U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

99–467PDF 2016

REVIEW OF THE FY 2017 FOREIGN ASSISTANCE

BUDGET: ALIGNING INTERESTS, ENSURING

EFFECTIVENESS AND TRANSPARENCY

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

MARCH 15, 2016

Serial No. 114–169

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/ or

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

MATT SALMON, Arizona 

DARRELL E. ISSA, California 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

PAUL COOK, California 

RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

CURT CLAWSON, Florida 

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee 

REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin 

DAVID A. TROTT, Michigan 

LEE M. ZELDIN, New York 

DANIEL DONOVAN, New York 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

AMI BERA, California 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

GRACE MENG, New York 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania

AMY PORTER, Chief of Staff THOMAS SHEEHY, Staff Director

JASON STEINBAUM, Democratic Staff Director 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

The Honorable Gayle Smith, Administrator, U.S. Agency for International 

Development ......................................................................................................... 4

The Honorable Dana J. Hyde, Chief Executive Officer, Millennium Challenge 

Corporation ........................................................................................................... 15

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

The Honorable Gayle Smith: Prepared statement ................................................ 7

The Honorable Dana J. Hyde: Prepared statement .............................................. 17

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 48

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 49

The Honorable Gerald E. Connolly, a Representative in Congress from the 

Commonwealth of Virginia: Prepared statement .............................................. 51

Written responses from the Honorable Gayle Smith to questions submitted 

for the record by: 

The Honorable Edward R. Royce, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of California, and chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs .............. 53

The Honorable Eliot L. Engel, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of New York ...................................................................................................... 69

The Honorable Ted Poe, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Texas .................................................................................................................. 71

The Honorable Brad Sherman, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of California ...................................................................................................... 76

The Honorable William Keating, a Representative in Congress from the 

Commonwealth of Massachusetts ................................................................... 77

The Honorable Grace Meng, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of New York ...................................................................................................... 80

Written responses from the Honorable Dana J. Hyde to questions submitted 

for the record by: 

The Honorable Edward R. Royce ........................................................................ 82

The Honorable Ted Poe ....................................................................................... 84

The Honorable William Keating ......................................................................... 88

(1)

REVIEW OF THE FY 2017 FOREIGN 

ASSISTANCE BUDGET: ALIGNING 

INTERESTS, ENSURING EFFECTIVENESS 

AND TRANSPARENCY 

TUESDAY, MARCH 15, 2016

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 o’clock a.m., in 

room 2172 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Edward Royce 

(chairman of the committee) presiding. 

Chairman ROYCE. This hearing will come to order. 

Today—we will have all the members take their seats—today we 

are going to review the U.S. Agency for International Development 

and Millennium Challenge Corporation. 

From countering the threat of ISIS to combating pandemic diseases, foreign assistance can advance our national security, and it 

does it at a modest price. It is important to ensure that all of these 

investments though, no matter their size, that they are all efficient, 

that they are all effective. And the ultimate objective here must be 

to see countries graduate over time from aid. 

Economic growth is the foundation upon which all of our development programs should be built: From expanding access to energy 

and clean water, to improving food security, strengthening health 

systems, expanding access to capital, advancing property rights—

and that means ending land grabbing—and empowering women to 

participate freely in civic and economic activity. Market-based economic growth is the key to ending extreme poverty and it is key 

to advancing, frankly, U.S. interests. 

In this sense, the Millennium Challenge Corporation is on the 

right track. By picking poor but relatively well-governed countries 

to partner with, and by pushing transparency and pushing accountability, MCC is putting countries on the path toward graduation. 

MCC is again requesting the authority to enter into ‘‘concurrent 

compacts.’’ And they do this to boost trade regionally. I am pleased 

to be backing this initiative, along with Congresswoman Karen 

Bass from Los Angeles. 

However, MCC must stay true to its mission. The reality is that 

its commitment to selectivity and accountability—principles which 

we legislated here in Congress—is constantly being tested. I just 

returned from Tanzania, where that government’s commitment to 

democracy is being tested. It is being tested by rising levels of corVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:53 Jul 19, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_FULL\031516\99467 SHIRL
2

ruption in Tanzania, by constraints on freedom of expression, and 

by a cavalier attitude with respect to the fixing of elections in Zanzibar. A second MCC compact with Tanzania is not supportable 

under these conditions. 

The Agency for International Development also is being put to 

the test. From ‘‘ghost schools’’ to abandoned irrigation projects and 

hundreds of millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars exposed to waste, 

fraud, and abuse in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Presidential initiatives are diverting critical resources away from economic growth. 

Strategic planning is weak. We need fundamental changes there in 

Afghanistan and Pakistan. 

To its credit, USAID has been working to reform. In many ways 

it is putting MCC principles in practice. The agency is seeking to 

focus more on results and innovation, while tapping the expertise 

and capital of the private sector. It has been helped by Congress’ 

transparency push, including Mr. Poe’s Foreign Assistance Transparency and Accountability Act, which needs to pass the Senate. 

USAID is the global leader in humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. From the devastating earthquake in Nepal, to the 

deadly Ebola epidemic, to the prolonged refugee crisis in Syria, 

USAID is most often the first to respond. When lives are at stake, 

flexibility can be essential. In the Philippines, I saw first-hand Typhoon Haiyan’s devastation there. USAID knew it would take 3 

weeks for U.S. food aid stored in Sri Lanka to arrive—12 weeks if 

they had to ship food from the United States—so they bought food 

locally. And because they did, they saved lives there. 

The administration has rightly renewed its request to ‘‘untie’’ a 

quarter of the Food for Peace budget from costly, outdated, and inefficient U.S. purchase and shipping requirements that would cost 

those 4 weeks in a disaster situation like that hurricane. I will continue working with the administration and my colleagues to see 

that our food aid reaches more people in less time. Again, this is 

about saving more lives. 

New technologies—from vaccines to mobile banking—have accelerated advances in global health, food security, and development finance. USAID and MCC must keep pace by modernizing their 

work force, by embracing innovation, and partnering with the private sector. I look forward to working with Administrator Smith 

and Ms. Hyde to address these challenges over the coming year. 

Mr. Engel will be joining us late, so I am going to recognize Mr. 

Sherman of California for any opening statement he might wish to 

make. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I will yield a 

minute to any other Democrat on this side that has something to 

say, in part out of my generosity and in part because I don’t have 

a prepared opening statement capable of filling the time. 

Congress can play an important role in foreign affairs by providing adequate funds and providing oversight. This is the most 

important work I think the Federal Government does because it 

not only helps the poorest in the world and the most unfree in the 

world, but it is the best investment we can make dollar for dollar 

in American security. In fact, we spend roughly 1⁄5 of 1 percent of 

our gross domestic product aiding and providing development assistance to the world’s poor. 

3

When you poll Americans, they say that perhaps we spend 10, 

25, or even 50 percent of the Federal budget rather than the 1 percent of the Federal budget, 1⁄5 percent of our GDP that we actually 

spend. Perhaps we should have a national referendum limiting 

total foreign aid to no more than 5 percent of the Federal budget. 

I see at least two people in this room that would be happy with 

that as a target figure. 

When you look at our military budget and combine it with veterans’ assistance and intelligence, you see that we spend an awful 

lot on our national security, roughly 5 percent of our GDP. And 

that doesn’t count the most significant cost, and that is the cost in 

blood when we do have to deploy our best forces into harm’s way. 

I would want to identify two regions of the world in which I take 

a particular interest. Our aid to Armenia has helped it alleviate 

the effect of the blockade imposed on Armenia by Turkey and Azerbaijan. We have, and should have, a robust package for the country 

of Georgia because part of its territory is still occupied by Russia 

and it faces significant challenges. And I hope that the region of 

Samtskhe-Javakhet, I guess it is abbreviated just Javakhet, in 

Southern Georgia would be particularly aided as part of that process since it has been left out in the past. 

And, of course, U.S. aid to Nagorno-Karabakh helps that critical 

and beleaguered area and people very much in need. We provide 

demining assistance. We ought to be doing more. 

As to Pakistan, there are different regions. And Pakistan is so 

complicated already if you look at the whole country, but you do 

have to look at the individual regions. And in the south, the provinces of Balochistan and Sindh have more than 50 million people. 

The people of Sindh have I think—I won’t quite say but by a clear 

majority rejected extremism. I know that we have spent $155 million on the Sindhi Basic Education Program, but the Inspector 

General found some problems. I am told that those problems have 

been remedied, or at least all the I.G.’s suggestions have been implemented. I look forward to asking questions about that. 

And I will look to see whether, yes, Mr. Meeks would have some 

opening statements. I yield to him. 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I can’t think of a more important time in our history than what 

we are doing right now with reference to USAID or the Millennium 

Challenge and how important it is. When I think of, for example, 

capacity building, it is something that can make the difference. 

When we talk about eradicating poverty, if we can build capacity 

so individuals can have the ability to create jobs and to participate 

in the 21st Century, it makes it safer and this whole globe much 

more secure. 

When I think about the issues that are before us, and the issues 

that we have to deal with on a global scope because the two oceans 

no longer just protects the United States—and as Mr. Sherman 

said, we spend a minuscule amount—and when you think about, 

just look at the agenda, whether it is science and innovation, 

whether it is global health, dealing with women’s health and malaria or global health security, the tropical diseases, whether it is 

agriculture and the Feed the Future initiative or the Global Food 

Security Act or food aid reforms and priorities, whether it is democVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:53 Jul 19, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_FULL\031516\99467 SHIRL
4

racy and governance that we are dealing with, or global climate 

change and wildlife trafficking, these are tremendous issues that 

are—and I can go on and on and on—but that we need to address. 

