh, Brazil, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Thailand Functions/Sectors Population and family planning, public policy and advocacy Budget
$550,000
Summary Population Communication was established in 1977 to assist governments in developing quality family planning and women's reproductive health programs, and to determine the most efficient path to achieving population stabilization. Population Communication conveys population messages to national leaders, and actively explores solutions to the population problem. Population Communication develops television and motion picture screenplays with family planning and population themes, informs doctors about the latest contraceptive techniques and obtains support for population stabilization policies from heads of government. Population Communication also develops child survival projects, studies the link between population and the environment, and promotes programs that improve the status of women. Population Communication supports immigration reform.

Presbyterian Disaster Assistance and Hunger Program
100 Witherspoon Street, Louisville, KY 40202-1396, USA t: 888-728-7228, 502-569-5000 f: 502-569-8005 e: PresbyTel@pcusa.org w: www.pcusa.org Regions Africa sub-Saharan, East Asia and Pacific, Europe and Central Asia, Latin America and Caribbean, Middle East and North Africa, Afghanistan, Albania, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia, Brazil, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, Dominican Republic, East Timor, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Jamaica, Japan, Kenya, Korea, Kosovo, Lebanon, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mexico, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Nicaragua, North Korea, Oman, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Russia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, South Africa, South Korea, Sudan, Thailand, Venezuela, Vietnam, Zambia, Zimbabwe Functions/Sectors Disaster and emergency relief, HIV/AIDS, membership services, public policy and advocacy, refugees and displacement Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): 85,976,231 Revenue source breakdown Basic mission support Shared mission support: $11,567,671 Directed mission support: $4,300,998 Churchwide special offerings Christmas joy: $4,987,578 One Great Hour of sharing: $8,245,099 Peacemaking: $1,177,333 Pentecost: $863,861 Witness: $32,465 ER specific appeals Emergency and disaster relief: $3,783,911 Additional giving offering, ECO: $6,763,268 Mission initiative Joining Hearts and Hands: $1,715,355 Special missionary support: $353,292 Hunger: $514,417 Theological Education Fund: $1,888,936 Additional forms of giving Presbyterian Women: $1,024,381 Bequests and annuities: $1,228,305 Other gifts: $19,932 Validated mission support: $215,246 Grants from outside foundations: $2,751,174 Interest and dividends PC(USA) restricted endowment funds: $7,201,177 PC(USA) unrestricted endowment funds: $8,049,365 Presbyterian Mission program fund: $368,333 Outside trusts: $1,353,691 Jinishian fund: $2,015,821 Short-term investments: $2,297,509 Other Partner churches and other: $651,060 Hubbard Press: $45,000 Sales curriculum: $2,676,332 Sales program services and MEP: $7,706,775 Sales resources: $1,976,353 Other income: $201,593
Summary Presbyterian Disaster Assistance and Hunger Program are two organizationally specific programs existing as part of the Worldwide Ministries of the Presbyterian Church (USA) whose mission is: To empower the church, in each place, to share transforming power with all people through partnership and mutuality with the worldwide body of Christ.

Project HOPE
255 Carter Hall Lane, Millwood, VA 22646, USA t: 800-544-4673 e: HOPE@projecthope.org w: www.projecthope.org Regions Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, Africa, Middle East, Asia and Pacific Functions/Sectors Health, education Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $182,602 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $167,082 (91,5 percent) Government grants: $11,245 (6 percent) Other: $4,275 (2.5 percent)
Summary Project HOPE is unique among international organizations in that we have always worked across the health spectrum in a wide variety of settingsfrom the family and community levels to the tertiary care leveltraining traditional birth attendants and community health volunteers where resources are limited and cardiac surgeons and biomedical engineers where technology is appropriate. Though the challenges have evolved, Project HOPE remains as committed as ever to addressing the world's new health threats by playing a leadership roleforging new alliances among those on the frontlines of health and together seek new solutions.

Mission To achieve sustainable advances in health care around the world by implementing health education programs and providing humanitarian assistance in areas of need.

Proliteracy Worldwide
1320 Jamesville Avenue, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA t: 315-422-9121 f: 315-422-9121 e: info@proliteracy.org w: www.proliteracy.org Regions Africa sub-Saharan, East Asia and Pacific, Latin America and Caribbean, Middle East and North Africa, South Asia, Afghanistan, Argentina, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chile, China, Colombia, Cuba, Democratic Republic of Congo, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kenya, Laos, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania, Mexico, Morocco, Namibia, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Rwanda, South Africa, Sudan, Tanzania, Thailand, Uganda, West Bank, Zambia, Zimbabwe Functions/Sectors Economic growth and development, education, environment, energy and natural, gender & diversity, health, HIV/AIDS, human rights, peacebuilding, peacekeeping budget:
Annual revenue (FY 2006):
Summary ProLiteracy Worldwide is represented in 51 developing countries as well as in the United States and serves more than 350,000 adult new learners around the world each year. Its purpose is to sponsor educational programs and services to empower adults and their families by assisting them to acquire the literacy practices and skills they need to function more effectively in their daily lives and participate in the transformation of their societies. Its publishing division, New Readers Press, produces and distributes approximately 500 titles of adult educational books and materials to literacy organizations, schools, libraries, and other institutions nationwide. New Readers Press also publishes News for You, a weekly newspaper for adult new readers, which is read by 90,000 adult learners.

Refugees International
2001 S Street NW, Ste. 700, Washington, DC 20009, USA t: 202-828-0110 f: 202-828-0819 e: ri@refintl.org w: www.refugeesinternational.org Regions Africa, Asia and Pacific, Latin America and Caribbean, Middle East Functions/Sectors Water and sanitation, food distribution/nutrition, shelter, health, camp coordination and management, gender, education, protection Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $3,203,762 Revenue source breakdown Contributions and grants: $3,139,838 (98 percent) Investments: $45,769 (1.5 percent) Other: $18,155 (.5 percent)
Summary Refugees International generates lifesaving humanitarian assistance and protection for displaced people around the world and works to end the conditions that create displacement.

Relief International
1575 Westwood Blvd., Ste. 200, Los Angeles, CA 90024, USA t: 800-573-3332 f: 310-478-1212 e: info@ri.org w: www.ri.org Regions Middle East, Europe, Asia, Africa Functions/Sectors Health, education, shelter, protection, food distribution/nutrition Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $19,309,300 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $15,674,830 (81 percent) Government grants: $3,586,423 (18.5 percent) Other: $6,839 (<1 percent) Notes: posted an investment loss of: $41,238
Summary Relief International, (RI) is a humanitarian nonprofit agency that provides emergency relief, rehabilitation, development assistance, and program services to vulnerable communities worldwide.

RI is solely dedicated to reducing human suffering and is nonpolitical and nonsectarian in its mission. RI's mission is to y Serve the needs of the most vulnerableparticularly women and children, victims of natural
disasters & civil conflicts, and the poorwith a specific focus on neglected groups and cases.
 y Provide holistic, multisectoral, sustainable, and pro-poor programs that bridge emergency relief
and long-term development at the grassroots level.
 y Empower communities by building capacity and by maximizing local resources in both program
design and implementation.
 y Promote self-reliance, peaceful coexistence, and reintegration of marginalized communities.
 y Protect lives from physical injury or death or psychological trauma where present.
 y Uphold the highest professional norms in program delivery, including accountability to beneficiaries
and donors alike.
Resolve Uganda
211 8th Street NE, Washington, DC 20002, USA t: 202-548-2517 f: 202-548-2518 e: info@resolveuganda.org w: www.resolveuganda.org
Regions
Uganda
Budget
Annual revenue (FY 2007): $94,830 Revenue source breakdown Member organizations: $32,700 (34 percent) Grants: $15,000 (16 percent) Private contributions: $47,070 (49 percent) Interest: $60 (1 percent)
Summary
Statement of purpose: Resolve Uganda works to get U.S. political leaders to take the steps that will permanently end the war in northern Uganda. To advance its mission to permanently end the war in northern Uganda, Resolve Uganda utilizes three primary program areas: y Research and reporting: resolve Uganda conducts field research and consults with partners in
Uganda to develop policy reports and its advocacy agenda.
 y Grassroots mobilization: resolve Uganda organizes thousands of supporters across the country to
participate in local and national advocacy campaigns (see attached report on 2008 Lobby Days for Northern Uganda).
 y Education of policymakers: resolve Uganda conducts media outreach, holds events and meets
directly with policymakers in Washington, DC, to influence U.S. policy (see attached press release).

## Results 750 First Street Ne, Ste. 1040, Washington, Dc 20002, Usa

t: 202-783-7100 f: 202-783-2818 e: results@results.org w: www.results.org Regions Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, United Kingdom Functions/Sectors Public policy and advocacy Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $436,019 Revenue source breakdown Grants and contributions: $425,479 Special events: $6,755 Royalties: $6,819 Other income: $387
Summary Begun in 1980, the purpose of RESULTS is to create the political will to end hunger and the worst aspects of poverty, and to heal the break between people and government. Against the background of silent indifference toward our elected officials, the voices of committed citizens can make an enormous difference. Working with its international RESULTS partners in Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, Mexico and the UK, RESULTS has had a widespread impact in creating the political will to end hunger and poverty by beginning a movement for the health and well-being of children everywhere.

Salvation Army World Service Office
615 Slaters Lane, P.O. Box 1428, Alexandria, VA 22313, USA t: 703-684-5528 f: 703-684-5536 e: sawso@usn.salvationarmy.org w: www.sawso.com Regions Angola, Argentina, Bangladesh, Brazil, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ecuador, El Salvador, Georgia, Ghana, Honduras, India, Kenya, Liberia, Malawi, Mexico, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Paraguay, Philippines, Russia, Rwanda, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe Functions/Sectors Disaster response, gender equality Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $36,121,571 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $33,261,395 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $751,579 Dividends and interests from securities: $42,530 Other: $2,066
Summary Support and strengthen the Salvation Army's efforts to work hand in hand with communities to improve the health, economics, and spiritual conditions of the poor throughout the world. The Salvation Army World Service Office provides financial and technical assistance to the international Salvation Army in support of its work in a variety of programs including education, health services, relief and disaster services, and community development. It also assists The Salvation Army in developing communitybased initiatives that address the underlying causes of poverty in developing countries.

Save the Children
54 Wilton Road, Westport, CT 06880, USA t: 800-728-3843 (8:00AM - 5:00PM EDT) e: twebster@savechildren.org w: www.savethechildren.org Regions North America, Latin America and Caribbean, Middle East, Asia, Africa Functions/Sectors Education, health, protection, food distribution/nutrition Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $356,240,000 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $158,819,000 (45 percent) Government grants: $111,114,000 (31 percent) Other: $86,307,000 (24 percent)
Summary Save the Children is the leading independent organization creating real and lasting change for children in need in the United States and around the world. It is a member of the International Save the Children Alliance, comprising 28 national Save the Children organizations working in more than 110 countries to ensure the well-being of children.

SEVA Foundation
1786 Fifth Street, Berkeley, CA 94710, USA t: 877-764-7382 f: 510-845-7410 e: info@seva.org w: www.seva.org Regions North America, Latin America and Caribbean, Asia and Pacific, Africa Functions/Sectors Health, education Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $5,386,000 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $3,987,337 (74 percent) Government grants: $106,640 (2 percent) Investments: $413,160 (8 percent) Other: $878,863 (16 percent)
Summary Our programs serve people who have been economically, politically, or otherwise marginalized. We change our program approach to relate to their culture and circumstances, reaching out in very different ways, for example, to nomads in Tibet, women in Tanzania, or indigenous Mayans in Guatemala. Our aim is to build a bridge of compassion between our donors and the people we serve people around the world who have the fewest resources. Seva embraces an expanded concept of health, recognizing that spiritual and cultural renewal, economic self-sufficiency, and basic civil and human rights are as important to well-being as medical care. Seva's programs foster self-reliance and aim to reduce dependence on outside assistance. In the communities where we work, we share skills and technology appropriate for local conditions, assist local decision-making, and help launch projects that will become financially self-sufficient. This transfer of knowledge enables communities to care for their own, now and into the future. We form long-term partnerships with those we serve. By developing close relationships with local organizations and community leaders, we build trust, mutual respect and cultural understanding. We honor the ability of communities to define their own solutions to the challenges they face.

SHARE Foundation
598 Bosworth Street #1, San Francisco, CA 94131, USA t: 415-239-2595 f: 415-239-0785 e: sharesf@share-elsalvador.org w: www.share-elsalvador.org Regions Latin America and Caribbean, specifically El Salvador Functions/Sectors Health, education, gender Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $816,431 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $343,965 (42 percent) Government grants: $308,878 (38 percent) Other: $163,516 (20 percent)
Summary Focusing on El Salvador, SHARE works to: forge community-to-community links between North Americans, faith communities, Salvadorans in the United States, and economically marginalized Salvadoran communities; assist communities working for human rights, civil liberties, sustainable environments, dignified lives, and freedom from want; advocate for the inclusion of the economically marginalized in conversations and decisions involving their economic future; and improve economic, educational, and human rights of women.

Society for International Development
1875 Connecticut Avenue NW, Ste. 720, Washington, DC 20009, USA t: 202-884-8590 e: generalinquiries@sidw.org w: www.sidw.org Functions/Sectors Agriculture, education, gender & diversity, governance, health, HIV/AIDS, information and communication, peacebuilding, public policy and advocacy, rural development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $452,347 Revenue source breakdown Program service revenue, including government fees and contracts: $275,650 Membership dues and assessments: $171,832 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $4,865
Summary The Society for International Development (SID), a not-for-profit founded in Washington, DC in 1957, is a global forum of individuals and institutions concerned with sustainable economic, social, and political development. Today, SID has members in 125 countries and over 65 local chapters worldwide -with the largest chapter in Washington, DC SID operates with a holistic, multidisciplinary, and multisectoral approach to development. Taking full advantage of its location in the policy capital of the international development community, SID-Washington is the most active chapter worldwide and is often referred to as the flagship of the organization.

Solar Cookers International
1919 21st Street #101, Sacramento, CA 95811, USA t: 916-455-4499 f: 916-455-4498 e: info@solarcookers.org w: www.solarcookers.org Regions Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Zimbabwe Functions/Sectors Education, Public policy and advocacy, refugees and displacement Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $855,846 Revenue source breakdown Gifts: $675,299 Grants: $74,577 Sales$93,760 Other: $8,977 Interest: $3,233
Summary The mission of Solar Cookers International is to assist communities to use the power of the sun to cook food and pasteurize water for the benefit of people and environments.

Stop Hunger Now
2501 Clark Avenue, Ste. 301, Raleigh, NC 27607, USA t: 888-501-8440 f: 919-839-8971 e: info@stophungernow.org w: www.stophungernow.org Regions North America, Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, Africa, Middle East, Asia and Pacific Functions/Sectors Health, food distribution/nutrition Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $8,271,730 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $8,253,014 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $15,913 Dividends and interest from securities: $803 Sales of assets: $2,000
Summary Established in 1998, Stop Hunger Now is a 501 (c) 3 nongovernmental relief organization that coordinates food and medical aid projects across the globe. Our mission is to provide the maximum amount of food and life saving aid to the maximum number of the most poor and hungry throughout the world in the most rapid, efficient and effective manner. Stop Hunger Now provides direct food relief in crisis areas and in areas where chronic hunger and malnutrition exists. Our innovative model of developing international partnerships, as well as working with indigenous organizations, has created a responsive, timely method of distributing needed resources.

Support Group to Democracy Regions Cuba Summary To encourage and support the people of Cuba in their efforts to establish a democratic society by helping the dissident movement inside Cuba with humanitarian aid. The organization has provided over 150,000 pounds of food and medication to the Cuban people, mainly to political prisoners, expolitical prisoners and their families, democracy activists, and members of fraternal and religious groups, through nongovernment channels. The aid has been distributed to the general population through almost two hundred independent groups within the island. GAD has established distribution centers for the humanitarian aid in over 170 Cuban municipalities, supplying medications, clothing, medical equipment, and informational materials of a nonsectarian nature promoting human rights, technical training, family relations, and other moral and ethical values.

