Treasury International Programs

Table of Contents

U.S. Department of the Treasury

International Programs

Congressional Justification for Appropriations

FY 2017

FY 2017 Executive Summary........................................................................................................ 3

Summary Tables ............................................................................................................................ 6

Multilateral Development Banks ................................................................................................. 8

World Bank Group ......................................................................................................................... 8

International Development Association .................................................................................. 8

International Bank for Reconstruction and Development ................................................... 13

Inter-American Development Bank Group ............................................................................... 16

Inter-American Development Bank ....................................................................................... 16

North American Development Bank ............................................................................................ 20

Asian Development Bank Group .................................................................................................. 23

Asian Development Fund ......................................................................................................... 23

African Development Bank Group ............................................................................................. 27

African Development Bank ...................................................................................................... 27

African Development Fund....................................................................................................... 31

Food Security ............................................................................................................................... 35

Global Agriculture and Food Security Program .................................................................... 35

International Fund for Agricultural Development ............................................................... 38

Infrastructure .............................................................................................................................. 41

Global Infrastructure Facility ................................................................................................. 41

Environmental Trust Funds ....................................................................................................... 43

Global Environment Facility ................................................................................................... 43

Green Climate Fund ................................................................................................................. 46

Central America and Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Program .............................. 50

Technical Assistance ................................................................................................................... 52

Office of Technical Assistance ................................................................................................ 52

Annex 1: FY 2017 Appropriations Language and Authorization Request ............................. 56
Message from the Secretary of the Treasury 

Dear Member: 

On behalf of President Obama, it is my pleasure to submit the Congressional Budget Justification 

for the Department of the Treasury’s International Programs for Fiscal Year 2017. The 

institutions and programs supported in this request provide U.S. leadership in international 

development, advance national security, and expand export markets for American businesses by 

promoting international financial stability and supporting key global initiatives such as reducing 

poverty, improving food security, investing in infrastructure, and addressing climate 

change. Our investments are cost-effective ways to address these global challenges. 

The FY 2017 request affirms the U.S. commitment to the international financial architecture and 

to maintaining our global leadership. Our request builds on the landmark year for international 

development, which saw the adoption of the Addis Ababa Action Agenda and the 2030 Agenda 

for Sustainable Development and culminated in a successful Paris Climate Agreement. Our 

request also reinforces the long-awaited, and much-welcomed, adoption of critical reforms by the 

United States at the International Monetary Fund. 

Retaining our shareholding in the multilateral development banks by paying our full 

shareholding subscriptions is key to U.S. global leadership. The MDBs, including their 

concessional windows that target the poorest countries, are among the most effective vehicles for 

financing critical U.S. priorities abroad. Through our requests for FY 2017, Treasury is helping 

to tackle challenges such as increasing access to electricity as part of the Administration’s Power 

Africa initiative, addressing the root causes of refugee crises and integrating refugees in their 

host countries, and investing in sustainable infrastructure that contributes to global growth and 

creates jobs. Our request also includes support for activities that facilitate the restoration of state 

legitimacy, delivering basic services in fragile and conflict-affected states. Left without critical 

support, these countries can too often become breeding grounds for violence and terrorist 

activities. U.S. contributions also promote private sector development, fostering new markets for 

U.S. exports and jobs for American workers. 

In addition to meeting our current MDB commitments, our request addresses prior unmet 

commitments, which have grown to levels that threaten to erode U.S. credibility and leadership 

and hamper the lending capacity of the institutions. Our request furthers the goal of the Paris 

Climate Agreement to help countries mitigate and adapt to climate change, as well as advances 

other core environmental concerns related to biodiversity, wildlife trafficking, oceans, land 

degradation, and chemical pollution. 

Finally, our request also increases funding for Treasury’s Office of Technical Assistance (OTA), 

reflecting a down payment on the commitment made at the United Nations Third International 

Conference on Financing for Development in Addis Ababa to double funding for OTA 

assistance by 2020. OTA supports effective public financial management in developing and 

transitional countries and has played a key role in the U.S. response to crises around the world, 

thereby supporting U.S. national security, foreign policy, and economic development priorities. 
Overall, these investments provide a significant return for the United States and complement our 

bilateral development assistance. They allow us to join the global fight against poverty and 

instability, while promoting economic growth and security in the United States and abroad. 

I look forward to working with you on this important request. 

Sincerely, 

Jacob J. Lew 
Treasury International Programs

3

FY 2017 Executive Summary

The Treasury Department requests $2.3 billion for International Programs in FY 2017. The 

request provides a cost effective way to provide leadership in international development, 

advance national security, and expand export markets for American businesses by promoting 

international financial stability and supporting key global initiatives such as poverty reduction, 

improved food security, infrastructure investments, and climate change mitigation and 

adaptation. 

Multilateral Development Banks

Treasury requests $105.3 million for annual general capital increase (GCI) commitments at the 

multilateral development banks (MDBs). GCI payments for the African Development Bank 

(AfDB) are scheduled to continue through FY 2019. GCI payments for the North American 

Development Bank (NADB) are scheduled to continue through FY 2021. FY 2017 is the first 

year since FY 2012 that funding is not requested for scheduled annual installments at the World 

Bank’s International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the Inter-American 

Development Bank (IDB), whose GCIs conclude during FY 2016. The FY 2017 request 

includes $22 million to clear unmet commitments to the IDB and $6 million to clear unmet 

commitments to the IBRD. The IBRD funding will protect U.S. shareholding at the World Bank 

by avoiding a forfeiture of shares by the United States.

The request also includes $1.6 billion to fully meet annual replenishment commitments to the 

World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA), the African Development Fund 

(AfDF), and the Asian Development Fund (AsDF). 

Food Security

The request includes $23 million for the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program 

(GAFSP), the multilateral component of the President’s Feed the Future initiative. In 2012, the 

United States pledged to contribute $1 for every $2 in new contributions by other donors up to 

$475 million during the pledge period. While U.S. leadership of GAFSP has been an important 

component of its success to date, the Administration continues to work with other donors to 

increase their contributions and to strive for a United States’ share of contributions of no more 

than one-third of total contributions since GAFSP’s inception in 2010. In addition, the request 

includes the second payment of $30 million towards the current replenishment of the 

International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). 

Environment and Clean Energy

Treasury’s request fully funds the annual installation of the replenishment commitment to the 

Global Environment Facility (GEF) at $137 million. Also, the request includes $250 million 

toward the U.S. pledge to the Green Climate Fund (GCF), providing a total of $750 million for 

the GCF when combined with $500 million requested through the Department of State. Joining 

other nations, the United States in 2014 pledged $3 billion – not to exceed 30 percent of total 

confirmed pledges – to the GCF, which has received over $10 billion in pledges to support the 

transition of developing countries to a low-emission and climate resilient development path. The 

GCF includes innovative mechanisms to help mobilize significant private-sector finance and is 

building on the best practices and lessons learned from the Climate Investment Funds (CIFs), to 
Treasury International Programs

4

which the United States has contributed with bipartisan support. FY 2017 is the first year since 

the United States made its original pledge to the CIFs that funding is not requested for the CIFs 

because the $2 billion pledge has been fulfilled. 

The request also includes $13 million for the Central America and Caribbean Catastrophe Risk 

Insurance Program multi-donor trust fund. This is the first time Treasury has requested funding 

for CCRIF. A U.S. contribution will help the six countries of Central America plus the 

Dominican Republic purchase catastrophe risk insurance coverage under the CCRIF Segregated 

Portfolio Company and access technical assistance to enhance their disaster risk management 

capacity, improving their resilience to natural disasters. 

Infrastructure

Treasury’s request includes $20 million for U.S. support to new infrastructure investments for 

the World Bank Global Infrastructure Facility (GIF). The GIF aims to catalyze private capital 

for public infrastructure projects by addressing constraints arising from countries’ legal and 

regulatory regimes, project design and implementation, and project and financing structures. 

Participation in this initiative will demonstrate a commitment to helping developing and 

emerging markets, bolster existing infrastructure financing from the MDBs, and reinforce U.S. 

leadership at the World Bank. 

Unmet Commitments 

U.S. unmet commitments, which are approaching $1.6 billion, erode U.S. leadership and 

influence, pose a threat to shaping the policy priorities of the MDBs and related funds, and 

hamper the ability of these entities to deliver results. The FY 2017 request would reduce these 

unmet commitments by $160 million for both GCIs and replenishments. In making allocations, 

Treasury has prioritized unmet commitments at institutions where contributions will most 

effectively showcase strong U.S. leadership of and commitment to the international financial 

architecture. The U.S. endeavors to avoid incurring new unmet commitments, but will not fully 

achieve that goal due to new unmet commitments to the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative 

(MDRI).

Specifically, the FY 2017 request allocates $93 million for unmet commitments at IDA. The 

approximately $777 million in U.S. unmet commitments to IDA severely constrain IDA’s overall 

programming capacity. Paying down unmet commitments would demonstrate sustained support 

for this global institution, which makes critical contributions to fragile states, citizen security in 

Central America, international efforts to address disaster responsiveness, and infrastructure 

financing for the world’s poorest countries. Additionally, demonstrating strong progress towards 

meeting the IDA and IBRD commitments is critical for maintaining U.S. leadership in the World 

Bank. 

The FY 2017 request includes $19 million to pay down U.S. unmet commitments to the AfDF. 

The nearly $227 million in U.S. unmet commitments constrain the AfDF’s capacity to make new 

investments. Paying down some of the U.S. unmet commitments would increase AfDF 

assistance, including support for Power Africa, as well as the fight against extremism and 

instability on that continent. 
Treasury International Programs

5

Treasury’s FY 2017 request allocates $9 million for unmet commitments at the AsDF, which is 

the largest on-budget financier of infrastructure and other services in Afghanistan. The AsDF 

also promotes energy sector reform in Pakistan, bolsters the democratic transition in Burma, and 

helps strategic partners in Central Asia reduce their economic dependence on Russia. 