And it makes, that affects not only these other countries but it affects us directly also. Because if you look at diseases, how fast they 

can travel, if we don’t solve things there, they come right back here 

at home. 

So I am excited and we will have some questions on some specific 

regions, but glad that you are here. And I think that we are here 

at a key strategic time. 

Thank you. I yield back. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Meeks. 

This morning we are pleased to be joined by Administrator 

Smith. She was sworn in as the 17th Administrator of USAID this 

past December. Before assuming this position, Administrator Smith 

served as Special Assistant to the President and as Senior Director 

for Development and Democracy at the National Security Council. 

And we welcome her to the committee. 

Prior to becoming Chief Executive Officer of the Millennium 

Challenge Corporation, Dana J. Hyde was the Associate Director at 

the Office of Management and Budget, and previously worked at 

the State Department. So it is good to see you again, Dana. 

Without objection, the witnesses’ full prepared statements will be 

made part of the record. And members here will have 5 calendar 

days to submit any statements or questions or extraneous material 

for the record. 

So Administrator Gayle Smith. Administrator, I think the red 

button there. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE GAYLE SMITH, ADMINISTRATOR, U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 

Ms. SMITH. Now am I on? All right, here we go. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and other members of the committee 

for the opportunity to discuss President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2017 

budget for the U.S. Agency for International Development. I will 

say I am also delighted to be here next to my friend and colleague, 

Dana Hyde of the MCC. 

For more than 50 years, USAID has led our nation’s efforts to 

advance dignity and prosperity around the world, both as an expression of our values and to help build peaceful, open, and flourishing partners. This request will help advance that important legacy, but our budget line items tell only part of the story. In recent 

years, with vital support from Congress, we have acted to make our 

work more efficient, effective, and impactful. 

First, recognizing that foreign assistance is just one valuable tool 

of many, we are making smarter investments with our assistance; 

leveraging private capital and funding from other donors to scale 

our impact; and supporting governments, small businesses, and entrepreneurs to mobilize domestic resources for development. 

Second, recognizing that development is indeed a discipline, we 

are improving the way we do, and measure, our work. Since adopting a new evaluation policy in 2011, the agency has averaged 200 

external evaluations a year, and our data show that more than 90 

5

percent of these evaluations are being used to shape our policies, 

modify existing projects, and inform future project design. 

Third, recognizing that USAID can achieve more when we join 

forces with others, we partner with U.S. Government agencies, 

American institutions of higher learning, NGOs, and communities 

of faith. When we can achieve greater efficiency or impact, we align 

goals and strategies with governments and organizations all over 

the world. Engagement with the private sector is now fully embedded into the way we do business. 

Finally, recognizing that development solutions are manifold, we 

are pursuing integrated country strategies, hoping to build local research capacity, and harnessing science, technology, and innovation 

to accelerate impact faster, cheaper, and more sustainably. 

These and other steps I believe are making us more accountable, 

stretching our dollars further, and helping USAID to live up to its 

important role as our lead development agency. For less than 1 

percent of the Federal budget, the President’s request will keep us 

on this path, enabling us to meet new challenges, seize emerging 

opportunities, improve the way we do business, and deliver transformational results on behalf of the American people. 

Specifically, the request of $22.7 billion will help advance 

progress in the four core pillars of our work: First, fostering and 

sustaining development progress; second, preventing, mitigating, 

and responding to global crises; third, mitigating threats to national security and global stability; and, fourth, leading in global 

development, accountability, and transparency. 

In countries around the world, USAID works to foster and sustain development progress in a range of sectors. In global health, 

we will continue to save lives and build sustainable health systems 

in the countries where we work. We will also continue to achieve 

transformational progress through the U.S. Government’s major 

development initiatives, including Feed the Future and Power Africa. We will continue to promote quality education and increase access to safe water and sanitation. 

Finally, as we know progress is not sustainable without open and 

effective governance in a vibrant civil society, the request will enable us to expand our work in democracy, rights, and governance. 

As a global leader in humanitarian response, the U.S. is there 

whenever a disaster hits. Our assistance saves lives and protects 

precious development gains, whether in Syria, in South Sudan, or 

on any of the four continents affected by El Nin ̃ o this year. 

The President’s request provides the agility and flexibility that 

is so desperately needed to prevent, mitigate, and respond to these 

global crises. 

We also work in places of strategic importance to U.S. foreign 

policy to mitigate emerging threats and other global security challenges. This request supports these critical efforts, from planting 

the seeds of dignity and opportunity that offer a counter-narrative 

to violent extremism, to fostering good will toward the United 

States. We are addressing the root causes of insecurity and immigration from Central America, strengthening our partners in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, and investing in long-term progress 

in Afghanistan. 

6

Finally, this request will enable USAID to continue to lead. It includes support for the Global Development Lab to help us spur and 

integrate innovation across and beyond the agency, and for our Bureau for Policy, Planning, and Learning to help us continue to drive 

with evidence. It also supports our work to strengthen USAID as 

an institution and support the men and women of this agency who 

serve their country bravely in some of the most challenging of the 

world’s environments. 

It is a great privilege to serve the American people alongside the 

men and women of USAID. I look forward to working closely with 

Congress to continue making USAID more agile, accountable, and 

impactful. Together we are building the agency we need and the 

world deserves, and making investments in a better future that 

will pay dividends for years to come. 

Thank you for this opportunity and for your support. I welcome 

your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Smith follows:]

7


99467a-1.eps
8


99467a-2.eps
9


99467a-3.eps
10


99467a-4.eps
11


99467a-5.eps
12


99467a-6.eps
13


99467a-7.eps
14


99467a-8.eps
15

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you. 

Ms. Hyde. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DANA J. HYDE, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE CORPORATION 

Ms. HYDE. Thank you, Chairman Royce, Congressman Sherman, 

and members of the committee. 

I am delighted to be here today with my friend——

Chairman ROYCE. I am going to ask you to, again, try that red 

button there. 

Ms. HYDE. It is on. 

Chairman ROYCE. And then speak into the mic. 

Ms. HYDE. Is this, is this helpful? 

Chairman ROYCE. Yes. Thanks. 

Ms. HYDE. I am delighted to be here today with my friend and 

fellow——

Chairman ROYCE. Just pull that microphone over about four 

inches. There we go. 

Ms. HYDE. How are we doing now? 

Chairman ROYCE. Perfect. 

Ms. HYDE. We are getting there? There you go. 

Over the past 11 years, MCC’s model has proven to be one of the 

most effective ways to transform lives and create opportunities in 

poor countries around the globe. As MCC turns the corner on its 

next decade, the agency is well poised to expand its reach and impact. 

In Fiscal Year 2017, MCC is requesting $1 billion to partner with 

impoverished countries in Africa and Asia. This funding will directly support compacts with Nepal, Lesotho, and the Philippines, 

as well as threshold programs in Sri Lanka and Togo. It will also 

enable MCC to move forward with critical investments in Cote 

d’Ivoire, Kosovo, and Senegal. 

In each of these countries, MCC’s data-driven approach will promote sustainable economic growth and reduce poverty in three key 

ways: 

First, MCC achieves some of its most dramatic results without 

spending $1 of taxpayer resources. MCC’s scorecard and global 

brand have created a powerful incentive for countries to undertake 

reforms to achieve eligibility, a phenomenon that has been labeled 

‘‘the MCC effect.’’ Countries like Cote d’Ivoire have taken forceful 

steps to change their laws and tackle corruption in order to qualify 

for MCC assistance; 

Second, MCC’s projects themselves are designed to tap economic 

potential and spur growth. Nepal, for example, is one of the poorest 

countries in Asia, and still recovering from last year’s devastating 

earthquake. But Nepal is also endowed with valuable human and 

natural resources. The flow of water from the Himalayas has the 

potential to power homes across the country and supply an energy 

surplus that Nepal can sell to neighbors like India. The Government of Nepal, with MCC’s support, is taking steps to turn this potential into reality. By harnessing its natural waters—through capital-intensive infrastructure projects—MCC can help Nepal on the 

path to long-term growth. 

16

Finally, MCC’s programs leave behind more than the sum of 

their individual projects. MCC’s commitment to a country-led, 

country-owned model of development prioritizes accountability, 

transparency, and systemic change. Consider MCC’s lasting impact 

in the Philippines. After an MCC-designed and funded road survived a direct hit from Typhoon Haiyan in 2013, the government 

adopted MCC’s resiliency standards and is now applying them to 

highways across the nation. 

With this committee’s support, MCC is on a strong footing. Last 

month, we released a 5-year strategy, NEXT. NEXT charts a course 

for expanding impact by doubling down on the core strengths of the 

MCC model. Allow me to share two important priorities. 

First, the strategy commits to deepening MCC’s leverage of the 

private sector. Increasingly, MCC is using its grant assistance to 

incentivize and support difficult sector reforms that help create an 

enabling environment for private investment. At the same time, 

MCC is expanding its use of public-private partnerships. Just over 

$1 billion in three recent compact investments is expected to leverage nearly $5 billion in private investment. 

Second, it is increasingly apparent that the path to economic 

growth in many of our partner countries lies in regional integration. After more than 10 years of successfully delivering large, complex infrastructure projects, MCC is well positioned to support the 

hard and soft infrastructure that will link markets and customers 

across borders. 

The President’s request asks Congress to provide MCC with the 

authority to make regional investments. You, Mr. Chairman, as 

well as Mr. Engel, Ms. Bass, and others, have been champions of 

this authority, and I am grateful to the committee for approving 

language that would support MCC’s regional work. 

In sum, Mr. Chairman, I am proud and humbled to lead an agency built on the pillars of evidence-based development. In this constrained budget environment, you can be assured that MCC’s datadriven investments yield results. 