Transparency International - USA
1023 15th Street NW, Ste. 300, Washington, DC 20005, USA t: 202-589-1616 f: 202-589-1512 e: administration@transparency-usa.org w: www.transparency.org/regional_pages/americas Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $1,786,512 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $642,521 Bequest: $1,107,700 Investment income: $13,227 In-kind contributions: $23,064 Net assets released from donor restrictions: $19,944
Summary For those who work to improve the lives of the poor around the world, corruption perpetually threatens to undo their efforts. Development assistance donors, humanitarian assistance organizations, and philanthropists all recognize that corruption is not only a cause of poverty but also a "cancer" on their work. It is the single greatest barrier to aid effectiveness. Corruption raises the costs of education, nutrition, clean water, and health care, often denying citizens access to these essential public services. Corruption impedes investment, undermines economic growth and denies citizens the benefits of open markets and global trade. When government is for sale, it destroys public trust in democratic institutions and destabilizes societies with serious implications for peace and security worldwide.

Trickle Up Program
104 W 27th Street, 12th Fl., New York, NY 10001-6210, USA t: 212-255-9980, 866-246-9980 f: 212-255-9974 e: daynellew@trickleup.org w: www.trickleup.org Regions Bangladesh, Benin, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, China, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Malawi, Mali, Myanmar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tanzania, Thailand, Uganda Functions/Sectors Agriculture, strengthening civil society, disaster and emergency relief, education, HIV/AIDS, refugees and displacement, rural development, urban development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $4,336,277 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $2,875,660 Government grants and contracts: $490,163 Donated services and materials: $47,017 Fundraising event income: $817,714 Interest income - operating accounts: $4,258 Appropriation from board designated endowment: $70,742 Other income: $30,723
Summary The mission of the Trickle Up Program is to help the lowest income people worldwide take the first step up, out of poverty, by providing conditional seed capital and business training essential for the launch of a microenterprise. This proven social and economic empowerment model is implemented in partnership with local agencies.

U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants
1717 Massachusetts Avenue NW, 2nd Fl., Washington, DC 20036, USA t: 202-347-3507 f: 202-347-7177 w: www.refugees.org Regions Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, Middle East, Africa, Asia and the Pacific Functions/Sectors Refugees, immigrants Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $19,330,475 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $1,446,688 (7.5 percent) Government grants: $16,905,312 (87.5 percent) Investments: $97,757 (.5 percent) Other: $880,718 (4.5 percent)
Summary To address the needs and rights of persons in forced or voluntary migration worldwide by advancing fair and humane public policy, facilitating and providing direct professional services, and promoting the full participation of migrants in community life.

U.S. Committee for UNDP
PO Box 65345, Washington, DC, 20035, USA t: 202-558-7104 f: 202-558-7105 e: info@undp-usa.org w: www.undp-usa.org Regions Latin America and Caribbean, Europe, Middle East, Africa, Asia Functions/Sectors Water and sanitation, food distribution/nutrition, health, gender, microfinance, education Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $1,455,359 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $1,451,023 (99.5 percent) Investments: $4,336 (.5 percent)
Summary UNDP-USA strives to educate Americans about UNDP's crucial role in international development, provide a forum to discuss how America can best provide support and leadership to the UN Development system, and coordinate that support. We do this by: y Educating the policy community about the importance of UNDP to achieving American development objectives, the value of UNDP partnerships, specific ways America can support UNDP.

 y Building partnerships between UNDP and corporate leaders with an interest in international development.

 y Engaging individual American citizens who wish to support UNDP.

U.S. Fund for UNICEF (United Nations Children's Fund)
125 Maiden Lane, New York, NY 10038, USA t: 800-486-4233 w: www.unicefusa.org Regions Latin America and Caribbean, Africa, Asia, Europe, Middle East Functions/Sectors Water and sanitation, food distribution/nutrition, health, education Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $372,131,340 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $362,919,865 (97.5 percent) Investments: $5,884,771 (1.5 percent) Other: $3,326,704 (1 percent)
Summary The U.S. Fund for UNICEF was founded in 1947 to support the work of the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) by raising funds for its programs and increasing awareness of the challenges facing the world's children. The oldest of 37 national committees for UNICEF worldwide, we are part of a global movement to save, protect and improve children's lives. In cooperation with governments and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), UNICEF helps develop community-based programs to promote health and immunization programs, basic education, nutrition, safe water supply and sanitation services, and continues to provide emergency relief as needed.

U.S. Institute for Peace
1200 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20036, USA t: 202-457-1700 f: 202-429-6063 e: lsucher@usip.org w: www.usip.org Regions North America Functions/Sectors Peace studies and conflict resolution Summary The United States Institute of Peace is an independent, nonpartisan, national institution established and funded by Congress. Its goals are to help: prevent and resolve violent international conflicts, promote postconflict stability and development, and increase conflict management capacity, tools, and intellectual capital worldwide. USIP does this by empowering others with knowledge, skills, and resources, as well as by directly engaging in peacebuilding efforts around the globe.

Unitarian Universalist Service Committee
689 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139-3302, USA t: 617-868-6600 f: 617-868-7102 e: programs@uusc.org w: www.uusc.org Regions North America, Africa, Asia, Latin America and Caribbean Functions/Sectors Water and sanitation, environmental and economic justice, rights in humanitarian crisis Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $18,372,194 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $778,503 (4 percent) Investments: $14,406,655 (79 percent) Other: $3,187,036 (17 percent)
Summary The UUUSC advances human rights and social justice around the world, partnering with those who confront unjust power structures and mobilizing to challenge oppressive policies.

United Methodist Committee on Relief
475 Riverside Drive, Room 330, New York, NY 10115, USA t: 800-554-8583 e: umcor@gbgm-umc.org w: www.umcor.org Regions Africa, Asia, Middle Ease, Latin America and Caribbean Functions/Sectors Health, camp coordination and management, food distribution/nutrition Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $68,498,812 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $24,886,832 (36 percent) Government grants: $36,675,726 (54 percent) Investments: $5,163,271 (7 percent) Other: $1,772,983 (3 percent)
Summary UMCOR is the humanitarian relief and development agency of the United Methodist Church, a worldwide denomination. Compelled by Christ, UMCOR responds to natural or human made disastersthose interruptions of such magnitude that they overwhelm a community's ability to recover on its own. UMCOR's mission is to alleviate human suffering. We provide practical, proactive support to the most vulnerable survivors of chronic or temporary emergencies due to natural or civil causes.

United States Association for UNHCR
1775 K Street NW Ste. 290, Washington, DC 20006, USA t: 202-296-1115 f: 202-296-1081 e: info@usaforunhcr.org w: www.usaforunhcr.org Regions North America Functions/Sectors Camp coordination and management Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $6,627,944 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $2,946,616 (44 percent) Government grants: $3,660,331 (55.5 percent) Investments: $20,997 (0.5 percent)
Summary Established by concerned American citizens, USA for UNHCR, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, builds support in the United States for the humanitarian work of the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR). Our mission is to inform Americans about the plight of refugees and advocate for their protection. We want to give individual Americans, frustrated by the growing refugee crisis and their own inability to do something to help, a way to put action behind their words. UNHCR provides protection, shelter, emergency food, water, medical care and other life-saving assistance to over 19 million people worldwide, who have been forced to flee their homes due to war and persecution. When possible, UNHCR helps refugees and other displaced people return to their homes voluntarily, safely, and with dignity. When return is not possible, the agency assists with local integration, or resettlement to a third country.

United Way International
701 North Fairfax St, Alexandria, VA 22314-2045, USA t: 703 519 0092 f: 703 519 0097 e: worldwide@unitedway.org w: www.unitedway.org/worldwide Regions Worldwide Functions/Sectors Donations Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $34,800,602 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $32,914,083 Fees: $1,152,637 Investment income: $622,254 World Assembly: $25,000 Donated services: $85,548 Other income: $1,080
Summary UWI helps build the capacity of communities, outside the US, to help themselves and improve the quality of life for their people. UWI provides leadership in the voluntary sector, connecting those who have time, talent and treasure with those who need these resources. In addition, we validate the quality and legitimacy of community building efforts.

Veterans for America
1025 Vermont Avenue NW, 7th Fl., Washington, DC 20005, USA t: 202-483-9222 f: 202-483-9312 e: awillis@veteransforamerica.org w: www.veteransforamerica.org Regions North America, Central America, Asia Functions/Sectors Other Summary Veterans for America is an advocacy and humanitarian organization. The primary mission of VFA is to ensure that our country meets the needs of service members and veterans who have served in Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). VFA focuses specifically on the signature wounds these conflicts: psychological traumas and traumatic brain injuries. VFA concentrates much of its attention on the needs of those who are currently serving in the military since the majority of those who have seen combat in Iraq and Afghanistan are still in the military and under the care of the Department of Defense.

Veterans Support Foundation
(*Formerly* Vietnam Veterans Assistance Fund) 8605 Cameron Street, Ste. 400, Silver Spring, MD 20910, USA t: 800-882-1316 ext 126 e: info@vvafund.org w: www.vvafund.org Regions North America Functions/Sectors Veterans' advocacy Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $685,761 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $420,636 (61 percent) Government grants: $171,284 (25 percent) Other: $101,232 (14 percent) Notes: Posted an investment loss of: $7,391
Summary The Vietnam Veterans Assistance Fund is a 501 (c) (3) Nonprofit humanitarian and educational organization founded to improve the quality of life for deserving veterans and their families. The Fund's office is located in Silver Spring, Maryland. The main objectives of the fund are to: help fund non profit organizations in support of veteran related projects throughout the United States; assist disabled veterans and their qualifying dependents and family members; assist and provide transitional and permanent housing for homeless and at risk veterans; enrich the lives of all veterans and their families. Established in 1991, the Vietnam Veterans Assistance Fund was founded by and for veterans. The Fund is committed to serving today's needy veterans and their families by awarding grants to organizations that address essential housing, education and medical needs.

Volunteer Association for Bangladesh
122 Taxter Road, P.O. Box 234 Irvington, NY 10533, USA t: 914-591-8635 e: info@vabonline.org w: www.vabonline.org Regions Bangladesh Functions/Sectors Education Summary VAB strives for quality education and training and a better life for underprivileged youth of rural Bangladesh. To fulfill this mission, VAB undertakes the following activities in Bangladesh: promoting quality secondary education, improving educational facilities in poor areas, promoting computer literacy and training, and supporting higher education of underprivileged meritorious students.

Water Aid America
232 Madison Avenue, Ste. 1202, New York, NY 10016, USA t: 212-683-0430 f: 212-683-0293 w: www.wateraidamerica.org Regions Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Nepal, Nigeria, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Tanzania, Timor-Leste, Uganda, Zambia Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $2,726,893 Revenue source breakdown Contributions, foundations and corporations: $2,303,913 Contributions, individuals and others: $207,382 Contributed services, materials and facilities: $15,402 Special events (net of expenses): $130,722 Investment income: $69,474
Summary WaterAid's mission is to improve poor people's lives by enabling them to gain access to safe water, sanitation and hygiene education. Its vision is of a world where everyone has access to safe water and sanitation. WaterAid is the world's leading champion of safe water, effective sanitation, and hygiene promotion. We aim to help one million people gain access to water and 1.5 million gain access to sanitation every year.

Winrock International
1621 North Kent Street, Ste. 1200, Arlington, VA 22209, USA t: 703-525-9430 f: 703-525-1744 e: information@winrock.org w: www.winrock.org Regions Latin America and Caribbean, North America, Europe, Asia, Africa Functions/Sectors Gender, environmental Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $61,810,515 Revenue source breakdown Government grants: $55,049,436 (89 percent) Investments: $6,752,126 (10.9 percent) Other: $8,953 (~0.1 percent)
Summary Winrock International is a nonprofit organization that works with people in the United States and around the world to increase economic opportunity, sustain natural resources, and protect the environment.

Women for Women International
4455 Connecticut Avenue NW, Ste. 200, Washington, DC 20008, USA t: 202-737-7705 f: 202-737-7709 e: general@womenforwomen.org w: www.womenforwomen.org Regions Middle East, Europe, Africa Functions/Sectors Gender Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $19,098,654 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $10,986,618(57.5 percent) Government grants: $6,079,096 (32 percent) Other: $2,032,940 (10.5 percent)
Summary Women for Women International mobilizes women to change their lives by bringing a holistic approach to addressing the unique needs of women in conflict and post-conflict environments. We begin by working with women who may have lost everything in conflict and often have nowhere else to turn. Participation in our one-year program launches women on a journey from victim to survivor to active citizen. We identify services to support graduates of the program as they continue to strive for greater social, economic and political participation in their communities.

Women Thrive Worldwide (aka Women's Edge Coalition)
1825 Connecticut Avenue NW, Ste. 600, Washington, DC 20009, USA t: 202-884-8396 f: 202-884-8366 w: www.womenthrive.org Functions/Sectors Gender equality, international development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $1,485,412 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $1,464,702 Program service revenue, including government fees and contracts: $1,400 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $14,850 Other revenue: $4,460
Summary Women's EDGE is a coalition of individuals and nonprofit organizations from around the world working to increase U.S. assistance to women and girls in developing countries and to ensure that complex international trade agreements do not harm people living in poor developing countries. Some of Women's EDGE member organizations include CARE, the Christian Children's Fund, Save the Children and Oxfam America.

Women's Environment and Development Organization
355 Lexington Avenue, 3rd Fl., New York, NY 10017, USA t: 212-973-0325 f: 212-973-0335 e: wedo@wedo.org w: www.wedo.org Regions Africa, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, North America Functions/Sectors Economic and social justice, gender and governance, sustainable development Budget Annual revenue (FY2007): $1,852,843 Revenue source breakdown Direct public support: $927,147 Government contributions (grants): $853,502 Program service revenue, including government fees and contracts: $63,753 Interest on savings and temporary cash investments: $10,280 Dividends and interest from securities: $60 Other revenue: $5,022
Summary WEDO is an international organization that advocates for women's equality in global policy. It seeks to empower women as decision-makers to achieve economic, social and gender justice, a healthy, peaceful planet and human rights for all. Through the organization's program areasgender and governance, sustainable development, economic and social justice, and U.S. global policyWEDO emphasizes women's critical role in social, economic and political spheres.

World Cocoa Foundation
1411 K Street NW, Ste. 1300, Washington, DC 20005, USA t: 202-737-7870 f: 202-737-7832 e: wcf@worldcocoa.org w: www.worldcocoafoundation.org Regions Bolivia, Cameroon, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cote d'Ivoire, Ecuador, Ghana, Liberia, Nigeria, Peru, Philippines, Trinidad & Tobago, United States of America, Vietnam Functions/Sectors Agriculture, economic growth and development, sustainable development Summary The World Cocoa Foundation (WCF) promotes a sustainable cocoa economy through economic and social development and environmental conservation in cocoa growing communities.

World Concern
19303 Fremont Avenue North, Seattle, WA 98133, USA t: 800-755-5022 f: 206-546-7269 e: info@worldconcern.org w: www.worldconcern.org Regions Asia, Africa, Latin America, and Caribbean Functions/Sectors Gender, education, water and sanitation, food distribution/nutrition, health, disaster response Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $59,575,000 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $12,089,000 (20 percent) Government grants: $4,024,000 (7 percent) Other: $43,462,000 (73 percent)
Summary World Concern is a nonprofit Christian humanitarian organization providing disaster response and community development programs to the world's poor in Africa, Asia and the Americas. Our help is extended without regard to race, religion, ethnicity or gender. We believe that life is full of promise that no place is too difficult and no person too hopeless to reach.

Mission Our mission is to provide life, opportunity and hope to suffering people around the world. Motivated by our love of Christ, we bring hope and reconciliation to those we serve, so they may in turn share with others. Empowering women with children is one of our specialties... World Concern works closely with local communities to eliminate core causes of poverty, with an emphasis on livelihood training, literacy and education; access to clean water, food and health care; disaster assistance; and special initiatives. Our goal is to reach 7 million people by 2010.

World Conference of Religions for Peace
777 United Nations Plaza, New York, NY 10017, USA t: 212-687-2163 f: 212-983-0098 e: info@wcrp.org w: www.wcrp.org Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $4,503,770 Revenue source breakdown Grants: $2,560,056 Contributions: $1,847,869 Interest/dividends: $104,110
Summary Religions for Peace is the largest international coalition of representatives from the world's great religions dedicated to promoting peace. Respecting religious differences while celebrating our common humanity, Religions for Peace is active on every continent and in some of the most troubled areas of the world, creating multireligious partnerships to confront our most dire issues: stopping war, ending poverty, and protecting the earth.