The FY 2017 request includes $10 million for unmet GEF commitments, which total $180 

million ($135 million from GEF-2 and $45 million from GEF-6). These resources will further 

increase the GEF’s ability to fund environmental projects that support key U.S. priorities, such as 

the President’s Executive Order on Combating Wildlife Trafficking and reducing mercury 

emissions that contaminate our food supply. Addressing these unmet commitments will help 

position the United States to capture a GEF-6 encashment bonus for prompt payment. 

Treasury Office of Technical Assistance

The FY 2017 request includes $33.5 million for Treasury’s Office of Technical Assistance 

(OTA), representing a $10 million increase over the FY 2016 enacted level. The requested 

increase would be a down payment on Secretary Lew’s commitment at the Financing for 

Development conference (Ethiopia, July 2015) to double OTA assistance by 2020 to support 

developing countries’ domestic resource mobilization and sound public financial management. 

If received, this significant and critical funding increase will help enable OTA to respond in a 

quick and sustained manner to the growing international demand for financial technical 

assistance around the world, thereby supporting U.S. national security, foreign policy, and 

economic development priorities, including, for instance, supporting the whole of government 

effort to expand U.S. engagement in Central America.

Treasury International Programs

6

Summary Tables

Summary of Appropriations and Request

Treasury International Programs

FY 2015 – FY 2017

(in dollars)

 FY 2015

Enacted 

 FY 2016 

Enacted 

 FY 2017 

Request 

 Of which, 

payment toward 

unmet 

commitments 

International Monetary Fund (IMF) 1/

Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) 1,999,804,448 1,816,476,910 1,802,958,148 150,040,148

International Development Association (IDA) 1,287,800,000 1,197,128,000 1,384,072,000 93,472,000

Int'l Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) 186,957,000 186,957,000 5,963,421 5,963,421

Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) 102,020,448 102,020,448 21,939,727 21,939,727

Multilateral Investment Fund (MIF) 3,378,000

African Development Fund (AfDF) 175,668,000 175,668,000 214,332,000 19,332,000

African Development Bank (AfDB) 32,418,000 34,118,027 32,418,000

Asian Development Bank (AsDB) 106,586,000 5,608,435

Asian Development Fund (AsDF) 104,977,000 104,977,000 99,233,000 9,333,000

North American Development (NADB) 10,000,000 45,000,000

Food Security 30,000,000 74,930,000 53,000,000

Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP) 2/ 43,000,000 23,000,000

Int'l Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) 30,000,000 31,930,000 30,000,000

Infrastructure 20,000,000

Global Infrastructure Facility (GIF) 20,000,000

Environmental Trust Funds 401,000,000 398,563,000 409,063,000 10,000,000

Clean Technology Fund (CTF) 184,630,000 170,680,000

Strategic Climate Fund (SCF) 49,900,000 49,900,000

ESF Statutory Transfer 3/ 29,907,000 9,720,000

Green Climate Fund (GCF) 250,000,000

Central America & Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Program 12,500,000

Global Environment Facility (GEF) 136,563,000 168,263,000 146,563,000 10,000,000

Treasury Office of Technical Assistance (OTA) 23,500,000 23,500,000 33,500,000

TOTAL 2,454,304,448 2,313,469,910 2,318,521,148 160,040,148

1/ The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 includes IMF quota reform. The reforms will not be funded through Treasury's 150s Account, but rather through 

emergency funding. 

2/ Includes permissive transfer authority from USAID to GAFSP, if such contribution will not cause the United States' contribution to exceed 33 percent of total donor 

contributions. 

3/ Provided by sec. 7060(c)(8) of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 and sec. 7060(c)(5) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016. 
T

reasury International Programs

7

MDB FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017

Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Enacted Request

IDA 478,073 480,543 423,043 430,525 680,175 683,300 776,772 1,021,040

IBRD 0 0 0 5,964 5,964 5,963 5,963 0

MIGA 6,867 6,867 6,867 6,867 6,867 6,867 6,867 6,867

AfDF 40,476 86,636 109,136 140,687 213,351 207,369 226,701 248,982

AfDB 615 615 615 2,316 2,316 2,316 615 615

AsDF 195,845 311,095 326,345 346,658 326,704 311,627 296,536 287,203

AsDB 0 213 213 5,609 5,609 5,608 0 0

IDB 0 0 27,020 21,931 21,952 21,952 21,940 0

MIF 50,331 50,381 50,381 35,386 29,088 25,710 25,710 25,710

IIC 41,429 20,471 15,801 15,801 15,801 15,801 15,801 15,801

IFAD 3,684 4,244 4,244 5,763 5,763 5,763 3,833 3,833

GEF 163,028 205,058 228,988 247,898 247,898 247,898 180,300 170,300

EBRD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 980,348 1,166,123 1,192,653 1,265,403 1,561,485 1,540,173 1,561,038 1,780,351

Unmet Commitments to Multilateral Development Banks

FY 2010 – FY 2017

(in thousands)

1. Projected amounts for IDA and AfDF include unmet commitments under the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative. 2. AfDB includes $615,239, which corresponds to the 51 capital shares from GCI-V forfeited by the United States.3. IIC includes $15,800,519, which corresponds to the 1,580 capital shares forfeited by the United States. 

Treasury International Programs

8

Multilateral Development Banks

World Bank Group

The World Bank Group comprises the International Development Association (IDA), the 

International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), the International Finance 

Corporation (IFC), the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), and the International 

Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). Treasury is seeking funding for its 

annual and unmet commitments to IDA and for its unmet commitment to the IBRD. 

International Development Association

FY 2015 

Enacted

FY 2016 

Enacted

FY 2017 

Request

IDA 1,287,800,000 1,197,128,000 1,384,072,000

Of which, payment toward 

unmet commitments - - 93,472,000 

Treasury requests $1,384 million for IDA. This amount includes $1,290.6 million for the third

of three annual installments to the seventeenth replenishment of IDA (IDA-17) and $93.5 million 

to pay down the unmet commitment to IDA. 

Program Description

IDA is the arm of the World Bank that supports the growth, poverty reduction, and development 

of the world’s 77 poorest countries, home to 2.8 billion people, in every region of the world. 

IDA works across a wide range of sectors, including infrastructure, agriculture, water and 

sanitation, the environment, education, and health. Because countries receiving IDA financing 

are too poor to attract sufficient capital to support their urgent development needs, they depend 

on IDA low-cost loans and grants to create jobs, build critical infrastructure, increase agricultural 

productivity, provide energy, and invest in the health and education of future generations. As 

countries implement the Sustainable Development Goals, which world leaders adopted in 2015 

to help guide development efforts over the next 15 years, IDA will continue to require strong 

guidance and support from the United States. 

IDA has a proven track record in helping countries reduce poverty and achieve higher levels of 

growth and institutional capacity. Over time, IDA’s support helps countries prepare to finance 

their development needs through domestic revenues and borrowing at non-concessional rates. 

To date, 33 countries once eligible for IDA assistance have graduated and no longer receive

support from IDA. 

IDA is financed predominantly by donor countries and requires replenishments of resources

every three years to continue its activities. IDA’s most recent replenishment (IDA-17) was 

finalized in December 2013 and will allow IDA to make new development commitments of up to 
Treasury International Programs

9

$56 billion over three years. The United States pledged $3,871.8 million to IDA-17, falling to 

second largest donor behind the United Kingdom. The United States, however, remains the 

largest IDA donor historically and holds the largest voting share at 10.1 percent. 

Of the $19 billion in financing approved in IDA’s 2015 fiscal year, more than half – $10.4 billion 

– went to countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Countries in South Asia received $5.8 billion in

IDA’s 2015 fiscal year, and the East Asia and Pacific region received $1.8 billion. Thirteen 

percent of IDA’s financing was provided as grants to fragile states and other countries at risk of 

debt distress during its 2015 fiscal year. 

How IDA Promotes U.S. Interests

IDA’s goals are to eliminate extreme poverty and boost shared prosperity in a sustainable 

manner. To achieve these goals, IDA supports the increased economic growth and 

improvements in government service delivery needed to create viable employment opportunities 

for fast-growing populations, build state legitimacy, and reduce social dissatisfaction that can 

lead to support for extremist groups. Consequently, IDA is an important partner in promoting 

U.S. national security and creating new markets for U.S. exports. 

IDA places special emphasis on fragile and conflict-affected states, with a focus on building the 

capacity of the state, strengthening institutions and governance, and improving public financial 

management. IDA projects promote economic, social, and political stability in strategically 

important countries, such as Afghanistan, Yemen, and Pakistan, and reinforce our bilateral 

security efforts in areas where new threats are emerging, such as the Sahel. During IDA-17, IDA

doubled its funding for fragile and conflict-affected states, due to the extreme needs of these 

countries. 

IDA is also helping build new markets for U.S. exporters, which lead to increased job growth in 

the United States. IDA provides assistance that fosters growth and private sector development, 

such as work on improving investment climates and infrastructure financing. For example, 

recognizing that African countries can only realize their full growth potential if they have a 

reliable electricity supply, IDA is partnering with African countries, the United States, the 

private sector, and others to invest in electricity generation and transmission capacity and to 

strengthen regulatory frameworks as part of Power Africa, the President’s innovative, private 

sector-focused initiative aimed at more than doubling electricity access in sub-Saharan Africa.

IDA also is positioned to help countries respond and rebuild when disasters or pandemics strike. 

IDA has a dedicated Crisis Response Window to quickly address such emergencies. For 

example, IDA supported the relief and recovery effort following the 2015 earthquakes in Nepal, 

including the reconstruction of 55,000 houses for the rural poor. 