MCC continues to promote American values and catalyze growth 

around the world. And since day one, MCC has held itself accountable to Congress and to the American people. 

Thank you very much for your time and attention, and I will be 

happy to answer your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Hyde follows:]

17


99467b-1.eps
18


99467b-2.eps
19


99467b-3.eps
20


99467b-4.eps
21


99467b-5.eps
22


99467b-6.eps
23


99467b-7.eps
24

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Ms. Hyde. 

I would just start by mentioning Mr. Chabot’s Girls Count Act, 

which we passed through this committee. And now the administration is working with the Lets Girls Learn initiative. 

As Mr. Chabot has pointed out in this committee, keeping girls 

in school reduces the likelihood that they are going to be made 

child brides or that they are going to end up trafficked or that they 

are going to be trapped in poverty. And so we have the Peace Corps 

and USAID heavily involved now in Lets Girls Learn. Which of the 

two is leading that effort, if I could ask? 

Ms. SMITH. We are working on that effort in conjunction with 

other agencies, Let’s Girls Learn. 

Chairman ROYCE. Very good. 

That would be, that would be something to look at in terms of 

how we can, how we can expand the effectiveness. 

Food aid reform, I wanted to talk about the flexibility. I raised 

that in my opening statement. Under what conditions would flexible food aid tools, like local and regional purchase, vouchers or 

transfers, be more appropriate than in-kind assistance? Maybe you 

could give us an example for the committee. It is something that 

I know the administration is looking to advance. This critical need 

is something I have worked on here for some years. And if you 

would like to amplify on the need for that, Administrator? 

Ms. SMITH. And if you would like me to also take the Let Girls 

Learn question. Thank you for your support and recognition of the 

impact of keeping girls in school. 

I would note that one of the elements of the request is for something called the Let Girls Learn Challenge Fund, which is aimed 

at spurring innovations to not only enroll but keep girls in school, 

because this is one of the other challenges we face. 

On the matter of food aid, we have always benefitted and hope 

to continue to benefit from a mix of commodities and cash. Our request for 25 percent flexibility in Food for Peace is rooted in the 

need to have flexibility, given the diverse range of crises that we 

face. In some cases commodities are the best answer. In many 

cases, for reasons that you pointed to in your introductory comment, a matter of speed, cost, or the type of commodity means that 

it is far more effective for us to purchase locally. 

We have found that this saves time, as you pointed out, but it 

also, we believe, has the impact of saving as many as 600,000 additional lives. 

Chairman ROYCE. Very good. 

With the recent elections, of course, in Burma, Burma continues 

to make strives. But despite this progress, treatment of the 

Rohingya Muslims in the Rakhine State is abhorrent. Even though 

we are going to see a new government here take power in Burma, 

I think the animosity toward the Rohingya runs deep there. And 

the administration has highlighted bolstering the democratic gains 

in Burma. 

How are we working to change attitudes there toward the 

Rohingya and affecting the persecution of the Rohingya in Burma? 

Ms. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the question. It is our 

belief that as we try to continue promoting democracy in Burma, 

the plight of the Rohingya people is one of the elements that needs 

25

to be on the table. We are, as you know, providing humanitarian 

assistance. We are about to launch a new program that is designed 

to improve the livelihoods of the Rohingya people, both for their 

benefit but also so that they might be more effectively integrated 

into Burmese society going forward. It is an issue we watch very 

closely and we will continue to work. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you. 

I also wanted to just return to the issue of MCC compacts, especially years of results, or in regard to what we saw in Tanzania in 

terms of the attempts to fix the election in Zanzibar. Now that is 

going to be re-voted on March 20th. But I think there is every reason that we have to use our considerable leverage. Where there is 

clear violation of the law and corruption of that kind of magnitude, 

you have to put your foot down and say ‘‘enough.’’

Also, I will just mention besides the situation in Tanzania on the 

attempt to fix that election on the island of Zanzibar, we have also 

got the situation in Peru last week where the Peruvian Electoral 

Court has barred Julio Guzman from next month’s elections over 

what they say is a procedural error in his party’s internal nominating process. Now, this is not an issue within his party, it is the 

opposition, frankly. It is Fujumoro, the rival candidate—Fujimori. 

And with just weeks until the first round of votes, Mr. Guzman has 

been polling second to the rival candidate. And now, not by the will 

of the people but by a 3 to 2 vote on this procedural issue, that is 

going to determine I guess who is going to lead Peru. 

I think that decision risks undermining the legitimacy of whomever should eventually prevail. And we should be using our considerable influence in situations like this where we see these attempts 

to steal elections. We should be engaged in that. 

I see, also, we are looking at another compact with the Philippines. As you know, we raised this issue of land grabbing in 

Cambodia where the corruption is driven from the top, from the 

central government, and from the Philippines where you have local 

governments involved in the process of land grabbing. And I think 

as we work to identify land grabbing and poor land tenure policies 

that are constraints to economic growth, we have to use our considerable leverage as a counterweight here to end those practices. 

I have run out of time. So I am going to go to Mr. Engel for his 

opening statement and any questions he may want to raise. 

Mr. Engel. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let me first 

say, Ms. Hyde, your leadership of the MCC has been exemplary. I 

want to just say that for the record. 

And let me say, as you well know, how pleased I am that Kosovo 

is now on track for an MCC compact. That is something we have 

worked for for a long time. And it is just nice to see government 

responding in a way that I believe it should. So thank you very, 

very much. 

Let me ask, Administrator Smith, I understand that you have 

worked at USAID during the Clinton administration. And many 

things obviously have changed since that time. We face staggering 

needs due to conflict and instability, and our foreign assistance 

budget remains constrained, which I think is an absolute mistake. 

26

How is USAID different now than it was when you were up there 

in the Clinton administration? Power Africa and Feed the Future, 

two of the signature development initiatives USAID has led in the 

past 3 years, how do these initiatives represent a new and different 

approach to development? 

Ms. SMITH. Well, thank you, Congressman, for the question. I 

think USAID has changed and grown a great deal. I would point 

to a couple of things. 

It has really become a knowledge institution that adapts and 

iterates. If I look at programs around the world and the progress 

that has been made, what I continue to see is an agency that, aided 

by evidence and analysis, is constantly improving what it does. 

A second thing I would point to is its ability to leverage private 

capital. There is broad agreement in the development community 

that it takes assistance, private capital, and domestic resources. 

The agency does a terrific job of bringing all of these to bear. 

I think that is true in both Feed the Future and Power Africa, 

both of which have the benefit of impacting the lives of real people 

who need electricity, and real farmers who need improvements in 

their lives, but which are also, in the case of Feed the Future, for 

example, linking small-holder farmers to markets, improving incomes, while at the same reducing the impact of stunting. 

In Power Africa, where we work very closely with the MCC and 

other government agencies, we are able to do two things: Again, expand access to electricity on the African continent, but also prime 

the pump of private investment so there is greater confidence and 

greater ability to draw private capital to viable energy projects. So 

I think this ability to invest, on the basis of evidence, in sustained 

outcomes that are really transformational, has been the tremendous progress that USAID has achieved over the last many years. 

Mr. ENGEL. Well, thank you. 

Let me ask you another question about the Zika virus. A number 

of my colleagues have suggested that rather than appropriate new 

funding for the Zika virus outbreaks that we ought to first expend 

unobligated Ebola response funds. Can you tell me if that is viable? 

How do you feel about using these unobligated Ebola funds to address the Zika virus? And what ramifications might we face if we 

were to shift this unobligated Ebola funding toward our Zika response? 

Ms. SMITH. Thank you. As Congressman Meeks has pointed out, 

and as I think we all know, we are going to see the spread of these 

kinds of diseases more and more frequently, as we have with Ebola 

and now Zika. We have identified some resources and are moving 

out with $2.5 million on Zika on public information campaigns. 

I will tell you honestly as somebody—as we now face the 2-year 

anniversary of the start of the Ebola epidemic—who worked it 

every single day for over 14 months, I have some great apprehension in spending down unobligated Ebola resources for Zika. And 

I will tell you why. 

These resources, in the first instance, are planned for a number 

of activities that are ongoing; so they are being spent down. Those 

include ensuring that we are prepared for any case of Ebola that 

we see and the threat of a possible outbreak. We were extremely 

lucky that the individual case in Nigeria that we saw at the height 

27

of the epidemic did not spread further. But I want to emphasize 

that we were lucky. I am very hesitant to suggest that we should 

take the risk of an unmanageable outbreak and be unable to respond. 

Second, in the three countries that were affected by the epidemic, 

there is an urgent need to build back their health systems but, 

also, incorporate and sustain their ability to do things like lab testing, run burial teams, keep trained healthcare workers who can respond again when and if we see additional cases. 

Finally, resources are going to what is called the Global Health 

Security Agenda, which is the long-term solution to this and Zika, 

which has to do with building the capacity of our partners to prevent, detect, and respond to outbreaks like Ebola and Zika. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you. Let me just quickly ask, Ms. Hyde, your 

testimony mentioned the changing landscape of poverty and your 

strategy for the next 5 years. The World Bank’s report on gross national income provides estimates on global poverty. And the report 

is a good starting place but it doesn’t always accurately capture 

where poverty is found around the world. 

So let me ask you, as MCC looks ahead, what are some of the 

ways that you will try to better measure poverty to improve the impact of the MCC model and its programs? 

Ms. HYDE. Thank you, Congressman. And thank you for your 

comments on Kosovo. We just had a high level delegation return 

and are delighted with the engagement thus far on our compact. 

Mr. ENGEL. As am I. Thank you. 

