a

GAO

United States Government Accountability Office

Report to Congressional Requesters

March 2005 FRESHWATER 

PROGRAMS

Federal Agencies’ 

Funding in the United 

States and Abroad

GAO-05-253
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-253.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Anu K. Mittal at 

(202) 512-3841 or mittala@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-05-253, a report to 

congressional requesters 

March 2005

FRESHWATER PROGRAMS 

Federal Agencies’ Funding in the United 

States and Abroad 

Of the over $52 billion in total financial support provided by federal agencies 

for freshwater programs during fiscal years 2000 through 2004, about $49 

billion was directed to domestic programs and about $3 billion supported 

programs abroad. Domestic program activities involved 27 federal agencies, 

but 3 agencies—the Environmental Protection Agency, the Army Corps of 

Engineers, and the Department of Agriculture’s (Agriculture) Rural Utilities 

Service—accounted for over 70 percent of the financial support. Eighteen 

agencies supported domestic drinking water supply programs and 16 

supported domestic wastewater treatment and watershed management 

programs. Grant programs of over $22 billion and direct federal spending of 

about $22 billion accounted for most of the domestic financial support. In 

addition to the about $49 billion that directly support freshwater activities in 

the United States, some agencies also have programs that may indirectly 

support such activities, but it is difficult to determine the dollar value of this 

indirect support. For example, Agriculture’s Conservation Reserve Program 

supports multiple activities, including irrigation, but information on each 

activity supported by the program is not readily available. Also included in 

the domestic program is about $175 million that the United States provided 

to three commissions that conduct freshwater activities along U.S. borders 

with Mexico and Canada. 

Of the estimated $3 billion in total financial support directed toward 

freshwater programs abroad between fiscal years 2000 through 2004, about 

$1 billion was recently provided for freshwater projects in Afghanistan and 

Iraq. Most of the financial support for international freshwater programs 

was provided by the U.S. Agency for International Development. Foreign 

wastewater treatment and watershed management programs were the ones 

that most of the agencies supported. The vast majority of the U.S. support 

for international programs was provided through grants. Not included in the 

$3 billion for international support are the contributions that the United 

States made to the general budgets of numerous international organizations, 

such as the United Nations and the World Bank. The international 

organizations used some portion of the U.S. contributions to support 

freshwater activities around the globe. 

Federal Agencies’ Estimated Obligations for Freshwater Programs in the United States and 

Abroad, Fiscal Years 2000 through 2004 

As the world’s population tripled 

during the past century, demand 

for the finite amount of freshwater 

resources increased six-fold, 

straining these resources for many 

countries, including the United 

States. The United Nations 

estimates that, worldwide, more 

than 1 billion people live without 

access to clean drinking water and 

over 2.4 billion people lack the 

basic sanitation needed for human 

health. Freshwater supply 

shortages—already evident in the 

drought-ridden western United 

States—pose serious challenges 

and can have economic, social, and 

environmental consequences. 

Multiple federal agencies share 

responsibility for managing 

freshwater resources, but 

consolidated information on the 

federal government’s financial 

support of these activities is not 

readily accessible. You asked GAO 

to determine for fiscal years 2000 

through 2004 how much financial 

support federal agencies provided 

for freshwater programs in the 

United States and abroad. For the 

purposes of this report, freshwater 

programs include desalination, 

drinking water supply, flood 

control, irrigation, navigation, 

wastewater treatment, water 

conservation, water dispute 

management, and watershed 

management. 
Page i GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Contents

Letter 1

Results in Brief 3

Background 4

Federal Agencies Provided an Estimated $49 Billion for Domestic 

Freshwater Programs during Fiscal Years 2000 through 2004 6

Federal Agencies Provided an Estimated $3 Billion for Freshwater 

Programs Abroad during Fiscal Years 2000 through 2004 18

Agency Comments 26

Appendixes

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 28

Appendix II: Federal Financial Support for Freshwater Programs in the 

United States and along U.S. Borders 32

Federal Agencies 32

Other Agencies 47

Binational Commissions 48

Appendix III: Federal Financial Support for Freshwater Programs

Abroad 51

Federal Agencies 51

Other Agencies 56

Selected International Organizations 57

Appendix IV: Comments from the U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services 63

Appendix V: Comments from the U.S. Department of the Interior 64

Appendix VI: Comments from the U.S. Agency for International 

Development 65

Appendix VII: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 66

GAO Contacts 66

Staff Acknowledgments 66

Tables Table 1: Federal Agencies’ Estimated Financial Support for 

Domestic Freshwater Programs, Fiscal Years 2000 through 

2004 7

Table 2: Federal Agencies’ Domestic Freshwater Programs, Fiscal 

Years 2000 through 2004 11
Contents

Page ii GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Table 3: Funding Mechanisms Used by Agencies to Provide 

Financial Support for Domestic Freshwater Programs, 

Fiscal Years 2000 through 2004 14

Table 4: Examples of Agencies’ Domestic Freshwater-Related 

Activities That Were Supported by Other Agencies, Fiscal 

Years 2000 through 2004 16

Table 5: U.S. Financial Contributions Used to Support Freshwater 

Projects along Both Sides of the U.S. Borders, Fiscal Years 

2000 through 2004 18

Table 6: Federal Agencies’ Estimated Financial Support for 

Freshwater Programs Abroad, Excluding Afghanistan and 

Iraq, Fiscal Years 2000 through 2004 19

Table 7: Federal Agencies’ Freshwater Programs Abroad, 

Excluding Afghanistan and Iraq, Fiscal Years 2000 through 

2004 20

Table 8: Examples of Agencies’ Freshwater-Related Activities 

Abroad That Were Supported by Other Agencies, Fiscal 

Years 2000 through 2004 21

Table 9: Federal Agencies’ Estimated Financial Support for 

Freshwater Projects in Afghanistan and Iraq, Fiscal Years 

2002 through 2004 23

Table 10: Total U.S. Contributions to Selected Multilateral 

Development Banks and Financial Institutions, Fiscal 

Years 2000 through 2004 (Some Portion of These 

Contributions Supported Freshwater Projects Abroad) 24

Table 11: Total U.S. Contributions to Selected International 

Organizations, Fiscal Years 2000 through 2004 (Some 

Portion of These Contributions Supported Freshwater 

Projects Abroad) 25

Figure Figure 1: Financial Support Provided by Each Funding Mechanism 

for Domestic Freshwater Programs, Fiscal Years 2000 

through 2004 15

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

A

March 11, 2005 Letr

The Honorable George Radanovich

Chairman, Subcommittee on Water

 and Power

Committee on Resources

House of Representatives

The Honorable Ken Calvert

House of Representatives

As the world’s population tripled during the past century, demand for 

accessible freshwater—which makes up less than 1 percent of the earth’s 

water—increased six-fold, straining freshwater resources for many 

countries, including the United States. In the United States, with increasing 

demand for the finite amount of freshwater available, large portions of the 

country could face water shortages in the next few decades. Freshwater 

supply shortages—already evident in the drought-ridden West—pose 

serious challenges and can have significant economic, social, and 

environmental consequences. Water shortages reduce farmland and forest 

productivity and damage plant and animal species, wildlife habitat, and air 

and water quality. In addition, water shortages can create potential 

disputes between various water users, managers, and government entities. 

Ensuring future water supplies to meet these various and sometimes 

competing needs may require significant investments. For example, the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimated that utilities would 

need to invest over $150 billion just to repair, replace, and upgrade the 

nation’s drinking water infrastructure over the next two decades. 

Freshwater supply issues are not unique to the United States—by 2025, 

one-third of the world’s population is likely to live in countries facing 

freshwater shortages. The United Nations highlighted these concerns when 

it declared 2003 as the International Year of Freshwater. In addition, it 

estimates that, worldwide, more than 1 billion people live without access to 

clean drinking water, and that over 2.4 billion people lack the basic 

sanitation needed for human health. Furthermore, the Secretary-General 

notes that water-related diseases are responsible for 80 percent of all 

illnesses and deaths in developing countries. Finally, the World Bank 

estimates that countries will need to double the $70 billion to $80 billion 

they currently invest annually to provide clean drinking water and basic 

sanitation for the world’s population. To help address these global 
Page 2 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

challenges, the United States contributes financial support to foreign 

countries and international organizations for various freshwater projects.

Multiple federal agencies share responsibility for managing freshwater 

resources.1

 Agencies provide services through direct federal spending or 

financial assistance through grant, loan, and loan guarantee programs to 

other parties. Direct federal spending includes payments that agencies 

make for services provided by federal employees and federal contracts for 

freshwater programs in the United States and abroad. Freshwater 

programs include, among other things, desalination, drinking water supply, 

flood control, irrigation, navigation, wastewater treatment, water 

conservation, water dispute management, and watershed management 

activities. Additionally, the United States makes financial contributions to 

several binational commissions that support freshwater projects along U.S. 

borders and to international organizations, such as the World Bank and the 

United Nations, that support freshwater projects around the world. 

However, consolidated information on the federal government’s financial 

support of freshwater programs in the United States and abroad does not 

currently exist. This information is not readily accessible because 

definitions of freshwater programs and the availability of financial data 

vary across agencies. 

In this context, you asked us to determine for fiscal years 2000 through 

2004 how much financial support federal agencies provided for freshwater 

programs in the United States and abroad. 

To address these objectives, we identified federal agencies that support 

freshwater programs in the United States and abroad by reviewing 

Congressional Research Service, GAO, and United Nations reports and the 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. We conducted initial interviews 

with officials from the agencies we identified to confirm that the agencies 

provided financial support for these programs during fiscal years 2000 

through 2004 and focused our efforts on those agencies responsible for the 

majority of the federal financial support. We used a questionnaire to gather 

detailed information from agencies that track freshwater expenditures. In 

this report, we have only included data on the financial support that 

agencies provided specifically for the following freshwater programs: 

1

In this report, the term “agency” represents executive departments, subagencies, or offices 

of executive departments, and independent agencies or commissions (such as EPA or the 

Appalachian Regional Commission).
Page 3 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

desalination, drinking water supply, flood control, irrigation, navigation, 

wastewater treatment, water conservation, water dispute management, 

and watershed management. We did not include financial support for 

programs that may indirectly provide financial support for freshwater 

projects because information on these programs’ freshwater activities is 

not tracked separately. As a result, the financial information in this report is 

an estimate of the minimum amount of funds agencies provided for 

freshwater programs. In addition, although we requested program-level 

financial information, we opted to present this information at the 

agency-level because agencies’ definitions of freshwater programs vary. We 

conducted follow-up interviews with respondents to confirm the 

information and to clarify the information they provided, if necessary. A 

more detailed description of our scope and methodology is presented in 

appendix I. We performed our work between March 2004 and January 2005, 

in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Results in Brief Of the estimated $52 billion in total financial support provided in the United 

States and abroad for freshwater programs during fiscal years 2000 through 

2004, about $49 billion came from 27 federal agencies specifically for 

domestic programs. Three agencies—EPA, the Army Corps of Engineers 

(Corps), and the Department of Agriculture’s (Agriculture) Rural Utilities 

Service—accounted for over 70 percent of the total federal support for 

domestic programs. Domestic drinking water supply programs received 

support from 18 agencies. Agencies provided most of the domestic 

financial support through grant programs and direct federal spending, over 

$22 billion and about $22 billion, respectively. We also identified domestic 

programs that may provide financial support for freshwater activities, but 

are not included in the $49 billion because supporting freshwater activities 

is not the programs’ primary purpose and the amounts spent on freshwater 

activities could not be readily identified. Also included in the domestic 

program is about $175 million that the United States provided to three 

binational commissions to support freshwater activities along both sides of 

the U.S. borders during fiscal years 2000 through 2004.

Federal agencies provided an estimated $3 billion in federal financial 

support for freshwater programs abroad during fiscal years 2000 through

2004. Of the about $3 billion in total international funding, the U.S. Agency 

for International Development (USAID) and the Department of Defense 

(Defense) provided about $1 billion for freshwater projects in Afghanistan 

and Iraq during fiscal years 2002 through 2004. USAID accounted for the 

majority of the international support. International wastewater treatment 
Page 4 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

and watershed management programs received the most U.S. support. 

Agencies provided most of the support through grants. Some federal 

agencies, such as the Department of the Interior’s (Interior) Bureau of 

Reclamation (Reclamation) and the Corps, conducted work on freshwater 

projects in foreign countries, but funding for these projects also originated 

from USAID and the Department of State (State). In addition to providing 

financial support directly for freshwater programs abroad, the United 

States indirectly supports such programs through its contributions to 

numerous international organizations, such as the World Bank.

Background The federal government supports multiple freshwater programs in the 

United States and abroad. Although agencies vary in how they describe 

their freshwater programs (activities, projects, or initiatives), the following 

terms generally describe the freshwater efforts covered in this review:

• Desalination—Activities and/or infrastructure related to the process of 

removing salts from saline water to provide freshwater. 

• Drinking water supply—Activities and/or infrastructure designed to 

improve access to and quality and availability of clean drinking water.

• Flood control—Activities related to dredging, hydrologic forecasting, 

and the construction, operation, and maintenance of infrastructure 

designed to reduce flood damage.

• Irrigation—Activities and/or infrastructure related to the diversion, 

distribution, delivery, and drainage of water for agricultural purposes. 

• Navigation—Activities and/or infrastructure related to dredging and the 

construction, operation, and maintenance of infrastructure (e.g., locks, 

channels, and dams), primarily for river-based transportation.

• Wastewater treatment—Activities and/or infrastructure designed to 

manage and treat storm water and domestic and/or industrial 

wastewater.

• Water dispute management—Adjudication, litigation, and negotiation 

activities to prevent or resolve water-related disputes, including water 

settlement payments.
Page 5 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

• Water conservation—Activities and/or infrastructure designed to 

reclaim, recycle, and/or reuse potable or nonpotable water. 

• Watershed protection, restoration, and management (watershed 

management)—Activities and/or infrastructure related to nonpoint 

source pollution prevention, wetlands restoration, and land-based 

activities related to source water protection and coastal zone 

management.

Federal agencies provide financial support for freshwater programs 

through direct federal spending and grant, loan, and loan guarantee 

programs. For the purposes of this report, direct federal spending is a 

general term used to describe, among other things, work performed by 

federal employees or through contracts with private and nongovernmental 

entities on the federal government’s behalf. For example, direct federal 

spending includes the financial support spent by federal agencies for, 

among other things, the construction of reservoirs for flood control and 

irrigation. Grants, loans, and loan guarantees are different types of 

financial assistance programs provided by federal agencies to help 

communities with projects, such as construction of water and wastewater 

treatment facilities. In addition to providing financial support on the direct 

costs of freshwater programs, such as capital construction and operations 

and maintenance costs, agencies also provide funds for technical 

assistance and research and development efforts. 

Agencies rely on several sources of funding—including annual 

appropriations from the general fund and from dedicated funding sources, 

such as trust funds—to provide financial support for these programs. 

Agencies obligate these funds for multiple purposes as they implement 

their programs. Obligations represent amounts for orders placed, contracts 

awarded, services received, and similar transactions during a given period 

that will require payments during the same or a future period. Obligations 

differ from expenditures in that an expenditure is the issuance of a check, 

disbursement of cash, or electronic transfer of funds made to liquidate an 

obligation. In addition, in some circumstances expenditures fulfilling an 

obligation may occur during subsequent years. Consequently, obligations 

provide the best estimate of what an agency plans to spend during a fiscal 

year. 