IDA provides a cost-effective means to support the world’s poorest countries; every $1 

contribution from the United States leverages almost $13 in contributions from other donors and 

the World Bank’s internal resources. 

 
Treasury International Programs

10

Meeting IDA Commitments 

U.S. unmet commitments to IDA replenishments and the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative 

(MDRI) currently amount to approximately $777 million. Failing to meet commitments to IDA

and MDRI will reduce IDA’s ability to provide concessional loans and grants to create jobs, 

build critical infrastructure, increase agricultural productivity, provide energy, and invest in the

health and education sectors in the poorest countries. 

Failing to meet commitments to IDA will also damage U.S. credibility and undermine IDA’s 

ability to deliver on policy commitments achieved by the United States during the IDA-17 

replenishment negotiations, such as improved focus on gender equality and fragile states and 

more attention to evaluation of impact. Maintaining strong U.S. leadership is especially 

important in advance of new replenishment discussions (IDA-18), with a range of important 

possible reforms already on the table, including proposals on how to better leverage IDA

resources. Other World Bank shareholders, including emerging markets, are becoming 

increasingly vocal about their priorities for IDA. Addressing the financial standing of the 

United States by paying down unmet commitments is essential to maintaining leadership and 

strong standing in IDA. 

A growing component of the unmet commitments to IDA involves MDRI. Launched in 2006 at 

the urging of the United States, MDRI provides 100 percent cancellation of eligible debt to IDA 

for countries that complete the conditions for debt relief under the Heavily Indebted Poor 

Countries (HIPC) Initiative. MDRI has allowed scarce resources in low-income countries to be 

reallocated for poverty-reducing expenditures in areas such as health and education. To prevent 

a depletion of IDA resources from debt relief, donors committed to compensate IDA for the 

cancelled debt on a dollar-for-dollar basis according to the payment schedules of the original 

loans. 

Of the 36 donors participating in MDRI at IDA, the United States is one of only three countries 

behind on its commitments, which is negatively affecting IDA’s ability to provide additional 

resources to countries such as Nepal, Liberia, and Afghanistan. At a 20.1 percent burden share, the 

U.S. share of the cost of MDRI under IDA-17 is $565 million. In addition to these current 

commitments, the United States will carry over $246 million in MDRI unmet commitments from 

IDA-16. By the end of FY 2017, the United States’ unmet commitment to IDA associated with 

MDRI could be as high as $811 million. However, the United States intends to apply credit that

it earns for accelerating its core replenishment payments to IDA, which could reduce total unmet 

commitments by as much as $228 million. 

 
Treasury International Programs

11

Achieving and Measuring Results

IDA is a leader on results monitoring and reporting. From 2011-2015, IDA has achieved the 

following: 

• Over $3.3 billion provided for disaster risk management; 

• 413 million people received health services;

• 205 million children immunized; 

• 50 million people provided access to better water sources; 

• 17 million women received prenatal care; and

• 5.1 million teachers recruited or trained.

Looking forward, expected results from projects financed by IDA-17 include electricity for 15 to 

20 million people, life-saving vaccines for 200 million children, access to clean water for 32 

million people, and the expansion of basic health services for 65 million people. 

In 2002, IDA adopted its Results Measurement System (RMS), an online scorecard that is updated 

annually and provides a snapshot of IDA’s performance and results across countries. IDA was the 

first multilateral development entity to use a framework with quantitative indicators to monitor 

results and performance. Its approach has since been emulated by other development institutions.

Under the scorecard, the World Bank’s Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) measures the 

results of a completed IDA project against the indicators that the project set out to achieve. As 

an independent entity, IEG is empowered to provide objective assessments of the World Bank’s 

project and program results. The IEG assigns a rating (highly satisfactory, satisfactory, 

moderately satisfactory, moderately unsatisfactory, or unsatisfactory) to a completed project 

based on the achievement of the project’s intended outcomes and development objectives. In 

IDA-16, 69.5 percent of IDA projects received a “satisfactory” rating or higher, against a target 

of 75 percent. In response to lower-than-expected ratings, World Bank management has 

developed a “Management Dashboard” to provide senior management with comprehensive realtime data on how the portfolio of World Bank projects, including IDA projects, is performing. 

The Dashboard will enable World Bank management to react more aggressively if problems 

arise with the overall quality of projects. 

Project Examples

Burkina Faso. In 2007, IDA approved a $39 million loan for the “Burkina Faso Energy Access 

Project.” The project assisted the government to implement its rural electrification strategy, 

helped communities more sustainably manage wood fuels and reduce pressure on forest 

resources, and strengthened the enabling environment for more private sector participation in 

energy service delivery. For example, IDA aimed to provide electricity to 626,000 people 

through household connections, and to enable 60 cooperatives and private sector enterprises to 

provide energy services. When the project was completed in 2014, the project had brought 

electricity to nearly 761,000 people, exceeding the original target by more than 20 percent, and 

92 cooperatives and private sector enterprises were providing energy services, exceeding the 

original target by more than 50 percent. The project also surpassed its target for constructing 

community electricity connections. Expanded access to energy helped transform living 

conditions for project beneficiaries, contributing to poverty reduction and economic growth. 
Treasury International Programs

12

Bangladesh. In 2008, IDA approved a $62 million loan to Bangladesh to support the 

implementation of the “National Agricultural Technology Project.” The agriculture sector is 

critical to the livelihoods of people in rural Bangladesh. However, many farmers fail to 

maximize the use of their land, and their farms do not produce to their full potential. To address 

this challenge, the National Agricultural Technology Project aimed to improve the effectiveness 

of technology used in agriculture. It strove to enhance the National Agricultural Research 

System, improve agricultural extension services, and develop agricultural supply chains. By the 

end of the project in 2014, 1.9 million farmers had adopted improved agricultural practices 

promoted by the project, far exceeding the project’s initial target of 388,000 farmers. The 

project also mobilized 400,000 farmers, most of whom are marginal and small farmers, into over 

20,000 common interest groups and linked them to markets. As a result, the project significantly 

increased agricultural productivity and incomes for its beneficiaries.
Treasury International Programs

13

International Bank for Reconstruction and Development

FY 2015 

Enacted

FY 2016 

Enacted

FY 2017 

Request

IBRD 186,957,000 186,957,000 5,963,421 

Of which, payment toward 

unmet commitments - - 5,963,421 

Treasury requests $6 million to address shortfalls from FY 2013 for the IBRD General 

Capital Increase (GCI) and Selective Capital Increase (SCI). If not paid, these shortfalls will 

result in a loss of U.S. shareholding at the IBRD. 

Program Description

The IBRD is the arm of the World Bank that provides financing to creditworthy middleincome countries to promote inclusive economic growth and reduce poverty. Middleincome countries – home to over 70 percent of the world’s poor – rely on the IBRD for 

financial resources and strategic advice to meet their development needs.

Working across a range of sectors, including agriculture, sustainable infrastructure, health 

and nutrition, and education, the IBRD supports long-term human and social development 

needs that private creditors often do not finance. During its 2015 fiscal year, the IBRD 

committed $23.5 billion to support 112 projects. The largest share of this lending went to 

countries in Europe and Central Asia ($6.7 billion) and Latin America and the Caribbean 

($5.7 billion), followed by countries in East Asia and the Pacific ($4.5 billion).

The IBRD raises resources like a conventional bank by issuing debt and on-lending to 

borrowers at market-linked rates. This capital model enables the IBRD to sustain stable 

lending, but prevents it from significantly scaling up as new demands from borrowing 

countries arise. In response to the global financial crisis, shareholders committed to provide 

the IBRD with additional capital to meet the growing needs in countries that suddenly found 

themselves shut off from global capital markets and facing sharp declines in domestic 

revenues.

The United States is the largest shareholder in the IBRD, with a 15.8 percent share of total 

voting power, followed by Japan and China. The United States is the only country with veto 

power over amendments to the World Bank’s Articles of Agreement.

How IBRD Promotes U.S. Interests

The IBRD is a cost-effective way to promote national security, support the next generation 

of export markets, and address key global challenges like environmental degradation and 

food insecurity. If left unaddressed, these challenges could generate unrest and conflict that 

could ultimately require costly and protracted U.S. involvement. 
Treasury International Programs

14

The IBRD also helps countries implement complex development goals, such as investing in 

sustainable infrastructure, building strong institutions, and undertaking structural reforms 

that are essential for sustained, inclusive growth, which, in turn, drive demand for U.S. 

goods and services.

The IBRD has been an invaluable partner in promoting U.S. strategic interests. The IBRD 

has supported Ukraine’s economic and energy reforms at a critical time. The IBRD has also 

stepped up its assistance and lending to Jordan to help the country cope with the effects of 

the Syrian refugee crises. It has also advanced economic and social reforms throughout 

Central America and the Caribbean, particularly in Jamaica, Guatemala, and El Salvador. 

With its global footprint and unique convening role, the IBRD facilitates the sharing of 

experiences and solutions gained in one part of the world to other countries elsewhere. The 

IBRD is also a global standard bearer, with strong environmental and social safeguards, high 

procurement standards, and a disciplined approach to debt sustainability. Indeed, some 

countries have adopted IBRD standards as their own national standards. 

U.S. investments in the IBRD have a significant leveraging effect. Every $1 of U.S. paid-in 

and callable capital leverages $25 in lending by IBRD because of burden-sharing with other 

shareholders and the World Bank’s ability to borrow in international capital markets.

Meeting IBRD Commitments

Without full funding for SCI commitments by March 2017 and full funding for GCI 

commitments by March 2018, the United States risks permanently losing shareholding at the 

IBRD. This could lead to a loss of U.S. veto power, leadership, and influence at the World 

Bank at a time when the World Bank is implementing many institutional reforms that the 

United States has encouraged. The IBRD’s support is critical for strategic priorities like 

providing financing to Ukraine, responding to the Syrian refugee crisis, and financing 

infrastructure in Asia. 