Religious communities are the largest and best-organized civil institutions in the world, claiming the allegiance of billions across race, class, and national divides. These communities have particular cultural understandings, infrastructures, and resources to get help where it is needed most.

Founded in 1970, Religions for Peace enables these communities to unleash their enormous potential for common action. Some of Religions for Peace's recent successes include building a new climate of reconciliation in Iraq; mediating dialogue among warring factions in Sierra Leone; organizing an international network of religious women's organizations; and establishing an extraordinary program to assist the millions of children affected by Africa's AIDS pandemic, the Hope for African Children Initiative.

World Education
44 Farnsworth Street, Boston, MA 02210, USA t: 617-482-9485 f: 617-482-0617 e: wei@worlded.org w: www.worlded.org Regions Angola, Benin, Burkina, Cote d'Ivoire, Egypt , Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Togo, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Laos, Lebanon, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Thailand, Russia, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama Functions/Sectors Education, microenterprise development, health, HIV/AIDS
Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $30,877,621 Revenue source breakdown Private support revenue Unrestricted contributions: $23,290 Restricted contributions and grants: $7,394,222 Interest and dividends: $17,784 Governmental programs USAID: $10,384,280 Other U.S. government: $1,768,058 Commonwealth of Massachusetts: $836,755 Government-custodian funds USAID: $9,879,113 Other: $574,119 Total support and revenue 30,877,621
Summary World Education is a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving the lives of the poor through economic and social development programs. World Education contributes to individual growth, strengthens the capacity of local partner institutions, and catalyzes community and national development. It is known for its work in education in the workplace, microenterprise development, and integrated literacy and health programs, including HIV and AIDS education, prevention, and care.

World Emergency Relief
2270 Camino Vida Roble, Ste. K, Carlsbad, CA 92011, USA t: 760-930-8001 f: 760-930-9085 e: info@wer-us.org w: www.worldemergencyrelief.org Regions Africa, Asia, Latin American and Caribbean, Europe, North America Functions/Sectors Education, other (coordinates gifts-in-kind, disaster response)
Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $50,882,448 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $2,980,403(6 percent) Government grants: $3,550 Investments: $4,830 Other: $47,561,414 (93 percent)
Summary World Emergency Relief's (WER) vision is to give children all over the world a living chance by addressing their practical, emotional, spiritual and economic needs, as well as the needs of their families and communities World Hope International
1906 Gus Kaplan, Alexandria, LA 71301, USA t: 888-466-4673 w: www.worldhope.org Regions Europe, Asia/Pacific, Oceania, Africa, North America, Latin America and Caribbean Functions/Sectors Education, microfinance, HIV/AIDS, rural development, antitrafficking Budget Annual revenue (FY 2006): $12,152,231 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $9,600,340 (79 percent) Government grants: $836,702 (7 percent) Investments: $62,468 (0.5 percent) Other: $1,652,721 (13.5 percent)
Summary World Hope International is a faith based relief and development organization alleviating suffering and injustice through education, enterprise and community health.

World Learning Kipling Road, PO Box 676 Brattleboro, VT 05302-0676, USA t: 802-257-7751, Toll free within the US: 800-257-7751 f: 802-258-3248 e: info@worldlearning.org w: www.worldlearning.org Regions Albania, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chile, China, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, France, Gaza, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Laos, Lithuania, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mexico, Mongolia, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Poland, Romania, Russia, Senegal, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, Tanzania, Uganda, Uruguay, West Bank, Zimbabwe Functions/Sectors Strengthening civil society, education, HIV/AIDS, public policy and advocacy, refugees and displacement Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $97,127,716 Revenue source breakdown Net tuition and program fees: $40,148,146 (41.3 percent) Grants and contracts: $49,850,982 (51.3 percent) Long-term investment: $2,006,467 (2.1 percent) Private gifts and pledges: $3,376,025 (3.5 percent) Auxiliary services: $1,143,436 (1.2 percent) Other revenue: $602,660 (0.6 percent)
Summary To enable participants to develop the knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed to contribute effectively to international understanding and global development.

World Neighbors
4127 NW 122nd Street, Oklahoma City, OK 73120, USA t: 405-752-9700, Toll free 800-242-6387 f: 405-752-9393 w: www.wn.org Regions Burkina Faso, Ecuador, Guatemala, Indonesia, Kenya, Nepal Functions/Sectors Agriculture, capacity strengthening, environment, energy and natural, gender and diversity, health Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $9,920,043 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $6,223,839 Special Events 276,709 Direct overseas grants: $2,088,524 Investment income: $813,479 Net investment gains: $497,385 Other income: $70,983
Summary World Neighbors is an international development organization striving to eliminate hunger, poverty and disease in the poorest, most isolated rural villages in Asia, Africa and Latin America. World Neighbors invests in people and their communities by training and inspiring them to create their own life-changing solutions through programs in agriculture, literacy, water, health and environmental protection. Since 1951, more than 25 million people in 45 countries have transformed their lives with the support of World Neighbors. World Neighbors does not give away food or material aid. World Neighbors takes a big-picture, integrated approach focusing on the entire community rather than on one issue.

World Rehabilitation Fund
16 E. 40th Street, Ste. 704, New York, NY 10016, USA t: 212-532-6000 e: wrfnewyork@msn.com w: www.worldrehabfund.org Regions Asia (Cambodia), Middle East (Lebanon), Africa (Sierra Leone)
Functions/Sectors Rehabilitation for victims of land mines Budget Annual revenue (FY 2004): $1,330,978 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $458,936 (34 percent) Government grants: $872,042 (66 percent)
Mission and Summary The mission of the World Rehabilitation Fund, Inc. (WRF) is to improve the quality of life for people with disabilities throughout the world, especially in war torn and developing countries. We develop programs which empower people with disabilities to improve their skills and knowledge of rehabilitation utilizing practitioners in the area of medical, psychosocial, and economic reintegration. The World Rehabilitation Fund aims to give help and hope to people around the world who have disabilities or are working to improve the lives of those who do.

World Relief
7 East Baltimore Street, Baltimore, MD 21202, USA t: 443-451-1900 or 800-535-5433 e: worldrelief@wr.org w: www.wr.org Regions Africa, Asia-Pacific, Latin America and Caribbean, Eastern Europe, North America Functions/Sectors Disaster response, child development, maternal and child health, AIDS, agriculture, microfinance, refugee care, immigrant services, trafficking victim protection Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $57,867,073 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $23,058,183 (40 percent) Government grants: $24,597,581 (42 percent) Investments: $1,176,360 (2 percent) Other: $3,473,637 (6 percent)
Summary World Relief works with local evangelical churches to bring relief to suffering people in the name of Christ. Together, World Relief and partner churches are saving lives and restoring hope through ministries that address poverty, disease, hunger, persecution and the effects of war and disasters. We meet suffering people's physical, emotional and spiritual needsshowing them that the Church cares because Jesus loves them.

World Resources Institute
10 G Street NE, Ste. 800, Washington, DC 20002, USA t: 202-729-7600 f: 202-729-7610 w: www.wri.org Regions Brazil, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Gabon, Ghana, Guatemala, Guyana, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Japan, Kenya, Mali, Netherlands, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Russia, South Africa, Sweden, Tanzania, Thailand, Uganda, Venezuela, Vietnam Functions/Sectors Agriculture, capacity strengthening, strengthening civil society, environment, energy and natural, governance, information and communication, millennium development goals, participation, partnership, policy research and analysis, poverty Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $26,429,000 Revenue source breakdown Grants/Contributions: $20,355,000 Federal Grants: $3,156,000 Support from Endowment Income/Publications/Others: $2,918,000
Summary The World Resources Institute's mission is to move human society to live in ways that protect earth's environment and its capacity to provide for the needs and aspirations of current and future generations. WRI's goals are to y reverse rapid degradation of ecosystems and assure their capacity to provide humans with needed goods and services, y guarantee public access to information and decisions regarding natural resources and the environment, y protect the global climate system from further harm due to emissions of greenhouse gases and help humanity and the natural world adapt to unavoidable climate change, and y harness markets and enterprise to expand economic opportunity and protect the environment.

World Society for the Protection of Animals - USA
Lincoln Plaza 89 South Street, Ste. 201, Boston, MA 02111 USA t: 800-883-9772 f: 617-737-4404 e: wspa@wspausa.org w: www.wspa-usa.org Regions Worldwide Functions/Sectors Agriculture, economic growth and development, food aid, millennium development goals, sustainable development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2008): $7,073,076 Revenue source breakdown Contributions and Membership: $6,596,963 Bequests: $427,026 Income: $49,087
Summary WSPA (pronounced *wis-pa*) aims to promote the protection of animals, to prevent cruelty to animals, and to relieve animal suffering in every part of the world. WSPA aims to promote humane education programs to encourage respect for animals and responsible stewardship, and laws and enforcement structures to provide legal protection for animals.

World Vision P.O. Box 9716, Dept. W, Federal Way, WA 98063-9716, USA t: 888-511-6548 e: info@worldvision.org w: www.worldvision.org Regions Eastern Europe, Latin America and Caribbean, Eastern Europe, Asia, Africa, Middle East Functions/Sectors Child sponsorship, international relief and rehabilitation, international community development Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $957,000,000 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $427,000,000 (45 percent) Government grants: $220,000,000 (23 percent) Other: $310,000,000 (32 percent)
Summary World Vision is a Christian humanitarian organization dedicated to working with children, families and their communities worldwide to reach their full potential by tackling the causes of poverty and injustice.

World Wildlife Fund
1250 24th Street NW, P.O. Box 97180, Washington, DC 20090, USA t: 202-293-4800 w: www.worldwildlife.org Regions Africa, Asia-Pacific, Latin America and Caribbean, North America Functions/Sectors Environmental conservation Budget Annual revenue (FY 2007): $160,800,000 Revenue source breakdown Contributions: $94,872,000 (59 percent) Government grants: $27,336,000 (17 percent) Other: $38,592,000 (24 percent)
Summary WWF's mission is the conservation of nature. Using the best available scientific knowledge and advancing that knowledge where we can, we work to preserve the diversity and abundance of life on Earth and the health of ecological systems by protecting natural areas and wild populations of plants and animals, including endangered species; promoting sustainable approaches to the use of renewable natural resources; and promoting more efficient use of resources and energy and the maximum reduction of pollution. We are committed to reversing the degradation of our planet's natural environment and to building a future in which human needs are met in harmony with nature. We recognize the critical relevance of human numbers, poverty and consumption patterns to meeting these goals.

## Annex 2. Selected Humanitarian Resources

NGO, UN, government, and private sector personnel involved in humanitarian assistance activities use the Internet for many information needs. This annex presents a series of annotations for websites most used by NGO personnel and others before, during, and after emergencies. This list is not inclusive, but attempts to highlight many of the very popular resources. Not all websites noted within the text of the book are repeated here.

## General News And Information

- Alertnet by Reuters
www.alertnet.org Provides listings of emergency and humanitarian-oriented news from Reuters wires and other organizations. NGOs can subscribe to specific channels by requesting a username and password.

- Cable News Network
www.cnn.com Provides humanitarian personnel with up-to-date news and information on many events worldwide. Often used for monitoring political conditions

- International Committee of the Red Cross
www.icrc.org/eng Provides comprehensive information, resources, and news on ICRC activities worldwide.
- International Crisis Group (ICG)
www.crisisweb.org Publishes periodically on international conflict. Leading think tank. Extremely thorough and indepth, with all reports free to the public.

- Integrated Regional Information Network (IRIN)
www.irinnews.org Provides ground-level reporting and analysis of humanitarian, conflict and disaster conditions daily on various regions of Africa and Central Asia. Part of OCHA, all stories published online. Some published in French.

- New York Times
www.nytimes.com Provides extensive news and analysis online on many international emergencies and political conditions important to humanitarian workers.

- ReliefWeb
www.reliefweb.int Largest humanitarian portal. Features updated news and information on emergencies directly from hundreds of contributing NGOs, UN agencies and government aid agencies.

- Disaster News Network
http://www.disasternews.net Tells the story of disaster response and suggests appropriate ways the public can help survivors. Facilitates information sharing among disaster responders and connects disaster survivors with those who are able to assist them. Covers related special topics such as preparedness and mitigation, public violence, environmental hazards, and terrorist disasters.

- Global Disaster Alert and Coordination System (GDACS)
www.gdacs.org Provides near real-time alerts about natural disasters around the world and tools to facilitate response coordination, including media monitoring, map catalogues, and Virtual On-Site Operations Coordination Centre.

- Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters
www.cred.be Dedicated to providing data on over 12,000 disasters. Normal users include national governments, NGOs, UN agencies and academic institutions. U.S. NGOs with OFDA funding are required to submit mortality and nutrition data to this group.

- Global Early Warning System (GLEWS)
www.who.int/zoonoses/outbreaks/glews/en Major animal diseases, including zoonoses. Builds on added value of combining and coordinating alert mechanisms of FAO, OIE and WHO for the international community and stakeholders to assist in prediction, prevention and control of animal disease threats, including zoonoses. Shares information, epidemiological analysis and contributes to joint field missions to assess and control the outbreak.

- Global Outbreak Alert & Response Network (GOARN)
www.who.int/csr/outbreaknetwork/en Aims to combat the international spread of outbreaks among humans, ensure that appropriate technical assistance reaches affected states rapidly, and contributes to long-term epidemic preparedness and capacity building.

- Health Library for Disasters (PAHO/WHO)
www.helid.desastres.net Comprehensive electronic information resource on public health for emergency preparedness and response and complex emergencies.

- Humanitarian Information Centres and Partners (HIC)
www.humanitarianinfo.org Forum where the humanitarian community can share and access information resources in order to improve the planning and delivery of humanitarian assistance. Serves as a focal point for data collection, analysis and dissemination in support of the provision of humanitarian assistance, developing and supporting data standards. Facilitator for initiatives and activities related to information management in the field, particularly in collaboration between other humanitarian actors in support of existing coordination structures. Advocate for a culture of informationsharing in the humanitarian community, generating awareness of good practice and making it possible for agencies to develop common standards and practices in the field.

- Humanitarian Practice Network
www.odihpn.org Independent forum for humanitarians to share and disseminate information, analysis and experience, They publish specialist resources for practitioners and policy makers and facilitate debate through regular events and their Online Exchange discussion forum.

- INCORE
www.incore.ulst.ac.uk/cds/countries Source for INCORE's information on activities, publications and events.
- International Emergency and Refugee Health Branch (IERHB/CDC)
www.cdc.gov/nceh/ierh Brings public health and epidemiologic principles to the aid of populations affected by complex humanitarian emergencies.

- Minorities at Risk Project
www.cidcm.umd.edu/mar University-based research project that monitors and analyzes the status and conflicts of politically active communal groups in all countries with a population of at least 500,000. Designed to provide information in a standardized format that aids comparative research and contributes to the understanding of conflicts involving relevant groups.

- Natural Hazards Center
www.colorado.edu/hazards A national and international clearinghouse of knowledge concerning the social science and policy aspects of disasters. Collects and shares research and experience related to preparedness for, response to, recovery from, and mitigation of disasters, emphasizing the link between hazards mitigation and sustainability to both producers and users of research and knowledge on extreme events.

- Pan American Health Organization
www.paho.org/english/dd/ped/home.htm Disasters and Humanitarian Assistance. Provides information and technical assistance regarding disaster response and humanitarian assistance for 35 member governments in Western Hemisphere. WHO Regional office.

- Carter Center
www.cartercenter.org Provides information and news on conflict and mediation efforts. Good analysis and advocacy on specific conflicts. Often used for gauging future peace accords or humanitarian access capabilities.

- Forum on Early Warning and Response (FEWER)
www.fewer-international.org Provides information on humanitarian conditions and conflict early warning and conflict prevention. Global coalition of nongovernmental and governmental agencies and academic institutions working to promote coordinated responses to violent conflict.

- Global Information and Early Warning System on Food and Agriculture (GIEWS)
www.fao.org/WAICENT/faoinfo/economic/giews/english/giewse.htm Major source of information for NGO personnel managing early warning activities and potential trouble-spot monitoring. Supported by the UN Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO).

- The Sphere Project
www.sphereproject.org A handbook, broad process of collaboration, and expression of commitment to quality and accountability.  Develops humanitarian charter and minimum standards in disaster response.