The extent to which agencies track their freshwater efforts vary. Agencies 

tend to track the financial support they provide to large freshwater 

programs, such as EPA’s Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. Some 
Page 6 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

programs, such as Agriculture’s Conservation Reserve Program, serve 

multiple purposes and specific program components, such as irrigation 

activities, are not specifically tracked. Similarly, freshwater projects (e.g., a 

dam) can serve multiple purposes, providing benefits such as water 

storage, flood control, and generation of hydroelectric power. The financial 

support provided for the overall project cost is generally available, but the 

costs for specific components of the project are not readily available. In 

addition, definitions of freshwater programs can vary depending on the 

agency’s role. An agency that is responsible for maintaining portions of the 

nation’s waterways may include lock infrastructure and waterway 

operations and maintenance activities in its navigation program; however, 

other agencies, which are responsible for research and development of 

freshwater resources, may include stream flow and sedimentation research 

within their navigation programs. Because of these differences, agencies 

may not be tracking their freshwater expenditures consistently across 

agencies. As such, financial information reported by the agencies on the 

federal government’s financial support of freshwater programs in the 

United States and abroad is an estimate of the minimum amount of funds 

provided for these efforts. 

Federal Agencies 

Provided an Estimated 

$49 Billion for 

Domestic Freshwater 

Programs during Fiscal 

Years 2000 through 

2004

Of the 27 agencies that provided about $49 billion in federal financial 

support specifically for freshwater programs in the United States during 

fiscal years 2000 through 2004, 3 agencies accounted for over 70 percent of 

the total.2

 EPA provided about 31 percent of the total support, the Corps 

accounted for about 26 percent of the total, and Agriculture’s Rural Utilities 

Service accounted for about 16 percent of the total. See table 1 for more 

information on the federal financial support provided for domestic 

freshwater programs.

2

The Rural Utilities Service is one of several subagencies within Agriculture’s Rural 

Development agency.
Page 7 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Table 1: Federal Agencies’ Estimated Financial Support for Domestic Freshwater Programs, Fiscal Years 2000 through 2004

Dollars in millions

 Fiscal year

Department or agency 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total 

Agriculture

Agricultural Research Service $87.9 $98.9 $103.9 $114.0 $119.1 $523.8

Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension 

Service 27.7 31.1 33.3 39.7 41.1 172.9

Economic Research Service 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.8 4.7

Farm Service Agencya 0.0 0.1 13.2 5.9 5.4 24.6

Forest Serviceb 59.0 52.1 59.3 62.1 59.0 291.5

Natural Resources Conservation Service 270.3 259.1 403.1 473.7 445.9 1,852.0

Rural Utilities Service 1,311.1 1,340.5 2,065.4 1,388.8 1,471.7 7,577.4

Subtotal $1,756.9 $1,782.7 $2,679.1 $2,085.1 $2,142.9 $10,446.7

Commerce

Economic Development Administration $56.9 $87.1 $59.3 $56.4 $77.8 $337.5

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrationc 35.2 36.3 41.7 42.5 46.6 202.3

Subtotal $92.1 $123.4 $101.0 $98.9 $124.3 $539.8

Defense

Army Corps of Engineersd $2,485.8 $2,614.0 $2,656.9 $2,702.6 $2,450.9 $12,910.2

Army Material Command 0.2 1.3 3.4 6.0 9.5 20.4

Office of Naval Research 0.8 1.2 0.7 7.2 7.0 16.8

Subtotal $2,486.8 $2,616.5 $2,661.0 $2,715.8 $2,467.4 $12,947.4

Energye $4.2 $1.5 $3.7 $0.3 $7.7 $17.3

Health and Human Services

Administration for Children and Families $5.1 $5.3 $6.6 $6.6 $7.2 $30.7

Indian Health Service 91.2 91.5 90.8 88.0 92.7 454.2

Subtotal $96.3 $96.8 $97.4 $94.5 $99.9 $484.9

Housing and Urban Development

Office of Community Planning and Developmentf $275.8 $478.9 $552.9 $528.9 $424.4 $2,260.9

Interior

Bureau of Indian Affairs $71.5 $74.5 $88.3 $89.2 $67.1 $390.7

Bureau of Land Management 47.2 52.7 61.6 71.1 80.7 313.3

Bureau of Reclamationg 692.7 637.2 802.2 739.7 788.8 3,660.6

Fish and Wildlife Serviceh 40.6 136.4 154.1 147.2 174.7 653.0

National Park Servicei 65.2 30.5 69.9 34.6 27.3 227.4
Page 8 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Source: GAO survey of federal agencies’ freshwater programs.

Note: Other agencies, such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency and Small Business 

Administration, may also provide financial support for these programs. In addition, the Department of 

the Treasury’s Judgment Fund paid out over $41 million in fiscal year 2003 and over $3 million in fiscal 

year 2004 as part of the settlement of a dispute related to the Central Valley Project, a large water 

project in California. Sumner Peck Ranch Inc. v. Bureau of Reclamation, No. CV-F-91-048 OWW (E.D. 

Cal). An additional payment of over $64 million was paid out in fiscal year 2005. The figures in the table 

are reported as obligations, appropriations, or expenditures in current dollars. Unless otherwise noted, 

figures refer to obligations. All totals were calculated prior to rounding to the nearest million. Totals may 

not equal the sums of the yearly amounts due to rounding.

a

These figures are for the Farmable Wetlands Program that began as a pilot program in fiscal year 

2001. The figures are an estimate of the amount of federal dollars (rental and other payments) paid to 

landholders to convert farmlands into wetlands. According to a senior agency official, these figures can 

be used as a proxy for obligations.

b

These figures are appropriations. According to a senior agency official, the agency obligates the 

entire relevant appropriation each fiscal year. 

c

These figures only include selective programs from the National Weather Service and Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Research offices.

d

These figures only include the Civil Works program and are primarily in obligations. Figures for one 

program were reported in expenditures. According to a senior agency official, the agency obligates the 

entire relevant appropriation for this program each fiscal year. 

e

The Department of Energy is counted by itself because no separate agencies were identified within 

the department that provided financial support for freshwater programs.

f

These figures are actual disbursements. 

g

These figures only include the agency’s Water and Related Resources budget and some nonfederal 

dollars, such as funds provided by local governmental entities, which were used to supplement the 

agency’s annual budget. The agency could not readily break out funds provided by the nonfederal 

dollars. 

h

These figures only include selective programs from the Division of Bird Habitat Conservation and the 

Division of Federal Assistance. The agency modified its data management system in 2001, which 

U.S. Geological Survey 196.6 212.3 216.6 218.0 225.8 1,069.3

Subtotal $1,113.9 $1,143.5 $1,392.8 $1,299.7 $1,364.4 $6,314.4

Transportation

Federal Highway Administrationj $24.4 $27.9 $17.5 $26.2 $20.2 $116.2

Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporationk 12.0 13.0 13.3 14.0 14.3 66.5

Subtotal $36.4 $40.9 $30.8 $40.2 $34.5 $182.7

Independent agency

Appalachian Regional Commissionl $23.6 $30.7 $22.7 $24.4 $23.9 $125.2

EPA 2,987.4 3,012.4 3,135.2 3,085.3 3,132.8 15,353.1

National Science Foundation 14.3 18.5 18.3 27.7 33.2 112.0

Subtotal $3,025.3 $3,061.6 $3,176.2 $3,137.4 $3,190.0 $15,590.4

Total $8,887.6 $9,345.9 $10,694.7 $10,000.9 $9,855.4 $48,784.5

(Continued From Previous Page)

Dollars in millions

 Fiscal year

Department or agency 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total 
Page 9 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

improved its ability to track freshwater programs. Financial support provided in fiscal year 2000 is 

incomplete because the information was not readily available.

i

These figures include the agency’s Water Resources Division’s budget along with water-related 

activities at the Everglades and Olympic National Parks. Financial support provided to other parks for 

freshwater programs were not readily available.

j

These figures only include costs related to mitigation of water pollution due to highway runoff.

k

These figures are appropriations. According to a senior agency official, the agency obligates the entire 

relevant appropriation each fiscal year. 

l

These figures are actual grant approval amounts. 

Each of the agency’s financial support of freshwater programs generally 

reflects the nature of its mission. EPA—as the agency responsible for 

protecting the nation’s waters through enforcing clean water and safe 

drinking water laws, providing support for municipal wastewater treatment 

plants, and protecting watersheds and sources of drinking water—provides 

substantial financial support for freshwater programs. On the other hand, 

the Department of Health and Human Services’ (Health) Administration of 

Children and Families—an agency responsible for federal programs that 

seek to promote economic and social well-being—administers a grant 

program dedicated to helping rural, low-income communities with their 

water and wastewater systems and provides a relatively small amount of 

financial support. In addition, agencies, such as Agriculture’s Rural Utilities 

Service, the Department of Commerce’s (Commerce) Economic 

Development Administration, Health’s Indian Health Service, the 

Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (Housing) Office of 

Community Planning and Development, and EPA, that assist communities 

with the development of drinking water supply and wastewater treatment 

facilities provide far more financial support than agencies, such as 

Agriculture’s Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension 

Service and Defense’s Army Material Command and Office of Naval 

Research, that primarily support research and development efforts. 

Agencies generally receive annual appropriations from the general fund to 

support their domestic freshwater programs. In addition to annual 

appropriations, 4 agencies—Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Service, the Corps, 

Defense’s Office of Naval Research, and the Appalachian Regional 

Commission—received funds from supplemental appropriations. The 

Department of Transportation’s (Transportation) Federal Highway 

Administration and Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation 

received the majority of their annual budgets from dedicated funding 

sources available subject to appropriations (the Highway Trust Fund and 

the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, respectively). In addition, 4 other 

agencies—Agriculture’s Farm Service Agency and Natural Resources 
Page 10 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Conservation Service, the Corps, and Interior’s 

Reclamation—supplemented their annual budgets with dedicated funding 

sources available subject to appropriation. The Agriculture agencies 

received funds from the Commodity Credit Corporation, while the Corps 

and Interior’s Reclamation received funding from trust funds. Finally, 

certain agencies, including Interior’s Reclamation and Fish and Wildlife 

Service and Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Service, received funds from 

dedicated funding sources available without further appropriation. For 

example, Interior’s Reclamation received funds from the Lower Colorado 

River Basin Development Fund to finance the operation and maintenance 

of freshwater infrastructure in the Colorado River Basin for, among other 

things, drinking water supply, flood control, and irrigation efforts.

Domestic drinking water supply and wastewater treatment programs were 

supported by 18 and 16 agencies, respectively. Agriculture’s Rural Utilities 

Service, Commerce’s Economic Development Administration, Health’s 

Indian Health Service, Housing’s Office of Community Planning and 

Development, and EPA primarily supported activities related to the 

development of drinking water supply and wastewater treatment 

infrastructure, and some of the other agencies mostly provided technical 

assistance and/or research and development assistance, such as water 

quality and water availability research. Sixteen agencies supported a 

variety of watershed management programs. While 7 agencies provided 

financial support for navigation programs, the Corps and Transportation’s 

Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation provided the majority of 

the support for, among other things, operations and maintenance of the 

nation’s waterways. See table 2 for more information on the domestic 

freshwater programs these agencies supported.
Page 11 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Table 2: Federal Agencies’ Domestic Freshwater Programs, Fiscal Years 2000 through 2004

Freshwater program

Department 

or agency Desalination

Drinking 

water 

supply 

Flood 

control Irrigation Navigation 

Wastewater 

treatment

Water 

dispute 

management 

Water 

conservation 

Watershed 

management

Agriculture

Agricultural 

Research 

Service X X X X

Cooperative 

State 

Research, 

Education,

and Extension 

Service X X X X X X X X

Economic 

Research 

Service X X X

Farm Service 

Agency X

Forest Service X X

Natural 

Resources 

Conservation 

Service X X X X

Rural Utilities 

Service X X

Commerce

Economic 

Development 

Administration X X X X

National 

Oceanic and 

Atmospheric 

Administration X X X X X

Defense

Army Corps of 

Engineers X X X X X X X X

Army Material 

Command X X X X

Office of 

Naval 

Research X X X

Energya X X X X
Page 12 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Health and 

Human 

Services

Administration 

for Children 

and Families X X

Indian Health 

Service X X

Housing and 

Urban 

Development

Office of 

Community 

Planning and 

Development X X X

Interior

Bureau of 

Indian Affairs X X X X X

Bureau of 

Land 

Management X X

Bureau of 

Reclamation X X X X X X X X

Fish and 

Wildlife 

Service X

National Park 

Service X X X

U.S. 

Geological 

Survey X X X X X X X X X

Transportation

Federal 

Highway 

Administration X

Saint 

Lawrence 

Seaway 

Development 

Corporation X

(Continued From Previous Page)

Freshwater program

Department 

or agency Desalination

Drinking 

water 

supply 

Flood 

control Irrigation Navigation 

Wastewater 

treatment

Water 

dispute 

management 

Water 

conservation 

Watershed 

management
Page 13 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Source: GAO survey of federal agencies’ freshwater programs.

Note: The programs noted above only include programs that contributed to the agencies’ financial 

support in table 1. Agencies may support additional freshwater programs. 

a

The Department of Energy is counted by itself because no separate agencies were identified within 

the department that provided financial support for freshwater programs.

Agencies used several different funding mechanisms to provide financial 

support for domestic freshwater programs. Twenty of the 27 agencies 

reported that they used direct federal spending to provide financial support 

for freshwater programs. For the purposes of our review, we define direct 

federal spending to include (1) work carried out by federal employees, 

contractors, and private and nongovernmental organization sectors for the 

federal government; (2) the federal government’s portion of federal 

cost-share programs; and (3) funds provided from one agency to another 

agency to conduct work. Thirteen agencies used grant programs, and 2 

agencies each used loan and loan guarantee programs. Many agencies used 

a combination of funding mechanisms to provide financial support for 

freshwater programs. See table 3 for more information on funding 

mechanisms used by agencies to provide financial support for freshwater 

programs in the United States.

Independent 

agency

Appalachian 

Regional 

Commission X X X X

EPA X X X

National 

Science 

Foundation X X X X X X X X

Total 8 18 12 10 7 16 7 10 16

(Continued From Previous Page)

Freshwater program

Department 

or agency Desalination

Drinking 

water 

supply 

Flood 

control Irrigation Navigation 

Wastewater 

treatment

Water 

dispute 

management 

Water 

conservation 

Watershed 

management
Page 14 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Table 3: Funding Mechanisms Used by Agencies to Provide Financial Support for Domestic Freshwater Programs, Fiscal Years 

2000 through 2004

Source: GAO survey of federal agencies’ freshwater programs.

Note: The funding mechanisms noted above only include mechanisms used to disburse agencies’ 

financial support reported in table 1. Agencies may use additional funding mechanisms. 

a

EPA grants are primarily used to fund the Drinking Water and Clean Water State Revolving Funds. 

These revolving funds make loans to municipalities. 

b

The Department of Energy is counted by itself because no separate agencies were identified within 

the department that provided financial support for freshwater programs.

c

In fiscal year 2002, the agency dissolved its loan guarantee program.