Achieving and Measuring Results

The World Bank has leveraged its strengths and resources to help countries drive economic 

growth, reduce inequality, and achieve sustainability. During FY 2013-2015, the World 

Bank, including the IBRD: 

• Provided 54.3 million people with access to an improved water source; 

• Generated 30,504 GWH of renewable power; 

• Reached 16.7 million farmers with agricultural equipment and services; 

• Provided 390.4 million people with essential health, nutrition, and population 

services; and 

• Helped institutionalize disaster risk reduction as a national priority in 36 countries. 

As part of the GCI resolution in 2010, the United States successfully pushed for the creation 

of a “Corporate Scorecard” that provides information on the performance and efficiency of 

the World Bank. The scorecard uses an integrated results and performance framework 
Treasury International Programs

15

organized in a three-tier structure. Tiers I and II provide information on member countries’

development results, while Tier III captures the IBRD’s performance in terms of outputs and 

efficiency. 

Under this scorecard, the World Bank’s Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) measures the 

results of completed World Bank projects against the targets for these projects. The IEG

assigns a rating (highly satisfactory, satisfactory, moderately satisfactory, moderately 

unsatisfactory, unsatisfactory) to a completed project based on the achievement of the 

project’s intended outcomes and development objectives. The 2015 Corporate Scorecard, 

which is available online, reports that 69.5 percent of World Bank projects met a

“satisfactory” or higher rating. IBRD management continues to focus on boosting project 

quality by increasing technical support and investing in a new monitoring system that tracks 

portfolio quality. 

Project Examples

Turkey. In 2010, the IBRD approved a $500 million loan to Turkey for an access to finance 

for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) project. In 2010, nearly all of Turkish businesses 

were SMEs, and these SMEs accounted for three-quarters of the country’s employment. 

However, in the aftermath of the financial crisis, access to finance for these SMEs tightened 

significantly, as SMEs were perceived as higher risk and often lacked collateral to access 

funding and longer-term finance. Through the use of a credit line intermediated by stateowned banks, the project broadened and deepened SMEs’ access to medium and longer-term 

finance and thus helped promote investments and business growth. By its conclusion in 

2015, the project had provided access to finance to 746 SMEs operating throughout Turkey, 

for a total amount of $519 million. Roughly half of the SMEs that received financing before 

2015 created new jobs, and overall, close to 7,000 net jobs have been created by firms 

financed by the project. 

Mexico. In 2010, the IBRD approved a $100 million loan to Mexico for a compensatory 

education project. Mexico’s indigenous populations and disadvantaged communities lacked 

equal education opportunities, and the quality of education services that reached these 

communities remained low. The IBRD-supported project helped expand services by the 

National Council for Educational Development (Council), which provided educational 

services in rural and indigenous areas. The project supported three initiatives to expand the 

Council’s services in the 172 most marginalized municipalities. These initiatives included 

expanding early child development services, improving select school-based management 

programs, and using mobile tutors in the worst performing schools. By the project’s 

conclusion in 2014, it had provided capacity building to roughly 47,286 parents’ 

associations per year across 141,857 community schools, benefitting just over 2 million 

students. The number of children attending at least 80 percent of early childhood 

development sessions increased from 43,241 to 57,983, and average test scores in 

compensatory schools increased significantly between 2010 and 2013. 
Treasury International Programs

16

Inter-American Development Bank Group

The Inter-American Development Bank Group comprises the Inter-American Development Bank 

(IDB), the Fund for Special Operations (FSO), the Inter-American Investment Corporation (IIC), 

and the Multilateral Investment Fund (MIF). Treasury is seeking funding for U.S. unmet 

commitments to the IDB. 

Inter-American Development Bank

FY 2015 

Enacted

FY 2016 

Enacted

FY 2017 

Request

IDB 102,020,448 102,020,448 21,939,727

Of which, payment toward 

unmet commitments - - 21,939,727 

Treasury requests $22 million to fully clear unmet commitments to the IDB’s Ninth General 

Capital Increase (GCI-9) which remain from an appropriations shortfall in FY 2012. 

Program Description

The IDB is the largest source of development financing for 26 nations of Latin America and the 

Caribbean, a strategically significant and economically important region for the United States, 

where 66 million people still live in extreme poverty. In 2015, the IDB committed $11.3 billion 

to support 172 projects. Forty-seven percent of commitments targeted small and vulnerable 

borrowing countries, such as El Salvador, Guyana, Honduras, and Jamaica.

The IDB works in a range of sectors and commits roughly half of its funding to support 

infrastructure and the environment (e.g., water and sanitation, transportation, and energy). The 

other half is split between capacity building (e.g., reform and modernization of government 

operations and financial markets) and the social sector (e.g., social investment, health, and 

education).

Given the IDB’s significant response to the global financial crisis, shareholders provided the IDB 

with new capital in 2010 through the GCI-9 to ensure that the IDB had the resources necessary to 

assist countries that suddenly found themselves shut off from global capital markets. As part of 

the GCI-9 package, the IDB established a special grant facility for Haiti that receives income 

transfers from the IDB of $200 million annually through 2020. Establishing this facility was an 

essential U.S. objective of the GCI-9, which provides Haiti with critical resources to support a

long-term development agenda. 

 

The United States is the largest shareholder of the IDB, with approximately 30 percent of total 

shareholding. While this allows the United States significant influence over any major decisions 

about the direction of the IDB, fulfilling prior commitments to the institution is crucial to 

maintaining U.S. credibility in this institution. Meeting prior commitments is especially

important since many Latin American economies are contracting and facing significant financial 

difficulties thereby negatively affecting their credit ratings, which in turn affects the IDB’s 
Treasury International Programs

17

capital base. As countries’ credit ratings are downgraded, this raises the capital requirement 

needed for the IDB to maintain its credit rating. 

How IDB Promotes U.S. Interests

The IDB supports U.S. strategic, economic, and national security interests in the Western

hemisphere by working to reduce poverty and social inequality in the region, addressing the 

needs of small and vulnerable countries, and promoting regional cooperation and integration. 

The IDB accomplishes these objectives through projects that develop transportation 

infrastructure, develop regulatory frameworks to protect the environment, improve access to 

water and sanitation, strengthen government institutions, improve fiscal efficiency and 

transparency, and expand access to education and basic health and nutrition services. The IDB 

also works with countries in the region to strengthen citizen security and implement anticorruption and anti-money laundering initiatives. These efforts promote demand for U.S. goods 

and services in a region that is a significant trading partner for the United States. (In 2014, U.S. 

exports to Latin America and the Caribbean totaled $323 billion, an increase of 25 percent from 

2010.) 

The IDB’s work also bolsters U.S. national security. For example, the IDB is taking a leading 

role in coordinating with U.S. government agencies to explore partnerships in the Northern 

Triangle region of Central America (El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras). The IDB’s work 

addresses both the symptoms and causes of emigration – violence and insecurity – with projects 

that boost employment, expand education, and promote criminal justice. The IDB’s projects 

focus particularly on prevention and strengthening civic, judicial, and commercial institutions. 

The IDB is also helping countries in the Caribbean and Central America that depend on heavily 

subsidized oil from Venezuela to transition to a more sustainable path. To help these countries 

avoid a major adjustment in the event of an oil supply shock, the IDB is encouraging 

governments to improve efficiencies in domestic energy sectors and develop cleaner sources of 

energy. 

In addition, the IDB is strengthening the region’s ability to prepare for and respond to natural 

disasters by designing infrastructure projects that are resilient to potential disasters and helping 

Latin America and the Caribbean address environmental challenges. The IDB supports activities 

with the largest potential for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, including reductions in 

GHGs from land use change and deforestation, transport, and power generation. 

U.S. investments in the IDB have a significant leveraging effect. Every $1 of U.S. paid-in and 

callable capital leverages over $10 in lending by the IDB because of burden-sharing with other 

shareholders and the IDB’s ability to borrow in international capital markets. 

Meeting IDB Commitments 

Currently, the United States is $22 million behind on its commitment to the GCI-9. Without 

payment of the full commitment of the United States, the IDB’s sustainable level of lending 

would be reduced, as shareholder contributions are leveraged through the IDB’s balance sheet. 
Treasury International Programs

18

This would reduce the amount of funding available to support lending and technical cooperation 

in Latin America and the Caribbean. The inability to fully meet commitments would also limit 

the IDB’s ability to improve its financial position through increased capital, which has become 

increasingly important following the credit rating downgrade of Brazil, its largest borrower. 

Further, a U.S. shortfall could cause other shareholders to reconsider their support for the $200 

million in annual grants to Haiti, as the United States was the most vocal advocate for this GCI-9 

commitment. Finally, a failure to meet commitments would mean a loss of U.S. influence at the 

IDB, which is one of the main channels through which the United States shapes economic and 

development priorities in Latin America and the Caribbean. 

Achieving and Measuring Results

The IDB’s annual Development Effectiveness Overview assesses progress in meeting the IDB’s 

broad development objectives, including lending program targets, operational effectiveness, and 

operational efficiency. The 2014 review showed that the IDB has already exceeded the 

following 2015 goals: 

• Providing 23 million individuals a basic package of health services. 23.2 million people 

were provided with a basic package between 2012 and 2014. 

• Enabling 8.5 million students to benefit from education projects. IDB education projects 

reached over 10.8 million people between 2012 and 2014. 

• Providing 600,000 people with programs to promote higher labor productivity. IDB 

labor productivity programs reached more than 850,000 people between 2012 and 2014. 

• Providing 16 million people with benefits from targeted anti-poverty programs. Antipoverty programs reached more than 17.5 million people between 2012 and 2014. 

• Financing 120,000 microenterprises, and small-, and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). 