- WHO Health Action in Crises
www.who.int/hac/en Provides early warning, disaster, and emergency information. Sponsored and hosted by World Health Organization (WHO).

- UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR)
www.unhcr.org Unmatched web resources. Provides news and updates on refugee and IDP conditions globally, and information about funding priorities, advancements, resources, and manuals.

- World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine (WADEM)
http://wadem.medicine.wisc.edu Specialized discussion list and website.

## Ngo Associations223

- Business Humanitarian Forum
www.bhforum.org Forum for businesses and humanitarian organizations to communicate, liaise and coordinate activities.

- Center for International Disaster Information (CIDI)
www.cidi.org Devoted to explaining appropriate giving, and to coordinating gift campaigns. Not specifically useful for NGO personnel seeking emergency-related information.

- InterAction
www.interaction.org Consortium of U.S.-based humanitarian organizations. Site used for membership information and appeals information.

- International Aid and Trade
www.aidandtrade.org Puts on trade shows. Provides information on shows, exhibits, attendees, and show supporters.
- International Council of Voluntary Associations (ICVA)
www.icva.ch Worldwide network of NGOs and nonprofits.
- Institute of Global Communications
www.igc.apc.org Telecommunications association, offering web hosting services to nonprofit groups, individuals, and small companies.

- VOICE
www.ngovoice.org
Consortium of European-based NGOs, similar to InterAction.

## Ngo Employment Sites

- Reliefweb Humanitarian Vacancies
www.reliefweb.int/rw/res.nsf/doc212?OpenForm
- InterAction Employment Pages
www.interaction.org/careers-international-development
- OneWorld Global Jobs
http://us.oneworld.net/jobs
- Idealist.org Career Center
www.idealist.org/en/career/index.html
- International Jobs Center
www.internationaljobs.org
- International Civil Service Commission (UN)
http://icsc.un.org/joblinks.asp
- General: Monster.com
www.monster.com
- General: Yahoo.com
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com

## Logistics Resources - Usaid/Deliver Project

http://deliver.jsi.com/dhome/topics/supplychain/logistics
- UNJLC Humanitarian Logistics Association
www.humanitarianlogistics.org/news/adieu2019-and-welcome-unjlc
- Humanitarian Logisitics
www.palgrave.com/products/title.aspx?PID=295273
- Fritz Institute Key Parameters in Humanitarian Logistics
www.fritzinstitute.org/PDFs/findings/XS_Davidson_Anne.pdf
- Supply Chain and Logistics Institute
www.scl.gatech.edu/research/humanitarian/projects.php

## Assistance And Disaster Relief Training Organizations

- ALNAP
www.alnap.org
- CHART
http://coe-dmha.org/course_chart.htm
- H.E.L.P.
www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/helpcourse
- IDHA
www.cihc.org/idha
- INTRAC
www.bricksandmortar.wordpress.com/2009/02/05/intrac-ngo-training-courses/
- InterWorks
www.interworksmadison.com
- Karl Kubel Institute for Development Education
www.kkid.org/ngo_training_programmes.asp
- RedR
www.redr.org

## Aid And Disaster Journals

- Bulletin of the World Health Organization
www.who.int/bulletin
- The Journal of Disaster Studies, Policy and Management
www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=0361-3666&site=1
- Forced Migration Review
www.fmreview.org
- Humanitarian Review
www.ngovoice.org
- Internet Journal of Rescue and Disaster Medicine
www.ispub.com/journal/the_internet_journal_of_rescue_and_disaster_medicine.html
- Journal of Humanitarian Assistance
www.jha.ac
- Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
www.cdc.gov/mmwr
- Prehospital and Disaster Medicine
http://pdm.medicine.wisc.edu/home.html
- The British Medical Journal
www.bmj.com
- The Humanitarian Practice Network
www.odihpn.org
- The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. World Disaster Report: Focus
on Recovery (2001)
www.ifrc.org/publicat/wdr2001
- The Lancet
www.thelancet.com
- The U.S. Committee for Refugees Annual World Refugee Survey
www.refugees.org
- Journal of Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness
www.dmphp.org

## Survey Instruments And Assessment Tools

- OXFAM Assessment Tools
www.oxfam.org.uk/resources/learning/humanitarian/fast/assessment_tools.html

- IASC Health Cluster Rapid Assessment Tools
www.humanitarianreform.org/humanitarianreform/Default.aspx?tabid=153

- FAO and Emergencies
www.fao.org/emergencies/home0/emergency_relief_and_rehabilitation/post_disaster_needs_ assessment_tools/en

- UN Disaster Assessment Portal
www.disasterassessment.org
- Methodology for Rapid Humanitarian Assessment
www.redhum.org/archivos/pdf/ID_2268_Redhum-LAC-Metodologia-Rapid_Assessment_ Methodology_ENG-ROLAC-20071204.pdf

- Health Action in Crises
www.who.int/hac/techguidance/tools/bibliography/en

## Un Agencies

- Department for Economic and Social Affairs
www.un.org/esa/desa
- Food And Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
www.fao.org
- International Strategy for Disaster Reduction
www.unisdr.org
- Official WEB Site Locator for the United Nations
www.unsystem.org
- UN Standing Committee on Nutrition
www.unscn.org
- UN Development Programme (UNDP)
www.undp.org
- UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
www.unhcr.ch
- UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS)
www.mineaction.org
- UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)
http://ochaonline.un.org
- UN Population Fund (UNFPA)
www.unfpa.org
- United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF)
www.unicef.org
- United Nations Home Page
www.un.org
- WHO Regional Office for Europe
www.who.dk
- WHO Health Action in Crises
www.who.int/hac/en
- World Food Program (WFP)
www.wfp.org
- United Nations Joint Logistics Center (UNJLC)
www.unjlc.org
- World Health Organization (WHO)
www.who.int/en

## Usaid And U.S. State Department Information

- USAID
www.usaid.gov
- Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA)
www.usaid.gov/our_work/humanitarian_assistance/disaster_assistance/
- USAID Field Operations Guide (FOG)
www.usaid.gov/our_work/humanitarian_assistance/disaster_assistance/resources/pdf/fog_ v4.pdf
- USAID Sub-Saharan Africa Bureau
www.usaid.gov/locations/sub-saharan_africa
- Contact Information for the Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance
http://gemini.info.usaid.gov/directory/pbResults.cfm?&urlOrganization=DCHA
- U.S. State Department
www.state.gov
- U.S. State Department List of Bureaus and Offices
www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/dos/1718.htm
- U.S. State Department Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration
www.state.gov/g/prm

## Civil-Military Resources

- Global Health NGO Database and Tools
www.global-health.org
- Center for Disaster and Humanitarian Assistance Medicine (CDHAM)
www.cdham.org
- Interagency Standing Committee. *Civil Military Relationship in Complex Emergencies* (June 2004)
www.humanitarianinfo.org/IMToolbox/10_Reference/Civil_Military_Relations/2004_Civil_ Military_Relationship_In_Complex_Emergencies.pdf
- Interaction. "Guidelines for Relationships Between U.S. Armed Forces and Non-Governmental
Humanitarian Organizations in Hostile or Potentially Hostile Environments"
www.interaction.org/sites/default/files/1/FACT%20SHEETS/InterAction%20US%20Mil%20 CivMil%20Guidelines%20July%2007%20flat.pdf
- United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Assistance: "Policy, Guidelines and
Related Documents"
http://ochaonline.un.org/AboutOCHA/Organigramme/EmergencyServicesBranchESB/ CivilMilitaryCoordinationSection/PolicyGuidelinesRelatedDocuments/tabid/4938/language/ en-US/Default.aspx
- Guidelines on the Use of Military and Civil Defence Assets to Support United Nations Humanitarian
Activities in Complex Emergencies (March 2003)
www.icva.ch/mcdaversion801.pdf
- *Use of Military or Armed Escorts for Humanitarian Convoys* (September 14, 2001)
www.who.int/hac/network/interagency/GuidelinesonArmedEscorts_Sept2001.pdf
- "General guidance for interaction between United Nations personnel and military and civilian
representatives of the occupying power in Iraq" (May 8, 2003)
www.coe-dmha.org/Media/Guidance/6GeneralGuidance.pdf
- "Relationships with military forces in AfghanistanGuidelines for UNAMA area coordinators and
other UN personnel" (2002)
http://ochaonline.un.org/OchaLinkClick.aspx?link=ocha&docid=1001039
- "Guidance on Use of Military Aircraft for UN Humanitarian Operations during the Current Conflict
in Afghanistan IMTF" (November 7, 2001)
http://ochaonline.un.org/OchaLinkClick.aspx?link=ocha&DocId=1001219

## Ngo Health-Related Resources

- Emergency Library Kit (ELK)
www.who.int/hac/techguidance/tools/bibliography/en/

- National Center for Disaster Medicine & Public Health
http://ncdmph.usuhs.edu
- *The Nation's Health*: "Public health leaders using social media to convey emergencies: New tools a
boon" (August 2009)
www.medscape.com/viewarticle/710011
- World Health Organization. *Guidelines for Drug Donations* (1999)
www.who.int/hac/techguidance/guidelines_for_drug_donations.pdf

## Ngo Security

- Security manuals
http://ngosecurity.googlepages.com/safety%26securitymanuals
- Papers, reports and studies
www.patronusanalytical.com/page12/page12.html
- InterAction
www.interaction.org
- European Commission Humanitarian Aid Development Office
http://ec.europa.eu/echo/
- International Security Assistance Force
www.nato.int/isaf
- NGO Security Blogspot
http://ngosecurity.blogspot.com/2006/01/primary-readings.html
- Koenraad Van Brabant, *Operational Security Management in Violent Environments*, Good Practice
Review #8 (London: Overseas Development Institute, 2000)
http://ngosecurity.googlepages.com/GPR8.pdf

## Other

- Global Health NGO Database and Tools
www.global-health.org
- Center for Disaster and Humanitarian Assistance Medicine (CDHAM)
www.cdham.org
- Military Health System
www.health.mil, www.health.mil/mshblog
- Federal Emergency Management Agency
www.fema.gov
- U.S. Army
www.army.mil
- U.S. Navy
www.navy.mil
- U.S. Air Force
www.af.mil
- U.S. Marines
www.usmc.mil
- U.S. Department of Defense
www.dod.mil
- U.S. Department of State
www.state.gov
- U.S. Department of Agriculture
www.usda.gov
- U.S. Agency for International Development
www.usaid.gov

## Annex 3. Selected Humanitarian Publications

The following publications are extracted from the literature to provide a wide array of references to aid in understanding the NGO sector and humanitarian assistance community. This list is abbreviated and by no means comprehensive. It focuses on providing those publications still available today and does not include conference report publications. Aall, Pamela, Lt. Col. Daniel Miltenberger, and Thomas G. Weiss. Guide to IGOs, NGOs, and the Military in Peace and Relief Operations (Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press, 2000). Anderson, Mary B., and Peter Woodrow. Rising from the Ashes: Development Strategies in Times of Disaster (Boulder, CO: Lynne Reinner, 1998). Bennet, Jon. *Meeting Needs: NGO Coordination in Practice* (London: Earthscan and ICVA, 1995). Black, Maggie. *A Cause for Our Times: Oxfam the First 50 Years* (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992) Boli, John, and George M. Thomas. Constructing World Culture: International Nongovernmental Organizations since 1875 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1995).

Byman, Daniel, Ian Lesser, Bruce Pirnie, Cheryl Benard, and Matthew Waxman. Strengthening the Partnership: Improving Military Coordination with Relief Agencies and Allies in Humanitarian Operations (Santa Monica, CA: Rand, 2000) Cuny, Frederick C. *Disasters and Development* (Dallas, TX: Intertect Press, 1994)
Dollar, David, and Lant Pritchett. *Assessing Aid: What Works, What Doesn't and Why* (Washington, DC: World Bank Policy Research Report, 1998) Edwards, Michael, and David Hulme. Nongovernmental Organizations- Performance and Accountability: Beyond the Magic Bullet (London: Save the Children and Earthscan, 1998).

Hampton, Janie, ed. *Internally Displaced People: A Global Survey* (London: Earthscan, 1998). Hancock, Graham. *Lords of Poverty: The Power, Prestige and Corruption of the International Aid Business*
(New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 1989). Hoy, Paula. *Players and Issues in International Aid* (Herndon, VA: Kumarian Press, 1998). InterAction. *InterAction Membership Directory, 20002001* (Washington, DC: InterAction, 2000). InterAction. *Global Work: Guide to Volunteer, Internship and Fellowship Opportunities* (Washington, DC: InterAction Press, 2000). Levenstein, Aaron. *Escape to Freedom: The Story of the International Rescue Committee* (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1983). Meyer, Carrie. *The Economics and Politics of NGOs in Latin America* (Westport, CT: Praeger Press, 1999).

Macrae, Joanna, and Anthony Zwi, eds. War and Hunger: Rethinking International Responses to Complex Emergencies (London: Zed Books, 1994). Malena, Carmen. Working with NGOs: A Practical Guide to Operational Collaboration Between the World Bank and Nongovernmental Organizations (Washington, DC: World Bank Operations Policy Department, 1995). Minear, Larry, and Thomas Weiss. *Mercy Under Fire: War and the Global Humanitarian Community* (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1995). Natsios, Andrew. *U.S. Foreign Policy and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse* (Westport, Conn: Praeger, 1997). Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance. Foreign Operations Guide for Disaster Assessment and Response, version 3.0 *(FOG)* (Washington, DC: USAID/BHR, 1999). . *OFDA Annual Reports* (Washington, DC: USAID Bureau for Humanitarian Response) Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Development Assistance Committee. Civilian and Military Means of Providing and Supporting Humanitarian Assistance during Conflict: Comparative Advantages and Costs (Paris: OECD, 1998). Pirnie, Bruce. *Civilians and Soldiers: Achieving Better Coordination* (Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 1998).

Salomon, Lester. "The Rise of the Non-Profit Sector." *Foreign Affairs* 73, no. 4 (July-August, 1994).

Scott, Colin, Larry Minear, and Thomas Weiss. *The News Media, Civil War, and Humanitarian Action*
(Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1996). Seiple, Chris. *The U.S. Military/NGO Relationship in Humanitarian Interventions* (Carlisle, PA: U.S. Army War College, 1996). Shawcross, William. *Deliver Us from Evil: Peacekeepers, Warlord and a World of Endless Conflict* (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2000). Sogge, David, ed. *Compassion and Calculation: The Business of Private Foreign Aid* (London: Pluto Press, 1996). Sphere Project. *The Sphere Project: Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Disaster Response*
(Geneva and Oxford: Oxfam Publishing, 2000). Suzuki, Naoki. *Inside NGOs* (London: Intermediate Technology Publications, 1998). Tarp, Finn, ed. *Foreign Aid and Development: Lessons Learned and Directions for the Future* (London: Routledge, 2000). Tvedt, Terje. *Angels of Mercy or Development Diplomats* (Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press, 1998).

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. *Handbook for Emergencies*, 2nd ed. (Geneva: UNHCR, 1999). Vaux, Tony. *The Selfish Altruist: Relief Work in Famine and War* (Sterling, VA: EarthScan, 2001).

Weiss, Thomas, and Cindy Collins. Humanitarian Challenges and Intervention: World Politics and the Dilemmas of Help, 2nd ed. (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2000). Willetts, Peter. The Conscience of the World: The Influence of Nongovernmental Organizations in the UN System (Washington, DC: Brookings Institute, 1996). Wood, Adrian, Raymond Apthorpe, and John Borton. Evaluating International Humanitarian Action:
Reflections from Practitioners (London: Zed Books, 2001).