Funding mechanism Department Agency that provided financial support

Direct federal spending Agriculture • Agricultural Research Service

• Economic Research Service 

• Farm Service Agency

• Forest Service

• Natural Resources Conservation Service

Commerce • National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration

Defense • Army Corps of Engineers 

• Army Material Command

Health and Human Services • Indian Health Service

Interior • Bureau of Indian Affairs

• Bureau of Land Management 

• National Park Service

Transportation • Federal Highway Administration

• Saint Lawrence Seaway Development 

Corporation

Grant programs Commerce • Economic Development Administration

Health and Human Services • Administration for Children and Families

Housing and Urban Development • Office of Community Planning and 

Development

Independent Agencies • Appalachian Regional Commission

• EPAa

• National Science Foundation

Direct federal spending and grant programs Agriculture • Cooperative State Research, Education, 

and Extension Service

Defense • Office of Naval Research

Energyb

Interior • Fish and Wildlife Service

• U.S. Geological Survey

Direct federal spending, and grant, loan, and 

loan guarantee programs

Interior • Bureau of Reclamationc

Grant, loan, and loan guarantee programs Agriculture • Rural Utilities Service
Page 15 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Grant programs and direct federal spending provided over $22 billion and 

about $22 billion, respectively, for domestic freshwater programs. Loan 

programs provided over $4 billion, and loan guarantee programs provided 

over $90 million in initial obligations. Initial obligations are the amount 

agencies obligated for the subsidy cost when a loan guarantee was made. 

They do not include subsequent reestimates. See figure 1 for the financial 

support provided by each funding mechanism.

Figure 1: Financial Support Provided by Each Funding Mechanism for Domestic 

Freshwater Programs, Fiscal Years 2000 through 2004

Note: In addition to these funding mechanisms, about 0.2 percent ($90.3 million) of the total financial 

support for domestic freshwater programs was provided through loan guarantee programs.

The $49 billion for domestic freshwater programs includes funding 

provided from one agency to another to conduct freshwater activities in the 

United States. For example, the Corps received financial support from EPA 

to conduct watershed management activities. We included funding for this 

effort in the financial information reported by EPA. See table 4 for 

examples of agencies that performed work on freshwater activities in the 

United States using financial support provided to them by other agencies.

Grant programs ($22.5 billion)

Direct federal spending ($21.8 billion)

Source: GAO survey of federal agencies' freshwater programs.

46%

45%

9%

Loan programs ($4.4 billion)
Page 16 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Table 4: Examples of Agencies’ Domestic Freshwater-Related Activities That Were Supported by Other Agencies, Fiscal Years 

2000 through 2004

Source: GAO survey of federal agencies’ freshwater programs.

Agency conducting the work Agency that provided financial support

Examples of freshwater-related 

activities

Agriculture

Agricultural Research Service • Agriculture agencies

• Defense agencies

• Interior agencies

• EPA

Irrigation, flood control, water 

conservation, and watershed management

Rural Utilities Service • Commerce’s Economic Development 

Administration

• Appalachian Regional Commission

Drinking water supply and wastewater 

treatment

Commerce

Economic Development Administration • Defense’s Office of Economic Adjustment

• Appalachian Regional Commission

Drinking water supply, wastewater 

treatment, irrigation, and flood control

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration

• Army Corps of Engineers

• Interior’s U.S. Geological Survey

Drinking water supply, water conservation, 

watershed management, and flood control

Defense

Army Corps of Engineers • Agriculture agencies

• Defense agencies

• Interior agencies

• EPA

Flood control, navigation, and watershed 

management

Health and Human Services

Indian Health Service • EPA Drinking water supply and wastewater 

treatment

Housing and Urban Development

Office of Community Planning and 

Development

• Appalachian Regional Commission Drinking water supply, wastewater 

treatment, and flood control

Interior

Bureau of Reclamation • Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation 

Service

• Commerce’s National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration

• Defense agencies

• Energy

• Interior agencies

• EPA

Drinking water supply, flood control, 

irrigation, wastewater treatment, and 

watershed management

U.S. Geological Survey • Defense agencies

• Interior agencies

• Energy

• EPA

Drinking water supply and watershed 

management

Independent agency

EPA • Agriculture agencies

• Army Corps of Engineers

Drinking water supply and watershed 

management
Page 17 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

We also identified domestic programs that may provide financial support 

for freshwater activities, but are not included in the $49 billion because 

supporting freshwater activities is not the programs’ primary purpose and 

activity-level data is not readily available. For example, Housing’s Office of 

Community Planning and Development administers a loan guarantee 

program that may provide financial support for water infrastructure 

projects, but aggregate information on the use of loan guarantee authority 

for particular categories of activities is not readily available. Consequently, 

financial support provided by these types of programs is not included in 

table 1. Other agencies also have these types of programs that may support 

freshwater-related activities: Agriculture’s Farm Service Agency, Forest 

Service, and Rural Utilities Service; Commerce’s Economic Development 

Administration; Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service; the Appalachian 

Regional Commission; and EPA. Furthermore, while these 27 agencies 

provided the majority of the federal financial support for freshwater 

programs in the United States, other agencies may also provide financial 

support for these types of programs. Appendix II provides information on 

some other agencies and programs that can provide financial support for 

freshwater-related activities. These agencies provide financial assistance 

primarily for specific regions of the United States and/or support a variety 

of programs, including freshwater-related activities.

In the domestic support for freshwater programs, we also identified the 

United States’ financial contributions to three binational 

commissions—Border Environment Cooperation Commission, 

International Boundary and Water Commission, and International Joint 

Commission. These commissions support a variety of projects on both 

sides of the U.S. borders with Canada and Mexico.3

 Typically, these 

commissions coordinate their efforts with EPA and/or State and are able to 

track how U.S. contributions are used to support their freshwater 

activities. Together, the three commissions used about $175 million in U.S. 

contributions to support a number of freshwater projects during fiscal 

years 2000 through 2004. For the purposes of our review, we include 

information on U.S. contributions to these commissions in the same 

section as the information for domestic freshwater programs because these 

projects are joint efforts among the United States, Canada, and Mexico 

3

For the International Boundary and Water Commission, the United States funds only the 

expenses of the U.S. section of the commission. In addition, the United States may provide 

financial contributions to other commissions, such as the North American Commission for 

Environmental Cooperation, which may fund freshwater projects that benefit the United 

States, Canada, and/or Mexico.
Page 18 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

along the shared borders; however, information on funding spent solely in 

the United States by the commissions is not readily available. Table 5 

presents information on total U.S. contributions to these commissions for 

freshwater projects. See appendix II for more information on these 

commissions.

Table 5: U.S. Financial Contributions Used to Support Freshwater Projects along Both Sides of the U.S. Borders, Fiscal Years 

2000 through 2004 

Sources: Department of State and commission officials.

Note: These figures are estimates of obligations in current dollars. All totals were calculated prior to 

rounding to the nearest million. Totals may not equal the sums of the yearly amounts due to rounding.

a

The commission did not support any freshwater projects in fiscal year 2000. 

Federal Agencies 

Provided an Estimated 

$3 Billion for 

Freshwater Programs 

Abroad during Fiscal 

Years 2000 through 

2004

Of the about $3 billion of U.S. financial support provided internationally for 

freshwater programs during fiscal years 2000 through 2004, an estimated 

$2 billion was spent throughout most of the world, and more recently 

another $1 billion supported freshwater projects in Afghanistan and Iraq. In 

addition to the financial assistance provided directly by federal agencies 

for freshwater programs abroad, the United States also indirectly supports 

these programs through its contributions to numerous international 

organizations, such as the World Bank and the United Nations.

Eight Federal Agencies 

Provided Financial Support 

for Programs throughout 

the World 

Eight federal agencies obligated an estimated $2 billion during fiscal years 

2000 through 2004 for freshwater activities abroad, excluding Afghanistan 

and Iraq. USAID accounted for over 90 percent of the $2 billion. Interior’s 

Fish and Wildlife Service provided about 6 percent; Agriculture’s Foreign 

Agricultural Service and the U.S. Trade and Development Agency (an 

independent federal agency) each accounted for around 1 percent. The 

Dollars in millions

Fiscal year

Commission 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total

Border Environment Cooperation Commission $3.1 $2.9 $5.4 $2.4 $1.6 $15.4

International Boundary and Water Commission 25.9 30.3 31.1 31.7 32.1 151.1

International Joint Commissiona 0.0 1.5 2.9 2.3 1.5 8.1

Total $29.0 $34.6 $39.3 $36.4 $35.2 $174.6
Page 19 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

remaining 4 agencies (State, the Corps, the African Development 

Foundation, and the National Science Foundation) together provided about 

1 percent of the support. See table 6 for information on the federal financial 

support provided for freshwater programs abroad, excluding aid provided 

to Afghanistan and Iraq. 

Table 6: Federal Agencies’ Estimated Financial Support for Freshwater Programs Abroad, Excluding Afghanistan and Iraq, 

Fiscal Years 2000 through 2004

Source: GAO survey of federal agencies’ freshwater programs.

Note: Some of the agencies primarily provide financial support on a project-by-project basis. 

Consequently, total financial support may vary from year-to-year. Other agencies, such as the 

Inter-American Foundation, may also provide financial support for these programs. The figures in the 

table are reported as obligations in current dollars. All totals were calculated prior to rounding to the 

nearest thousand. Totals may not equal the sums of the yearly amounts due to rounding. 

a

These figures only include the Civil Works program.

b

This total includes contributions provided to the Consultative Group on International Agricultural 

Research during fiscal years 2000 through 2004 for irrigation and watershed management projects.

For international support on freshwater programs abroad, agencies 

generally receive annual appropriations from the general fund to support 

their freshwater programs. Some freshwater programs, such as those at 

Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service, are also supported by permanent or 

dedicated funding sources, which remain available without further 

appropriation. Agriculture’s Foreign Agricultural Service receives funds for 

Dollars in thousands

Fiscal year

Department or agency 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total

Agriculture

Foreign Agricultural Service $57 $4,213 $2,875 $396 $19,303 $26,844

Defense

Army Corps of Engineersa 28 100 100 200 100 528

Interior

Fish and Wildlife Service 18,363 29,799 30,067 26,446 24,033 128,708

State 1,693 1,950 2,000 2,865 200 8,708

Independent agency

African Development Foundation 55 102 393 30 279 859

National Science Foundation 100 112 126 222 146 706

U.S. Agency for International Development 432,004 339,310 372,592 344,746 331,486 1,820,137b

U.S. Trade and Development Agency 4,115 7,616 9,214 4,769 2,932 28,645

Total $456,414 $383,201 $417,367 $379,673 $378,479 $2,015,134
Page 20 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

its freshwater programs from the Commodity Credit Corporation (a 

dedicated funding source at Agriculture subject to congressional 

appropriation). 

Seven of the 8 agencies reported that they provided financial support for 

wastewater treatment and watershed management programs abroad. In 

addition, 6 agencies each provided financial support for drinking water 

supply and irrigation programs. See table 7 for information on the 

freshwater programs supported by federal agencies abroad. 

Table 7: Federal Agencies’ Freshwater Programs Abroad, Excluding Afghanistan and Iraq, Fiscal Years 2000 through 2004

Source: GAO survey of federal agencies’ freshwater programs.

Freshwater program

Department or 

agency Desalination

Drinking 

water 

supply 

Flood 

control Irrigation Navigation 

Wastewater 

treatment

Water 

dispute 

management

Water 

conservation 

Watershed 

management

Agriculture

Foreign 

Agricultural 

Service X X X X X X

Defense

Army Corps of 

Engineers X X X X X X

Interior

Fish and 

Wildlife Service X

State X X X X X X X X

Independent 

agency

African 

Development 

Foundation X X X

National 

Science 

Foundation X X X

U.S. Agency for 

International 

Development X X X X X X X X

U.S. Trade and 

Development 

Agency X X X X X X X X

Total 3 6 4 6 2 7 4 4 7
Page 21 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

About 99 percent of the estimated $2 billion in federal financial support for 

freshwater programs abroad was delivered through grant programs 

administered by 7 agencies. The Corps was the only agency that did not 

have a grant program to support freshwater programs abroad. Agriculture’s 

Foreign Agricultural Service, the Corps, State, and USAID provided a 

relatively small amount of financial support (about $15 million total) 

through direct federal spending. Additionally, USAID obligated $4 million in 

loan guarantees for water supply and wastewater treatment projects 

through its Development Credit Authority program to cover up to 

50 percent of the risk in lending.4

Some of the $2 billion for freshwater programs abroad includes funding 

provided from one agency to another to conduct freshwater projects in 

foreign countries. For example, Interior’s Reclamation received funds from 

State to conduct desalination activities. We included funding for this effort 

in the financial information reported by State. See table 8 for examples of 

agencies that performed work on freshwater activities abroad using 

financial support provided to them by other agencies. 

Table 8: Examples of Agencies’ Freshwater-Related Activities Abroad That Were Supported by Other Agencies, Fiscal Years 

2000 through 2004

4

The $4 million figure represents initial obligations, not annual reestimates, of the amount in 

loan guarantees necessary to cover up to 50 percent of the risk in lending on 

USAID-supported loan projects. See appendix I for more information on loan guarantee 

programs and the types of financial information presented in this report.

Agency conducting the work Agency that provided financial support

Examples of freshwater-related 

activities

Agriculture

Agricultural Research Service • Agriculture’s Foreign Agricultural Service

• State

Irrigation

Foreign Agricultural Service • State Wastewater treatment

Forest Service • State Watershed management

Commerce

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration

• State

• USAID

Flood control and watershed 

management

Defense

Army Corps of Engineers • State

• USAID

Watershed management and 

wastewater treatment
Page 22 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Source: GAO survey of federal agencies’ freshwater programs.

Appendix III provides information on these and other agencies and 

programs that can also provide financial support for freshwater activities 

abroad.

Financial Support for 

Afghanistan and Iraq

For Afghanistan and Iraq, USAID and Defense provided about $1 billion 

during fiscal years 2002 through 2004 to support the reconstruction and 

rehabilitation of freshwater infrastructure in these countries. For the 

purposes of our review, we report financial support for freshwater projects 

in Afghanistan and Iraq separately from the $2 billion total in foreign aid 

because these funds were primarily made available during fiscal year 2004. 

USAID provided financial support through grants and contracts and by 

transferring funds to the Corps to carry out work on water supply, 

wastewater treatment, irrigation, and watershed projects in Afghanistan 

and Iraq. USAID received funds from the Emergency Supplemental 

Appropriation for Defense and for the Reconstruction of Iraq and 

Afghanistan for Fiscal Year 2004 to support, among other activities, 

freshwater projects in those two countries. Within the Office of the 

Secretary of Defense, (1) the Defense Security Cooperation Agency’s 

Humanitarian Assistance Program supports, among other things, water 

infrastructure projects overseas and (2) the Army’s Commander’s 

Emergency Response Program is designed to respond to urgent 

humanitarian relief and reconstruction requirements at the local level in 

Afghanistan and Iraq. Also within Defense, the Project and Contracting 

Office awarded and continues to manage various contracts to support, 

among other things, the construction of rural water systems and the 

rehabilitation of drinking water supply facilities in major cities in Iraq.