The IDB is taking steps to improve its monitoring and evaluation of projects. The IDB’s 

development effectiveness framework for projects has three components: the Development 

Effectiveness Matrix (DEM), the Progress Monitoring Report (PMR), and the Project 

Completion Report (PCR).

• The DEM is the main tool for assessing how well a project in the design stage sets 

realistic, time-bound, and measurable targets. The DEM identifies the elements that are 

considered essential to a project’s “evaluability” during and after project implementation. 

This includes the IDB’s ability to monitor progress during project implementation, make 

mid-course corrections, and evaluate the project after completion. In 2014, the 

percentage of IDB projects rated “highly evaluable” and “evaluable” reached 100 

percent, surpassing the target of 85 percent. 

• The PMR is a self-evaluation tool to assess how well a project met its output targets and 

achieved development objectives. 
Treasury International Programs

19

• In 2015, the IDB introduced a revamped PCR to conduct project evaluations of 

completed projects with greater objectivity, transparency, and results-based evidence. 

The changes respond to recommendations from the IDB’s independent Office of 

Evaluation and Oversight. As a result, the PCR will better enable the IDB to incorporate 

lessons learned about projects and enhance its development effectiveness. 

Project Examples

El Salvador. In 2010, IDB approved a $60 million loan to El Salvador to support its Integrated 

Health Program, and approved a further $5 million loan in 2011. The program has supported 

improved access to health services for more than 766,000 of the most vulnerable El 

Salvadorians. This was achieved through constructing and equipping 39 new health centers and 

rehabilitating 19 existing ones, as well as training more than 3,600 healthcare workers in primary 

health services. The program also equipped 154 health units across the country with a Master 

Health data system, provided training on the system for 2,000 personnel, and strengthened the 

network of laboratories. 

 

Guatemala. In 2008, the IDB provided a $150 million loan to support Guatemala’s program to 

expand education coverage, particularly at the primary level, to achieve greater access for 

disadvantaged groups while addressing the cultural and linguistic diversity of the beneficiary 

populations. The program financed rehabilitation of 3,200 pre-primary and primary schools, 

benefiting 500,000 children. To increase learning, the program also delivered 7.35 million 

books, benefiting 2.8 million children. The books were delivered in 11 Mayan languages, as 

well as in Spanish. Finally, the program funded teacher training to increase the quality of 

education. In addition to emphasizing the importance of cultural and linguistic diversity in 

education in the targeted communities, the program paid special attention to children with 

disabilities. 

Haiti. In 2009, the IDB approved a $30 million loan to reduce the vulnerability of rural 

populations in Haiti to natural disasters in four strategic watersheds that together account for the 

majority of agricultural production in the country. Results include direct support to 7,246 

farmers, of whom 29 percent are women, for adoption of sustainable cropping practices for 

coffee, cocoa, and agroforestry, and construction of 160 watershed protection infrastructures. 

The project also contributed to strengthening local governance of watershed management, by 

creating watershed management committees and training them to manage watershed resources 

more efficiently and effectively. 
Treasury International Programs

20

North American Development Bank

FY 2015 

Enacted

FY 2016 

Enacted

FY 2017 

Request

- 10,000,000 45,000,000

Treasury requests $45 million for the second installment of the first North American 

Development Bank (NADB) General Capital Increase (GCI). 

Program Description

NADB, founded in 1994 by the United States and Mexico, provides financing for environmental 

infrastructure projects within the areas up to 100 kilometers (62 miles) north and 300 kilometers 

(186 miles) south of the U.S.-Mexico border. These projects, implemented on both sides of the 

border, improve the quality of life for residents of the border region, strengthen municipal 

services, and create new jobs and business opportunities. Key areas of focus include wastewater 

collection and treatment, air quality improvements, solid waste management, and renewable 

energy. NADB’s sister institution, the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC), 

which is in the process of merging with NADB, must certify the environmental benefits of all 

projects before they are eligible for NADB financing. NADB is well-respected among states and 

communities along the border, where it has had a tangible impact on the environment and the 

lives of the area’s residents. 

NADB approved $260 million in new loans in 2015. As of September 30, 2015, NADB’s 

outstanding loan portfolio was $1.31 billion, and the total investment value of all the projects to 

which it provides or administers funding was over $2.5 billion, reflecting NADB’s ability to 

crowd in additional financing for projects from the private and public sectors. In 2014, 16 new 

projects, which are projected to benefit an estimated 1.55 million residents through improved 

water and wastewater systems, clean and renewable energy, and better air quality, were certified

by BECC and financed by NADB. 

Due to the increase in lending in the past five years, NADB’s capital adequacy ratios have 

deteriorated. While NADB still maintains strong ratios in line with other MDBs, rating agencies 

require NADB to maintain stronger-than-average ratios due to its geographic and sector 

concentration. Without a GCI, NADB’s projected annual sustainable lending level would drop 

from $250 million to below $90 million. A GCI of $225 million in paid-in capital from the 

United States and Mexico each that is paid over a seven-year period, supplemented by $1.275 

billion in callable capital from each, will allow NADB to maintain current lending levels over the 

near term and reach projected annual lending levels of $350 million by 2024. Mexico announced 

its support for a GCI in March 2014 and is prepared to match the U.S. capital commitment. 

Under NADB’s charter, the United States and Mexico contributed equally to NADB’s initial 

authorized capital stock, a total contribution of $450 million in paid-in capital and $2.6 billion in 

callable capital. The United States and Mexico each have a 50 percent voting share, and a GCI

requires the approval of both nations. 
Treasury International Programs

21

How NADB Promotes U.S. Interests

NADB is one of the key components of the High Level Economic Dialogue between the United 

States and Mexico, which has a goal of maintaining or enhancing NADB’s role in the border 

region to help build more secure and resilient communities. Strengthening NADB would be a 

tangible demonstration of the United States’ shared commitment with Mexico to build a stable 

and prosperous border region. Despite gains made in recent decades, the United States’ border 

region experiences poverty rates that are double the national average, while Mexico faces 

ongoing security challenges and infrastructure gaps. As a valued and trusted institution on both 

sides of the border, NADB can help mitigate these pressures through its continued engagement 

in the region. NADB’s environmental infrastructure projects help promote greater regional 

stability and diminish migration flows. Furthermore, Mexico is a key partner to the United 

States, and regional leader, in helping boost shared prosperity and security among Central 

American countries.

By fully meeting commitments, the United States will achieve important goals, including 

bolstering our bilateral relationship with Mexico, our third-largest trading partner. NADB will 

be able to continue lending for much-needed environmental infrastructure in the U.S.-Mexico 

border region, creating job opportunities as a result of new infrastructure and providing 

increasing investment opportunities for American businesses in the environmental infrastructure 

sector. Full funding for NADB will also demonstrate the U.S. commitment to develop the border 

region with better municipal services that improve the environment, public health, and the 

economy.

Meeting NADB Commitments 

The $45 million request would represent the second annual payment and first full payment as 

part of a commitment to provide a total of $225 million over seven years. Mexico would pay the 

same amount over that time period, and NADB’s 50/50 shareholding structure would remain the 

same. The $450 million in total paid-in capital from both countries would be supplemented with 

$2.55 billion in total callable capital ($1.275 billion from the United States). Overall, NADB’s 

capital base would increase by $3 billion, representing a doubling of NADB’s capital. Meeting 

this commitment will allow NADB to sustain annual lending of $250 million for critical 

environmental infrastructure investments along both sides of the border. 

Achieving and Measuring Results

NADB and BECC have monitored their projects since inception to ensure proper operation and 

to emphasize simplicity and cost effectiveness. The project monitoring cycle involves project 

development, certification, implementation, and operation. During each phase, projects are 

subject to review of inputs, outputs, outcomes, and impacts from which NADB can measure 

grant and loan compliance and provide impact assessments. Recent results include: 

• Rehabilitation of more than 1,700 water hook-ups and 1,800 sewer connections in Playas 

de Rosarito, Baja California. An impact assessment of NADB’s sanitation projects in the 

Mexican state of Baja California found that 90 percent of the population that had 

previously been using latrines connected to the sewer system, contributing to a reduction 
Treasury International Programs

22

in waterborne disease incidence ranging from 17 percent in Mexicali to 95 percent in 

Playas de Rosarito.

• Improved access to water services through more than 6,250 water hook-ups in San Luis, 

Arizona. NADB determined that the project strengthened institutional capacity and 

helped ensure that there was a sufficient annual budget to properly cover operations and 

maintenance.

• Paving of 33 miles of urban roads in Playas de Rosarito, resulting in a 99 percent 

reduction of particulate matter along the newly paved roads. 

Project Examples

Pharr Texas. NADB provided $10 million of financing to the Pharr Waterworks and Sewer 

System utility company to rehabilitate the city’s wastewater system. The project helped to 

eliminate wastewater overflows and protect the health of the residents of Pharr, Texas. The 

rehabilitated wastewater collection system benefitted 54,619 residents and surrounding 

communities, by decreasing health hazards like waterborne diseases. Updating the water system 

also allowed the city to comply with federal and state regulatory wastewater standards. The 

project was successfully completed in August 2011. 

Tecate, Baja California and San Diego County, California. NADB provided $39.1 million of 

financing to a project to construct a 155 MW, 47 turbine wind energy farm in Tecate, Baja 

California and a 5 mile transboundary transmission line to San Diego County. San Diego Gas & 

Electric in California is purchasing the electricity generated by the wind farm, which is expected 

to generate sufficient electricity to cover the annual electricity consumption of about 70,832 

households. Commercial operations began in June 2015. 

Nuevo Leon, Mexico. In December 2014, NADB approved $46 million in financing for a 

project that increased paved street coverage in Nuevo Leon, Mexico, helping to reduce air 

pollution and respiratory ailments caused by airborne dust particles generated by traffic on 

unpaved streets. The project is expected to reduce particle emissions by an estimated 1,874 tons 

per year. It will also provide safer roadways for motorists and allow easier access for police, 

firefighters, and ambulances.
Treasury International Programs

23

Asian Development Bank Group

The Asian Development Bank Group comprises the Asian Development Fund (AsDF) and the 

Ordinary Capital Resources of the Asian Development Bank (AsDB). Treasury is seeking 

funding to address U.S. unmet commitments to the AsDF. 