## Annex 4. Code Of Conduct

Principles of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGHAs/NGOs in Disaster Response Programs (1994)224 1. The humanitarian imperative comes first. The right to receive humanitarian assistance, and to offer it, is a fundamental humanitarian principle which should be enjoyed by all citizens of all countries. As members of the international community, we recognize our obligation to provide humanitarian assistance wherever it is needed. Hence the need for unimpeded access to affected populations is of fundamental importance in exercising that responsibility. The prime motivation of our response to disaster is to alleviate human suffering amongst those least able to withstand the stress caused by disaster. When we give humanitarian aid it is not a partisan or political act and should not be viewed as such. 2. Aid is given regardless of the race, creed or nationality of the recipients and without adverse distinction of any kind. Aid priorities are calculated on the basis of need alone. Wherever possible, we will base the provision of relief aid upon a thorough assessment of the needs of the disaster victims and the local capacities already in place to meet those needs. Within the entirety of our programs, we will reflect considerations of proportionality. Human suffering must be alleviated whenever it is found; life is as precious in one part of a country as another. Thus, our provision of aid will reflect the degree of suffering it seeks to alleviate. In implementing this approach, we recognize the crucial role played by women in disaster prone communities and will ensure that this role is supported, not diminished, by our aid programs. The implementation of such a universal, impartial and independent policy can only be effective if we and our partners have access to the necessary resources to provide for such equitable relief, and have equal access to all disaster victims. 3. Aid will not be used to further a particular political or religious standpoint. Humanitarian aid will be given according to the need of individuals, families and communities. Notwithstanding the right of [nongovernmental humanitarian agencies] NGHAs to espouse particular political or religious opinions, we affirm that assistance will not be dependent on the adherence of t he recipients to those opinions. We will not tie the promise, delivery or distribution of assistance to the embracing or acceptance of a particular political or religious creed. 4. We shall endeavor not to act as instruments of government foreign policy. NGHAs are agencies which act independently from governments. We therefore formulate our own policies and implementation strategies and do not seek to implement the policy of any government, except in so far as it coincides with our own independent policy. We will never knowingly - or through negligence - allow ourselves, or our employees, to be used to gather information of a political, military or economically sensitive nature for governments or other bodies that may serve purposes other than those which are strictly humanitarian, nor will we act as instruments of foreign policy of donor governments. We will use the assistance we receive to respond to needs and this assistance should not be driven by the need to dispose of donor commodity surpluses, nor by the political interest of any particular donor. We value and promote the voluntary giving of labour and finances by concerned individuals to support our work and recognise the independence of action promoted by such voluntary motivation. In order to protect our independence we will seek to avoid dependence upon a single funding source. 5. We shall respect culture and custom. We will endeavor to respect the culture, structures and customs of the communities and countries we are working in. 6. We shall attempt to build disaster response on local capacities. All people and communities
even in disasterpossess capacities as well as vulnerabilities. Where possible, we will strengthen these capacities by employing local staff, purchasing local materials and trading with local companies. Where possible, we will work through local NGHAs as partners in planning and implementation, and co-operate with local government structures where appropriate. We will place a high priority on the proper co-ordination of our emergency responses. This is best done within the countries concerned by those most directly involved in the relief operations, and should include representatives of the relevant UN bodies. 7. Ways shall be found to involve program beneficiaries in the management of relief aid. Disaster response assistance should never be imposed upon the beneficiaries. Effective relief and lasting rehabilitation can best be achieved where the intended beneficiaries are involved in the design, management and implementation of the assistance program. We will strive to achieve full community participation in our relief and rehabilitation programs. 8. Relief aid must strive to reduce future vulnerabilities to disaster as well as meeting basic needs. All relief actions affect the prospects for long term development, either in a positive or a negative fashion. Recognizing this, we will strive to implement relief programs which actively reduce the beneficiaries' vulnerability to future disasters and help create sustainable lifestyles. We will pay particular attention to environmental concerns in the design and management of relief programs. We will also endeavor to minimize the negative impact of humanitarian assistance, seeking to avoid long term beneficiary dependence upon external aid. 9. We hold ourselves accountable to both those we seek to assist and those from whom we accept resources. We often act as an institutional link in the partnership between those who wish to assist and those who need assistance during disasters. We therefore hold ourselves accountable to both constituencies. All our dealings with donors and beneficiaries shall reflect an attitude of openness and transparency. We recognize the need to report on our activities, both from a financial perspective and the perspective of effectiveness. We recognize the obligation to ensure appropriate monitoring of aid distributions and to carry out regular assessments of the impact of disaster assistance. We will also seek to report, in an open fashion, upon the impact of our work, and the factors limiting or enhancing that impact. Our programs will be based upon high standards of professionalism and expertise in order to minimize the wasting of valuable resources. 10. In our information, publicity and advertising activities, we shall recognize disaster victims as dignified humans, not hopeless objects. Respect for the disaster victim as an equal partner in action should never be lost. In our public information we shall portray an objective image of the disaster situation where the capacities and aspirations of disaster victims are highlighted, and not just their vulnerabilities and fears. While we will co-operate with the media in order to enhance public response, we will not allow external or internal demands for publicity to take precedence over the principle of maximizing overall relief assistance. We will avoid competing with other disaster response agencies for media coverage in situations where such coverage may be to the detriment of the service provided to the beneficiaries or to the security of our staff or the beneficiaries.

## Annex 5. How The U.S. Government Provides Humanitarian Aid

Taken directly from the USAID website, this annex describes in detail how USAID and OFDA formulate and implement humanitarian assistance activities.225

## Office Of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance

The Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA) is the office within USAID responsible for providing non-food humanitarian assistance in response to international crises and disasters. The USAID Administrator is designated as the President's Special Coordinator for International Disaster Assistance and USAID/OFDA assists in the coordination of this assistance. USAID/OFDA is part of the Bureau for Humanitarian Response (USAID/BHR), along with the Office of Food For Peace (USAID/ FFP), the Office of Transition Initiatives (USAID/OTI), the Office of Private and Voluntary Cooperation (USAID/PVC), and the Office of American Schools and Hospitals Abroad (USAID/ASHA). USAID/ OFDA recently reorganized into three divisions, under the management of the Office of the Director. The Disaster Response and Mitigation (DRM) division is responsible for coordinating with other organizations for the provision of relief supplies and humanitarian assistance. DRM also devises, coordinates, and implements program strategies for the application of science and technology to prevention, mitigation, and national and international preparedness initiatives for a variety of natural and man-made disaster situations. The Operations Division (OPS) develops and manages logistical, operational, and technical support for disaster responses. OPS maintains readiness to respond to emergencies through several mechanisms, including managing several Search and Rescue (SAR) Teams, the Ground Operations Team (GO Team), field Disaster Assistance Response Teams (DART), and Washington Response Management Teams (RMT). The Program Support (PS) division provides programmatic and administrative support, including budget/financial services, procurement planning, contract/grant administration, general administrative support, and communication support for both USAID/OFDA Washington, DC and its field offices.... ...USAID/OFDA/DRM provides humanitarian assistance in response to a declaration of a foreign disaster made by the U.S. Ambassador or the U.S. Department of State. Once an event or situation is determined to require U.S. Government (USG) assistance, USAID/OFDA can immediately provide up to $25,000 to the U.S. Embassy or USAID Mission to purchase relief supplies locally or give a contribution to a relief organization in the affected country. USAID/OFDA also can send its own relief commodities, such as plastic sheeting, blankets, tents, and water purification units, from one of its five stockpiles located in Italy, Guam, Honduras, and the United States. Increasingly, USAID/OFDA deploys short or long-term field personnel to countries where disasters are occurring or threaten to occur, and in some cases, dispatches a DART. The largest percentage of USAID/OFDA's assistance goes to relief and rehabilitation project grants managed by Private Voluntary Organizations (PVOs), Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), and International Organizations (IOs). Relief projects include airlifting relief supplies to affected populations in remote locations, managing primary health care and supplementary feeding centers, and providing shelter materials to disaster evacuees and displaced persons. A rehabilitation project might immunize dislocated populations against disease, provide seeds and tools to farmers who have been affected by disasters, or drill wells or rehabilitate water systems in drought-stricken countries. USAID/OFDA carefully monitors the organizations implementing these projects to ensure that resources are used wisely and to determine if the project needs to be adapted to changing conditions. The goal of each project is to meet the humanitarian needs of the affected population, with the aim of returning the population to self-sufficiency. The "notwithstanding" clause of Section 491 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 states that no statutory or regulatory requirements shall restrict USAID/OFDA's ability to respond to the needs of disaster victims in a timely fashion. USAID/OFDA follows the standard USAID procedures for routine procurements, but utilizes expedited or modified procedures when necessary to achieve its disaster response objectives. The first principle in disaster response accountability is to ensure that appropriate assistance gets to the neediest victims in time to minimize death and suffering. Procurement and accounting procedures may be expedited, but must include effective systems of internal control. Not all of USAID/OFDA's assistance goes to providing aid in response to disasters. USAID/OFDA's mitigation staff oversees a portfolio of projects designed to reduce the impact of disasters on victims and economic assets in disaster-prone countries. Over the last several years, USAID/OFDA has invested in a number of programs in partnership with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), the Asian Disaster Preparedness Center, the World Environment Center, and other offices within USAID. These programs not only enhance a country's capacity to manage its own disasters and hazards, but also promote the transfer of technology, goods, and services between the U.S. and the host country. USAID/OFDA mitigation-related programs range from investing in drought early-warning systems that can possibly head off a famine to training local relief workers to manage the response to a disaster more effectively. USAID/OFDA is increasingly investing in programs designed to prevent, mitigate, prepare, and plan for complex emergencies, which are more the result of human actions than acts of nature.

## Other U.S. Government Offices Providing Foreign Humanitarian Assistance

USAID/OFDA is not the only office within the USG that provides humanitarian aid to foreign countries. USAID/FFP is responsible for administering the USG's foreign food aid programs, under U.S. Public Law (P.L.) 480 Titles II and III. Title II emergency food aid programs are targeted to vulnerable populations suffering from food insecurity as a result of natural disasters, civil conflict, or other crises. Title II emergency food aid is provided without repayment requirements, whereas Title III food aid is provided as a bilateral loan program to countries in need of assistance. USAID/OTI is the office within USAID responsible for providing assistance to countries that are in a stage of transition from crisis to recovery. Its assistance is designed to facilitate the transition to peace and democracy by aiding in the demobilization of combatants or developing democratic governance structures within the country. Other parts of USAID, such as the regional bureaus, provide foreign development aid, which often complements humanitarian relief programs or can be regarded as disaster recovery assistance. Countries that have achieved sustainable development are less likely to require massive USG humanitarian assistance. Three of the biggest providers of USG humanitarian assistance are the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Department of State's Bureau for Population, Refugees and Migration (State/PRM) and the U.S. Department of Defense's Office for Peacekeeping and Humanitarian Affairs (DOD/PK/ HA). USDA works closely with USAID/FFP in allocating surplus food commodities to developing countries, under the Section 416(b) program of the Agricultural Act of 1949. This food aid is often used for emergency feeding programs in countries experiencing food shortages due to drought or civil strife. In other countries, local currency proceeds from the sale of Section 416(b) food aid is used in support of disaster assistance projects. State/PRM provides multilateral grants to international relief organizations in response to refugee emergency appeals and contributes to the regular program budgets of organizations such as the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). DOD/ PK/HA coordinates the utilization of DOD assets for humanitarian assistance overseas. In addition, DOD works closely with USAID/OFDA and the U.S. Department of State to coordinate the Denton Program, a program that transports humanitarian goods on a space available basis, using U.S. military transportation. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also provide technical assistance in response to disasters and potential hazards overseas.

| Country            | Disaster          | Program Length   | Total Funding   |
|--------------------|-------------------|------------------|-----------------|
| Former Yugoslavia* | complex emergency | 9 years          | $328.00         |
| Sudan              | complex emergency | 14 years         | $280.70         |
| Angola             | complex emergency | 12 years         | $137.60         |
| Somalia            | complex emergency | 12 years         | $133.80         |
| Rwanda             | complex emergency | 9 years          | $108.40         |

* Accumulated funding for programs in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Kosovo, and Serbia-
Montenegro.

## Annex 6. Red Cross And Red Crescent Systems Explained

Steven Hansch T
he Red Cross movement accounts for a large portion of the system of civilian aid agencies, but has a special status, in part because of its relationship with governments. It derives its international legal mandate from governments from the Geneva Conventions. In addition, the individual Red Cross and Red Crescent societies operating at a country level are established under national law. The term movement refers to both the 186 national societies and to the two entities, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the International Federation of the Red Cross and the Red Crescent (IFRC), that span the globe. Most national societies mobilize thousands or tens of thousands of volunteers each year, a characteristic that sets the Red Cross movement apart from the UN and other humanitarian assistance organizations. The many parts of the movement comes together roughly every four years in the International Red Cross Conference. The ICRC and IFRC both work closely with national societies in emergencies. As shown in table A6.1 below, national societies (one per country) are divided between those in wealthier, donor countries, and those that are in emergency-prone poorer countries.

| ICRC                    | IFRC                | Donor Societies     | Recipient Societies   |
|-------------------------|---------------------|---------------------|-----------------------|
| one per country         | Organization type   | unique legal status | association of        |
| national societies      |                     |                     |                       |
| example: American       |                     |                     |                       |
| Red Cross,              |                     |                     |                       |
| established by U.S.     |                     |                     |                       |
| Congress                |                     |                     |                       |
| works around            |                     |                     |                       |
| disasters, refugees,    |                     |                     |                       |
| and epidemics           |                     |                     |                       |
| support the ICRC and    |                     |                     |                       |
| IFRC and give directly  |                     |                     |                       |
| to countries in need.   |                     |                     |                       |
| in principle the lead   |                     |                     |                       |
| agency for disaster     |                     |                     |                       |
| readiness, mitigation,  |                     |                     |                       |
| and response in most    |                     |                     |                       |
| developing countries    |                     |                     |                       |
| Main focus              | protects and offers |                     |                       |
| assistance to           |                     |                     |                       |
| civilians in conflict   |                     |                     |                       |
| zones, promotes         |                     |                     |                       |
| international           |                     |                     |                       |
| humanitarian law and    |                     |                     |                       |
| Geneva Conventions      |                     |                     |                       |
| Headquarters            | Geneva              | Geneva              | capitol cities        |
| 2009 budget             | $1.13 billion       | $200 million        |                       |
| example: American       |                     |                     |                       |
| Red Cross: $3.7 billion |                     |                     |                       |
| example: Indian Red     |                     |                     |                       |
| Cross $55 million       |                     |                     |                       |

The core humanitarian principles of impartiality, and independence that are today pervasive across a wide range of aid agencies were originally crafted as the fundamental principles of the Red Cross movement. They are seen as critical to the identity and effectiveness of agencies in this movement.

## Icrc: International Committee Of The Red Cross

The ICRC, which is based in Geneva, is established by international convention and promotes adherence to the Geneva Conventions in war zones. It is also the lead agency in developing advances to international humanitarian law and principles. To assist people affected by armed conflict, the ICRC speaks with all parties to a conflict. It supports the efforts of arms carriers to respect international humanitarian law or other fundamental rules protecting persons in situations of violence. The ICRC also visits prisoners of war and security detainees and registers them to prevent disappearances. In addition, the ICRC works with authorities to ensure that people deprived of their liberty are treated humanely and according to recognized international standards, which forbid torture and other forms of abuse. The ICRC has one of the largest budgets (over $1 billion a year) of any agency devoted entirely to helping in humanitarian crises. In short, its mandate includes the following elements:

-
Try to ensure civilians not taking part in hostilities are spared and protected.
-
Visit prisoners of war and security detainees.
-
Transmit messages to and reunite family members separated by armed conflict.
-
Help find missing persons.
-
Offer or facilitate access to basic health care services.
-
Provide urgently needed food, safe drinking water, sanitation and shelter.
-
Promote respect for international humanitarian law.
-
Monitor compliance with and contribute to developing international humanitarian law.
-
Help reduce the impact of mines and explosive remnants of war on people.
-
Support National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies to prepare for and respond to armed conflict and other situations of violence.
As a private Swiss organization, the ICRC, with a mandate given by states in the Geneva Conventions, receives funding directly from governments. The U.S. Department of State, for example, gives the ICRC a sum, earmarked by Congress, for use each year for its worldwide operations. With this funding, the ICRC is more directly engaged in implementing field programs than other international organization funded through state channels are. The ICRC's relief assistance is perhaps the most comprehensive of any implementing agency, including food aid, nutrition, water supply, medical and surgical care, shelter, and care for livestock. Unlike the World Food Programme (WFP), the ICRC not only procures food but also distributes it directly to populations affected by emergencies. In the 1980s, the ICRC catalyzed an international movement to view landmines as a violation of the laws of war because the mines kill civilians at least as often as they kill armed combatants. Most ICRC expatriate staff used to be Swiss, but today include many nationalities, including Americans. The American Red Cross sometimes sends U.S. delegates to ICRC operations overseas.