Table 9 presents information on financial support provided by USAID and 

Defense for freshwater projects in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Interior

Bureau of Reclamation • State

• USAID

Desalination, flood control, and water 

dispute management

U.S. Geological Survey • State

• USAID

Flood control, drinking water supply, 

wastewater treatment, and water 

conservation

Independent agency

EPA • State Drinking water supply

(Continued From Previous Page)

Agency conducting the work Agency that provided financial support

Examples of freshwater-related 

activities
Page 23 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Table 9: Federal Agencies’ Estimated Financial Support for Freshwater Projects in Afghanistan and Iraq, Fiscal Years 2002 

through 2004

Sources: U.S. Agency for International Development and Department of Defense.

Note: The figures in the table are reported as obligations in current dollars. All totals were calculated 

prior to rounding to the nearest million. Totals may not equal the sums of the yearly amounts due to 

rounding. 

a

The agency’s Humanitarian Assistance Program funded these projects.

b

Army’s Commander’s Emergency Response Program funded these projects.

The United States Also 

Provided Financial 

Contributions to Various 

International Organizations 

That Support Freshwater 

Programs

In addition to providing financial support directly through federal agencies 

for freshwater programs abroad, the United States also indirectly supports 

these programs through its contributions to numerous international 

organizations (e.g., the United Nations and the World Bank). In most cases, 

the United States makes contributions to the general budgets of these 

organizations and not to a specific project or program. In addition, these 

organizations usually combine U.S. contributions with other sources of 

funds, including contributions from other countries, to fund their 

freshwater programs. As a result, it is difficult to determine what portion of 

U.S. contributions to international organizations is used to support 

freshwater programs. 

The United States contributed to the general budgets of a number of 

multilateral development banks and financial institutions that support 

Dollars in millions

Fiscal year

Country or agency 2002 2003 2004 Total

Afghanistan

Defense’s Defense Security Cooperation Agencya $1.2 $1.1 $0.5 $2.8

Defense’s Secretary of the Armyb - - 5.8 5.8

U.S. Agency for International Development 15.1 9.6 82.8 107.5

Subtotal $16.3 $10.6 $89.1 $116.1

Iraq

Defense’s Defense Security Cooperation Agencya $0.0 $1.1 $2.3 $3.4

Defense’s Project and Contracting Office - - 369.8 369.8

Defense’s Secretary of the Armyb - - 24.6 24.6

U.S. Agency for International Development - 214.9 348.6 563.5

Subtotal $0.0 $216.0 $745.3 $961.3

Total $16.3 $226.7 $834.4 $1,077.4
Page 24 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

freshwater projects around the world, and some portion of these 

contributions was used to support freshwater efforts worldwide. Using 

funds contributed by the United States and other countries or borrowed 

from world capital markets, multilateral development banks finance 

economic and social development programs around the world. Together, 

these autonomous institutions are the largest single source of 

developmental assistance for developing countries. The United States is a 

member of, and has made financial contributions to, five multilateral 

development banks that support freshwater projects around the world. 

These multilateral development banks include the African Development 

Bank Group, the Asian Development Bank, the European Bank for 

Reconstruction and Development, the Inter-American Development Bank, 

and the World Bank Group. The United States also contributed to other 

international financial institutions—including the Global Environment 

Facility, the International Fund for Agricultural Development, and the 

North American Development Bank—that also support freshwater projects 

abroad. See table 10 for figures on total contributions the United States 

made to selected multilateral development banks and financial institutions. 

Some portion of these contributions supported freshwater projects abroad. 

Table 10: Total U.S. Contributions to Selected Multilateral Development Banks and Financial Institutions, Fiscal Years 2000 

through 2004 (Some Portion of These Contributions Supported Freshwater Projects Abroad)

Sources: Department of the Treasury and the Environmental Protection Agency (for contributions to the North American Development 

Bank).

Note: The figures in the table are reported in current dollars.

Dollars in millions

Fiscal year

Multilateral development bank or financial institution 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total

African Development Bank $57.8 $105.9 $105.1 $5.1 $224.5 $498.4

Asian Development Bank 132.2 71.8 115.0 0.0 240.8 559.8

European Bank for Reconstruction and Development 36.2 36.7 35.6 35.7 35.3 179.5

Global Environment Facility 58.1 107.8 100.5 146.9 138.4 551.7

Inter-American Development Bank 69.0 34.9 18.0 42.6 24.9 189.4

International Fund for Agricultural Development 0.0 5.0 15.0 14.9 14.9 49.8

North American Development Bank 41.0 84.0 0.0 102.6 61.4 289.0

World Bank Group 992.8 783.3 796.4 1.6 1,753.4 4,327.5

Total $1,387.1 $1,229.4 $1,185.6 $349.4 $2,493.6 $6,645.1
Page 25 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

The United States also contributed to the general budgets of a number of 

international organizations that support freshwater projects around the 

world, and some portion of these contributions was used to support 

freshwater efforts. Of these organizations, the United States contributed 

the most financial support to the United Nations. In addition to assisting 

with peacekeeping efforts, the United Nations provides funds for 

humanitarian, environmental, and development programs that support, 

among other things, water resources management efforts around the 

world. Table 11 presents figures on contributions the United States made to 

selected international organizations. Some portion of these contributions 

supported freshwater projects abroad. 

Table 11: Total U.S. Contributions to Selected International Organizations, Fiscal Years 2000 through 2004 (Some Portion of 

These Contributions Supported Freshwater Projects Abroad) 

Source: Department of State. 

Note: The figures in the table are reported as obligations in current dollars. All totals were calculated 

prior to rounding to the nearest million. Totals may not equal the sums of the yearly amounts due to 

rounding.

a

These figures are estimates of financial contributions the United States made to the organizations in 

fiscal year 2004.

b

These figures include: (1) assessed contributions to the United Nations (U.N.), and selected 

specialized agencies of the U.N.—Food and Agriculture Organization and World Health Organization, 

and (2) voluntary contributions to selected specialized agencies of the U.N.—the Food and Agriculture 

Organization, the U.N. Development Programme, the U.N. Environment Programme, the U.N. 

Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the World Health Organization. 

c

These figures do not include voluntary contributions to the U.N. or its selected specialized agencies. 

d

These figures include voluntary contributions and dues paid to the World Conservation Union.

e

This figure does not include voluntary contributions to the World Conservation Union.

Dollars in millions

Fiscal year

Organization 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004a Total

Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture $12.3 $16.4 $16.4 $20.2 $16.6 $81.7

Organization of American States 45.8 53.3 50.1 69.0 55.3 273.5

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development 50.0 44.8 51.7 63.8 82.2 292.5

Pan American Health Organization 51.7 52.3 55.0 66.3 57.2 282.4

Ramsar Convention on Wetlands 0.8 0.8 1.1 0.7 0.8 4.2

United Nationsb 569.2 592.9 673.8 775.3 506.9c 3,117.5

The World Conservation Uniond 1.5 1.4 1.9 1.6 0.3e 6.7

Total $731.3 $761.7 $849.9 $996.8 $719.3 $4,085.5
Page 26 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Appendix III presents general information on these multilateral 

development banks, financial institutions, and international organizations 

and their freshwater programs.

Agency Comments We provided the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, 

Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, 

Transportation, and State and independent agencies, including the African 

Development Foundation, the Appalachian Regional Commission, EPA, the 

National Science Foundation, the Small Business Administration, USAID, 

and the U.S. Trade and Development Agency, with a draft of this report for 

review and comment. Three of these agencies—Interior, Health and Human 

Services, and USAID—provided us with written comments that are 

included in appendixes IV through VI. The 3 agencies agreed with the 

report and provided us with technical comments, which we have included 

as appropriate. The other 13 agencies provided us with technical comments 

orally or did not provide us with any comments. We have made changes in 

response to the technical comments throughout the report, as appropriate. 

We will send copies of this report to interested congressional committees; 

the Secretaries of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Health and 

Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, 

Transportation, and State; the Administrators of EPA, Small Business 

Administration, and USAID; the Directors of the National Science 

Foundation, Office of Management and Budget, and U.S. Trade and 

Development Agency; the President of the African Development 

Foundation; the Federal Co-Chair of the Appalachian Regional 

Commission; and other interested parties. We will also make copies 

available to others upon request. In addition, the report will be available at 

no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
Page 27 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

If you or your staff have any questions, please call me or Edward Zadjura at 

(202) 512-3841. Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix VII.

Anu K. Mittal

Director, Natural Resources 

 and Environment
Page 28 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Appendix I

Scope and Methodology ApApenednxidexiIs

The objectives of our review were to determine for fiscal years 2000 

through 2004 how much financial support federal agencies provided for 

freshwater programs in the United States and abroad. 

To identify the agencies that support freshwater programs in the United 

States and abroad, we reviewed the Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance and reports published by GAO, the Congressional Research 

Service, the United Nations, and the National Research Council of the 

National Academies. We also interviewed water and natural resources 

experts at the Congressional Research Service. For the purpose of our 

review, we examined freshwater programs that support desalination; 

drinking water supply; flood control; irrigation; navigation (primarily for 

river-based transportation); wastewater treatment; water conservation; 

water dispute management; and watershed protection, restoration, and 

management activities. We identified numerous agencies that support at 

least one of these freshwater programs. After conducting additional 

background research and interviews with officials at these agencies, we 

narrowed our focus to 32 agencies.1

 These agencies received congressional 

appropriations during each of the fiscal years from 2000 through 2004 and, 

to some extent, tracked the amount of financial support they provided for 

freshwater programs. Together, these agencies accounted for the majority 

of the federal financial support for freshwater programs in the United 

States and abroad during fiscal years 2000 through 2004. These agencies 

include the following:

• Department of Agriculture (Agriculture): Agricultural Research 

Service; Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service; 

Economic Research Service; Farm Service Agency; Foreign Agricultural 

Service; Forest Service; Natural Resources Conservation Service; Rural 

Utilities Service;

• Department of Commerce (Commerce): Economic Development 

Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration;

1

We also obtained financial information on the total amount of funds the Department of 

Defense provided to support freshwater projects in Afghanistan and Iraq through the 

Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Secretary of the Army, and Project Contracting 

Office. Although the Small Business Administration also provides loan guarantees for 

freshwater-related projects, these efforts are not the focus of the agency. In addition, the 

agency obligated a small amount of funds for these efforts during the 5-year period covered 

in this review. Consequently, we did not focus our efforts on these agencies. 
Appendix I

Scope and Methodology

Page 29 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

• Department of Defense (Defense): Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), 

Army Material Command, Office of Naval Research;

• Department of Energy (Energy);

• Department of Health and Human Services (Health): Administration 

for Children and Families, Indian Health Service;

• Department of Housing and Urban Development (Housing): Office of 

Community Planning and Development;

• Department of the Interior (Interior): Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau 

of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), Fish and 

Wildlife Service, National Park Service, U.S. Geological Survey;

• Department of State (State);

• Department of Transportation (Transportation): Federal Highway 

Administration, Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation; and

• Independent agencies: African Development Foundation, Appalachian 

Regional Commission, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 

National Science Foundation, U.S. Agency for International 

Development (USAID), U.S. Trade and Development Agency. 

To determine the amount of financial support these agencies provided for 

freshwater programs, we used a questionnaire to gather information on 

agencies’ freshwater programs, including funds provided on an annual 

basis to support these programs.2

 Before distributing the questionnaire, we 

had staff from the Resources, Science, and Industry and American Law 

Divisions of the Congressional Research Service review the draft 

questionnaire, and we included their comments, accordingly. In addition, 

we pretested the questionnaire with an official from the Corps and 

incorporated her comments, as appropriate. We sent the questionnaires, 

along with a cover letter, to respondents and requested that agencies return 

the completed questionnaire within 4 weeks. All agencies returned their 

2

For the purpose of our review, we defined the term “financial support” to include federal 

dollars provided through grant, loan, and loan guarantee programs and direct federal 

spending.
Appendix I

Scope and Methodology

Page 30 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

questionnaires. We conducted follow-up interviews with respondents to 

confirm the information and to clarify the information, if necessary. 

In our questionnaire, we requested financial information on the direct costs 

of agencies’ freshwater programs, such as capital construction and 

operations and maintenance costs of freshwater infrastructure. We also 

requested information on the amount of financial support provided for 

technical assistance and research and development efforts related to 

freshwater programs.3

 We requested information on freshwater programs 

that agencies typically fund during a year and excluding atypical funding, 

such as financial support for freshwater projects in response to natural 

disasters. We obtained and reported on financial support for freshwater 

projects in Afghanistan and Iraq separately from the total foreign 

assistance because these funds were provided in recent years.

We requested this information in the form of obligations because 

obligations provide a good estimate of what an agency plans to spend 

during a fiscal year. Additionally, financial information in the form of 

obligations are the best measure for comparing the amount of financial 

support provided from year to year over a period of time. Because we 

reviewed a fairly recent period of time during which inflation was minimal, 

we reported the figures in current dollars. For loan guarantee programs, we 

requested that the agency provide the amount they initially obligated the 

year the loan was guaranteed to cover potential defaults, rather than 

annual reestimates of these amounts. 

In cases where agencies do not track financial information in the form of 

obligations, we requested that senior agency officials provide the best 

available proxy for obligations. Some officials said that obligations are 

comparable to their appropriation or expenditure figures. Other officials 

stated that their agency collects information on actual disbursements or 

actual grant approval amounts. Agencies for which we do not report 

obligations include Agriculture’s Farm Service Agency and Forest Service, 

Housing’s Office of Community Planning and Development, 

Transportation’s Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, and 

the Appalachian Regional Commission—see notes to table 1 for more

3

For the purpose of our review, we excluded administrative overhead costs, such as those 

related to administering grant, loan, and loan guarantee programs.
Appendix I

Scope and Methodology

Page 31 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

information on these agencies’ financial information.4 We did not 

independently assess the reliability of the financial information provided by 

agency officials because obligations are agency expectations for 

expenditures and there are no associated transactions to track. 

Although we requested program-level financial information, we opted to 

present this information at the agency-level because agencies’ definitions 

of freshwater programs vary. However, we collected the program-level 

financial information to ensure that agency officials reported financial 

support for freshwater programs consistently across agencies. As part of 

this effort, we confirmed with each agency that for each of the programs 

listed in the questionnaire, the agency only provided financial information 

on the freshwater portion of the program. In addition to programs that 

specifically supported freshwater activities, we also requested information 

on other programs that may provide funding for these activities. We did not 

include financial support from these programs in the agency totals because 

supporting freshwater activities is not their primary purpose and activity 

level data is not readily available. Consequently, the financial information 

we reported is an estimate of the minimum amount of financial support 

provided by the agencies.

In addition to the agencies that specifically supported freshwater 

programs, we identified and obtained information on several binational 

commissions, international organizations, and multilateral development 

banks to which the United States made financial contributions and which 

support freshwater programs along U.S. borders or abroad. To identify how 

U.S. contributions to binational commissions were used to support 

freshwater programs along U.S. borders, we obtained financial information 

from officials at State and EPA and representatives from the commissions. 

To identify the annual amount of the United States’ financial contributions 

to multilateral development banks and other international organizations, 

we obtained financial information from officials at State and the 

Department of the Treasury. When necessary, we corroborated this 

information with support from other sources, including annual reports to 

Congress on U.S. contributions to international organizations. 