Asian Development Fund 

FY 2015 

Enacted

FY 2016 

Enacted

FY 2017 

Request

AsDF 104,977,000 104,977,000 99,233,000

Of which, payment toward 

unmet commitments 15,077,000 15,077,000 9,333,000 

Treasury requests $99.2 million, with $89.9 million to serve as the fourth of four payments to the 

AsDF’s Tenth Replenishment (AsDF-11), and $9.3 million for partial clearance of the over $297 

million in unmet commitments to the AsDF. 

Program Description

The AsDF provides concessional loans and grants to the 27 poorest countries in Asia, 13 of 

which are eligible for grants. It focuses on supporting inclusive, environmentally sustainable

economic growth and regional cooperation and integration. AsDF’s core comparative advantage

is in infrastructure finance. Water, energy, and transportation infrastructure comprise about twothirds of all AsDF projects. Other important sectors include financial systems development, 

agriculture, and health. The AsDF investments across these sectors especially focus on fostering 

inclusion and resilience, for example through rural roads that connect farmers to markets, the 

integration of disadvantaged groups into the economy, or disaster response. 

Since 2009, the AsDF has approved $18 billion in concessional loans and grants for AsDFeligible countries. Two-thirds of all AsDF projects over the past five years have been to 

countries in Central, West, and South Asia. The AsDF has been instrumental in alleviating

extreme poverty and combating the effects of earthquakes, flooding, and other natural disasters in 

countries like Bangladesh and Nepal. The AsDF is among the largest financiers of infrastructure 

and other priority sectors in Afghanistan and Pakistan. By improving livelihoods and supporting 

economic development in these two countries, AsDF’s investments help reduce the lure of 

extremist groups and support critical U.S. development and national security priorities. AsDF’s 

efforts to improve economic conditions and connect markets across Asia effectively increase 

export opportunities for American businesses. 

Thirty-two countries have donated to the AsDF. Japan is by far the largest donor, with 52 

percent of total contributions, followed by the United States, with 11 percent. Because financing 

is provided on concessional terms, donors need to replenish AsDF resources every four years. 

The current replenishment – AsDF-11, covering the years 2013-2016 – was negotiated in April 

2012, with the United States committing $359.6 million to the AsDF over four years. 
Treasury International Programs

24

In 2015, AsDB Governors approved a historic reform to merge the AsDF’s concessional lending 

resources into the ordinary capital of the AsDB, resulting in a boost in concessional and nonconcessional lending capacity of about 40 percent over the next decade. As a result, AsDF-12 

will only require fresh funding from donors for grants to the poorest countries in Asia and the 

overall replenishment amount is expected to decrease. However, to achieve the full increase in 

concessional lending capacity from the merger and maintain grant support for Asia’s poorest and 

most fragile countries that are at greatest risk of debt distress, such as Afghanistan and small 

Pacific Island states, the United States must still fulfill unmet commitments to the AsDF. 

How AsDF Promotes U.S. Interests

AsDF assistance helps achieve key U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives in Asia, a 

region of increasing strategic importance. Regional trade projects expand markets for American 

exports, while investments in sectors such as energy and transportation infrastructure provide a 

critically important stabilizing role in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Tajikistan, among other 

countries. AsDF’s reengagement in Burma is supporting the country’s democratic transition, 

while projects in the Pacific Islands helps the small island nations better prepare for and respond 

to natural disasters. 

U.S. contributions have a multiplier effect, as contributions are pooled with those of 31 other 

donor countries and then leveraged to provide assistance to lower income borrower countries. 

For AsDF-11, each dollar the United States contributes is matched with $9 in contributions from 

other donors and internal resources.

Meeting AsDF Commitments

The outstanding $297 million in unmet commitments to the AsDF have significant adverse 

impacts on the AsDF and on U.S. leadership in the institution. Without fully funding 

commitments, the United States risks losing the ability to provide guidance to shape the direction 

of AsDF policies and activities at the very time that new institutions, like the Asian Infrastructure 

Investment Bank, are poised to launch activities. Unmet commitments are inconsistent with the 

U.S. strategic interest in ensuring that sufficient concessional finance is available to strategically 

important countries like Afghanistan and Pakistan. The only other donor with unmet 

commitments to the AsDF is Spain (with a far smaller shortfall than the United States). U.S. 

unmet commitments also have a negative multiplier effect because, in some cases, other donors 

block the AsDF from using funds that they have contributed until the United States meets its 

commitments. For the current replenishment, three donors have withheld a total of $115 million 

of their contributions from being used by the AsDF because of the inability of the United States

to meet commitments. 

Achieving and Measuring Results

Over the past four years, the AsDF has achieved the following notable results: 

• Connected over 500,000 households with electricity; 

• Improved water supplies or built new water connections for 1 million households; 

• Improved or developed sanitation systems for roughly 300,000 homes; 

• Provided better educational facilities for nearly 20 million students;
Treasury International Programs

25

• Trained 1.6 million new teachers to improve teaching quality and meet competency 

standards; 

• Provided microfinance loans to over two million entrepreneurs; and

• Constructed or rehabilitated 15,625 miles of roads.

The AsDB Group reports on results through its annual Development Effectiveness Review 

(DEfR) and Performance Scorecard, which compiles project-level outputs for both AsDF and 

AsDB projects. In particular, the DEfR measures whether projects across the AsDB Group are 

effective, completed on time and according to benchmarks, and sustainable after the conclusion 

of AsDB Group involvement. These standards are used by AsDB Group staff to compile lessons 

learned for future projects. 

Results in recent years have shown continued progress on the AsDF’s development 

effectiveness. During 2012-2014, 68 percent of completed AsDF projects that were validated by 

the AsDB’s Independent Evaluation Department (IED) were rated successful. Technical 

Assistance projects were among the most successful, with success rates near 90 percent. From 

2012-2014, the IED rated 55 percent of AsDF projects as both successful and sustainable. The 

metric allows AsDB Group staff to measure factors, including policy and regulatory 

environments and administrative capacity, that impact the ultimate success of projects after 

AsDB Group involvement ends. Improvements in project success rates reflect increased efforts 

to strengthen project readiness, including establishing the feasibility of design, clarifying 

implementation arrangements, applying social and environmental safeguards, and establishing 

procurement plans up front. 

At the recommendation of the United States and other donors, the AsDB Group is making 

important operational changes in an effort to become even more effective and efficient. For 

example, the AsDB Group is allocating more resources for project preparation and supervision, 

and has decentralized more activities by shifting staff from AsDB Group headquarters in Manila 

to resident missions, which has been shown to improve project performance. 

Project Examples

Mongolia. In 2014, AsDF completed a program that provided a $12 million grant to a food and 

nutrition social welfare project. The grant improved the existing social welfare system and 

assisted the Mongolian government in designing and implementing emergency measures that 

reduced the impact of the 2008 food price crisis on the poorest populations and undertook 

measures to address social welfare issues. The project improved the most vulnerable 

households’ access to food, reduced the number of undernourished Mongolians by 120,000, and 

contributed to improved child nutrition by encouraging more consumption of fruits and 

vegetables. An assessment of the program also found that it freed up income to allow more 

citizens to send their children to school. 

Tajikistan. In 2005, AsDF provided $51.7 million to Tajikistan for the border road 

rehabilitation project, which was completed in 2013. The highway is an important artery that 

connects Tajikistan and Afghanistan with the rest of Central Asia. The project upgraded 43 

miles of highway and 38 miles of rural access roads. Work included strengthening road 
Treasury International Programs

26

foundations, resurfacing, improving drainage systems and bridges, and shoring up retaining walls 

against landslides. The AsDF also helped Tajikistan introduce a maintenance outsourcing 

scheme under which service payments to private companies are tied to their performance and 

timing of delivery. More than 260,000 people living along the roads have benefited from the 

upgrading, with some villagers reporting up to a 30 percent increase in their income. Traffic on 

the highway has tripled, including an eight-fold increase in freight traffic since 2006, including 

from Afghanistan. The time to drive from Dushanbe to the Kyrgyz border decreased from 13 

hours in 2007 to less than eight hours, while road accidents decreased by 80 percent. As a result, 

the cost of operating a vehicle on the road decreased by $45 for a car and $194 for a heavy truck.
Treasury International Programs

27

African Development Bank Group

The African Development Bank Group comprises the African Development Bank (AfDB) and 

the African Development Fund (AfDF). Treasury is seeking funding for U.S. commitments to

the AfDB and the AfDF. 

African Development Bank

FY 2015 

Enacted

FY 2016 

Enacted

FY 2017 

Request

AfDB 32,418,000 34,118,027 32,418,000

Of which, payment toward 

unmet commitments - 1,700,307 - 

Treasury requests $32.4 million for the sixth of eight installments for the AfDB’s Sixth General 

Capital Increase (GCI-6).

Program Description

The AfDB provides public sector financing at market-linked rates to 17 member countries, and 

provides loans, equity investments, lines of credit, and guarantees to the private sector in all 54 

African member countries.

The AfDB had about $6.7 billion in lending approvals in 2014, two-thirds of which was to 

sovereigns and one-third to private sector projects. Sixty percent of AfDB financing is in 

infrastructure (including energy, transportation, communication, and water and sanitation) and 

27 percent is in finance, with the remaining balance in the social sector, agriculture and rural 

development, and governance. Despite regional and global challenges, the AfDB contributed to 

Africa’s average GDP growth rate of 3.9 percent in 2014, compared to the global average of 3.4 

percent. 