The ICRC does not participate in coordinating forums such as the UN cluster system, in the same ways that other NGOs do. Because it is not an NGO, it is not a member of NGO associations, though it often attends meetings. Because of its strict adherence to its principles of neutrality, impartiality and confidentiality, it must avoid the appearance of signing on to coalition efforts. Thus, although it will meet one-on-one with militaries, including the U.S. military or peacekeeping forces, it avoids those forums that give the appearance of joint efforts where NGOs, militaries, and governments may have struck joint strategies. The ICRC always has maintained both the fact and the appearance of independence of action, in order to gain access to vulnerable populations on each side in a war. The ICRC has dramatically grown its Washington, DC staff in recent years to more than two dozen persons today. Its purpose is largely to liaison with other U.S. organizations, including the federal government and the military. The ICRC also has a delegation at the United Nations in New York. Contact information for the North American delegation International Committee of the Red Cross Regional Delegation for United States and Canada 1100 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20036 202-587-4600 washington.was@icrc.org

## Ifrc: Federation Of Societies

The association of the various Red Cross agencies is the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, also often referred to as the Federation. Based in Geneva, it was previously named the League of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and depends on its members for most of its resources, staff, and overseas work. In effect, its value is in facilitating the contributions from various members to each country affected by crisis. The Geneva hub conducts assessments and surveillance for all its members, and is increasingly playing a lead role in creating standardized health and food aid responses. The federation engages in a wide array of activities, mirroring the many needs its members confront in different parts of the globe. These include the following:

-
providing technical support, emergency kits, and financial resources to national societies;
-
proposing ways for donor societies to contribute within specific technical sectors to the needs of societies in poorer countries prone to emergencies;
-
organizing and managing refugee camps;
-
promoting humanitarian diplomacy, such as where access to the most vulnerable have been politically restricted, as in Burma and Zimbabwe;
-
taking the lead in creating and promoting a new body of international disaster response law (IDRL) and related rules and principles;
-
transporting and delivering food aid to mitigate famine;
-
providing global leadership in the development of humanitarian aid codes, standards, evaluations, and technical guidelines;
-
promoting prevention, preparedness, and mitigation for natural disasters, including local stores for readiness;
-
coordinating rebuilding and economic reconstruction after wars and natural disasters;
-
promoting primary health care and first aid throughout the developing world, including the operationalization of standards for integrated management of childhood illness;
-
planning for and responding to deadly pandemics;
-
acting proactively to help national societies tackle threats posed by climate change, including floods, desertification, and disappearing island states;
-
offering catalytic support for and at times hosting global initiatives for the whole NGO community, such as SPHERE (minimum standards used by NGOs in crises), the Steering Committee for Humanitarian Response (a consortia of consortia), and the ProVention Consortium (dedicated to disaster risk reduction); and
-
facilitating communication among national societies.
The Federation responds to natural disasters and promotes disaster mitigation and risk reduction more than any other network. Within the cluster approach" for humanitarian aid responsibilities, and with the family of UN agencies, the IFRC has the lead role for shelter after disasters, manages refugee camp aid, and helps reconstruct health systems after conflicts have ended. The IFRC was originally created by donor governments to address pandemics, and today remains very involved in influenza pandemic preparedness. The ICRC and IFRC cooperate in their response to any given crisis through their Sevilla Agreement. The IFRC has in recent years partnered increasingly with the UN World Food Programme, such as in responding to food shortages in East Africa. Contact Information for the Secretariat International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies PO Box 372,CH-1211 Geneva 19, Switzerland T: 41-22-730-4222 F: 41-22-733-0395 E: secretariat@ifrc.org Contact Information for the Secretariat New York Delegation to the UN International Federation 800 Second Avenue, Suite 355, 3rd Fl., New York, NY 10017 USA T: 212-338-0161 F: 212-338-9832

## National Societies

The Red Cross movement requires that each nation have no more than one Red Cross or Red Crescent society, and that the determination be made by the government of that country. That national society represents the entire country, just as the American Red Cross is the only national society in the United States. Any country can establish its society to be either a Red Cross or a Red Crescent society. Red Crescent societies differ in the emblem they display, but not in their mission and modes of operation, and are full members of the international Red Cross movement. Many countries with large Muslim populations have chosen to name their society Red Cross given that the original Red Cross emblem was based on the flag of Switzerland rather than any religious symbol. China, Nigeria, and Indonesia each have huge Islamic populations but adopted the Red Cross rather than the Red Crescent. In most countries, the national Red Cross society has a closer relationship with its government, and its military, than other NGOs do. The Red Cross in many developing countries is not particularly effective. As in the United States, many Red Cross societies also become involved in managing blood supplies. Frequently, therefore, local Red Cross societies play a critical role as the channels for international assistance from donor Red Cross societies. The Canadian Red Cross, with an annual budget of over $350 million, is active in responding to disasters in Canada, but is also generous in providing aid internationally. Within a few days of the 2010 Haitian earthquake, the Canadian Red Cross had raised almost $50 million for assistance. As well, the Canadian government collaborated with the Canadian and Norwegian societies to set up a medical field hospital in Port au Prince only a few days after the quake. The Haitian National Red Cross Society also worked closely with many other Red Cross societies as well as the Federation and ICRC in the life-saving responses. The Red Cross Society of China, founded in 1904, leapt in prominence after the deadly 2008 Sichuan earthquake, for which it raised more than $200 million, an unprecedented sum for a nonprofit in China. In recent years the Red Cross Society of China has become a frequent donor to other crises, including Cambodia, Kenya, and Thailand. Chinese citizens donated hundreds of thousands of dollars through their Red Cross Society in the days after the Haitian earthquake. The first search and rescue team to arrive in Haiti immediately after the quake came from China.

## American Red Cross

The American Red Cross is the national Red Cross society in the United States, founded by Clara Barton in 1881 and first chartered by Congress in 1900. It is a charitable organization, not a government agency. The main share of its work is domestic: it shelters, feeds, and provides emotional support to victims of disasters, supplies nearly of the nation's blood, and supports military members and their families. The American Red Cross's annual budget of over $3 billionwhich does not include the tens of thousands of work hours contributed by community volunteersis primarily expended on needs within the United States. However, its international services branch does respond to disasters and address long-term humanitarian needs overseas, but the resources for this tend to be irregular or clumpy. In other words, more than other NGOs, the American Red Cross receives enormous contributions for the occasional vhigh-visibility crisis (Hurricane Mitch in 1998, Kosovo in 1999, Afghanistan 2002, the tsunami in 2004, and Haiti in 2009). It receives less than many other U.S. NGOs, however, for majority of other crises occurring around the world each year. The American Red Cross received and spent roughly $600 million in assistance for the 2004 AsianIndian Oceantsunami, a sum that greatly exceeded its budget for all other parts of the world and crises combined. Alone among U.S. NGOs because of its size, the American Red Cross has the advantage of counterparts - other Red Cross societies - in each country overseas with which it can work. This gives it more options for how it may respond in any given emergency. Sometimes the American Red Cross responses by seconding staff to another element of the Movement, or goods, or funding. Sometimes it works largely through the Federation and at other times does not. Beyond major disasters, the American Red Cross has also worked with grants from USAID, the Department of State, USDA, PEPFAR, foundations, and other institutional funders to manage local projects in many developing countries. In its other aid programs, the American Red Cross, like other international NGOs, has delivered valuable programs in the areas of disease prevention (malaria and HIV/AIDS), water supply, livelihoods, and disaster risk reduction. From time to time, it has also acted as a leader in the interagency community organizing open conferences for many NGOs to come together to share technical lessons about improving aid. One massive effort it led, working with partners such as the Federation, WHO and UNICEF, is the Measles Initiative, which reduced measles deaths in children under five by 78% globally between 2000 and 2008, averting more than 4 million childhood deaths.

## Red Cross Myths

Red Cross Myth 1. The Red Cross emblem is meant to be a religious symbol The Red Cross (a plus + sign against a white background) was chosen by the founders of the movement precisely to be neutral, to imply no race, creed, nationality, or religion. It is based on the national flag and symbol of Switzerland, a country that had demonstrated neutrality over many centuries. It was not meant to be a reference to the Christian cross, though at times uninformed people suspect that it might be. The Red Crescent emblem was offered as an alternative in a diplomatic conference in 1929, after which many countries adopted it. In 2005, the governments involved in the 1949 Geneva Conventions added another emblem (through additional protocol III), the red crystal, following which the Israeli society, the Magen David Adom joined the movement.

Red Cross Myth 2. International humanitarian law applies only to uniformed combatants.

International humanitarian law (IHL) specifically addresses wars and combatants, but is intended to be binding on all parties to any major conflicts, including rebel groups and irregular militia. The Geneva Conventions also specify that civilian populations cannot be targeted in wartime, and go on to confer protections on aid agencies working in conflict zones. The ICRC works actively to apprise all military forces to respect the obligations imposed by the Geneva Conventions.

Red Cross Myth 3. There is only one international Red Cross agency.

Often news reporters speak about the International Red Cross as if there were an agency with this name, which there is not. There is indeed a Red Cross movementthe alliance of different Red Cross agencies. But there are two international Red Cross bodies, both of which are based in Geneva, but in different offices, under different administrations, and with separate budgets and programs. The Swiss National Red Cross Society, which is also is based in Switzerland, though in Berne, also sometimes provides international aid. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is the lead agency spoken about by the press in war zones, whereas the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) is the organization that more often takes the lead in refugee camps, natural disasters, and epidemics.

Red Cross Myth 4. The Federation helps only in natural disasters.

Whereas the ICRC works inside war zones, the IFRC frequently works around them, including displaced persons camps and in postconflict reconstruction. The Federation helps national societies address any humanitarian threats.

Red Cross Myth 5. The Red Cross gets involved only after crises.

The Federation, perhaps more than any other organization in the world, emphasizes disaster reduction through prevention, preparedness, and mitigation. ICRC works in the worst war zones, but also will step in if serious needs are unmet and offer its services based on the statutes of the movement. Again, the ICRC tries to address the root causes of conflict by bringing scholarly and diplomatic attention to the spread of arms; it publishes journals that act as forums for scholarly analysis of the application of humanitarian principles to emerging problems, such as chemical weapons, biological weapons, the spread of small arms, and landmines.226
Red Cross Myth 6. ICRC's policy of confidentiality supports human rights violators.

The ICRC policy to not reveal information it finds in its site visits (for example, to prisons) is at times criticized by NGOs. It is argued that ICRC either is cowardly and uncaring or lacks a sense of outrage and stands too fastidiously on its bureaucratic rules. Organizations like NGOs are free to criticize governments for human rights and IHL violations; the system works effectively because these groups can complement the ICRC. Meanwhile, if the ICRC did not strictly adhere to its confidentiality policy, it would not be invited into countries and into prisons, and there would be no observation to protect prisoners. Moreover, ICRC discretion has its limits, and the ICRC reserves the right to speak out, publish findings, or stop its work in exceptional cases. For example, if a detaining authority issues excerpts from a confidential reports without the ICRC's consent, the ICRC reserves the right to publish the entire report to prevent any inaccurate or incomplete interpretations of observations and recommendations. Likewise, if it's clear that a confidential approach isn't working, for example, because a government or rebel group simply refuses to take concerns seriously, the ICRC can and will take action by expressing concerns publicly. The decision to speak out is never taken lightly but it is important to remember that confidentiality is not unconditional.

Red Cross Myth 7. The American Red Cross is like other any other U.S. Nonprofits.

The American Red Cross is distinct from other U.S. aid agencies in various regards. For one, it was chartered by Congress. Most other NGOs working internationallyCARE, Catholic Relief Services, World Vision, and hundreds of others (see annex 1)are registered with the U.S. government but have no assigned mission. Because it was established by Congress, the American Red Cross is meant to be national, representing all the American people, in a politically nonpartisan way. Second, the American Red Cross is itself a system: a system of chapters across the United States, each with it own board, governance, fundraising, and authorities. The national headquarters, based in Washington, DC, which leads on international aid issues, works closely with its various chapters, which are largely organized around metropolitan areas. Third, more than other nonprofits, the American Red Cross builds volunteerism throughout its structure. Not only are part-time aid workers and their board of governors volunteers, but volunteers are also matched to decision-making managers across the organization. Fourth, the American Red Cross shares sole rights with the U.S. military for use of the emblem in its advertising, as established by Congress. Fifth, the American Red Cross has a privileged relationship with the U.S. government which frequently looks to it as a lead agency, recommending the public to donate to it, whereas otherwise silent about advocating donations to other specific NGOs. Last, because of its automatic network with other Red Cross entities, the American Red Cross is in a special position for fundraising and mounting programs. For example, after the fall of the Soviet Union, the U.S. government turned to the American Red Cross to help mount brand new aid efforts to the breakaway states in the Caucasus and central Asia, because although no U.S. NGOs had much experience in working in any of them, the American Red Cross at least had counterpart Red Cross and Red Crescent societies that it could immediately work through. As another example, whatever the crisis in the world, the press gives top coverage to the ICRC or some Red Cross entity, and Americans accordingly donate more to the American Red Cross.

Red Cross Myth 8. The ICRC picks and chooses which wars to work in.

In many of the very worse conflicts, even when other NGOs have to flee for security concerns, the ICRC typically comes in. Every NGO, including the American Red Cross, has latitude to decide on its own which crises it wants to become involved with. The statutes of the ICRC do not allow an option. The ICRC is mandated to work in any and all war zones where it is needed for as long as it is needed. The ICRC stays in the worst crises even when other agencies have pulled out, including Somalia in 1991 and Rwanda in early 1994. The ICRC pulls out only when conditions do not permit the organization to reach the populations in need, for example, when three unarmed staff members were executed in Burundi in 1995 and six in Chechnya in 1996. Similarly, after an ICRC relief plane was shot down en route to Biafra, Nigeria, in 1968, the ICRC also temporarily withdrew its staff.

Red Cross Myth 9. The ICRC is the author of the Geneva Conventions The Geneva Conventions were written and are amended collectively by governments (states). Thus, the U.S. Department of State has a direct say in what has been added, or will be added or edited in them. The ICRC, which derives its mandate from the Geneva Conventions, and has a lead role in interpreting and promoting knowledge about them, is not a signatory. However, it is very involved in thinking, researching, and writing about the conventions and what might be added. Thus it does influence evolving debates about them.

Red Cross Myth 10. The Red Cross defends war criminals in Guantanamo.

Worldwide, ICRC visits 500,000 prisoners of war and civilian internees every year to assess detention conditions and procedural safeguards, and to help restore contacts among separated family members. The ICRC has, since 2002, made many regular trips to visit persons held at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Station on the island of Cuba. The ICRC maintains a confidential dialogue with U.S. authorities on the treatment and conditions there as well as on legal frameworks, and it facilitates contacts between detainees and their families. The ICRC does not act as a legal representative of detainees nor engage in court cases. ICRC findings from Guantanamo referred to in the press were not given to the press by the ICRC but by U.S. government or other sources.

## Annex 7. Key United Nations Agencies

Steven Hansch and Grey Frandsen D
ozens of UN agencies participate in some form of humanitarian assistance each year. And in those emergencies that the UN responds to, there are a handful of dominating agencies that play essential roles in managing international emergency response efforts. Two of them, UNHCR and WFP, are important to NGOs because they pass large sums of resources on to NGOs. Others, such as WHO and OCHA are important for coordinating activities and giving NGOs key technical guidance. Below are brief profiles of each of the larger UN agencies most often encountered in emergency settings.

## United Nations High Commissioner For Refugees (Unhcr)

The UN High Commissioner for Refugees grew, in 1951, out of the International Refugee Organization (IRO), which the General Assembly had established in 1946. Over the decades its scope of activities grew, from an original focus on legal support to European asylum-seekers, to a full-service aid agency working in every part of the world, wherever there are refugees. Whereas UNHCR grew into a manager of large relief programs in the 1980s, in the 1990s, it faced the responsibility of negotiating and planning mass return. It helped to arrange the repatriation of some ten million refugees during the 1990s. UNHCR works largely through its NGO partners, approximately 300 of them.