Ms. HYDE. Yes. MCC’s 5-year strategy focuses on a number of 

areas. Two I highlighted in my oral statement. First, the deep focus 

on leverage and private sector engagement. 

Second, MCC is working in the reform space. That is, how do we 

incentivize and support governments to undertake really challenging reforms in sectors that can enable private investment and 

other donor investment? 

With respect to poverty, MCC only works in poor countries. I believe MCC should only work in poor countries. But what we know 

is that over the last decade there have been a number of shifts in 

poverty. Right now, that candidate pool is assessed based on per 

capita income. And the challenge with average incomes, GNI, 

which is the World Bank measure, is that in cases where there is 

extreme inequality, or in countries where there is concentrated natural mineral wealth, it really doesn’t address what the percentage 

of poverty is and where it exists in those countries. 

MCC is a data-based organization. We are undertaking a thorough examination of other sources of poverty data and how we 

might better capture that. And we look forward to working with 

the committee in coming forward this summer with some ideas and 

proposals with respect to that. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you. And, again, thanks to both of you for extraordinary work. We really appreciate it. Thank you. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Engel. 

Mr. Dana Rohrabacher from California. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much. And I also thank you 

for your service. You work really hard and you try to keep us inVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:53 Jul 19, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_FULL\031516\99467 SHIRL
28

formed. You have had some meetings with me as well, and I appreciate that. 

Just some notes of concern, and that is when you talk about land 

grabbing, the chairman mentioned land grabbing in the Philippines 

and elsewhere, it is not just land grabbing but there are also 

claims, as we have talked about, American citizens, their projects, 

their property, their industries have been confiscated by various 

governments throughout the world. The one, of course, I have a 

constituent directly involved in Ethiopia that has taken possession 

of a very important industry in that country and will not give the 

property back. And I would hope, as we have talked, that in countries that are themselves, their government are taking property or 

if they are acquiescing to land grabbing that we should not be 

using the Millennium Challenge account to subsidize those governments. 

I would just say that we do have a little problem in our own 

country. It is called eminent domain. And just ask Mr. Trump; he 

knows all about that and utilizing it for his benefits. And we have 

to make sure that we are following our own principles as well when 

I suggest that. 

One last note and I am going to then yield to my friend Mr. 

Smith from New Jersey, and that is I really believe that we should 

be focusing on humane and humanitarian crises rather than development. I don’t think development is something that the American 

people are responsible for developing other countries. We are responsible as human beings, when other human beings are in danger and natural catastrophes, or even situations where war has 

come in and a lot of people are, lives are at risk, yes, we must help 

people out. But developing their country, helping them develop 

their country, I don’t necessarily think we can afford that anymore. 

And with that said, I yield the rest of my time to Mr. Smith. 

Mr. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY. Thanks for yielding. Thank you. 

Administrator Smith, thank you for your work, especially with 

the Enough campaign which I think is extraordinary, particularly 

the work in Sudan. Let me just ask you a couple of very quick 

questions. 

The End Neglected Tropical Disease Act, my hope is that the administration can support this bipartisan legislation. We have had 

seven hearings in my subcommittee on these devastating diseases, 

of which Zika virus is one, Ebola another. Can you support the legislation? 

Secondly, yesterday the House passed two resolutions, one calling the horrific murdering of Christians a genocide in Syria, and 

a second bipartisan resolution calling for the establishment of an 

independent ad hoc Syrian war crimes tribunal. My hope is that 

everyone who cares about the humanitarian impact that war has, 

particularly when it is a genocide, could weigh in on the administration, other parts of it, to make a determination. The President 

has until Thursday. Our hope is that he will do both. They go tandem. 

Article 6 of the Genocide Convention, as we all know, makes 

very, very clear that the prosecution of individuals who have committed genocide is a treaty obligation under the Genocide ConvenVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:53 Jul 19, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_FULL\031516\99467 SHIRL
29

tion. And an international tribunal is a venue that is well adept 

to that. 

And, finally, Ms. Hyde, why is there no role for faith-based organizations in the selection criteria? I know Yale, Columbia, 

UNESCO, World Bank all have input. Faith-based groups are the 

most efficacious groups on the ground in delivering humanitarian 

aid as well as developmental aid. Why aren’t they included in that? 

Thank you. 

Ms. SMITH. Thank you, Congressman. And thank you for your 

particular recognition of the work on neglected tropical diseases. As 

we have discussed, I think the gains there have been extraordinary: If you look at the delivery of 287 million treatments over 

the last 10 years, and an annual $2 billion leveraged in contributions. 

One of the things we are doing is looking outward at what the 

plan should be over the next 10 years, because I think that if we 

remain on a steady course we can get neglected and eradicated 

tropical diseases in many cases. 

Thank you for your comments on the resolutions which I have 

noted and will duly share. The plight of Christians, of minorities 

throughout the Middle East has been something that has been of 

great attention to our agency. We strive to ensure that humanitarian assistance is delivered to all. Also, through our own faithbased office, we have received many delegations from these groups 

and others, and we intend to continue. 

Thank you. 

Ms. HYDE. Thank you, Congressman, for the question. 

With respect to the indicators themselves, we would be happy to 

take a look if there is a specific indicator that might be appropriate 

in terms of measuring growth. You know, most of the indicators 

that we are using are the IMF, the IFC, the World Bank and these 

kinds of sources. But if there is some gap that we are missing——

Mr. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY. Well, you know that there are NGOs 

like Freedom House and others. 

Ms. HYDE. Freedom House and others, yes. 

Mr. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY. And the faith-based groups, Catholic 

Relief Services——

Ms. HYDE. Yes. 

Mr. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY [continuing]. Samaritan’s Purse, they 

are absolutely essential. 

Ms. HYDE. Yes. No, I couldn’t agree——

Mr. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY. And they should be contributing, I 

would say, to that criteria. 

Ms. HYDE. Couldn’t agree more. So to the extent it may be the 

inclusion of a new indicator. I will say that with respect to our designing investments and our civil society outreach, faith-based 

groups are absolutely part of where we reach out to country by 

country. In fact, our work with Niger this year will prove as a good 

example of that. 

But we are always seeking to see if there is a data source that 

we are missing that could be appropriate. And I would be happy 

to follow up with you on that. 

Mr. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY. Yes, let’s do that. 

Ms. HYDE. Okay. 

30

Mr. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you. We go now to Mr. Brad Sherman. 

And without objection, I am going to yield a couple of minutes to 

Mr. Sherman to—you had some remarks on the House Floor last 

night that I think in the interest of the committee might be well 

served if I just yield to you a few minutes right now, Mr. Sherman, 

to reiterate your observations about the Senate and the House. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will give you a 1-

minute report on our consideration last night of S. 2426. Some in 

this committee will have noticed that that bill, that Senate bill we 

considered last night was identical to H.R. 1853, written by Mr. 

Salmon and passed by this committee. And so I will report to you 

on that coincidence by quoting the remarks I made on the Floor 

last night:

‘‘The House passed H.R. 1853 overwhelmingly last year. We 

sent the bill to the Senate. Instead of acting on the House bill, 

the Senate Xeroxed our bill, put their own name on it, and 

sent it back here. The decision to send the bill back to us with 

their own name on it is a trend that we are seeing in the foreign affairs area, a trend that I do not condemn because it allows us here on the House Floor to consider well-drafted House 

bills not once but twice, and to vote on them twice, and to emphasize to the administration how serious we are about them 

being enforced. 

‘‘I appreciate the Senate copying our work, since imitation is 

the most sincere form of flattery.’’

Anyway, that is the report from last night. 

Now I want to address the witnesses. First, as I want to associate myself with the chairman’s remarks on the Rohingya and 

note again the importance of fighting the Zika virus and other, 

other infectious diseases. And this is part of our national security, 

since these diseases which we call tropical are coming our way, 

whether that is for a host of reasons. 

As to Southern Pakistan, which I mentioned in the opening 

statement, I want to commend you from one—from, let me see, the 

construction of 26 schools that you have started, both girls’ schools 

and primary schools, training 113 supervisors. And I wonder if you 

could comment, Madam Administrator, on your work in Sindh and 

Balochistan? 

Ms. SMITH. Yes, sir. And thank you for your comment again on 

Zika. I think it is extremely important that we all recognize that 

this is a new and modern threat that is going to continue to challenge us. 

In Sindh Province—and thank you for your recognition of the 

work—we have, as I think you know, a comprehensive development 

assistance portfolio that includes repairing power stations, developing a workforce program targeting disadvantaged youth, increasing enrollment in schools, and improving infrastructure, and technical capacity to deliver quality health services. 

You have pointed to some of the results we have seen. I would 

also like to point out the Health Infrastructure Improvement Program which trains over 1,300 healthcare workers and provides 

care, importantly for 140,000 women annually. 

31

Mr. SHERMAN. Thank you. 

I have been advocating for direct aid to Nagorno-Karabakh since 

1997. It is an important investment we make in peace in that region and in support of a negotiated and democratic solution. Recently, aid direct to Nagorno-Karabakh has dropped to $1.5 million 

per year, principally directed at demining. 

Can you explain why we are not doing more, given the fact that 

this area is beleaguered and in need of help? 

Ms. SMITH. Thank you for that. And as you know, we are operating in an environment that forces some tough choices. I think the 

good news is that we have seen in the Fiscal Year 2017 request, 

increases across the board for that region. 

In addition to demining, we have also supported humanitarian 

assistance. Should there be a recurrent need for that we are always, as in any part of the world, willing to take another look at 

that. 

Mr. SHERMAN. I will look forward to talking to you and showing 

you that that need has already occurred. 

Ms. SMITH. Absolutely. I would love to do that. 