The AfDB is financed by capital contributions from shareholders and borrowing from 

international capital markets, as well as retained earnings. In 2010, AfDB shareholders 

committed to provide the AfDB with new capital through the GCI-6 to ensure that the AfDB had 

the resources necessary to assist countries in the region hardest hit by the financial crisis (as well 

as those hit by food and fuel crises) and to continue expanding its support to the private sector in 

Africa. 

During the GCI-6 negotiations, the United States championed a number of key institutional 

reforms that have enhanced the AfDB’s effectiveness, including strengthened financial 

management, increased transparency and disclosure, and robust results reporting. The United 

States is the largest non-regional shareholder at the AfDB, with 6.5 percent of total shareholding, 

and the second-largest shareholder overall, after Nigeria. 
Treasury International Programs

28

How AfDB Promotes U.S. Interests

Through its support for growth in Africa’s middle-income countries, the AfDB is helping 

solidify nascent democracies in North Africa and create stable societies that can govern 

effectively and meet the needs of their people, which are key U.S. national security priorities. 

Recognizing that the private sector is the engine for Africa’s growth, the AfDB is doing more to 

leverage and support private investment and is helping to develop financial and capital markets 

to better serve the needs of African and global businesses. By promoting private sector growth 

and improving the quality of the regulatory environment, the AfDB helps create new markets for 

U.S. businesses. The AfDB is currently upgrading its procurement policy to ensure value for 

money while maintaining high fiduciary standards, reforms that present enhanced opportunities 

for U.S. businesses. Finally, U.S. investments in the AfDB have a significant leveraging effect. 

Every $1 of U.S. paid-in and callable capital leverages $20 in lending by the AfDB because of 

burden-sharing with other shareholders and the AfDB's ability to borrow in international capital 

markets.

Meeting AfDB Commitments

Failure to meet commitments to the AfDB GCI would result in further dilution of U.S. 

shareholding and could risk our single-country seat on the Executive Board, where the United 

States is the only shareholder to have its own seat. This would significantly weaken U.S. 

credibility and influence at the AfDB and across Africa, at a time when the AfDB has just 

elected a new president and is undertaking many critical reforms on which the United States is a 

leading voice. These priorities include enhancing AfDB efforts to promote private sector growth 

in Africa (opening doors for U.S. businesses), strengthening the AfDB’s approach to fragile and 

conflict affected states, and working to achieve gender equality. Failure to meet commitments 

would also impair the AfDB’s ability to advance key U.S. strategic priorities, such as increasing 

access to energy and stabilizing North Africa’s nascent democracies. The U.S. commitment to 

Africa would also be called into question, particularly given high expectations for U.S. 

leadership on the continent following our recent high-level outreach to Africa’s leaders, private 

sector, and citizens. 

Achieving and Measuring Results

The AfDB Group updated its Results Measurement Framework (RMF) in 2013 to improve its 

tracking of development goals and rate the number of projects that meet expectations. The RMF 

tracks roughly 100 performance indicators, organized in four interconnected levels: 

1) development progress in Africa; 2) the AfDB Group’s contribution to development in Africa; 

3) the AfDB Group’s operational performance; and 4) the AfDB Group’s organizational 

efficiency.

For example, from 2012-2014, AfDB assistance produced the following results: 

• $1.7 billion in additional government revenues from AfDB projects and investments;

• 1.4 million women who benefitted from private sector projects and microfinance; 

• 1.2 million jobs created; and

• $368 million in turnover from AfDB investments in small- and medium-sized businesses. 
Treasury International Programs

29

The RMF also tracks performance on cross-cutting issues, such as gender and the environment. 

The results show that in 2014, 89 percent of new AfDB projects had a design that considered the 

project’s possible effects on gender equality, an improvement from 86 percent in 2013, and 78 

percent of completed AfDB projects had satisfactory gender equality outcomes, an improvement 

from 67 percent in 2012. In 2014, 75 percent of new AfDB projects had a design that considered 

potential environmental impacts on the project and the project’s potential environmental benefits, 

an improvement from 70 percent in 2013. Additionally, the RMF tracks progress on the AfDB 

Group’s implementation of both its new Integrated Safeguards System. In 2014, about 72 

percent of AfDB projects were assessed as having satisfactory social and environmental risk 

mitigation measures, an improvement from 60 percent in 2012. 

To build on the RMF, the AfDB Group recently began producing Country Development 

Effectiveness Reviews for specific countries and sectors, which will eventually cover AfDB 

Group activities in all 54 member countries and each sector in which it works. The first such 

reports provide comprehensive reviews of the AfDB Group’s activities in Ethiopia, Rwanda, 

Senegal, Tunisia, and Zambia, as well as in the sectors of energy, governance, fragile states, and 

regional integration. 

This focus on results has contributed to improvements in the AfDB Group’s performance and 

effectiveness. In 2014, 94 percent of completed AfDB projects were rated as satisfactory and 82 

percent were assessed as delivering sustainable outcomes. 

Finally, the AfDB Group introduced “MapAfrica” in 2014, a new geocoding tool that maps the 

AfDB Group’s entire ongoing portfolio. This map allows the AfDB Group to improve the 

geographic allocation of its resources and provide stakeholders and citizens with a better 

understanding of the AfDB Group’s activities and impact on local development. 

Project Examples

Morocco. The AfDB’s $306 million Financial Sector Development Support Program improved 

access to finance and financial services in Morocco, particularly for rural poor women and small 

businesses lacking access to conventional credit. By completion of the project’s second phase in 

2013, the proportion of microcredits granted to women in Morocco had risen from 49 percent to 

64 percent, helping to support rural income-generating activities in agriculture and handicrafts. 

Additionally, the AfDB helped the Moroccan government design housing loan facilities for 

disadvantaged populations that increased the provision of housing credits by 30 percent. The 

project also modernized Morocco’s system for providing guarantees to the private sector, 

including the design of a new guarantee product that has benefited more than 500 small 

businesses. Overall banking rates in Morocco increased by 10 percent during the course of the 

project. The AfDB provided technical assistance to strengthen governance of Morocco’s 

financial sector, particularly supervision of the insurance sector, and to promote reforms to 

deepen Morocco’s capital markets. 

Egypt. In December 2014, the AfDB completed a $362 million thermal power project to 

increase the availability of a reliable and affordable power supply to support Egypt’s economic 

growth and socioeconomic development. With total power generation capacity of 1,300 

megawatts, the power plants increased Egypt’s national power grid capacity by 4 percent, 
Treasury International Programs

30

addressed electricity shortages and power outages, and contributed to the government’s efforts to 

gradually replace the use of fossil fuels in the agricultural sector with electric water pumping. 

The project created 3,600 jobs for Egyptians, the majority of which were filled by low-income 

workers. Post-completion analysis found that that the project yielded positive financial and 

economic impacts, with an economic rate of return of 17.5 percent due to the additional energy 

delivered to Egypt’s primary electricity consumers, including residential, industrial, commercial, 

and public buildings, health, and education facilities, public services, and agriculture.
Treasury International Programs

31

African Development Fund

FY 2015 

Enacted

FY 2016 

Enacted

FY 2017 

Request

AfDF 175,668,000 175,668,000 214,332,000

Of which, payment toward 

unmet commitments - - 19,332,000 

Treasury requests $214.3 million for the AfDF, with $195 million to serve as the third of three 

payments to the thirteenth replenishment of the AfDF (AfDF-13), and the remaining $19.3 

million to partially pay down unmet commitments to the AfDF. 

Program Description

The AfDF provides grants and highly concessional loans to the poorest countries in Africa, of 

which nearly half are fragile or conflict-affected states. In 2015, the AfDF approved about $2.0 

billion in financing to 36 countries. As the largest official financier of infrastructure in subSaharan Africa, nearly half of the AfDF’s 2014 commitments were to national and regional 

infrastructure projects, in sectors such as energy, transport, and water and sanitation. The 

remainder of AfDF’s funding is devoted to governance, agriculture and food security, and human 

capital development (e.g., health and education). The AfDF also sets aside special funding for 

fragile states and regional projects. In 2014, the AfDF increased its support to the West Africa 

region, which grew by an average of 6 percent in 2014 despite the persistence of conflicts and 

the heavy human and economic toll wrought by the Ebola outbreak. Indeed, AfDF was a first 

responder to the Ebola crisis in 2014. 

The AfDF is financed by donor countries, including the United States. Because the AfDF 

provides grants and low-cost loans, it needs new donor resources every three years to

continue operating. In September 2013, the United States joined other donors in raising 

$7.3 billion for AfDF-13. The United States is historically one of the largest donors to the 

AfDF, contributing the second-largest amount historically (behind Japan) and the thirdlargest amount in AfDF-13 (behind the United Kingdom and Germany). Voting power is 

based on total historic contributions. The United States has a 5.4 percent voting share, just 

behind Japan. 

How AfDF Promotes U.S. Interests

The AfDF, which is solely dedicated to working with the poorest countries in Africa, supports 

U.S. economic and security interests by promoting inclusive growth in the region’s new frontier 

economies, deepening economic and regional integration, and working with post-conflict and 

fragile states to assist them in becoming productive and stable. 

The AfDF served U.S. national security and global health interests by helping to stem the spread 

of Ebola, committing $223 million to Ebola-affected countries in 2014. In 2015, the AfDF 

provided additional support to the post-Ebola recovery efforts, including the establishment of a 

$32 million post-Ebola social investment fund, which received a $5 million grant from the U.S. 
Treasury International Programs

32

State Department. The social investment fund focuses on stimulating private sector growth 

through support to small- and medium-sized businesses in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. 

The AfDF also buttresses our bilateral security objectives by addressing the underlying causes of 

instability in areas where security threats persist, such as the Sahel and Horn of Africa. 