United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF)
Of all the UN agencies, UNICEF behaves the most like an NGO. If it were not in fact a UN body, it would be listed in this publication as if it were a large, ubiquitous humanitarian NGO. It has an advantage over other UN agencies in being present in virtually every emergency affected area; unlike UNHCR, its work precedes emergencies and comes after emergencies and unlike WFP it does not only work in areas of food shortages. More than any other UN body, it is operational, working close to the ground mobilizing health, hygiene, nutrition and education for women and, through women, children. For UNICEF, emergencies take up a small portion of its portfolio, roughly 10 percent, and because UNICEF has such a wide range of technical capabilities, it responds to displaced population (DP) needs with programs that are quite different from one crisis to the next. Sometimes it focuses on food securitya major element of its work in southern Sudan, for example. In Kosovo, it led the humanitarian community in providing education and warnings about landmine hazards. In northern Kenya, it drilled and maintained wells to provide water to Somali refugees. In Zaire, it managed centers for abandoned or "unaccompanied" Rwandan refugee children. Increasingly, UNICEF has tried to systematize the rapid re-establishment of education as an essential emergency service, and bring more resources to the recovery of children, including remedial services for psychosocial trauma. In refugee crises, UNICEF often works under UNHCR's coordination, helping out in a particular sector, shoulder to shoulder with NGOs. In other crises, it can sometimes play more of a lead role, as in southern Sudan, where UNICEF manages the UN umbrella aid effort for internally displaced and famine victims known formally as Operation Lifeline Sudan (OLS). UNICEF was created by the UN General Assembly (government representatives) in 1946 to focus both on the needs of children and their mothers. Like other specialized agencies, it does not receive a budget from the UN Secretariat, but derives its income from voluntary contributions from governments. Just as the ICRC is guided by the Geneva Conventions, UNICEF is guided by the Convention of the Rights of the Child (CRC), which entered into force in September 1990. One of the oldest and best known of all annual reports is UNICEF's State of the World's Children, which NGOs look to as a source of data about immunization coverage, malnutrition and other health trends in developing countries. UNICEF's 8,000 staff also promote the Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative BFHI, The Education for All (EFA) principles,227 research on drug use and new vaccines, such as the Children's Vaccine Initiative, and is increasingly involved in human rights promotion.

World Food Program (WFP)
The World Food Program began as an experiment, promoted by the Kennedy administration, and working initially under the Food and Agriculture Organization, another UN agency. But after the 1974 World Food Summit, donors committed to the WFP idea more fully, and the program grew throughout the 1960s. WFP has always received significant food donations from the U.S. government (as appropriated under Title II of the Food for Peace account of Public Law 480). For most of its history, WFP staff saw it as primarily a development agency, using food to support economic challenges of developing countries. In the 1990s, however, WFP was pulled into more and more responses to disasters, conflicts and protracted refugee operations, where refugees needed food in large volumes year after year. Today, the larger share of WFP's food budget goes to humanitarian crises. Headquartered in Rome, WFP tracks the shipments of international donations of food aid, and in some cases buys local foods with cash given to it. In almost all cases, it hands food over to counterpart organizations, such as international NGOs, or local groups such as the Red Cross for distribution.

World Health Organization (WHO)
The World Health Organization works by supporting other agencies with the best technical information available. It staffs world medical experts who publish and disseminate guidelines and epidemiologic analyses about crises. There are several parts of WHO that are relevant in emergencies, including the Emergency and Humanitarian Assistance (EHA) division, the nutrition division, which looks as part of its work at malnutrition in refugee camps, and the Emerging Infections Division, which works with EHA to find ways to ensure surveillance of explosive and growing epidemic diseases that often occur in failed states and conflict zones.

UN Office for the Coordinator for Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)
OCHA is an office of the UN Secretariat, not a stand-alone operational agency. It is the mechanism by which the UN secretary-general and UN teams can ensure that someone is monitoring all emergencies, from wars to refugee flight to natural disasters. The buck stops here. OCHA was created in the aftermath of the poor UN response after the Iraq/Gulf war of 1991when millions of refugees sought assistance north to Turkey and east to Iran. Originally it was called the Department for Humanitarian Affairs (DHA). The feeling of governments in 1992 was that no one point in the UN had the responsibility to watch over all EPs, that there was no place where the buck stopped. OCHA is that place now, but lacks much capability on its own; it accomplishes its work primarily by getting resources for other UN agencies to act.

Inter-Agency Coordinating Committee (IASC)
OCHA convenes and chairs a forum in which each of the independent UN agencies meet to determine who is doing what and what gaps need to be addressed, collectively or by different agencies with a lead opportunity. The IASC meets regularly, not only during large crises, in New York and Geneva, and allows NGOs to interface with representatives from WHO, WFP, UNHCR, and other key agencies, including the ICRC. NGOs tend to be represented at IASC meetings through their NGO-association representatives, from InterAction, Voice and the NGO Steering Committee for Humanitarian Response. Less well known is the ECHA, the Executive Committee for Humanitarian Affairs within the UN Secretariat, which OCHA also chairs, of senior experts within the UN Secretariat departments in New York. Similarly, another group meets regularly in Geneva and New York among the representatives of the various embassies to the UN, that is, among government officials interested in sharing information about humanitarian aid: the Humanitarian Liaison Group.

United Nations Development Program (UNDP)
In most countries, UNDP has the responsibility to mange the joint UN office for all aid, and to make sense of the work of other UN agencies. Often, OCHA will colocate within UNDP's office. The official resident representative for the UN in most countries is the head of the UNDP office there. Originally, UNDP's orientation in emergencies was to serve as the lead agency for natural disaster prevention and reconstruction. Increasingly, UNDP is trying to also become a leader in preventing and reconstructing civil society and governance, putting human rights and democracy at the top of its priorities for assistance. UNDP attempts to track all manner of human development, human security, income disparities, access to water, vaccines, enterprise training, education, and intellectual property rights.228 UNDP is based in New York and works closely with the UN Secretariat.

United Nations Joint Logistics Center (UNJLC)
The United Nations Joint Logistics Centre (UNJLC) was born out of the humanitarian response to the 1996 Eastern Zaire crisis, which demanded intensified coordination and pooling of logistics assets among UNHCR, WFP, and UNICEF. UNJLC was institutionalized in March 2002 and housed in Rome; it has had large scale humanitarian operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Liberia, Sudan, Uganda, Indian Ocean Tsunami Response, Pakistan Earthquake Response, Bangladesh floods response, Lebanon, and DRC. Staff members in UNJLC are seconded from WFP, UNHCR, UNICEF, as well as direct hire personnel. UNJLC facilitates and supports the coordination of logistics capabilities among cooperating humanitarian agencies, and complements and supports the global and field Logistics Clusters, using Logistics Information Management, mapping, customs, commodity tracking tools, and services.

## Myths About Humanitarian Un Agencies

Myth 1. UN secretary-general manages all UN agencies.

The secretary-general of the UN has direct management control over the UN Secretariat offices in New York and Geneva but limited practical authority over the various UN agencies, such as UNHCR and WFP, which have their own directors and supervisory boards made up of representatives of governments, including the United States. Of the UN groups mentioned here, only OCHA falls under the direct authority and management of the secretary-general. In each new large emergency, the secretary-general does make an important decision to designate one UN entity as the lead humanitarian agency for that crisis. The default, if no special responsibility is assigned, is UNDP, headquartered in New York, which is supposed to maintain the general UN representation in each country and also have responsibility for working with each government to provide disaster preparedness.

Myth 2. UN Engagement in emergencies is primarily via peacekeeping troops.

Much attention is given to those situations in which armed UN peacekeeping troops deploy to a zone of conflict. Most UN forces, however, work in areas where there is no active conflict; their purpose, after all, being to prevent the possibility of conflict. In contrast, UNHCR, WFP, UNICEF, and OCHA are involved in many hundreds of live, active humanitarian emergencies every year, the majority of which do not involve peacekeeping.

Myth 3. UN deployment in crises defies or circumvents U.S. interests.

The U.S. government gets its way in a large proportion of UN deliberations about how and where UN capabilities will be put to use. In those circumstances where the United States wants a large UN deployment, there usually will be. In most refugee crises and natural disasters, the United States wants UN involvement, and criticizes the UN when it is slow off the mark. In fact, most of the work of UNHCR and WFP in providing aid to refugee communities, aid that grew quickly in the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s, was aid for people fleeing countries that were either communist or at war with communists, and the United States wanted the aid as a symbol of opposition to the Soviet Union's influence, to call attention to the failures and human rights abuses that came with Soviet involvement. Since the early 1990s, after Russia abandoned communism, U.S. and European donors to the UN redirected the same UN agencies to now contain refugee flows, for example, to assist displaced populations inside Bosnia and Kosovo and prevent large numbers of people from trying to flee to other developed countries.

Myth 4. UN involvement in emergencies bails out autocratic states.

Many Americans complain that humanitarian aid creates the preconditions for future emergencies, by helping dictators or by bailing out incompetent and corrupt governments, who then create everworsening conditions for their own people. In some instances this is true, and aid has the unintended effect of stabilizing countries that might benefit from civil resistance. But it's also true in as many instances that humanitarian aid brings embarrassment to governments who looked weak in the light that assistance from other countries was needed. Very little humanitarian aid (disaster relief, food aid, health care) from the United States is delivered by the governments of the affected country; most passes through NGOs and the Red Cross. That's true of aid the UN manages also: UNHCR works largely through NGOs, not governments.

Myth 5. UN aid to crisis areas fosters long-term dependency.

Humanitarian aid can sometimes support EPs in the same refugee camp for years or even decades. Some refugees stayed for 10 years in large camps in Malawi, Honduras, and Thailand. Refugees from Burma, Tibet, and Afghanistan have stayed for more than 20 years in some cases. But humanitarian aid does not tend to include such great incentives that it discourages anyone from entrepreneurial efforts. In most cases, refugees become self-reliant.

Myth 6. UNHCR gives assistance directly to refugees.

Like many agencies, UNHCR takes credit for all the activities it funds or that occur under its aegis. But, except for legal services, UNHCR delegates most assistance delivery to partner groups; it devolves actual direct contact with refugees to NGOs.

Christophe Fournier, International President of MSF, delivered a speech to a Conference in Rheindahlen 7-8 December 2009 organised by NATO's Allied Rapid Reaction Corps (ARRC). ARRC led NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) for Afghanistan from May 2006 to February 2007 and has also been involved in IFOR and KFOR operations in Bosnia Herzegovina and Kosovo as well as in operations in Iraq. The stated purpose of the conference - which beside NATO and the UK Armed Forces brought together representatives from the diplomatic world, the UN and NGOs, the media, academia and the EU - was to examine best working practices on the integration of civilian and military efforts to achieve Unity of Purpose in Hybrid Operations. In his speech, Christophe Fournier explains why MSF can never be part of a "militaryhumanitarian coalition", the importance to make a clear distinction between impartial humanitarian actors such as MSF and other more partisan aid actors, and finally the harmful consequences on the local population when this distinction is blurred. This conference was an opportunity to clarify that we, MSF, don't believe in a unity of purpose, we believe in a mutual understanding with all warring parties that allows for the deployment of impartial aid operations in order to contain the devastations of war.

## Nato Speech - Rheindalen, Germany. 8 December 2009.

Outside of humanitarian circles, it's not often that I am invited to speak before a room full of people who share with MSF one rather rare feature. You and I may have the only jobs in the world that require going towards conflict, not running in the other direction. And while NATO may have participated in a few wars over the past decades, we have been to all of them. The big crisis like Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Afghanistan, Darfur and Angola, and invisible conflicts like today in Central African Republic or the Naxalite insurrection in India. So we have that in common. For the rest, we are probably more different than appearances make some people to believe. I am going to start by doing something very humanitarian. I am going to make myself vulnerable. You represent such a massive amount of firepower and I am but a simple doctor and aid worker. Please allow me to say that this should make me feel very vulnerable. I am not at all nervous about that, because of the warmness of your welcome but also because, as a humanitarian, I am used to be vulnerable. And very used to people we try to help who are far, far more vulnerable than MSF could ever be. Interestingly, it is the vulnerability of being humanitarian that provides us with protection. For MSF, this is a vulnerability rooted in our being armed with nothing more than our stethoscopes, our medicines and bandages and the commitment to deliver urgent medical services based solely on need. People across cultures recognize in our vulnerability the human compassion which drives the medical act and they trust us. When that trust is established, even the well-armed fighters who watch our every move trust us. They have faith in the doctors and nurses bumping up and down those long, dusty roads to reach people in crisis. They entrust their health and their loved ones to our skilled personnel. That trust lies at the core of MSF's humanitarian project. That trust is an important theme of what I'm about to say. So I am not nervous about being vulnerable. I am nervous about the undermining of that trust. I am nervous about the "unity of purpose" you consider so crucial to the achievement of your objectives. This is a "unity of purpose" MSF believes is harmful to this trust. It casts doubt upon our integrity as humanitarians because people may doubt our motives or our objectives. That is why I am nervous, and that is what I would like to talk about today. Medecins sans Frontieres delivers medical and humanitarian aid in over 60 countries. We're quite busy. For example, in 2008 we did:

- Almost 9 million outpatient consultations, over 300,000 hospitalizations - Over 47,000 surgical operations - Treated 212,000 children for severe acute malnutrition. - [When cholera exploded in the cities and towns of Zimbabwe MSF managed staggering 75 percent of the over 100,000 cases.]
These are significant numbers for a non-governmental organization, especially in our eyes because we know the people and patients behind those numbers. Yet still I can tell you as president of MSF that I am not happy with these results. I am not happy that in Somalia our programmes are dwarfed by the massive needs of those war-ravaged communities. I am not happy that we struggle to be meaningfully operational in key conflicts like Darfur, Pakistan and Iraq. And I am particularly not happy that the needs of tens of thousands of sick, malnourished or wounded Afghans continue to require urgent humanitarian relief that we are unable to deliver. Prior to the murder of five colleagues in Baghdis in 2004 MSF had worked continuously in Afghanistan since 1980. In the year 2000s we were running activities in Afghanistan in half of the provinces. Today, circumstances force us to be much less present. We have recently opened two programmes, one in a hospital in the East of Kabul and another in Laskargah, the capital of Helmand Province. There are many factors explaining our limitations in Afghanistan. One of those factors is this concept for the title of this conference: Unity of Purpose. Before going further I want to reassure you that MSF is neither pacifist nor antimilitary. That may sound strange for an organization that was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize a decade ago, but we are not pro-peace. We do not stand in judgment of either your objectives or those of your enemies. We stand, MSF and NATO, in the same volatile geographic location, so we must deal with the reality of our coexistence in the tight and tense corridors of war. While we will never have a common understanding, we need to improve our mutual understanding in order to be clear about our different motivations, responsibilities, strategies, and purposes.

## 1. Our Purpose Is To Limit The Devastations Of War.

I've talked many times with our Afghanistan mission team and it seems that at every encounter between MSF and NATO (most of them good, productive encounters) the NATO representatives say something at the end like "at least we share a common goal." It seemingly doesn't matter whether this is with your local commanders in the field or with policy makers in Brussels. "At least we share a common goal": What does that mean? I can assure you it leaves all of us at MSF with a profound sense of being misunderstood. Confused and manipulated as it has become (and I'll come back to that), we believe the humanitarian project is a fairly simple one and very limited one. Our goal is to help people survive the devastations of war. That means finding and caring for those most in need - those caught in the crisis of conflict who are suffering illness, wounds, hunger, grief, and fear. We respond by delivering aid that saves lives and alleviates suffering here and now. As I said, our ambition is a limited one. Our purpose is not to bring war to an end. Nor is it humanitarian to build state and government legitimacy or to strengthen governmental structures. It's not to promote democracy or capitalism or women's rights. Not to defend human rights or save the environment. Nor does humanitarian action involve the work of economic development, post-conflict reconstruction, or the establishment of functioning health systems. Again, it is about saving lives and alleviating suffering in the immediate term. This marks a fundamental difference between our two ways of thinking. What you do in Afghanistan today is for the Afghanistan of tomorrow. What we do in Afghanistan today is for today. We heal people for the sake of healing people. All of these other activities (reconstruct the country, promote democracy, etc) might be worthy of praise. They may even be exactly the sort of activities that NATO and NATO countries should be promoting in Afghanistan. But they are goals and activities which fall outside of humanitarian ones. Related? Yes. But outside. More importantly, when humanitarian goals and activities are lumped together with this larger, broader and more future-oriented agenda, the direct result is confusion and even contradiction. The indirect result is that civilians in conflict do not receive the assistance to which they have a right. I want to urge that you do not confuse MSF's position today with any sense of moral judgment or superiority. We do not believe humanitarian objectives are more noble than military ones in a place like Afghanistan. I can assure you we have no opinion on the legitimacy of NATO spending the next 100 years in Afghanistan. Or leaving tomorrow. Or, it should be clear, of the Taleban regaining control of the State. In other words, we are not on your side. We are not on any side. That is the principle of neutrality. We neither support nor oppose parties to a conflict, regardless the justice or brutality of their actions. This is the reverse of your position.