Mr. SHERMAN. And obviously a lot of countries are seeing refugees from Syria. And we are helping Turkey. That is well publicized. Many of the Christian refugees are making their way to Armenia, especially being ethnic Armenians. Are we providing aid to 

the Government of Armenia to take care of those refugees? 

Ms. SMITH. We are providing some assistance to help with refugees who have migrated to parts of Europe, as well as trying to 

concentrate our assistance both for people inside Syria and those 

in the surrounding regions. In addition, the State Department, 

through PRM, is providing assistance to those people. 

Mr. SHERMAN. You wouldn’t happen to know how much is going 

to Armenia for assistance? 

Ms. SMITH. I can get that specific answer for you. 

Mr. SHERMAN. I look forward to it. 

Ms. SMITH. I would be happy to provide it in writing or in person. 

[The information referred to follows:]

WRITTEN RESPONSE RECEIVED FROM THE HONORABLE GAYLE SMITH TO QUESTION

ASKED DURING THE HEARING BY THE HONORABLE BRAD SHERMAN

The United States provides support to Armenia for refugee assistance through the 

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). UNHCR has provided 

approximately $20 million for Armenia since 2012. UNHCR estimates that there are 

approximately 15,690 refugees in Armenia, as of June 2015; as the United States 

provides roughly 35 percent of UNHCR funds, that means the United States has 

provided approximately $7 million to Armenia in refugee assistance, which comes 

to approximately $446 per refugee.

Mr. SHERMAN. Thank you. 

I want to again commend you on your work. And yield back the 

rest of my time. 

Mr. CHABOT [presiding]. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize myself for 5 minutes. 

And, again as the other members have said, we welcome you 

here and your testimony. Let me ask you this, Madam Administrator, how much taxpayer money is the President requesting for 

the Global Climate Change Initiative? 

32

Ms. SMITH. Well——

Mr. CHABOT. Could you turn your mic on, please. 

Ms. SMITH. Sorry. 

Mr. CHABOT. That is all right. 

Ms. SMITH. I can get you that. For USAID specific funding I believe it is in the range of $300 million. 

Mr. CHABOT. Okay. 

Ms. SMITH. I have that right here. I will look it up for you. 

Mr. CHABOT. All right. Let me, correct me if I am mistaken here, 

but I have been led to believe that it is $483.9 million? 

Ms. SMITH. I am happy to look at that figure specifically.

WRITTEN RESPONSE RECEIVED FROM THE HONORABLE GAYLE SMITH TO QUESTION

ASKED DURING THE HEARING BY THE HONORABLE STEVE CHABOT

The USAID FY 2017 request for Global Climate Change funding is $352.2 million. 

The State Department request is $631.7 million, which includes $500 million for the 

State Green Climate Fund.

Mr. CHABOT. Okay. Well, for the purpose of my next questions, 

if you will assume that that is the number, unless you have one 

of your folks find out it is different, in which case I am happy to 

be corrected. I see you are getting handed a piece of paper there 

now, so. 

Ms. SMITH. I am. Three fifty-two. 

Mr. CHABOT. $352 million, so $1⁄3 billion approximately. 

Ms. SMITH. Yes. 

Mr. CHABOT. All right. Well, the numbers that our crack staff 

had supplied to us was $483 million. But in Washington, $150 million that we are not clear about some people might think that that 

is not a big deal. I think it is a pretty big deal. But let’s, let’s 

maybe by the end of the day we can come up with the exact figure. 

But let’s assume it is somewhere between $352 million and $483.9 

million. 

But that doesn’t change the focus of my next couple of questions, 

which is this: This nearly $1⁄3 billion or $1⁄2 billion of the hardworking American people’s tax dollars is pursuant to commitments 

that were made at last year’s Paris Climate Conference; is that correct? 

Ms. SMITH. Our work—and I can confirm it is $352 million. We 

would be happy to go over specific numbers with you or your staff. 

But those figures reflect——

Mr. CHABOT. But that is not my question now about the amount. 

Ms. SMITH. Sure. 

Mr. CHABOT. It was pursuant to the President’s commitment at 

the Paris Climate Conference last year? 

Ms. SMITH. Actually, the work that USAID does in this area we 

have been doing for many years. 

Mr. CHABOT. It has nothing to do with the Paris Climate Conference? 

Ms. SMITH. Part of our Paris commitment included——

Mr. CHABOT. Some amount of the money is pursuant to the 

President’s commitment last year; is that correct? 

Ms. SMITH. Yes, sir, I believe it is. 

Mr. CHABOT. Okay, thank you. 

33

And how much input did the duly-elected representatives of the 

American people, which would be the House of Representatives and 

the Senate, have in making those particular commitments, irregardless of what the commitments might have been previous to 

that, but how much involvement was there by the folks here, the 

elected representatives of the American people in that commitment 

at the Paris Global Warming Conference? 

Ms. SMITH. Congressman, I wonder if perhaps you are referring 

to the Green Climate Fund? 

Mr. CHABOT. Do you remember when they had the pretty horrible attacks on Paris, the terrorist attacks last——

Ms. SMITH. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CHABOT [continuing]. Last year? 

Around that time, shortly after that there was this Global Climate Conference in Paris, wasn’t there? 

Ms. SMITH. Yes. 

Mr. CHABOT. Okay. That is what I am referring to. 

Ms. SMITH. Yes. 

Mr. CHABOT. Okay. The President commits a whole lot of money. 

Did he seek, did he get approval from Congress on that? It is a 

pretty simple question I think. 

Ms. SMITH. Yes. And if I may, two quick points on that. If indeed 

you are referring to the Green Climate Fund, that is something 

that the State Department has determined it has the authorization 

to make the grant that was made. 

From the perspective of USAID we have——

Mr. CHABOT. Let me go on with my time. I have only got a 

minute left here. 

Ms. SMITH. Okay. 

Mr. CHABOT. You can correct me for the record later on if you 

want to, but I don’t think there was a whole lot, we certainly didn’t 

vote on approving what the President committed of the hard-working American people’s dollars. 

And there is at least one Senator that apparently believes that 

so-called climate change deniers—and I would argue that that language itself is reprehensible because it infers that people that don’t 

buy in completely to the fact that we ought to be spending huge 

amounts of money when it could be considerable loss of jobs and 

taxpayer money spent, and it kind of compares deniers of the Holocaust to people that are skeptical about climate change—but in any 

event there is at least one Senator who thinks that the Justice Department and the FBI should be pursuing legal action against socalled climate deniers. 

So my question would be—and I am almost out of time—but my 

question is am I or anybody else who might be skeptical about 

huge amounts of money, whether it is $350 million or whether it 

is $450 million that are going toward these types of initiatives, are 

we in some legal jeopardy for expressing some concern about the 

use of the American people’s tax dollars in that way? 

Ms. SMITH. Sir, it is my considered view that expressing your 

views and opinions are absolutely your right and prerogative. 

Mr. CHABOT. Thank you. I appreciate that greatly. Thanks for 

your testimony. 

34

My time has expired. The gentleman from New York, Mr. Meeks, 

is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Let me, you know I don’t think I did this initially, let me say I 

think this is the first time that you, Madam Administrator, have 

been here as the new Administrator for the USAID. Let me congratulate you on being confirmed and in your new job. I had the 

pleasure of working with you in the other, in the Clinton administration and others, particularly on Africa. And know I look forward 

to working with you in the future. And congratulations and welcome. 

Let me just first ask when talking about Trade Africa, you know 

we have worked on Africa together, and I have been a promoter of 

increased regional trade in Africa and in increased trade between 

Africa and the United States. And I know that trade, the Trade Africa initiative, is a new approach, a multi-agency approach with the 

potential to significantly assist in expanding U.S. trade. 

And the initiative, or a key goal of the initiative, is to build U.S.-

African trade and investment hubs in three African regions which 

are supposed to function as a resource both for African exporters 

and U.S. firms. So can you tell us what the status is of the three 

hubs and what are USAID’s main activities in current and prospective challenges under Trade Africa? 

Ms. SMITH. Thank you for your longstanding support of Trade Africa, even before it was named. 

We have the three hubs, and those are doing a number of things. 

One is working with potential partners who under the terms of 

AGOA want to increase trade with the United States. 

Second is to train and work with entrepreneurs, small businesses, and others, including with a special emphasis on women in 

terms of the value chains that we support. 

And the third is supporting efforts for regional integration, which 

is very important as you know. The size of many of these economies in each of the three regions are very small, and their ability 

to trade both with each other and as regional trading blocs will be 

significantly enhanced by their ability to integrate. So there is a lot 

of work on the policy and reform side. 

Mr. MEEKS. And let me ask also, are there any other trade and 

investment—focused activities that USAID is supporting in Africa? 

Let me ask that. And then——

Ms. SMITH. Yes. 

Mr. MEEKS. Go ahead. 

Ms. SMITH. No, go ahead. 

Mr. MEEKS. Go ahead, because I am going to change to a different country in the second question. 

Ms. SMITH. Yes, there are efforts underway to work on trade facilitation as part of the WTO agreement, which I think you have 

followed, and to help countries as they work toward WTO accession. 

Mr. MEEKS. And let me ask now because I am taking the rest of my time on this, President Obama has proposed $450 million in 

Fiscal Year 2017 for assistance for Colombia in what we are calling 

Peace Colombia. I was a huge supporter of Plan Colombia and believed that supporting peace in Colombia is equally crucial. But I 

35

also know that the region that was most affected was the AfricanColombian and indigenous communities in Colombia have been disproportionately affected by violence in the nation’s long-lasting conflict. 

So my question is, how do you envision U.S. assistance to Colombia helping those communities specifically? And which USAID programs do you envision plussing up? And which program do you 

think that you can envision phasing out? 