We conducted our review from March 2004 through January 2005 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

4

Obligation figures were reported for most of the Corps’ programs except one, which was 

reported in expenditures.
Page 32 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders ApendxiI

This appendix discusses federal financial support of freshwater programs 

in the United States and along U.S. borders in three parts. First, we provide 

a general overview on the agencies responsible for the majority of the 

federal financial support for freshwater programs in the United States, 

along with the total amount of financial support provided for freshwater 

programs during fiscal years 2000 through 2004. Second, we briefly 

summarize the information on some other agencies that can also provide 

financial support to domestic freshwater programs. Third, we provide 

information on (1) binational commissions that used U.S. financial 

contributions for freshwater projects along the U.S. borders with Canada 

and Mexico and (2) total U.S. financial contributions to these commissions 

for their freshwater programs during fiscal years 2000 through 2004. 

Federal Agencies The following agencies provide the majority of the federal government’s 

financial support specifically for freshwater programs in the United States. 

These programs, as described by agency officials, documents, and reports, 

are discussed below.

Department of Agriculture: 

$10.4 Billion

The mission of the Department of Agriculture is to provide leadership on 

food, agriculture, and natural resources issues on the basis of sound public 

policy, the best available science, and efficient management. The 

department conducts work under a variety of mission areas, including farm 

services, natural resources and the environment, research and education, 

and rural development. The agency provides financial support for 

freshwater programs primarily for the construction of drinking water and 

wastewater facilities, watershed and wetland management, and freshwaterrelated research.

Agricultural Research Service: 

$523.8 Million

The Agricultural Research Service is the department’s primary in-house 

scientific research agency. The agency conducts research to develop and 

transfer solutions to address agricultural problems to enhance natural 

resources, such as protecting and sustaining freshwater resources. The 

agency’s authority to conduct these efforts primarily falls under the 

Department of Agriculture Organic Act of 1862 and the Agricultural 

Research Act of 1935. Freshwater programs include technological 

improvements in irrigation, rural and urban water recycling and reuse, 

nonpoint source pollution prevention, stream restoration, and flood control 

structures. The agency also receives financial support from other federal 

agencies—such as Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 33 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Administration and the Corps—to support domestic freshwater programs, 

including watershed management, irrigation, and water conservation. 

Additionally, the agency receives funds from State to conduct freshwater 

activities abroad, such as irrigation systems in Pakistan and Mexico. 

Cooperative State Research, 

Education, and Extension 

Service: $172.9 Million

The Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service was 

created in 1994 through the USDA Reorganization Act. The agency provides 

financial support—primarily through grants to universities, nonprofit 

associations, private industry, and other groups—for state and local 

research, education, and outreach activities. The agency conducts these 

activities primarily through the Hatch Act of 1887, as amended, the 

National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 

1977, and section 406 of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and 

Education Reform Act of 1998. For example, through the Hatch Act, the 

agency provides block grants for agricultural research on an annual basis 

primarily to state land grant institutions. These funds are distributed 

according to a statutory formula. Although the scope of the agricultural 

research conducted under the Hatch Act is broad, portions of the financial 

support are directed toward research projects on freshwater resources.

Economic Research Service: $4.7 

Million

The Economic Research Service is Agriculture’s main source of economic 

information and research. Regarding freshwater resources, the agency 

primarily provides financial support for research and development 

programs. For example, the agency is currently conducting research on the 

impact of agriculture on water quality by examining (1) the influence of 

economic, environmental, and institutional factors affecting adoption of 

water conservation management practices and irrigation technologies; 

(2) the economics of alternative public policy mechanisms to encourage 

agricultural water conservation and improved water quality; and (3) the 

availability of water infrastructure and policy mechanisms to facilitate 

water reallocations and the implications for irrigated agriculture and 

resource costs. According to a senior agency official, these research

activities are generally performed under the Agricultural Marketing Act of 

1946. In addition to conducting its own freshwater programs, the agency 

receives funds from Agriculture’s Foreign Agricultural Service to support 

freshwater research and development efforts to foreign countries, such as 

a project to support hydrological modeling of river systems in North China.

Farm Service Agency: $24.6 

Million

The Farm Service Agency was formed after a departmental reorganization 

in 1994 and incorporated programs from several agencies. One of the 

agency’s primary missions is to help farmers conserve both land and water 
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 34 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

resources. The agency supports several multipurpose programs—such as 

the Debt for Nature Program and the Conservation Reserve Program—that 

may also benefit freshwater resources, but financial information 

specifically for freshwater efforts is not readily available. For example, 

through the Conservation Reserve Program, landowners receive annual 

rental payments and other payments for implementing long-term 

conservation practices on their land, for among other things, management 

of wetlands. The Farmable Wetlands Program, which began as a pilot in six 

states in fiscal year 2001 and is part of the Conservation Reserve Program, 

provides payments to farmers who voluntarily restore farmable wetlands. 

The program expanded nationwide in fiscal year 2002 when it was 

authorized by the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002. Funding 

for this program comes from the Commodity Credit Corporation—a 

government-owned and -operated corporation established in 1933 to 

stabilize, support, and protect farm income and prices.

Forest Service: $291.5 Million Among its goals, the Forest Service promotes ecosystem health and 

conservation in part by improving and protecting watershed conditions to 

provide the water quality and quantity necessary to support ecological 

functions. In the United States, forests cover approximately one-third of 

the land area from which about 66 percent of freshwater originates. Under 

the Organic Act of 1897, one of the primary reasons for establishing 

national forests was to maintain and restore watersheds to protect 

freshwater resources. The agency fulfills these efforts by supporting 

programs for watershed management activities, such as conducting water 

quality monitoring and watershed restoration. The agency also secures 

water rights to protect and use freshwater on Forest Service lands. 

Natural Resources Conservation 

Service: $1.9 Billion

The mission of the Natural Resources Conservation Service is to provide 

leadership in a partnership effort to help landowners conserve, maintain, 

and improve natural resources, including freshwater. As a part of these 

efforts, the agency supports watershed management, flood control, and 

water conservation programs. The agency provides financial support for 

freshwater activities through a variety of programs, including Watershed 

Protection and Flood Prevention Operations and the Watershed 

Rehabilitation Program. Most financial support for freshwater activities 

reported by the agency was through the Wetlands Reserve Program, which 

was mandated by the Food Security Act of 1985 and reauthorized by the 

Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002. The program is voluntary 

and offers landowners financial and technical assistance for the 

restoration, protection, and enhancement of wetlands. To be eligible for the 

program, a landowner must have owned the land for at least 12 months and 
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 35 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

the wetland must be restorable and suitable for wildlife benefits. As with 

the Farmable Wetlands Program administered by the Farm Service Agency, 

the source of funds for the program is through the Commodity Credit 

Corporation. 

Rural Utilities Service: $7.6 

Billion

Part of the mission of the Rural Utilities Service is to improve the quality of 

life in rural communities by administering drinking water supply and 

wastewater treatment programs. The agency provides the most financial 

support for freshwater programs of any Agriculture agency. The agency 

primarily uses grant and loan programs to provide financial support for 

developing water systems in rural areas and reducing water costs for rural 

users. The main authority to administer these programs is through the 

Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act of 1961. Municipalities, 

counties, special-purpose districts, Indian tribes, and nonprofit 

organizations are eligible for the programs. In addition, the agency provides 

technical assistance and training grants to nonprofit organizations to assist 

rural communities with drinking water and wastewater issues. 

Furthermore, the agency also administers a loan guarantee program for 

drinking water supply and wastewater treatment loans it provides. In 

addition to executing its own grants during fiscal years 2000 through 2004, 

the agency, under a memorandum of understanding, administered grants 

funded by Commerce’s Economic Development Administration and the 

Appalachian Regional Commission for drinking water supply and 

wastewater treatment projects. 

Department of Commerce: 

$539.8 Million

The Department of Commerce’s strategic goals include, among other 

things, encouraging economic growth that benefits Americans and 

observing, protecting, and managing the Earth’s resources to promote 

environmental stewardship. The department’s freshwater programs include 

water infrastructure and water availability activities. 

Economic Development 

Administration: $337.5 Million

The Economic Development Administration, established by the Public 

Works and Economic Development Act of 1965, as amended, leads the 

federal government’s economic development efforts by facilitating growth 

in America. Through its Public Works and Economic Adjustment 

Assistance Programs, the agency provides grants to communities and 

entities in regions experiencing economic decline and distress. These 

grants are used for, among other things, revitalizing, expanding, and 

upgrading the physical infrastructure, including water and sewer systems. 

Under the Partnership Planning Program, the agency also provides grants 
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 36 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

for planning and technical assistance. The agency can track the majority of 

its freshwater activities using standard industrial codes, such as water 

system and water treatment. The agency also supports other programs that 

can provide funds for freshwater-related activities. In addition to executing 

its own grants during fiscal years 2000 through 2004, the agency, under a 

memorandum of agreement, administered grants funded by the 

Appalachian Regional Commission and Defense’s Office of Economic 

Adjustment to carry out freshwater infrastructure activities.

National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration: 

$202.3 Million

Among its missions, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

researches and gathers data related to changes in the weather and 

availability of water. Several offices within the agency provide financial 

support for freshwater activities. The National Weather Service—

authorized under the Organic Act of October 1, 1890, as amended, and the 

Flood Control Act of 1938, as amended—provided the largest portion of the 

agency’s budget for freshwater programs. Within its hydrology program, 

the National Weather Service supports watershed management and flood 

control activities, such as forecasting water availability activities on rivers, 

lakes, and streams and inland water research. In addition, the Office of 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Research provides financial support for drinking 

water supply, water conservation, watershed management, and navigation 

in the Great Lakes region. These activities are carried out under various 

legal authorities, such as the National Climate Program Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 

2901-2908) and the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement of 1978, as 

amended. Other offices within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration also provide financial support for, among other things, 

fisheries and aquatic species management and freshwater-related activities 

in coastal, estuarine, and marine environments. During fiscal years 2000 

through 2004, the agency performed work in other countries, but funding 

for these efforts typically originated with State and USAID.

Department of Defense: 

$12.9 Billion

The Department of Defense provides services for military and civilian 

purposes. The Corps provides financial support for the vast majority of the 

department’s freshwater programs for civilians through its Civil Works 

program. In addition, the Army and Navy provide financial support for 

science and technology research on drinking water supply, water 

conservation, wastewater treatment, and desalination. Some of these 

technologies have the potential to be transitioned from a military function 

to benefit civilians. 
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 37 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Army Corps of Engineers: $12.9 

Billion 

The Army Corps of Engineers provides engineering services for military 

and civilian purposes. In addition to designing and managing construction 

of military facilities, the Corps plans, designs, builds, and operates water 

resources and other civil works projects through its Civil Works program. 

The Corps carries out water infrastructure and environmental management 

and restoration projects under various legal authorities, including 

numerous river and harbors acts, flood control acts, and Water Resources 

Development Acts. Activities supported include navigation, flood 

protection, dam and reservoir projects, and drinking water and wastewater 

projects.1

 The Corps’ annual appropriations are primarily directed to 

specific projects. These appropriations are received through Energy and 

Water Development appropriation acts rather than the Department of 

Defense appropriations acts. In addition to annual appropriations from the 

general fund, the Corps receives appropriations from dedicated funding 

sources, such as the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and the Inland 

Waterway Trust Fund, which receive revenue through receipts of, 

respectively, a tax on port use and a tax on fuel used by vessels in 

commercial waterway transportation. The Corps also performs domestic 

work funded by agencies, such as EPA, Agriculture, and Interior. 

Army Material Command: $20.4 

Million

The Army Material Command conducts research related to, among other 

things, the logistics of providing water for combat operations on land. The 

agency performs in-house research, manages contract efforts, and supports 

other military and government agencies with drinking water treatment, 

monitoring, storage, and distribution; wastewater treatment; desalination; 

and water conservation programs. Within the agency, the Army TankAutomotive Research, Development and Engineering Center researches, 

develops, engineers, and integrates advanced technology into ground 

operations. For example, the Water Purification and Recovery Technology 

program seeks to reduce the logistical burden of providing water for 

ground troops. According to Army officials, the Army carries out these 

activities under its general mission to provide and equip combat operations 

on land. 

Office of Naval Research: $16.8 

Million

The Office of Naval Research coordinates, executes, and promotes the 

science and technology programs of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps. The 

agency provides financial support through direct federal spending and 

grant programs for drinking water supply, wastewater treatment, and 

1

Funding provided for regulatory permitting activities are not included in the agencywide 

totals. 
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 38 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

desalination projects. In addition to private contractors, the agency 

collaborates with schools, universities, government laboratories, and 

nonprofit organizations to execute its science and technology programs. 

More recently in fiscal year 2003, in response to appropriations committee 

direction, the Office of Naval Research began funding the Expeditionary 

Unit Water Purification project, which will develop prototype 

demonstrators to produce drinking water from brackish or saline water.2

The agency leads this effort, which involves other federal agencies, such as 

the Army, Interior’s Reclamation, and the Department of Energy. The Office 

of Naval Research conducts its research efforts under 10 U.S.C. §§ 5022-

5023.

Other Defense Programs The Office of the Secretary of Defense administers programs that can 

provide financial support for freshwater activities, although that is not the 

focus of the programs. For example, the Strategic Environmental Research 

and Development Program and the Environmental Security Technology 

Certification Program fund research for technologies related to, among 

other things, water quality and wastewater treatment. In addition, the 

Legacy Program supports watershed rehabilitation and freshwater 

conservation efforts, although these efforts are not specifically tracked. 

The Office of Economic Adjustment provides technical expertise and 

financial support to state and local governments in planning community 

adjustments. The agency may acquire the services of Commerce’s 

Economic Development Administration to execute grants that implement 

plans to convert former military bases to civilian uses. According to a 

senior agency official, the agency does not track its implementation 

projects by category, some of which could be water infrastructure projects.

Department of Energy: $17.3 

Million

Created by the Department of Energy Organization Act of 1977, Energy’s 

mission is to advance the national, economic, and energy security of the 

United States; promote scientific and technological innovation in support 

of that mission; and ensure the environmental cleanup of the nation’s 

nuclear weapons complex. Although freshwater-related issues are not a 

primary focus, the department, through grants and direct federal spending, 

provides financial support for groundwater cleanup projects and for the 

2

The administration has not requested funding for the Expeditionary Unit Water Purification 

project in its annual budgets, but Congress has nevertheless provided funding since fiscal 

year 2003.
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 39 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

research and development of desalination technologies. As provided for in 

the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978, the department 

engages in groundwater cleanup and remediation activities at several 

former uranium mill sites. The department also provides funding for 

alternative clean water supplies, a distillation water treatment plant, and 

flood control activities at these sites. In addition, Energy and Interior’s 

Reclamation collaborated to produce a national road map in 2003 for the 

research and development of desalination and water purification 

technologies. The Conference Committee report accompanying the 2004 

Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act directed Energy’s 

Office of Environmental Management’s Technology Development and 

Deployment Program to provide $3 million to support the research and 

development of desalination research technologies. Sandia National 

Laboratories coordinated these activities for the department.

Department of Health and 

Human Services: $484.9 

Million

The Department of Health and Human Services is the government’s 

principal agency for protecting the health of Americans and providing 

essential human services. The department’s freshwater programs primarily 

provide financial support for water supply and wastewater treatment 

systems.