## 2. In Order To Be Accepted By All Belligerents, We Are Committed To A Policy Of Neutrality And Impartiality.

Humanitarian aid must address human beings regardless their side with regard to the frontlines or warring parties; no matter their race, religion, ethnicity or allegiance. That is the principle of impartiality. It constitutes the sine qua non of humanitarian action. The duty of impartiality comes to humanitarian organizations from the Geneva Conventions, which bestows certain rights and protections upon "an impartial humanitarian body". Impartiality means MSF must have access to all civilian populations, in order to identify and treat those most in need. Obviously, decisions of where and how to intervene is thus based on our own independent assessment of health needs. Just as obviously, it cannot be based on the need for stabilization, reconstruction, state-building, winning hearts and minds, force protection, or winning support in publics back home. As a soft target, to have access requires us to be accepted not just by local communities but by all armed parties in the conflict area: national governments, armed oppositions movements, international forces, private security forces, criminal gangs, and so on. These parties must recognize MSF as a neutral health actor providing useful services. That means life-saving assistance with no ulterior agenda. Actual impartiality and neutrality are of course important, but MSF must equally safeguard the perception of these principles. Here is why independence - and the perception of it - is so important. Can you imagine MSF convincing the Taleban of our neutrality if our operations were funded by your governments? For that matter, can you imagine the reverse? A health organization working in London or New York or Copenhagen and funded by the Taleban? I am guessing your governments would be more than just suspicious, and would take serious measures against such an organization. So you see the difficulties of MSF gaining acceptance in today's Afghanistan. That is the reason for our strict independence from the Western governments, especially those who are a party to the conflict. That includes financial, logistical and operational independence as well as an independence of purpose.

## 3. The Very Idea Of A "Humanitarian War" Or "Military-Humanitarian Coalition" Is In Total Contradiction With The Core Idea And The Modus Operandi Of The Humanitarian Enterprise.

The challenges to acceptance and access begin at the macro level, at the level of the intervention itself. The involvement of the military in aid delivery is nothing new. It has long been a standard component of counterinsurgency strategies. And we see it in response to natural disasters such as the December 2004 tsunami. Yet there is a growing change towards something loosely labelled "humanitarian war". This concept became more distinct with the NATO intervention in the rebellious Serbian Province of Kosovo. Any interventions must ultimately be based upon threats to international peace and security. In Kosovo, though, the public discourse shifted, with an emphasis upon the foreign military invasion as having a humanitarian goal, like a response to people's suffering. Troops were primarily portrayed as care givers to the massive numbers of refugees fleeing Serbia. For MSF, "humanitarian war" is a dangerous corruption of the humanitarian ideal. It supports the view that the use of violence is a legitimate way to deliver humanitarian assistance. It also confuses two profoundly distinct human endeavours. [This bellicose "humanitarian" intervention marks a curious reversal of history. The original intent of the humanitarian project was to "civilize war" - through the distinction between combatants and non-combatants. Now we have come to waging "wars for civilization".] Although humanitarian actors such as MSF are not opposed to war, we are strongly committed to non-violent modes of action in the delivery of aid. "Shoot to feed" or "shoot to heal" is abhorrent to our modus operandi. We well understand the need for countries or organizations such as NATO to obtain popular support and political consensus for an overseas intervention, especially going to war. In this matter, the humanitarian rhetoric can be quite useful, as it puts forward a moral appeal of near universal value. In the end, though, portraying military interventions as humanitarian creates a continuity between two opposites. On one end, the impartial provision of urgent health and humanitarian services. On the other end, the policies of regime change, foreign occupation, pacification, state building and violence. Such a continuity undercuts trust.

## 4. Being Accepted By All Belligerents Tends To Be More Difficult In Conflicts Where Un Or Western Troops Are Involved.

At the country level, in a place such as Afghanistan, the challenges to acceptance and access are as plain as the noses of our faces. Contrary to a common knowledge, our experience shows that acceptance by all belligerents tends to be more difficult where UN or western troops are involved in the fighting. One-sided assistance means one-sided access. Afghanistan today is a good example of this difficulty. The breach of trust in Afghanistan comes from the fact that our organization originates from the very same countries that decide upon, finance and furnish the troops you command. In short, if you except the battle dress, we look like you. Our claim to act independently from our countries of origin, who are so politically and militarily-engaged, is naturally met with strong scepticism by local actors, especially by those hostile to the international intervention. This lack of trust is all the stronger when UN and/or western militaries claim to use military force in furtherance of "humanitarian" goals, thereby unilaterally pronouncing a unity of purpose between humanitarian NGOs and intervention/occupation forces. In 2001 no less than Colin Powell proclaimed "NGOs are such a force multiplier for us, such an important part of our combat team." Even more unhelpful, humanitarians have been labelled as sources of information. It should be obvious to you in the military that if we are part of your team, if we are on your side, if we are providing you with information, if we are advancing towards the same goals as you, then we fall directly into the crosshairs of the other side. It's nothing personal, but we can't afford this sort of unity. Looking more at the community level, in places like Afghanistan the actions of our fellow NGOs reinforce the confusion of roles and purposes I've just described. The aid system is very diverse. The vast majority of aid agencies have broader objectives than limiting the devastation of war. Often announcing themselves as humanitarian, they are actually geared towards supporting peace, good governance, justice, sustainable development, gender equality, and so on. In Afghanistan, many are sponsored by belligerent parties to the conflict. That means they are funded by governments whose aid policies openly declare that such financing is in direct furtherance of their foreign policy objectives. Within this framework, it is easy to understand the perception that aid agencies contribute to the international war effort and state building policies of one side and one side only. In Afghanistan, what we see is that the massive resources of the aid system, both UN and NGO, support the Afghan government and the objectives of the Western intervention forces. Looked at critically, the aid system in Afghanistan operates as an implementing partner of your counter-insurgency, pacification and state-building policies. It's not just the NGOs and the UN. Non-aid actors such as the military have spent enormous resources on the delivery of aid. Essentially, you have portrayed yourselves as somehow part of this humanitarian project. Again, we do not judge your course of action, but there are consequences. Crucially, beyond our concern for the integrity of humanitarianism, there is a pragmatic issue: the negative consequences on the local population. The moment the humanitarian project becomes militarized, either in terms of its modus operandi or its public perception, is the moment when the humanitarian project becomes a military target. That militarization of, say, a specific hospital or healthcare programme may be a matter of fact. For instance when your armed teams provide security or care itself. Or that militarization of a specific hospital or healthcare programme may be a matter of perception because of the way it is done in other locations. Either way, the results are potentially lethal. So whether or not this targeting is legitimate doesn't matter. The point is that when some schools or health facilities or aid convoys become militarised by one side, they all become potential targets by the other side. No humanitarian NGO can work under such conditions. In Afghanistan this dangerous phenomenon has been illustrated on many occasions. ISAF protection of health personnel and facilities has contributed to turning the latter into a battle ground with armed opposition groups. The result is that patients who need of care are afraid to go to these facilities. They fear an attack on the facility. They also fear retribution (retaliation) for having used these services. In too many communities, people are hence left with the impossible choice of watching a child suffer without treatment or risking a night visit from the armed opposition. For MSF, negotiation, not firepower, is the key to security in our health facilities and our access to people who need urgent help. That is why our policy is to enforce a "gun free zone" within our premises and vehicles; and to obtain from all belligerents a commitment to recognize MSF health structures, ambulances, offices and homes as "demilitarized sanctuaries" and thereby off-limits from combat, police, and intelligence operations.

## 5. The Partiality Of The Un And The Aid System Toward Nato/Oer/Goa And The Direct Involvement Of Military Unit In Aid Operations Are Not Condemnable Per Se As Long As They Do Not Jeopardize Population Access To Essential Services.

You've heard that we oppose the notion of "humanitarian war." And you've heard that we are critical of placing aid in service to military objectives. It may surprise you, then, that we have no principled objection to military units delivering aid as part of the war effort. We don't have any principled objection to aid being part of hearts and minds campaigns or of UNAMA and aid agencies supporting the Afghan government. But we would like to underscore two points. First, aid efforts undertaken to assist counter insurgency strategies or build the state cannot be impartial because they are not based with an exclusive eye upon need. Such aid should not be attached to the term "humanitarian". Second, and most importantly, counter-insurgency and state-building aid policies have a poor record of meeting the vital needs of civilians in a conflict situation such as Afghanistan. Aid doesn't go to those most in need because it is directed by other priorities. For example, the military and political priorities of the Afghan government and its allies do not cover much of the country today. In Kabul itself the level of public and internationally supported primary health care facilities is highly insufficient. Why? Because while the population of Kabul has quadrupled since 2001, it is not considered a priority in terms of counter-insurgency. Given their partisan stance on one side of the conflict, and given their funding by NATO countries, most aid agencies are considered de facto targets by armed opposition groups in Afghanistan today. It does not matter that their aid is vitally needed by local communities. In the end, since 2006 and the expansion of hostilities to much of the country, the majority of Afghan population lie out of reach to aid providers. That is the consequence of this perception that we all share the same unified purpose. Conclusion In conclusion, I would like to thank you for this important opportunity to exchange views on the distinct roles and functions of our organizations. I could understand MSF's position is perhaps unfair to you, as this speech is more of a monologue. We welcome a dialogue between our organizations. And I invite you to talk with Arjan Hehenkamp, one of our senior operational directors, and myself. Before sitting down, though, I'd like to be clear on a few points. First, I want to reaffirm the need for impartial aid operators to be allowed to act independently from the government, NATO, UN, OEF as well as AOG security agenda Second, to reiterate our call on all warring parties and aid actors to ensure the neutrality of functioning health facilities. This implies: -

-Implementation and respect for a gun-free policy within health premises; -An abstention of the use of force against demilitarized health or humanitarian structures, vehicles and premises. -A commitment not to arrest or seek information from patients during their stay in our facilities.
Third, we don't want to oppose the "virtue" of a humanitarian aid driven by impartiality to the "cynicism" of aid driven by counter-insurgency and state building imperatives. We just want to underline that we measure aid by humanitarian standard. That standard is whether aid meets the vital needs of those civilians most in need, across the entire country, and not whether aid meets other objectives. Fourth, to underline the importance in NATO public discourse and its modes of deployment to maintain an explicit distinction between two types of aid actors - partisan deliverers of relief and impartial humanitarian actors. Finally, I'd like to read you a paragraph from US Army, Joint Publication 3 - 57. The paragraph explains "Civil-Military Operations" and reads: "The activities of a commander that establish, maintain, influence, or exploit relations between military forces, governmental and [civilian NGOs] ... and the civilian populace in a friendly, neutral or hostile operational area in order to facilitate military operations, to consolidate and achieve US objectives." I hope my presentation leaves you with a much better grasp of why such words leave me nervous. They leave all of us in MSF nervous. This mutual understanding is important to us. While MSF may not believe in a unity of purpose, we think that the more recently promoted unity of understanding would be closer to the reality than the unity of purpose idea. Yes, a common, or better said a mutual understanding with all warring parties that allows for the deployment of impartial aid operations in order to contain the devastations of war is what we are looking for. Thank you.

## Sources

This publication has been produced with a variety of sources and material collected over the past five years. Listed are publications used for or referenced in this guidebook and interviews conducted in person, by e-mail, or by telephone. Publications include materials also cited in the footnotes. Some citing is sparse because little information was available for various publications found online or in old libraries. Many more publications were referred to and/or read during the production of this publication, but these are some of the most pertinent. Interviews and personal resources include approximately fifty individuals both named and not named who contributed in some fashion to this publication. This is not an inclusive list but does include those who played a major role. Titles are included for individuals interviewed or communicated with but not listed by name. Many dates are specific. Others are more general, indicating several interviews or communications over that period.

## Publications

Aal, Pamela, Daniel Miltenberger, Thomas G. Weiss. Guide to IGOs, NGOs and the Military in Peace and Relief Operations (Washington, DC: USIP, 2000). Auf der Heide, Erik. *Disaster and Response: Principles of Preparation and Preparedness* (St. Louis: CV
Mosby, 1989), http://orgmail2.coe-dmha.org/dr/PDF/DisasterResponse.pdf.

Bres, P. L. J. *Public Health Action in Emergencies Caused by Epidemics* (Geneva: WHOOMS, 1986). Burnell, Peter. *Foreign Aid in a Changing World* (Philadelphia: Open University Press, 1997).

Chege, Sam. "Donors Shift More Aid to NGOs." United Nations Department of Public Information. June, 1999. Center for Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance. "CMO/CIMIC Reference Library for the Civilian and Military Practitioner." CD-Rom (New Orleans: Center for Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance ). www.cdmha.org. Cuny, Frederick C. *Disasters and Development* (Dallas, TX: Intertect Press, 1994).

The Cuny Center. *Greater Efficiency in Humanitarian Assistance Operations* (Arlington VA: The Cuny Center, 2002). Davidson, Lisa Witzig, Margaret Daly Hayes, and James J. Landon. Humanitarian and Peace Operations:
NGOs and the Military in the Interagency Process (Washington, DC: NDU Press Book, December 1996). Hoy, Paula. *Players and Issues in International Aid* (Sterling, VA: Kumarian Press, 1998).

International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. "Humanitarian Principles of Conduct." www.ifrc.org/publicat/conduct/code.asp.

Joint Chiefs of Staff. *Joint Doctrine for Civil-Military Operations*, JP 3-57 (Washington, DC: Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2003). Mathews, Robert and Timothy McCormack. "The Influence of Humanitarian Principles in the Negotiation of Arms Control Treaties." International Review of the Red Cross, 1999. Maynard, Kimberly. *Healing Communities in Conflict: International Assistance in Complex Emergencies.* (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999). wwwc.cc.columbia.edu/sec/dlc/ciao/access/
maynard/maynar. Minear, Larry, Ted Van Baarda, and Marc Sommers. "NATO and Humanitarian Action in the Kosovo Crisis." Occasional Paper #36 (Providence, RI: Thomas J Watson Jr. Institute for International Studies and the Humanitarian Law Consultancy, 2000). NATO. *NATO Civil-Military Co-operation (CIMIC) Doctrine*, AJP-09 (Brussels: North Atlantic Treaty Organization, 2003). Natsios, Andrew. U.S. Foreign Policy and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. Humanitarian Relief in Complex Emergencies (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1997). OCHA. "Affected Populations in the Great Lakes Region" (Nairobi: OCHA Great Lakes Regional Office, April 2001). Refugee Policy Group. "Civilian and Military Means of Providing and Supporting Humanitarian Assistance during Conflict: A Comparative Analysis" (Washington, DC: Refugee Policy Group, 1997). Seiple, Chris. *The US Military/NGO Relationship in Humanitarian Intervention* (Carlisle, PA: U.S Army War College, Peacekeeping Institute, Center for Strategic Leadership, 1996). Shawcross, William. *The Quality of Mercy* (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1984). The Sphere Project. www.Sphereproject.org/practice/cs_alb.htm. UN Development Program. *Human Development Report 2001* (New York: UNDP, 2001). UN Food and Agricultural Organization. *FAO's Emergency Activities: Technical Handbook Series* (New York: FAO, 2004). www.fao.org/DOCREP/003/X6868E/x6868e00.htm#e. UN High Commissioner for Refugees. "Burundian Refugees Return Home Despite Clashes." UNHCR Press Release. April 8, 2002. UN High Commissioner for Refugees. *UNHCR Handbook for Emergencies* (Geneva: UNHCR, 2000)

. *Water Manual for Refugee Situations* (Geneva: UNHCR, 1992).
UNICEF. *Technical Notes: Special Considerations for Programming in Unstable Situations* (New York: UNICEF, 2000). U.S. Agency for International Development. Factsheets. www.info.usaid.gov.