Ms. SMITH. Thank you for the question. Our view in this next 

phase of the transition in Colombia is that integration is going to 

be absolutely key, as is equity between and amongst people who 

have been divided by a long conflict, and that includes the Afro-Colombian community. 

You will be pleased to note, I think, that in the Fiscal Year 2017 request we include 60—a $61-million program targeted just for 

those communities, aimed at building their capacity, including for 

self-governance, to engage in public debate and dialogue with the 

government, and build capacity and resources among those communities so that we might see, as Colombia does enter this next 

phase, greater equity than we have seen historically. 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you. Because that is absolutely critical, you 

know, as I believe our peace process was. As members that were 

falling into the FARC start coming back, that is the area where 

they go. And we want to make sure that those who have suffered 

and been displaced for a long period of time that they are considered in this process. And a lot of the aid and capacity-building dollars are there because there is great opportunity there from whether it was the Colombia Trade Agreement or other opportunities 

that present themselves there. 

Ms. SMITH. I would agree with you, and that is very much what 

our assistance is aimed to do, as well as our dialogue with the Government of Colombia. 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you. And I yield back. 

Mr. CHABOT. Thank you. The gentleman yields back. 

The gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Duncan, is recognized 

for 5 minutes. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And let me just say, I think USAID is for the most part a very 

effective tool in the foreign policy realm. It transcends administrations. It has been around a long time. And I appreciate its efforts. 

And so, Administrator Smith, I would like to address some questions to you. But the things I know about USAID, things like ongoing efforts in Iquitos, Peru, to combat dengue and now Zika, research on mosquitos and how those two fevers and viruses are 

transmitted. And I support efforts such as Electrify Africa because 

I believe that we can improve the quality of lives of folks in Africa 

and, really, all across the Third World with simple things that electricity and energy provides: And that is to keep food from spoiling; 

to be able to heat and cool homes and keep the mosquitos out by 

being able to close windows; to being able to improve quality of air 

by not burning something in the house; being able to cook food over 

something other than coal or wood. These are simple things. 

Being able to read after the sun goes down, whether reading to 

your parents or reading yourself, or there are just so many things 

36

we take for granted that I think, you know, electrifying efforts, 

whether it is Africa or anywhere in the Third World can benefit. 

So these are things I support. 

But I went to the Summit of the Americas last year. I was Chairman of the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee. And at the summit 

had a chance to have a conversation with President Obama. And 

we were talking about the money for the Northern Triangle countries for the unaccompanied children. I told the President at the 

time, I said, I am somebody on my side of the aisle that probably 

would surprise you in my support for giving money to those Northern Triangle countries to help combat this because I believe it is 

the issues in those countries that are causing the parents to send 

their children north, not necessarily the carrots that we are dangling here in this country. I probably differ with him on the 

amount, and I told him that. 

But I said, at the time I said, Mr. President, we have to make 

sure that there is some accountability for this money that we do 

give to these countries. And he said at the time, which kind of 

caught me off guard, he said, you are absolutely right, Congressman. Too much money has gone missing in the past. 

Which was an affirmation, I think, that money has been 

skimmed by rogue dictators or whoever. So we need to make sure 

that we get the money to where the rubber meets the road and 

make it effective. And I think the President acknowledged that. 

So playing on his words to me during that conversation, my 

question to you is how do we address accountability, especially in 

Third World countries, where we see folks like Taylor in Liberia or 

others that have taken a lot of foreign aid and used it for ill-gotten 

gains? So how are you addressing accountability? Understanding 

that everyone is acknowledging that this has happened in the past, 

these are taxpayer dollars. This is not off a money tree in the back 

yard. Hard-working Americans pay taxes and they want to make 

sure that their tax dollars are spent effectively by any administration. 

So, Ms. Smith, if you could just address what you are doing 

about accountability, I would appreciate it? 

Ms. SMITH. Thank you for your support of our work. I think part 

of the deal we make with the American people, in addition to our 

obligation and my obligation to ensure that taxpayers’ dollars are 

spent effectively, is to show results and be sure that these are worthy investments. That has everything to do with accountability and 

transparency, which we approach in a number of ways. 

First transparency, is ensuring that we have clarity and visibility 

on the dollars spent, and that we increasingly obligate our partners, including governments, to be transparent with their own citizens and with us about the expenditure of those dollars. 

Second is building the capacity for governments to set up, whether it is anti-corruption commissions, or to put in place the regulations and laws that are necessary to prevent corruption, while at 

the same time supporting civil society. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Is that a requirement for receiving help, that they 

set up some sort of anti-corruption policy? 

Ms. SMITH. There are. In the case of the Northern Triangle countries some of our assistance over the last few years has gone into 

37

building the capacity of high-impact courts, local anti-corruption institutions, number one. We also support civil society organizations 

because part of the way you get accountability is when citizens ask 

where the money is and create a demand signal. So that is another 

way we do it. 

I think this has become—when I was asked a question of what 

has really changed to date, I think the incorporation—and I am 

sure my colleague will speak to this—but I think across the board 

on foreign assistance dollars this emphasis on building capacity to 

fight corruption and building capacity of civil society to hold governments accountable and demanding degrees of transparency that 

were not required in the past, quite frankly, in some of the examples to which you refer is a huge priority for us. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Right. Well, I appreciate that. I appreciate your efforts on transparency, accountability. When we see things like Afghanistan where a lot of money has gone for projects that weren’t 

built and then taken by others, it is important because these are 

our taxpayer dollars. 

I appreciate it. 

Ms. SMITH. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. DUNCAN. And I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CHABOT. Thank you. The gentleman yields back. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

The gentlelady from California, Ms. Bass, is recognized for 5 

minutes. 

Ms. BASS. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Let me begin by commending both of you for your work and your 

leadership over both agencies over these last few years. I certainly 

have enjoyed working with both of you. And, Madam Administrator, with your time in the White House and now at USAID I 

want to congratulate you. 

I thought I would try to get all my questions out at once. And 

then the rest of the time you could answer them. I do want to 

thank you for you reluctance to shift Ebola funding to Zika. I think 

it is just so important that we not do that, especially because we 

know that we need to strengthen the health infrastructure in the 

three countries. And it is nice that the urgency has passed, but we 

certainly don’t want to change the money. 

So the one question on food aid reform, I wanted to know what 

additional reforms you believe are needed, and what constraints in 

the current system prevent U.S. food aid from reaching more people? That is one question. 

And then what are we doing now to address the drought in 

Southern Africa and Ethiopia? 

You know, when I was looking at this chart on USAID appropriations, if I understand it correctly it looks as though there is no 

funding request for the Democracy Fund. And I wanted to know if 

you could clarify that because it says zero. It says $62 million in 

2016 and zero in 2017; so maybe you could clarify that? 

And then for MCC, I wanted to know, Ms. Hyde, where you see 

doing regional compacts in Africa? 

And then a second MCC question is about the private sector role, 

and so I wanted to know what MCC is doing to mobilize private 

capital in compact countries? And to what extent—and hopefully 

38

this is where we might work together in the future—has MCC been 

able to leverage the participation of U.S. private companies in its 

activities? So how is that? 

Ms. HYDE. Thank you, Congresswoman, and thank you for your 

leadership overall, but in particular with respect to the Regional 

Compact Authority that you and I have spoken about a number of 

times. 

So as I mentioned, we know that in 2016 we live in a global economy and that regional integration is key to helping markets develop. This is particularly true in Africa where you have 54 disparate countries, many small, without economies of scale. Over the 

decade, 65 percent of MCC’s portfolio has been invested in Africa. 

The MCC brand is very strong there. We have had bilateral compacts, a number there. 

And while I think regional compacts could be successful in many 

parts of the world, I think Africa is particularly ripe for one. In 

particular, I would say West Africa, where MCC’s penetration is 

quite strong. We see a number of opportunities either in power, to 

work across borders there in transmission and distribution as well, 

or in transportation. 

And, you know, I was struck by, I believe that the political will 

is there to help and that they are looking for capacity and assistance particularly in infrastructure. The two most recent selections 

in Africa from the board meeting in December are Cote d’Ivoire and 

Senegal. We are still seeking the authority. At the same time, we 

are looking to do the due diligence to see what are actually the opportunities that exist in Senegal, which is really a regional leader, 

and Cote d’Ivoire, as well as keeping our eyes open elsewhere. 

With respect to the private sector, MCC has evolved in a way 

that I think has a unique value proposition for the private sector. 

We are in two dozen countries around the globe. We are there for 

a 5-year period of time. We have a platform that is usually in a 

sector where there is interest in private capital: Transportation as 

well as energy as well as irrigation. And what we are doing is both 

using our investments to see where we can invest in public goods, 

which is often, for example in energy, the utilities. 

Ms. BASS. Excuse me. Mr. Chair, I might run out of time. If you 

wouldn’t mind——

Ms. HYDE. Yes, yes, yes. 

Ms. BASS [continuing]. Giving a minute. 

Mr. CHABOT. Go right ahead. Proceed. 

Ms. HYDE. And to bring in American companies, I would cite 

Ghana as an example of this, where there are a number of companies, GE and others, who are going to work in generation in 

Ghana, while MCC will be investing in the utility to make the sector more viable. And now I will stop. 

Ms. BASS. Great. One, two, three? 

Ms. SMITH. Thank you, Congresswoman. 

Our request on food aid is for the 25 percent, which we think will 

give us the flexibility to have the right mix in the future discount 

between commodities and cash. 

Thank you for raising El Nin ̃ o. We are responding in both Southern Africa and Ethiopia. In Ethiopia, as you may know, we have 

recently launched a Disaster Assistance Response Team, or DART. 