Administration for Children and 

Families: $30.7 Million

The Administration for Children and Families promotes the economic and 

social well-being of families, children, individuals, and communities. As 

part of these efforts, the Office of Community Services provides training 

and technical assistance grants on a regionwide basis to help small, rural, 

low-income communities construct, repair, and rehabilitate water and 

wastewater systems. The agency’s Rural Community Facilities 

Development Program provides these services, authorized under section 

680 of the Community Services Block Grant Act included in the Coats 

Human Services Reauthorization Act of 1998. Project activities under this 

program include (1) providing training and technical assistance to lowincome rural communities to develop expertise needed to establish and 

manage water facilities; (2) improving the coordination of federal, state, 

and local agencies with rural water and wastewater management; and (3) 

educating local, rural community leaders about available federal resources. 

According to agency officials, the program enables rural communities to 

comply with the requirements of the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking 

Water Act. Entities eligible for the program include multistate, regional, 

private, and nonprofit 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. 
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 40 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Indian Health Service: $454.2 

Million

The Indian Health Service originated in 1955 when Interior transferred 

administration of the American Indian and Alaska Native health programs 

to the Department of Health and Human Services. However, the Indian 

Health Service continues to receive annual appropriations from a 

budgetline within Interior’s annual appropriations. The Office of 

Environmental Health and Engineering provides technical and financial 

support to Indian tribes and Alaska Native communities to promote a 

healthy environment through the cooperative development and continuing 

operation of safe water, wastewater, and solid waste systems. The 

Sanitation Facilities Construction Program is the Indian Health Service’s 

primary water infrastructure program. Program services are authorized 

under Public Law No. 86-121, Indian Health Care Improvement Act (Pub. L. 

No. 94-437), as amended, and the Indian Self-Determination and Education 

Assistance Act (Pub. L. No. 93-638), as amended. The Indian Health Service 

may provide sanitation facilities directly or in partnership with other 

federal agencies or with nonfederal entities. The agency’s nonfederal 

project partners could include tribes, tribal-designated housing entities, 

tribal enterprises, states, counties, and municipalities. The agency’s federal 

partners include Housing’s Office of Native American Programs, Interior’s 

Bureau of Indian Affairs and Reclamation, Agriculture’s Rural Utilities 

Service Program, and EPA. The agency may also administer projects 

funded by those federal agencies to provide sanitation facilities services to 

tribes. 

Department of Housing and 

Urban Development: $2.3 

Billion 

The Department of Housing and Urban Development supports community 

development through partnerships with states and local governments. The 

department’s primary tool for providing financing for public improvements 

is the Community Development Block Grant program, authorized under 

title 1 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as 

amended. The program is managed by (1) the Office of Community 

Planning and Development and (2) the Office of Public and Indian Housing.

Office of Community Planning 

and Development: $2.3 Billion

The Office of Community Planning and Development runs the Community 

Development Block Grant program for states, entitled cities and counties, 

and insular areas (U.S. territories). Grant recipients design and administer 

their projects, and the Office of Community Planning and Development 

provides project oversight. In order to qualify for a grant, a project must 

meet one of the following national objectives: (1) principally benefit lowand moderate-income families, (2) aid in the prevention or elimination of 

slums or blight, or (3) meet other urgent community development needs. 

The agency can track some of its freshwater projects on the basis of 
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 41 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

general categories, such as water and sewer and flood and drainage 

activities. In addition to the Community Development Block Grant 

program, local governments may apply for a loan guarantee program, 

authorized under section 108 of the Housing and Community Development 

Act of 1974, as amended.3

 The local government pledges its future year 

Community Development Block Grant funds as security for a federally 

guaranteed loan, which provides funds to pursue neighborhood 

revitalization projects. Freshwater projects are not specifically tracked in 

this program. In addition to executing its own grants during fiscal years 

2000 through 2004, the agency, through a memorandum of agreement, 

administered grants funded by the Appalachian Regional Commission. 

Office of Public and Indian 

Housing

The Office of Public and Indian Housing provides programs for Indian 

tribes and Alaska Native communities, which are similar to those provided 

by the Office of Community Planning and Development. These programs 

are the Indian Community Development Block Grant program governed by 

title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as 

amended,4

 and the Indian Housing Block Grant program governed by the 

Native American Housing Assistance and Self Determination Act of 1996. 

The programs can provide financial support for water infrastructure 

projects; however, the freshwater component is not specifically tracked. 

Indian Housing Block Grant recipients are eligible to secure financing for 

affordable housing activities using a 95 percent federal loan guarantee 

under title VI of the Native American Housing Assistance and SelfDetermination Act. Infrastructure projects that support freshwater and 

sanitary waste disposal for low- and moderate-income households are 

eligible activities under the title VI program.

Department of the Interior: 

$6.3 Billion

Part of the mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect natural 

areas through scientific research and to foster sound use of land and water 

resources. Consequently, the department supports multiple types of 

freshwater programs. 

Bureau of Indian Affairs: $390.7 

Million

Specifically related to freshwater resources, the Bureau of Indian Affairs is 

responsible for protecting water and land rights and developing and 

3

Regulations governing the section 108 program may be found at 24 C.F.R. Part 570, Subpart 

M.

4

Regulations governing the program appear at 24 C.F.R. Part 1003. 
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 42 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

maintaining infrastructure, such as dams and drinking water facilities, on 

55.7 million acres of land held in trust by the United States for Indian tribes 

and Alaska Native communities. As part of these efforts, the agency 

provides financial support for drinking water supply, wastewater 

treatment, irrigation, dam safety, water rights litigation and negotiation, 

and Indian land and water claim settlements programs. The agency’s 

authority to support these programs comes primarily from the Snyder Act 

of 1921 and the Indian Dams Safety Act of 1993.

Bureau of Land Management: 

$313.3 Million

The mission of the Bureau of Land Management is to sustain the health, 

diversity, and productivity of federally owned lands that are located 

primarily in 12 western states. As such, the agency supports watershed 

management and water dispute management activities and carries out 

these efforts primarily under the Federal Land and Policy Management Act 

of 1976. Among its programs, the agency supports water resource 

inventories, watershed assessments, wetland and stream projects, and the 

monitoring of lake and stream ecosystems. 

Bureau of Reclamation: $3.7 

Billion

The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and 

protect water and related resources in an environmentally and 

economically sound manner. As a part of these efforts, the agency is the 

nation’s largest supplier of water—managing 457 dams and 348 reservoirs 

in 17 western states—and delivers water to irrigate 10 million acres of land 

and to supply more than 31 million municipal, rural, and industrial water 

users. Financial support for freshwater programs is provided under a 

number of different legal authorities, but primarily under the Reclamation 

Act of 1902. The agency provides financial support for freshwater activities 

primarily through the Water and Related Resources program, through 

direct federal spending and through grant, loan, and loan guarantee 

programs.5

 The terms of funding vary and are dictated by project 

authorization, legislation, or other authorizations. In addition to annual 

appropriations, Reclamation receives funding from a variety of sources,

5

In fiscal year 2002, the agency dissolved its loan guarantee program.
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 43 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

such as the Reclamation Fund,6 Central Valley Project Restoration Fund,7

and funds collected from surcharges placed on the use of water and power. 

Reclamation also receives funds from other federal agencies to conduct 

various freshwater programs, such as collecting data for the U.S. 

Geological Survey’s watershed management and flood control activities. 

Moreover, Reclamation—under section 607 of the Foreign Assistance Act 

of 1961—periodically received funds from USAID and State to conduct 

freshwater projects in other countries during fiscal years 2000 through 

2004.

Fish and Wildlife Service: $653 

Million

The mission of the Fish and Wildlife Service is, working with others, to 

conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats 

for the continuing benefit of the American people. As such, the agency’s 

freshwater programs primarily support watershed protection, restoration, 

and management through direct federal spending and grant programs.8

 For 

example, under the Landowner Incentive Program, the agency provides 

grants to state agencies with primary responsibility for fish and wildlife to 

establish or supplement landowner incentive programs that protect and 

restore habitats on private lands. Freshwater programs carried out by the 

agency are conducted under a number of different legal authorities—

generally under the North American Wetlands Conservation Act of 1989, 

the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act of 1937, and the DingellJohnson Sport Fish Restoration Act of 1950. According to agency officials, 

the majority of the funds come from dedicated funding sources—the 

Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act and the Dingell-Johnson Sport 

Fish Restoration Act, which includes excise taxes collected on sporting 

arms, ammunition, bows and arrows, and fishing equipment. The remaining 

funds come from annual appropriations from the general fund.

6

The Reclamation Fund—a special fund established by Congress under the Reclamation Act 

of 1902, as amended—receives revenue from the sale of public lands, proceeds from the 

Mineral Leasing Act, and certain other revenues. Reclamation receives congressional 

appropriations from this fund for investigating, constructing, operating, and administering 

Reclamation projects. 

7

The Central Valley Project Restoration Fund—authorized in the Central Valley Project 

Improvement Act, title 34 of Public Law 102-575—provides funding for habitat restoration, 

improvement and acquisition, and other fish and wildlife restoration activities in the Central 

Valley project area of California. Revenues are derived from payments by project 

beneficiaries and from donations. 

8

Funding provided for listing activities under the Endangered Species Act are not included 

in the agencywide totals. 
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 44 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

National Park Service: $227.4 

Million

The mission of the National Park Service is to preserve unimpaired natural 

and cultural resources and values of the national park system. Through the 

National Park Service Organic Act of 1916, the agency mainly supports 

watershed protection, restoration, and management programs as well as 

drinking water supply and water rights management programs. Each of the 

388 national parks is responsible for management activities in the park. 

Information on the amount of financial support provided for freshwater 

programs at individual parks is not tracked centrally. However, the agency 

did provide information on major freshwater projects as well as the 

financial support provided by the Water Resources Division. The agency 

conducts freshwater work directly through wetlands restoration efforts at 

the Everglades National Park and stream restoration activities affiliated 

with the removal of the Elwha and Glines Canyon Dams in Olympic 

National Park. In addition, the Water Resources Division within the agency 

provides direct financial and technical support for freshwater resources 

management and policy and operation support to units of the national park 

system.

U.S. Geological Survey: $1.1 

Billion 

The mission of the U.S. Geological Survey is to provide reliable scientific 

information to, among other things, describe and understand the Earth and 

manage freshwater resources. The agency conducts programs that support 

the planning and operation of freshwater resources, primarily through 

technical assistance and research activities. Specifically, the agency 

collects basic data on stream flow, groundwater levels, and water quality 

and conducts interpretive studies designed to answer specific questions 

about water resources. These activities are primarily carried out through 

the Cooperative Water Program, National Water Quality Assessment, and 

Hydrologic Networks and Analysis Program. The agency conducts its 

freshwater programs under many different legal authorities—most 

generally under the U.S. Geological Survey Organic Act. The agency also 

receives funds from other federal agencies—such as EPA, the Corps, State, 

and Interior’s National Park Service—to gather data on water resources 

and water contaminant studies.

Department of 

Transportation: $182.7 

Million

The Department of Transportation develops and coordinates policies to 

provide for an efficient and economical national transportation system. 

The department’s freshwater programs include watershed management 

and navigation.
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 45 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Federal Highway Administration: 

$116.2 Million

The Federal Highway Administration is charged with carrying out highway 

safety projects and administering the Federal-Aid Highway Program. 

Funded by the Highway Trust Fund as authorized by the Transportation 

Equity Act for the 21st Century and other acts, the program provides 

financial resources and technical assistance to state and local governments 

for constructing, preserving, and improving highways. The program 

provides financial support for selecting, planning, designing, and building 

highways. Funds may also be used for reducing water pollution due to 

highway runoff and are included in the project’s overall costs. States are 

responsible for project oversight and may voluntarily report data spent on 

individual project costs to the Federal Highway Administration. Another 

component of the Federal-Aid Highway Program is the wetland mitigation 

program, which replaces an average of 1.5 acres of wetlands for every acre 

affected by highway construction activities. Financial information on this 

program is not included in the agency’s total because it is incomplete and 

primarily available on an acreage basis, which compares acres of wetlands 

replaced and the acres affected by highway construction activities. 

Saint Lawrence Seaway 

Development Corporation: $66.5 

Million

A wholly owned government corporation within the Department of 

Transportation, the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation was 

created by the Wiley-Dondero Act of May 13, 1954. In cooperation with the 

Canadian St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation, the agency 

serves the marine transportation industries by providing a safe, secure, 

reliable, efficient, and competitive international waterway. The agency 

constructs, operates, and maintains the part of the St. Lawrence Seaway 

between Montreal and Lake Erie that is within the territorial limits of the 

United States. The majority of the agency’s activities are related to lock 

infrastructure and waterway operations, maintenance, and security. The 

agency receives the vast majority of its annual budget from an 

appropriation from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. The rest of its 

budget is derived from other sources, such as interest income, rent 

payments, and the collection of noncommercial tolls.

Independent Agencies: $15.6 

Billion

Appalachian Regional 

Commission: $125.2 Million

The Appalachian Regional Commission, established by the Appalachian 

Regional Development Act of 1965, as amended, seeks to foster economic 

and community development across the 13-state Appalachian Region. The 

region includes all of West Virginia and portions of Alabama, Georgia, 
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 46 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, 

Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. The agency 

provides grants, which are primarily funded by annual appropriations, for 

basic infrastructure services to public and nonprofit entities through its 

Area Development Program. According to a senior agency official, 

approximately 33 percent of the agency’s budget goes toward grants for 

drinking water, wastewater, and related activities. The agency has other 

programs that may also provide financial support for freshwater activities, 

although that is not their primary purpose. The Appalachian Regional 

Commission grants are administered either by the agency or by another 

federal agency, such as Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Service; Commerce’s 

Economic Development Administration; Housing’s Office of Community 

Planning and Development; and, occasionally, EPA. 

Environmental Protection 

Agency: $15.4 Billion

Within the Environmental Protection Agency, the Office of Water supports 

most of the agency’s freshwater efforts, primarily through the Drinking 

Water and Clean Water State Revolving Funds. Under these programs, EPA 

provides grants to states for below-market loans to municipalities for 

drinking water or surface water protection and restoration projects. The 

Clean Water State Revolving Fund supports the construction of municipal 

wastewater facilities and nonpoint source pollution control and estuary 

protection projects. The Drinking Water State Revolving Fund provides 

financial support to community water systems for installing, upgrading, or 

replacing infrastructure. EPA also administers other grant programs, such 

as the Public Water System Supervision Grants Program, Water Quality 

Cooperative Agreements, Non-Point Source Grants, and Wetland Program 

Grants. These programs are conducted primarily under the Clean Water Act 

and the Safe Drinking Water Act. EPA also receives funds from other 

federal agencies to carry out freshwater programs. For example, EPA 

received funds from the Corps for wetland restoration activities in coastal 

Louisiana. 

National Science Foundation: 

$112.0 Million 

Established by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, the National 

Science Foundation is an independent federal agency whose mission is to 

promote the progress of science; advance the nation’s health, prosperity, 

and welfare; and secure the nation’s defense. Using annual appropriations 

from the general fund, the agency provides grants for research activities 

across scientific and engineering disciplines to address issues related to, 

among other things, the preservation, management, and enhancement of 

the environment. With regard to freshwater issues, the agency provides 

financial support for research on, among other things, drinking water 

treatment, desalination, flood control, wastewater treatment, and 
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 47 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

watershed management. For example, during fiscal years 2000 through 

2004, the agency—through the Science and Technology Centers Program—

provided financial support to the Center for Sustainability of semi-Arid 

Hydrology and Riparian Areas. The center will carry out multidisciplinary 

research into the hydrology and management of freshwater resources in 

semi-arid regions. 

Small Business Administration: 

$0.3 Million 

The Small Business Administration, created by the Small Business Act of 

1953, seeks to assist the interests of small businesses. The agency does not 

lend money; rather, it provides loan guarantees to small businesses. The 

agency’s Basic 7(a) and Basic 504 loan programs can be used for water 

infrastructure projects, such as water supply and irrigation systems, 

sewage treatment facilities, and dredging and surface cleanup activities. 

Under both programs, the agency guarantees a portion of the loans and 

shares the risk with a commercial lender if a borrower defaults on its loan. 

A senior agency official notes that unlike the Basic 7(a) program, the Basic 

504 program receives no appropriations. Eligibility for the programs varies 

slightly, but under both programs recipients must be a for-profit 

corporation. The Small Business Administration initially obligated about 

$327,000 during fiscal years 2000 to 2004 to cover potential default on 

water-related loans in its loan guarantee program. This small amount of 

obligations is not included in our governmentwide totals.

Other Agencies Our review focuses on the federal agencies that provide the majority of the 

federal financial support for selected freshwater programs. Additional 

agencies that support freshwater activities, as described by agency 

officials, reports, and documents, are discussed below.

Bonneville Power 

Administration 

The Bonneville Power Administration is a self-financing agency that 

markets wholesale electrical power and operates and markets transmission 

services in the Pacific Northwest. The agency pays for its costs through 

power and transmission sales and funds the region’s efforts to protect and 

rebuild fish and wildlife populations in the Columbia River Basin.

Federal Emergency 

Management Agency

Within the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency leads the nation’s efforts to prepare for hazards and 

manages the federal response and recovery efforts following any national 

event. In terms of freshwater activities, the agency manages the National 
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 48 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Flood Insurance Program—a program that assists with flood insurance, 

floodplain management, and flood hazard mapping activities. 

Regional Economic 

Development Entities

Regional commissions provide assistance to some of the nation’s most 

chronically poor and distressed communities. Since its creation in 1965, the 

Appalachian Regional Commission has been providing assistance to 

counties affected by severe and chronic economic distress. More recently, 

Congress created additional regional economic development entities. The 

Delta Regional Authority, created in 2000, serves parts of Alabama, 

Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and 

Tennessee. The Northern Great Plains Regional Authority, created in 2002, 

includes the states of Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South 

Dakota. Additionally, Congress created a wholly intrastate commission in 

1998, the Denali Commission, to provide infrastructure and economic 

development throughout Alaska. 

River Basin Commissions The Water Resources Planning Act of 1965 authorized the President to 

establish river basin commissions to serve as the principal agencies for 

coordinating the development of water and related land resources in river 

basins. In 1981, an executive order terminated six of these commissions. 

Many river basin commissions established by interstate compacts, such as 

the Delaware River Basin Commission, still exist. Information on federal 

financial assistance provided to river basin commissions is not readily 

available because individual commissions primarily maintain these data. 

Tennessee Valley Authority The Tennessee Valley Authority is a self-financing corporation of the 

federal government that supplies affordable and reliable power and 

operates fossil fuel, nuclear, and hydropower plants in the Tennessee 

Valley. The agency receives its revenues through power sales and the sale 

of bonds in the financial market and uses its own funds for a variety of 

stewardship and watershed activities. These activities include reservoir 

operations, navigation, watershed improvement activities, aquatic plant 

management, and land planning and use.

Binational 

Commissions

During fiscal years 2000 through 2004, the United States provided financial 

contributions to three binational commissions for freshwater projects 

along U.S. borders. The United States typically made contributions to the 
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 49 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

budgets of these commissions, and a portion of these contributions 

supported freshwater projects along U.S. borders. Since the commissions 

coordinate activities along U.S. borders with State and EPA, financial 

information on the U.S. contributions for freshwater projects during fiscal 

years 2000 through 2004 was available. These commissions, as described 

by federal agencies and commission officials and documents, are discussed 

below.

Border Environment 

Cooperation Commission: 

$15.4 Million

Created as a side agreement to the North American Free Trade Agreement, 

the Border Environment Cooperation Commission is a binational 

international organization that works to conserve, protect, and enhance the 

environment along the U.S.-Mexico border. The commission’s annual 

budget for drinking water and wastewater treatment activities comes 

mainly from EPA. The commission’s annual budget for irrigation, air 

quality, solid waste, and other projects comes from State and Mexico’s 

Secretariat of Environment and Natural Resources. Managed by a 

binational Board of Directors, composed of five members from each 

country, the commission identifies, supports, evaluates, and certifies 

various environmental infrastructure projects. Once the commission 

certifies that sustainability and public participation requirements are met, 

project sponsors may qualify for funding from the North American 

Development Bank or from other sources requiring such certification. 

Additionally, through its Project Development Assistance Program, which 

is EPA-funded, the commission provides technical grants to qualifying 

border communities for the development of water and wastewater 

projects.

International Boundary and 

Water Commission: $151.1 

Million

The International Boundary and Water Commission is a binational, treatybased organization comprised of a U.S. section, headquartered in El Paso, 

Texas, and a Mexican section, headquartered in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico. 

Through binational cooperation, the commission seeks to preserve the 

international land and river boundary between Mexico and the United 

States in a manner that balances economic, environmental, and sovereignty 

needs; carry out the conservation, flood control, national ownership, and 

utilization of international waters; and improve the quality and utilization 

of international waters in a manner that supports ecological needs and 

regional development. The U.S. section of the commission operates under 

State’s foreign policy guidance and receives an annual appropriation 

through the Departments of Commerce, State, Justice, and other related 

agencies’ appropriation bills. The U.S. section of the commission operates 
Appendix II

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs in the United States and along U.S. 

Borders

Page 50 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

and maintains two international wastewater treatment plants, multiple 

diversion dams, and numerous smaller in-river structures for flood control 

and water distribution. In addition, the U.S. section and the Mexican 

section of the commission jointly operate two international dams. 

Additionally, the U.S. section of the commission is responsible for the 

operation and maintenance of five flood control projects with over 500 

miles of levees and related structures, which protect approximately 3 

million residents and 1.5 million acres of adjoining farmland in the United 

States and Mexico. 

International Joint 

Commission: $8.1 Million 

Established by the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909, the International Joint 

Commission is an independent binational organization that assists the 

governments of the United States and Canada in addressing water quality 

and quantity issues and air pollution problems along the U.S.-Canadian 

border. The U.S. section of the commission receives an annual 

appropriation through State for these purposes. The commission is made 

up of six commissioners, three that are appointed by the President of the 

United States and three appointed by the Governor in Council of Canada, 

on the advice of the Prime Minister. Although the commission does not 

build or maintain any water-related infrastructure, it undertakes research 

efforts and analyses of binational water issues and of the operations of 

selected water works affecting both countries. For example, a current 

research and development effort is a 5-year, $20-million study to determine 

changes to the operation of infrastructure that affect water levels and flows 

on Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River. The U.S. section and the 

Canadian government are sharing equally the cost of this study. 
Page 51 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Appendix III

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs Abroad ApendxiI

This appendix on U.S. financial support of freshwater programs abroad has 

three sections. First, we provide a general overview of the agencies 

responsible for the majority of the U.S. government’s direct financial 

support for freshwater programs abroad, along with the total amount each 

agency provided for freshwater programs during fiscal years 2000 through

2004, excluding aid provided to Afghanistan and Iraq. Second, we briefly 

discuss other agencies that can also support freshwater programs abroad. 

Third, we provide information on international organizations to which the 

United States contributes annually and that support freshwater projects 

around the world. 

Federal Agencies The following agencies provide the majority of the U.S. government’s 

financial support specifically for freshwater programs abroad. These 

programs, as described by agency officials, documents, and reports, are 

discussed below.

Department of Agriculture: 

$26.8 Million

With the Department of Agriculture, the Foreign Agricultural Service works 

to improve foreign market access for U.S. products and provides food aid 

and technical assistance to foreign countries. As the primary agency 

responsible for Agriculture’s international work, the agency administers 

international research and technical assistance activities in coordination 

with developing and transitional countries. These activities include 

international cooperative research efforts on freshwater quality and 

availability, irrigation, and watershed management issues. The majority of 

the agency’s financial support for freshwater activities abroad is provided 

by the Export Credit Guarantee Program using various food aid 

agreements, as authorized by several statutes, including the Food for 

Progress Act of 1985; section 416(b) of the Agriculture Act of 1949, as 

amended; and the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and 

Child Nutrition Program of 2003. Through these food aid agreements, the 

Export Credit Guarantee Program provides U.S. agricultural commodities 

to a recipient country for resale. The proceeds from the sale may be used to 

support various agricultural, economic, and infrastructure development 

projects in the recipient country. Recently, this program funded the 

development of, among other things, water supply, irrigation, and water 

treatment projects in countries such as Guatemala, Pakistan, Vietnam, and 

Uzbekistan. Additionally, as authorized by section 1543 of the Food, 

Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990, as amended, the agency 

manages the Cochran Fellowship Program, which provides opportunities 
Appendix III

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs Abroad 

Page 52 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

for professionals from foreign countries to attend training programs on a 

number of agricultural issues, including drought mitigation and irrigation 

management. 

Department of Defense: $0.5 

Million

Although freshwater is not a focus area for the Department of Defense, the 

department provides financial support for several efforts related to 

freshwater projects abroad.1

 In addition to providing engineering services 

for military and civilian purposes in the United States, the Corps, through 

its Civil Works program, provides technical assistance to foreign countries 

on a number of freshwater issues, such as wastewater treatment, flood 

control, and irrigation. The Corps is authorized by section 234 (Interagency 

and International Support Authority) of the Water Resources Development 

Act of 1996 to provide up to $250,000 of its own funding for technical 

assistance on freshwater projects to international organizations and federal 

agencies in foreign countries. However, other federal agencies, such as 

USAID, and the governments of foreign countries often provide the funding 

that supports the Corps’ freshwater work in foreign countries. Recently, the 

Corps received funds from USAID to provide technical assistance for the 

reconstruction of drinking water infrastructure and wastewater treatment 

systems in Iraq. The Corps also received funds from USAID for similar 

work in Afghanistan.

In addition to the Corps, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, within 

the Office of the Secretary of Defense, coordinates and oversees 

humanitarian assistance programs abroad. Under 10 U.S.C. § 2561, U.S. 

military units are authorized to perform humanitarian activities (primarily 

carried out through contracts) in communities and areas where military 

units are deployed abroad. These activities include, among other activities, 

digging wells and improving sanitation facilities. For example, military 

commanders in Afghanistan and Iraq from the United States Central 

Command have used these funds to repair and augment drinking water and 

wastewater systems.

1

The estimated $500,000 figure only includes the technical assistance provided by the Corps 

for freshwater projects abroad. For information on Defense’s financial support for 

freshwater projects in Afghanistan and Iraq, see table 9 and the associated narrative.
Appendix III

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs Abroad 

Page 53 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Department of the Interior: 

$128.7 Million

As part of its mission to conserve fish, wildlife, and plants and their 

habitats for the American people, the Fish and Wildlife Service—within the 

Department of the Interior—protects wetlands used by waterfowl and 

migratory birds, in Canada and Mexico, as well as in countries in Central 

and South America and the Caribbean. The agency provides financial 

support to protect, restore, and enhance these wetlands through several 

programs, including the North American Wetlands Conservation Act of 

1989 and the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 2000. 

Through its North American Wetlands Conservation program, the agency 

coordinates with representatives from Canada and Mexico to provide 

grants for long-term acquisition, restoration, and/or enhancement of 

critical wetlands used by waterfowl and migratory birds in the three 

countries. Grant recipients are required to provide matching funds at a 1:1 

ratio. Under the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 2000, the 

Fish and Wildlife Service established a matching grants program that, 

among other things, supports the maintenance, protection, and restoration 

of the habitats of birds in the United States, Latin America, and the 

Caribbean. Government agencies, individuals, corporations, and other 

private entities may apply for a grant from this program, if they provide $3 

for every $1 they receive from the agency.

Department of State: $8.7 

Million 

As recognized in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, the 

Department of State is the lead agency responsible for the continuous 

supervision and general direction of foreign assistance. The department’s 

mission is to create a more secure, democratic, and prosperous world for 

the benefit of the American people and the international community.

Several bureaus within State provide financial support for freshwater 

programs abroad; however, the level of their involvement varies. The 

Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs 

coordinates the department’s overall policy for international environmental 

issues, including freshwater issues. The bureau provides grants to support 

international initiatives on watershed management, access to safe drinking 

water, flood control, and water dispute management. The Bureau of Near 

Eastern Affairs coordinates U.S. foreign policy and diplomatic relations 

with countries in the Middle East and North Africa. In support of the United 

State’s role in the Middle East Peace Process, this bureau promotes 

technical cooperation between Arabs and Israelis on numerous freshwater 

issues. Typically, the bureau provides funds to other federal agencies, such 

as those within Agriculture and Interior, for projects designed to promote 
Appendix III

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs Abroad 

Page 54 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

water cooperation and the building of strong working relationships 

between water officials and experts in the region. 

The Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration coordinates the 

department’s efforts related to global population, refugees, and migration 

issues. This bureau provides financial support for various water and 

sanitation projects in foreign countries through grants and cooperative 

agreements issued to international and nongovernmental organizations. 

These projects provide water for drinking, irrigation, and sanitation to 

temporary refugee camps. Although State does not specifically track 

freshwater expenditures for refugee camps, a bureau official estimates that 

less than $5 million a year is obligated to support these activities. 

The Bureau of International Organization Affairs develops and implements 

the U.S. government’s policies and efforts with the United Nations, its 

affiliated agencies, and other international organizations. This bureau 

manages the U.S. government’s assessed and voluntary contributions to 

various organizations. Most of these contributions are made directly to the 

core budgets of these organizations and are not designated for specific 

activities.

Independent Agencies

African Development 

Foundation: $0.9 Million

The African Development Foundation is a public corporation and federal 

agency established by the African Development Foundation Act of 1980, as 

amended. The agency supports community-based, self-help initiatives to 

alleviate poverty and to promote sustainable development in Africa. 

Currently working in 15 sub-Saharan African countries, the agency 

provides grants of usually $250,000 or less directly to community-based, 

nongovernmental organizations and enterprises administered by Africans. 

The agency’s grants enable community-based groups to expand their 

production capacity and increase incomes, thereby improving the 

community’s economic security. Although freshwater is not a program 

focus, the agency supported various irrigation, drinking water, and 

wastewater projects in countries such as Botswana, Guinea, Mali, and 

Niger. 

National Science Foundation: 

$0.7 Million

Established by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended, 

the National Science Foundation is an independent U.S. government 

agency whose mission is to promote the progress of science; advance the 
Appendix III

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs Abroad 

Page 55 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

national health, prosperity, and welfare; and secure the national defense. 