39

Part of the reason to move so early is that we believe—as do other 

donors—that if we can provide sufficient assistance quickly enough 

we can prevent the worst impacts. 

And on the democracy side, we don’t request our funding through 

the fund. 

Ms. BASS. Okay. 

Ms. SMITH. But I am pleased to let you know that the request for Fiscal Year 2017 has increased to $2.3 billion through USAIDmanaged funds. 

Ms. BASS. So you don’t think there is any additional reforms that 

are needed with food aid? You think what you have now is okay? 

Ms. SMITH. What we are looking for now is that 25 percent that 

is in the Fiscal Year 2017. 

Ms. BASS. And any request for AWEP, the African Women’s Entrepreneur Program? 

Ms. SMITH. That is managed by the State Department. We work 

very closely——

Ms. BASS. Okay. 

Ms. SMITH [continuing]. With them and support African women 

entrepreneurs through our trade hubs. 

Ms. BASS. Thank you very much. 

Mr. CHABOT. The gentlelady’s time has expired. 

The gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Perry, is recognized for 

5 minutes. 

Mr. PERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Madam Administrator, hi, good morning. Just let me start off by 

saying I have had the privilege of working with some of your field 

agents down range, as military folks call it, and they have been 

nothing but professional and a pleasure to work with. 

I do have a question, however, regarding the West Bank and that 

foreign assistance through your organization, as I understand it, 

exceeds $363 million for Fiscal Year 2017. This is moving away 

from the $80 million, $80 million reduction from last year. To date, 

Palestinians have received nearly $5 billion in assistance from the 

United States, which is more aid per capita, according to the figures I have, than any other people. 

I am just curious about how you use the power of that financial 

influx into the PA to kind of influence the Palestinian Authority 

when, you know, when President Abbas makes a statement claiming that the recent stabbing attacks in Israel represent a popular 

peaceful uprising? And while in 2014, 81 percent of Palestinians 

believed that there was corruption in the Palestinian Authority, 

and as well an EU audit showed that the PA mismanaged over $3 

billion from 2009 to 2013. 

So taxpayers are working hard and they are paying their taxes 

and we are sending money to the PA, who then is alleged to—and 

I don’t know if this is proven, I think it is, but I will just say ‘‘alleged’’ for these purposes—to pay a stipend. When individuals carry 

out and conduct a terrorist attack and end up in prison, then their 

family gets a stipend for that. And the more horrific the act, the 

higher the stipend. 

How do we, as a Federal Government, leverage the money we 

spend, a fantastic amount here, $363 million—maybe not much in 

the scope of the trillions of dollars that we budget annually and 

40

spend—but how do we leverage that to minimize these horrific acts 

and get a good value out of the taxpayer dollar? 

Ms. SMITH. Thank you for your question and for your kind comments about our people. I would agree with you: They are nothing 

but terrific. 

USAID’s role in these environments, and this is a tough one, is 

to try to build the capacity of fundamental governments so that the 

needs of people are served. In this environment we work through 

partners. We do not simply hand over the money. We vet, we audit, 

and we track it very closely. 

The assistance is targeted at things like delivering basic services: 

Clean, potable water for citizens, basic education, and things that 

will make a difference—we hope a positive difference—in the lives 

of, particularly, young Palestinians. 

In terms of leverage, I think there are two things. One, that 

presence and engagement enables our State Department to undertake its diplomatic efforts. I think on our side as USAID, it allows 

for engagement with people, and again particularly young people, 

to try to encourage something different, quite frankly, than what 

we have seen. 

We track very closely all of our assistance, as I say. Corruption 

concerns are absolutely worthy of consideration. But I think it is 

our view that this kind of engagement is critically important to 

building capacities that are needed, but also to ensure engagement 

with the Palestinian people, and particularly young people. 

Mr. PERRY. I would agree with those things: The infrastructure, 

the engagement. I think those are good things. But money being 

fungible, do you get the sense that to a certain extent while American citizens and taxpayers are helping to pay for infrastructure 

and better governance, that is the money that the PA has other 

places that could be used for that, instead they use it to build tunnels into Israel and support their other nefarious activities. And 

how do you balance that and how do you, again, how do you leverage that? 

I mean the things that you said are very aspirational and they 

are great. But at the same time, the taxpayer in my district sees 

us funding many times terrorism, and people that hate America, 

hate Israel, our ally, and hate the West and are committed to the 

destruction of those things, and we will help them pay for it. What 

do I say to them? 

Ms. SMITH. I think that is a fair question. I think the first thing 

you can say to them with confidence is we do not fund terrorists. 

We will closely track our assistance to ensure that at an individual 

or any other level that does not happen. 

I think it is a matter of policy, and we work under the auspices 

of our foreign policy. There is a decision and a view, again, that 

there is a need to build that fundamental capacity on the ground. 

And as I say, I think our State Department is able to use that engagement and our presence in what we do as USAID to press the 

Palestinian Authorities to move in a different direction. 

Mr. CHABOT. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. PERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CHABOT. Thank you. 

41

The gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Keating, is recognized 

for 5 minutes. 

Mr. KEATING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you for your 

service; it is truly appreciated. And I speak not just of you, but everyone that works with you. 

You have heard some this morning talk about the fact that you 

don’t support developmental aid. And I think you have heard a 

shared concern of many of us, including myself, about taxpayers 

making sure their money is well spent. So my belief is that—and 

I wish in a way there was another term besides ‘‘developmental 

aid,’’ because I don’t think it really catches what it truly is—I think 

that indeed putting money into that, that, those resources, will put 

the fires out before they occur and they, as a result, will help taxpayers get the most of their money. 

Could you give us some examples of how that is indeed the case, 

just so I think the public listening, in particular, will become more 

aware of this? How putting resources into that is cost-effective and 

will put those fires out before they occur? 

Ms. SMITH. Thank you. I think you are absolutely right that part 

of what we are doing is making an investment in the future. I 

think perhaps the best example of that right now is Colombia, 

where 15 years of sustained support and engagement has yielded 

something that I think people thought was not possible: The reductions in crime, coming out of a recession, the possibility of peace, 

and, I believe, the happiest country on the planet. Again, I think 

we can point to a dramatic change there. 

I think we can also point to some other changes that make a difference. It was said at the opening of this hearing that countries 

need to foot more of the bill themselves. We are starting to see 

that, particularly in the areas including health and agriculture, 

where countries with whom we work who, over time, have increased their own expenditures, and we have been able to reduce 

ours. 

I think the third area where we can show the impact is in areas 

like global health where we are the world’s leader. Whether it is 

putting us on the road to end the HIV/AIDS epidemic, which I 

think we all know would have been profoundly destabilizing, to improving the lives of mothers and children so that you have less poverty and the kind of instability it can breed. 

The good news is we have the data and the evidence, both at 

USAID and also at the MCC, to make that case to the American 

people. 

Ms. HYDE. I would just add in Africa, as an example, Cote 

d’Ivoire, is a country that a decade ago was in the throes of a violent civil war, and the story of Cote d’Ivoire for MCC is that 3 

years ago they were passing only 5 of 20 indicators. They came to 

us, they said, we want a compact. We want to get better. 

Fast forward to 3 years later, they changed their laws and they 

are now an MCC compact country. That said, there is still instability, as you well know, and recent events will say in that region. 

And we need to stay engaged and vigilant in a very accountable 

system so that these countries that are trying to do the right thing 

are able to stay afloat. 

42

Mr. KEATING. And I also just want to point out an area of concern that I have looking forward along those lines, particularly in 

terms of being an incubator for terrorist activity and for extremism, 

and that is in Central Asia. I am concerned as I look at the inability of people to get work, the economy in Russia, people migrating 

out of there. This area, the North Caucasus area, those areas are 

ripe for this. 

Are there things we can do in that area that, or can you think 

of that as something in the future that could be addressed in terms 

of that potential instability? Well, it is not potential, it is unstable. 

Ms. SMITH. Yeah, I can speak to that. There are a number of 

parts of the world where I think we see that combination of things: 

A youth bulge, heavy unemployment, and lack of access to opportunity. Much of our work goes to that across the board. A lot of our 

specific work, and there is an increase in our request for countering 

violent extremism, which is targeted at getting to some of the root 

causes of the kinds of threats to which you speak. 

One of the things that USAID is able to contribute to this is very 

sharp analysis of what exactly are the drivers and where can we 

make the investments that will yield results. 

But that is one of the many areas that we are looking at. 

Mr. KEATING. And my time is limited so I probably will go in 

writing with this question. But I am curious, and we will do this 

in writing because I am sensitive to my colleagues’ time, about the 

gender policy issues and USAID’s gender policy and the success for 

that. Because again——

Ms. SMITH. Right. 

Mr. KEATING [continuing]. It is an area I believe investing in 

those issues will really be serving the taxpayers well and preventing things from occurring in the future. So again, thank you. 

And I yield back. 

Mr. CHABOT. The gentleman yields back. 

Ms. SMITH. Happy to respond in writing. 

Mr. CHABOT. Thank you. 

The gentleman’s time has expired. 

The gentleman from Rhode Island, Mr. Cicilline, is recognized for 

5 minutes. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank our 

witnesses for your testimony, for your extraordinary leadership, 

and for the work of your colleagues that they do every day to continue to enhance our security and the stability of the world. 

And I really want to echo Mr. Keating’s point that development 

assistance is not a gift but it is a strategic investment in our national security and our health and economic well-being and, obviously, very important. 

There are three areas that I wanted to submit questions on. One 

relates to the 20-year decline in the personnel of USAID and the 

status of the USAID’s board, as well as the Development Leadership Initiative, how do you see that moving forward? 