Using annual appropriations from the general fund, the agency provides 

grants for scientific research for various freshwater issues abroad, 

including watershed management, drinking water treatment, and 

wastewater management. The statute creating the agency authorizes it to 

promote the interchange of scientific information between scientists and 

engineers in the United States and foreign countries. For example, the 

agency’s Office of International Science and Engineering provides grants to 

U.S. scientists and engineers to participate in international collaborative 

research partnerships with their foreign colleagues. 

U.S. Agency for International 

Development: $1.8 Billion

The U.S. Agency for International Development is an independent federal 

agency created under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended. 

Operating under guidance from the Secretary of State, USAID provides 

economic, development, and humanitarian assistance around the world in 

support of U.S. foreign policy goals. As part of the agency’s efforts to 

promote an integrated approach to water resources management, USAID 

provides technical assistance, educational and outreach opportunities, 

emergency relief assistance, and international leadership on a variety of 

water issues in over 76 countries. USAID reports that over the 5-year period 

covered in this analysis (fiscal years 2000 through 2004), approximately 5 

percent of its annual appropriation has been used to support freshwaterrelated activities. USAID provides financial support for freshwater 

programs through partnerships with nongovernmental organizations; 

government entities (host country and U.S. government agencies); and 

public international organizations, such as United Nations agencies. 

During fiscal years 2000 through 2004, USAID missions in Egypt, Jordan, 

and the West Bank/Gaza received the most financial support from USAID 

for freshwater projects.2

 Most funds for freshwater projects are distributed 

as grants, although some funds are provided in the form of loan guarantees 

through USAID’s Development Credit Authority. The majority of USAID’s 

freshwater funds are used to support water supply projects. USAID also 

supports sanitation and wastewater management projects. Additionally, 

USAID provides financial support for, among other things, watershed 

management, irrigation, and flood and drought forecasting and 

preparedness activities in foreign countries. During fiscal years 2002 

through 2004, USAID provided about $670 million for the reconstruction of 

drinking water infrastructure and wastewater treatment systems in 

2

According to USAID, a mission is a USAID office in a foreign country. 
Appendix III

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs Abroad 

Page 56 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Afghanistan and Iraq.3 USAID primarily drew on funds from the President’s 

Supplemental Appropriation for the Reconstruction and Development of 

Iraq and Afghanistan to carry out this work. 

U.S. Trade and Development 

Agency: $28.6 Million 

Created under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, the U.S. 

Trade and Development Agency is an agency that provides financial 

support to promote U.S. private sector participation in development 

projects in developing and middle-income countries. The agency offers 

early planning support to overseas development projects by funding 

technical assistance activities, feasibility studies, conferences, and other 

activities. The agency provides grants directly to host-country project 

sponsors (i.e., local, regional, and national governments; private sector; 

and nongovernmental organizations) that agree to select U.S. companies to 

perform the work associated with project planning. Agency-supported 

projects span a variety of sectors, including drinking water supply, 

wastewater treatment, irrigation, and flood control. For example, the 

agency supported the development of water treatment and supply projects 

in Ghana, wastewater treatment facilities in India, and an irrigation project 

in China.

Other Agencies Our review focused on the federal agencies that provide the majority of the 

federal financial support for selected freshwater programs abroad. 

Additional agencies that support freshwater programs, as described by 

agency officials, reports, and documents, are discussed below.

Department of Health and 

Human Services—Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention 

In conjunction with the Pan American Health Organization, the Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention developed a Safe Water System program to 

help provide safe drinking water to developing countries. To date, this 

project has supplied inexpensive, adaptable, and flexible drinking water 

technologies to communities in at least 19 countries. 

Export-Import Bank of the 

United States

The Export-Import Bank is an independent agency that assists in financing 

the export of U.S. goods and services to international markets by providing 

U.S. businesses with working capital guarantees, export credit insurance, 

loan guarantees, and direct loans. Although freshwater-related goods and 

services are not a primary focus, the bank provides financial support for 

3

See table 9 for more information on these USAID obligations.
Appendix III

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs Abroad 

Page 57 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

the export of water purification devices, wastewater treatment systems, 

and technologies designed to prevent and mitigate water pollution. 

Inter-American Foundation The Inter-American Foundation is an independent foreign assistance 

agency that provides grants to nongovernmental organizations in Latin 

America and the Caribbean for economic and social development projects. 

The agency primarily relies on congressional appropriations to fund 

development projects. The agency also has access to additional funding 

from the Social Progress Trust Fund, which consists of payments on loans 

made by the United States to Latin American and Caribbean countries 

under the Alliance for Progress program. According to a senior agency 

official, the agency does not specifically track freshwater expenditures, 

which are a small part of the agency’s total portfolio; activities supported 

include improving access to drinking water, developing irrigation systems, 

and protecting watersheds. 

Overseas Private Investment 

Corporation

The Overseas Private Investment Corporation is a self-sustaining U.S. 

government corporation created to facilitate U.S. private investment in 

developing countries and emerging market economies, primarily by 

offering political risk insurance, loan guarantees, and direct loans. The 

agency provides financial support for various development projects 

worldwide, including some freshwater projects. 

Peace Corps Created in late 1961, the Peace Corps promotes world peace and friendship 

by helping developing countries meet their need for trained workers while 

promoting mutual understanding between Americans and citizens of 

foreign countries. The Peace Corps supports volunteers who commit to 2-

year assignments in host communities where they work on various 

community development projects, such as teaching English, strengthening 

farmer cooperatives, or building sanitation systems. Although some 

volunteers work on water sanitation systems and agricultural projects, the 

Peace Corps does not directly fund any freshwater projects. 

Selected International 

Organizations

During fiscal years 2000 through 2004, the United States indirectly 

supported freshwater programs abroad through its financial contributions 

to various international organizations that support freshwater programs 

abroad. The United States typically made contributions to the general 

budgets of these organizations, although some contributions were directed 

for a particular project or program. Some portion of the general budgets of 

these organizations was used to support freshwater projects around the 
Appendix III

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs Abroad 

Page 58 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

world. These organizations can be split into two groups: (1) multilateral 

development banks and international financial institutions and (2) other 

international organizations. Contributions to multilateral development 

banks and international financial institutions are typically coordinated by 

the Department of the Treasury,4

 while contributions to the other 

organizations are typically coordinated by State. These organizations’ 

freshwater projects and programs, as described by officials and 

documents, are discussed below. 

Multilateral Development 

Banks and Financial 

Institutions

African Development Bank 

Group

The African Development Bank Group—the African Development Bank 

and the African Development Fund—provides loans and offers technical 

assistance to African countries for development projects. The bank’s 

priority areas include rural water supply, irrigation, and other agricultural 

and development projects. The bank’s membership includes all countries in 

Africa as well as some countries in the Americas, Asia, and Europe.

Asian Development Bank The Asian Development Bank—the Ordinary Capital Resources group and 

the Asian Development Fund—provides loans and loan guarantees and 

offers technical assistance to low- and middle-income countries in Asia and 

the Pacific for a variety of economic and social development projects. 

Traditionally, the bank supports projects related to agriculture (including 

irrigation) and rural development. Recently, the bank placed additional 

importance on its Social Infrastructure Sector, which supports projects to 

improve water supply. Since its inception, the bank has lent the most 

money to Indonesia; China, Pakistan, and India were also major borrowers.

European Bank for 

Reconstruction and 

Development

Created in 1991, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development 

seeks to foster the transition toward open market-oriented economies in 

countries in Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth of 

Independent States. The bank provides financial support for, among other 

issues, the development and improvement of water and wastewater 

systems.

4

During fiscal years 2000 through 2004, EPA provided U.S. contributions to the North 

American Development Bank.
Appendix III

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs Abroad 

Page 59 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Global Environment Facility The Global Environment Facility is a multilateral, financial institution that 

provides grants and other financial assistance, particularly in low- and 

middle-income countries, for projects that protect the global environment. 

One of the organization’s top priority areas is protecting freshwater 

resources. Working in partnership with the U.N. Environment Programme, 

the U.N. Development Programme, and the World Bank, the organization 

funds projects to improve protection of safe drinking water supply, manage 

water disputes, and reduce water-borne pollutants. 

Inter-American Development 

Bank

The Inter-American Development Bank provides financial and technical 

support for various development projects in Latin America and the 

Caribbean. The bank funds projects in several sectors, including 

agriculture, fisheries, water and sanitation, and the environment. Since 

1961, the bank has lent most of its money to Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, and 

Colombia. 

International Fund for 

Agricultural Development 

Established in 1977, the International Fund for Agricultural Development 

works to alleviate poverty and improve nutrition around the world, with a 

special focus on low-income countries. As an international financial 

institution associated with the United Nations, the organization provides 

loans and grants for technical assistance, research, and activities in several 

areas related to freshwater. These areas include agricultural development, 

irrigation, and water infrastructure development in rural areas.

North American Development 

Bank 

Created in a side agreement to the North American Free Trade Agreement, 

the North American Development Bank is jointly funded by Mexico and the 

United States. Working closely with the Border Environment Cooperation 

Commission, the bank finances projects related to drinking water supply, 

wastewater treatment, and other environmental infrastructure projects 

along the U.S.-Mexico border. The United States provides its annual 

contributions—through EPA—to the bank as a grant. The bank may use a 

portion of these contributions to support freshwater projects along the U.S. 

borders. The bank’s Board of Directors consists of members from the 

United States and Mexico, with the chairmanship of the board annually 

alternating between U.S. and Mexican representatives.

World Bank Group The World Bank Group, the largest multilateral development bank, is made 

up of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, 

International Development Association, International Finance Corporation, 

and Multilateral Investment Guaranty Agency. These institutions provide 

loans and loan guarantees and offer technical assistance for various 
Appendix III

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs Abroad 

Page 60 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

economic and social development projects. The bank has several waterrelated program areas that focus on, among other things, extending water 

supply and sanitation services to the urban poor, increasing rural access to 

water supply and sanitation, and improving water resources management. 

The bank has funded the construction of dams, flood control 

infrastructure, and drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities in 

countries around the world. Together with the U.N. Development 

Programme, the World Bank created the Water and Sanitation Program, 

which works with donors, governments of foreign countries, and 

nongovernmental organizations to support the development of costeffective water delivery technologies and implementation of strategies for 

providing safe water and sanitation to the world’s poor. 

Other International 

Organizations That Support 

Freshwater Programs 

Abroad

Inter-American Institute for 

Cooperation on Agriculture

Created more than six decades ago, the Inter-American Institute for 

Cooperation on Agriculture is a specialized international agency that 

promotes agricultural development, food security, and rural economic 

development in North, Central, and South America and the Caribbean. The 

institute’s focal areas include rural development, agribusiness 

development, and agricultural and food safety. Within these areas, the 

institute provides technical assistance for the management of, among other 

things, water resources, watershed management, and efforts to combat 

desertification.

Organization of American States The Organization of American States brings together 35 countries in North, 

Central, and South America and the Caribbean to strengthen cooperation 

and advance common interests. Through its Office for Sustainable 

Development and Environment, the organization provides technical 

assistance to countries and promotes cooperation on various issues, 

including integrated water resources management. For example, the 

organization provides financial support to help countries in South and 

Central America manage transboundary water resources in several major 

river basins. The organization works in partnership with the United 

Nations’ Environment Programme, the World Bank, and the Global 

Environment Facility on these projects. The organization also serves as the 

technical secretariat for the Inter-American Water Resources Network, 
Appendix III

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs Abroad 

Page 61 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

which was created in 1993 to foster cooperation on water management 

issues in the hemisphere.

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development 

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development brings 

together 30 industrialized nations in a forum to discuss, develop, and refine 

economic and social policies. The organization is funded by contributions 

from member countries, with the United States providing 25 percent of the 

general budget. Among other issues, the organization carries out research 

and analysis on water management policies, water use for agriculture, 

water pricing, water and wastewater infrastructure financing, and 

technologies to improve water quality. 

Pan American Health 

Organization

The Pan American Health Organization is an international public health 

agency that works to improve the health and living standards of residents 

in North, Central, and South America and the Caribbean. Affiliated with the 

United Nations and the World Health Organization, the organization 

provides technical support to various countries on a number of healthrelated issues. Among the organization’s top priorities are improving 

supplies of clean water and adequate sanitation facilities.

Ramsar Convention on Wetlands The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands is an inter-governmental treaty 

adopted in 1971 that addresses various wetlands-related issues worldwide. 

A small secretariat carries out the work of the convention using financial 

contributions from the 138 countries that are signatories to the convention. 

The United States makes voluntary contributions to the organization’s 

general budget and also funds a grant program for wetlands-related 

training. The organization has also used U.S. contributions to support the 

protection of key wetland habitats for migratory birds in Latin American 

and the Caribbean. 

United Nations Among other purposes, the United Nations seeks to achieve international 

cooperation in solving economic, social, cultural, and humanitarian 

problems. Funded through assessed dues paid by its 191 member nations, 

the United Nations consists of a number of commissions, funds, 

organizations, and other entities developed to respond to global needs. The 

United States has been the largest contributor of funds since the 

organization’s inception in 1945, making annual contributions that amount 

to about 22 percent of the United Nations’ general budget. In addition to its 

assessed contributions, the United States provides voluntary contributions 

to the United Nations and its affiliated organizations. Most of these 

contributions are used for humanitarian and development programs. With 
Appendix III

Federal Financial Support for Freshwater 

Programs Abroad 

Page 62 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

respect to freshwater projects, the United Nations provides advisory and 

technical assistance to governments on various freshwater issues, such as 

water resources management and infrastructure improvements. Within the 

United Nations’ system, 26 entities support water-related projects. 

However, according to a U.N. official who works on freshwater issues, the 

entities do not currently work together to track the financial support 

provided for freshwater projects.

World Conservation Union Created in 1948, the World Conservation Union is an international 

environmental organization with members from the government of foreign 

countries, governmental agencies, and nongovernmental entities. The 

organization has over 1,000 members from 140 countries, including 6 U.S. 

federal agencies—USAID, Agriculture’s Forest Service, Commerce’s 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Interior’s Fish and 

Wildlife Service and National Park Service, and EPA. The organization’s 

mission is to encourage the conservation of nature and ensure that the use 

of natural resources is ecologically sustainable. In addition to providing 

technical assistance on the management and restoration of wetlands and 

water resources, the organization supports several freshwater projects, 

such as the Water for Nature Initiative. This initiative works with partners 

in approximately 40 countries to improve water resources management in 

10 river basins. 
Page 63 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Appendix IV

Comments from the U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services ApendxiIV
Page 64 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Appendix V

Comments from the U.S. Department of the 

Interior ApendxiV
Page 65 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Appendix VI

Comments from the U.S. Agency for 

International Development ApendxiVI
Page 66 GAO-05-253 Freshwater Programs

Appendix VII

GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments ApendxiVI

GAO Contacts Ms. Anu K. Mittal, (202) 512-3841

Edward Zadjura, (202) 512-9914

Staff 

Acknowledgments

In addition to those named above, Diana Cheng, Richard P. Johnson, 

Nathan Morris, Lynn Musser, Jonathan Nash, and Kim Raheb made 

significant contributions to this report. Denise Fantone, Jessica Fast, 

Carol Herrnstadt Shulman, and John Hutton also contributed to this report.

(360448)
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help 

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost 

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to 

www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.”

Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to:

U.S. Government Accountability Office

441 G Street NW, Room LM

Washington, D.C. 20548

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Congressional 

Relations

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548

Public Affairs Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548