Also, there has been a terrific initiative, the International Aid 

Transparency Initiative so that taxpayers can be sure that there is 

a good return on their investment and the impact it is making and 

the status of that, as well as your view about the importance of 

continuing to support Nogorno-Karabakh and how you see that 

43

going forward in light of the news that exists, as Mr. Sherman 

mentioned. 

So I would like to give you an opportunity to provide some more 

detailed information. But I am going to ask three questions today 

and just give you whatever time is left to answer them. 

As you well know, USAID has done important work in responding to the very serious challenges facing LGBT individuals around 

the world where we are seeing increased criminalization and grave 

danger very often to members of our community. The Special Coordinator for LGBT Rights Todd Larson is doing a terrific job. And 

so I would like you to just give a little bit about how you see that 

role continuing, where you are seeing some success? What are 

areas of particular concern? 

Secondly, in the area of global health, USAID as you know plays 

a critical role to foster innovation in health technologies working 

across its programs, with many diverse partners, with other U.S. 

agencies to advance new vaccines, drugs, diagnostics, and other 

tools urgently needed to combat existing and emerging global 

health threats. And I would love to hear your thoughts on how 

USAID will continue this role, and particularly how it is working 

to encourage a coordinated, government-wide approach to global 

health research and development. 

And on the side for MCC, of which you know I am a huge fan, 

thank you for your great work. Would you talk a little bit about 

the challenges that MCC faces in implementing compacts in fragile 

states like Liberia and Cote d’Ivoire and how the agency is really 

prepared to address that? 

And, of course, I am always interested to know how Cape Verde 

is doing in its second compact, particularly in the areas of legal institution foundations and rights, how they are meeting those roles? 

So I will stop and give you as much time as I have remaining 

for your answers. 

Ms. SMITH. Thank you. I agree; Todd is doing and has done a terrific job. I think both he and his office. But the fact that we now 

have points of contact in every single bureau in the agency on the 

issue of our LGBT community. And I think we have made important progress. We and some other donors are putting this issue on 

the map and ensuring that governments protect the rights of all of 

their citizens and prevent and protect them against discrimination. 

What we are looking at now is how do we ensure that this remains part of the agency’s work going forward, both through maintaining a coordinator position, but looking again at how we can institutionalize it across the board, including in the field and with 

our partners. 

I have also had the privilege and opportunity to speak to several 

other donors who have been leaders in this area. We are of the 

same view that we need to find ways, not only to expand our work, 

but ensure that it is continued by those who may succeed us. 

On global health coordination, that is something I work on now 

and worked on in the past, including with Dana in an earlier life, 

in the specific area of research and development of new diagnostics 

and vaccines and other things. On coordination, we work closely 

with the CDC and NIH. They play huge and tremendous roles 

there in making sure that there is no duplication or overlap. We 

44

also work with them to make sure that even as they are developing 

new opportunities, we are looking at how these can be deployed, 

whether through GAVI—which I think you may know, the Global 

Vaccine Alliance—or our own programs. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Thank you. 

Ms. HYDE. Very quickly. So with respect to Cape Verde, we are 

on time, under budget, and closing out next year. All of the reforms 

are going forward. In fact, the executive director was just in town 

this week, and it is going very well. So I have every reason to believe we will be set up for success there. The engagement of the 

government and our partners has been extraordinary. 

With respect to fragile states, the MCC is working in the fragile 

states within the scorecard of the governance criteria. That is, by 

definition, a fragile state that is striving to be among the better 

half in terms of rule of law, and corruption. So I think it is absolutely critical that MCC be there and be supportive of it. 

That said, the capacity challenges certainly are there in terms of 

our model, in terms of the data that is needed for cost-benefit analysis. Data is a challenge everywhere; we see it particularly so. We 

are working through our partners, the MCA units. So that is in 

country. And looking at how we deploy more support there. 

Our accountability measures are very strong. As you know, the 

funds sit in the U.S. Treasury and we have independent fiscal 

agents, independent procurement agents. But we are really looking 

at how we can partner. 

I will give you an example with Niger this year coming forward, 

we will be partnering in the Community-based Livestock Program 

as well as large-scale irrigation infrastructure, the types of things 

we will be doing there. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Okay, thank you so much. 

I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CHABOT. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Batting clean-up, last but certainly not least, the gentlelady from 

Florida, Ms. Frankel, is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. FRANKEL. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I often feel like I am in 

that Agatha Christie novel, ‘‘And Then There Were None,’’ I mean. 

Anyway, I thank both of you for your service. 

I really have two different questions. I hope you can get to them 

both. The first has to do with Syria. I would like to have an overview of your major efforts in the humanitarian crisis in Syria, and 

whether or not you see any hope or possibility that when the violence is over—whenever that might be—that they could get back to 

a normal society? 

My second question, it is a little different, and has to do with 

women, girls’ education. And if you could give me, I would like to 

know, you know, sort of an overview of what you are doing, and 

especially who is doing the teaching and what kind of materials are 

you using and what is your follow-up to see the efficacy of it? 

Ms. SMITH. Thank you, Congresswoman. And with regard to 

Syria, this has been a very big piece of USAID’s work for over 4 

years. Of the assistance that we provide, about half of that goes inside Syria to help people where they live all across the country, and 

about half of that goes to people who are refugees. 

45

There is a small—I do not want to overstate it—but a small and 

significant glimmer of hope, given the hard work of Secretary 

Kerry, on a humanitarian cessation of hostilities which is allowing 

us to get some more assistance to what are called ‘‘besieged areas.’’ 

Again, it is not a complete end of the war but it is significantly 

very grateful for his work on that. 

As to your question about when the violence ends will they be 

able to return to normalcy, one of the things USAID has a great 

deal of experience in over the last many, many decades is working 

in transitions of countries out of civil war and violence, or from 

authoritarianism to democracy. It takes a long time. We know a lot 

about it. I think the agency is quite good at it and has learned 

enough over the years to enable us to marshal a plan or design to 

help Syria return to normalcy and peace. I think it is possible. We 

have seen other countries do it. But I also think it is going to take 

a very, very, very long time. 

On girls’ education I will speak to that. And I——

Ms. FRANKEL. Just something back to Syria though. 

Ms. SMITH. Yes. 

Ms. FRANKEL. What are the—I know you do food and you are 

doing health. What else? 

Ms. SMITH. Yes. 

Ms. FRANKEL. Education? What are the pieces of your aid in 

Syria now? 

Ms. SMITH. We provide food assistance. We also provide health 

assistance. Some education, including emergency learning centers 

and also some education for refugees. So our assistance is diversified. 

Ms. FRANKEL. Housing? Do you do house? 

Ms. SMITH. Some temporary shelter. It is very difficult for people 

to find. Often they are seeking refuge in school buildings that have 

been abandoned, winterization during the colder months so that 

people can keep themselves and their families warm. 

We try to provide as diverse an array of assistance as we possibly can, given the enormity of the needs. 

On girls’ education, that is a big priority for us. The way that 

works is we work with partners, most often Ministries of Education, both in ways to provide direct assistance, but also to do 

things like teacher training, like curriculum development, and an 

emphasis on—I am glad you made the comment about ensuring 

that it works—an emphasis on quality. 

One of the things USAID did a few years ago—we are now at the 

end of a 5-year strategy—was revise the education strategy so that 

we could make sure that quality was as high on the list as quantity, and that we were making sure that students, including girls, 

are able to read. They didn’t just go through primary education but 

departed primary education with the ability to read. Thus far we 

have reached 30 million students with that program. 

Ms. FRANKEL. Okay, let me, okay, Ms. Hyde, why don’t you. 

Ms. HYDE. I will keep this short. 

Ms. FRANKEL. Yes, please. 

Ms. HYDE. MCC typically is working in the secondary or vocational space, so very rarely in primary education. We are doing so 

in countries where it is identified as a key constraint to growth. 

46

About a third of our constraints analyses identify human skills. If 

a country wants an education program, we will be looking to see 

how we have a nexus to jobs and to markets and in vocational. 

Morocco is an example I would give as a recent compact with a 

large investment, always with a focus on girls and gender. We 

know that if the economics are there that girls will stay in school, 

that they will provide for communities, and that there is actual evidence tagging education to growth with completion rates, which I 

think the World Bank just came out with. 

Mr. CHABOT. Thank you. The gentlelady’s time has expired. 

I would like to thank the witnesses for appearing here this morning. We covered a lot of important issues. 

And if there is no further business to come before the committee, 

we are adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:40 a.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

(47)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

48

f


99467n.eps
49


99467m-1.eps
50

f


99467m-2.eps
51


99467c-1.eps
52

f


99467c-2.eps
53


99467d-1.eps
54


99467d-2.eps
55


99467d-3.eps
56


99467d-4.eps
57


99467d-5.eps
58


99467d-6.eps
59


99467d-7.eps
60


99467d-8.eps
61


99467d-9.eps
62


99467d-10.eps
63


99467d-11.eps
64


99467d-12.eps
65


99467d-13.eps
66


99467d-14.eps
67


99467d-15.eps
68

f


99467d-16.eps
69


99467e-1.eps
70

f


99467e-2.eps
71


99467f-1.eps
72


99467f-2.eps
73


99467f-3.eps
74


99467f-4.eps
75

f


99467f-5.eps
76

f


99467g.eps
77


99467h-1.eps
78


99467h-2.eps
79

f


99467h-3.eps
80


99467i-1.eps
81

f


99467i-2.eps
82


99467j-1.eps
83

f


99467j-2.eps
84


99467k-1.eps
85


99467k-2.eps
86


99467k-3.eps
87

f


99467k-4.eps
88

Æ


99467l.eps