 

The AfDF also plays a central role in numerous U.S. initiatives in sub-Saharan Africa and is a 

key partner in Power Africa, President Obama’s innovative, private sector-focused initiative 

aimed at doubling electricity access in sub-Saharan Africa. The AfDB Group has committed $3 

billion to this initiative over five years, a large share of which is from the AfDF. A number of 

Power Africa projects, in countries such as Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, and Tanzania, have 

been financed through AfDF or are currently in the AfDF pipeline. As a major partner, the 

AfDF provides financing and guarantees for projects supporting power generation, transmission, 

and distribution across Africa, as well as technical assistance for governments to implement the 

power sector reforms needed to attract public and private investment. In September 2015, new 

AfDB President Akinwumi Adesina announced a major new strategic initiative called the New 

Deal for Energy in Africa, which will further expand the AfDF’s support to the sector in close 

collaboration with the United States and other partners. 

The AfDF promotes good governance in Africa through projects to strengthen public financial 

management capacity and extractive industries transparency. The AfDF has a transparent 

performance-based allocation formula, largely because of strong U.S. leadership calling for this 

approach. The formula rewards governments that make progress on economic governance and 

sound policymaking, have strong institutions, and have a positive track record of managing 

AfDF assistance. 

U.S. contributions to the AfDF provide significant returns because every dollar contributed 

leverages close to $12 in other donor contributions and internally-generated resources.

Meeting AfDF Commitments

U.S. unmet commitments to AfDF replenishments and the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative 

(MDRI) currently amount to approximately $227 million and the United States is the only donor 

country with protracted unmet commitments. These unmet commitments decrease the financial 

capacity of the AfDF, reducing the amounts available to support the poorest African countries 

and to respond to pressing regional emergencies. Addressing unmet commitments would help 

restore U.S. leadership and help the AfDF deliver on its strategic priorities, such as promoting 

private sector growth in Africa, stabilizing regions recovering from conflict and fragility, and 

increasing access to energy. 

Continued U.S. unmet commitments to the AfDF threaten to undermine U.S. leadership and 

credibility at a time when the AfDB Group has just elected a new president and is undertaking 

many critical reforms on which the United States is currently a leading voice. Additionally, the 

United States is looking to the AfDF as a key partner in helping to promote U.S. economic and 

national security interests in Africa. However, if the United States is unable to maintain a 

leadership role in the AfDF, emerging donors, who may not share our development priorities, are 

willing and eager to promote their interests. 
Treasury International Programs

33

A growing component of the U.S. unmet commitments to AfDF involve MDRI. Launched in 2006 

at the urging of the United States, MDRI provides 100 percent cancellation of eligible debt to

AfDF for countries that complete the conditions for debt relief under the Heavily Indebted Poor 

Countries (HIPC) Initiative. MDRI has allowed scarce resources in low-income countries to be 

reallocated for poverty-reducing expenditures in areas such as health and education. To prevent 

a depletion of AfDF resources from debt relief, donors committed to compensate the AfDF for 

the cancelled debt on a dollar-for-dollar basis according to the payment schedules of the original 

loans. 

Of the 23 donors participating in MDRI at the AfDF, the United States is one of only three 

countries that is behind on commitments. The unmet commitments are negatively impacting the 

AfDF’s ability to provide new concessional loans and grants to create jobs, build critical 

infrastructure, increase agricultural productivity, and provide energy in Africa’s poorest and most 

fragile countries. At 11.8 percent burden share, the U.S. share of the cost of MDRI under AfDF13 is $55 million. In addition to these current commitments, the United States will carry over 

$29 million in MDRI unmet commitments from AfDF-12. By the end of FY 2017, the U.S.

unmet commitments to the AfDF associated with MDRI could be as high as $84 million. 

However, the United States intends to apply credit that it earns for accelerating its core 

replenishment payments to AfDF, which could reduce total unmet commitments by as much as 

$13 million. 

Achieving and Measuring Results

The AfDB Group updated its Results Measurement Framework (RMF) in 2013 to improve the 

tracking of development goals and better rate project performance. The RMF tracks roughly 100 

performance indicators, measuring development progress in Africa; the AfDB Group’s 

contribution to development in Africa; the AfDB Group’s operational performance; and the 

AfDB Group’s organizational efficiency.

For example, from 2012-2014, AfDF assistance produced the following results: 

• 11 million people with new or improved electricity connections; 

• 4 million people with improved access to water and sanitation; 

• 425 miles of cross-border roads constructed or rehabilitated; 

• 16 countries with improved quality of budgetary and financial management; 13 countries 

with improved transparency, accountability, and corruption mitigation in the public 

sector; and 7 countries with improved business climate as a result of AfDF policy advice 

and assistance. 

The RMF also tracks performance on cross-cutting issues, such as gender and the environment. 

The results show that in 2014, 71 percent of completed AfDF projects had satisfactory gender 

equality outcomes. In 2014, 80 percent of new AfDF projects had a design that considered 

potential environmental impacts on the project and the project’s potential environmental benefits. 

This focus on results has contributed to improvements in the AfDB Group’s performance and 

effectiveness. In 2014, 94 percent of completed AfDF projects were rated as satisfactory, an 

improvement from 89 percent in 2013, and 77 percent were assessed as delivering sustainable 

outcomes. 
Treasury International Programs

34

Project Examples

Tanzania. Completed in 2014, the AfDF’s agricultural project provided Tanzania with $79 

million in grants and loans to increase agricultural productivity and incomes of farming 

households in Tanzania’s rural areas. The project supported 780 trainers to provide technical 

capacity-building and introduce new farming technologies to 252,836 farmers organized into 

11,375 “participatory farmers groups.” The project also established 780 village development 

committees and 86 savings and credit cooperatives. The project completed more than 1,400 

micro infrastructure projects such as feeder roads and bridges, small irrigation schemes, water 

pumps, storage facilities, and market sheds. After completion of the project, a study found that 

crop productivity among participatory group members was nearly three times the regional 

average, and members experienced food shortages at one-fifth the average rate. 

Kenya. In 2007, the AfDF provided Kenya with $186 million in loans to finance the 

improvement of a congested system of highways and roads between Nairobi’s central business 

district and populous rural towns. The project upgraded a 28-mile, eight-lane highway that has 

benefited more than 100,000 residents and businesses, reducing their commuting time from over 

three hours to 30 minutes, and improving connectivity and commercial opportunities. The 

project created jobs for more than 4,200 workers, technicians, and engineers and benefited 

thousands of small businesses along the corridor, the majority of which belong to women who 

sell food in roadside markets. 

Treasury International Programs

35

Food Security

Global Agriculture and Food Security Program

FY 2015 

Enacted

FY 2016 

Enacted

FY 2017 

Request

- 43,000,000 23,000,000

 

Treasury requests $23 million for the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP), a 

multi-donor trust fund called for by the Group of 20 (G-20) Leaders at the November 2009 

Pittsburgh Summit. GAFSP is the multilateral component of the President’s Feed the Future 

initiative. In 2012, the United States pledged to contribute $1 for every $2 in new contributions 

by other donors up to $475 million during the pledge period. While U.S. leadership of GAFSP 

has been an important component of its success to date, the Administration continues to work 

with other donors to strive for a United States share of contributions of no more than one-third of 

total contributions. 

Program Description

 

An estimated 780 million people in developing countries are hungry today, and the world will 

need to produce up to 60 percent more food by 2050 to feed a projected global population of 9 

billion people. Of the world’s 1.3 billion people living on less than $1.25 a day, about 70 percent 

live in the rural areas of developing countries. Most are directly or indirectly dependent on 

agriculture for their livelihoods. Launched in 2010, GAFSP plays an important role in 

supporting efforts to tackle food insecurity in the world’s poorest countries by allowing multiple 

donors to pool their funds and finance the food security plans of developing countries at scale. 

GAFSP is unique in the multilateral architecture for global food security due to the combination 

of its exclusive focus on the world’s poorest countries, its competitive process for awarding 

funding, its ability to support public and private sector institutions, and its inclusive governance 

model. 

GAFSP is housed at the World Bank, which serves as an implementing agency along with the 

other multilateral development banks (including the African Development Bank, Asian 

Development Bank, and Inter-American Development Bank), as well as UN agencies (including 

the International Fund for Agricultural Development, the World Food Programme, and the Food 

and Agriculture Organization). GAFSP operates through two windows: 

• The Public Sector Window provides multi-year grant financing to support countrydeveloped agriculture and food security investment plans. Grants are awarded on the 

basis of a transparent, competitive process involving independent technical experts. By 

supporting country-led efforts to invest in sustainable agriculture and food security, 

GAFSP is helping to increase incomes and reduce hunger in the world’s poorest 

countries. To date, GAFSP’s Public Sector Window has awarded $1,019 million in 

grant financing to 30 countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Although many 

GAFSP projects are only in the early stages of implementation, the Public Sector 

Window is expected to reach a total of about 20 million smallholder farmers and their
Treasury International Programs

36

families. At the end of 2014, Public Sector Window projects had already reached about 

2.15 million beneficiaries, of whom approximately 705,000 were female. 

• The Private Sector Window provides long- and short-term loans, credit guarantees, and 

equity to support private sector activities that improve agricultural development and food 

security. GAFSP’s Private Sector Window has approved $192.1 million of investments 

to date. These include investments in small- and medium-sized dairy and fruit 

processors and animal feed companies in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, and 

partnerships with local commercial banks in West and East Africa to offer warehouse 

receipt financing to smallholder farmers. On average, each dollar invested by the 

Private Sector Window has attracted six times that amount in additional private 

financing. Private Sector Window investments are expected to reach over 2.76 million 

farmers, most of them semi-commercial smallholders and subsistence farmers. 

How GAFSP Promotes U.S. Interests

GAFSP promotes U.S. global development goals by supporting long-term, sustainable 

investments in agricultural productivity, which have been shown to be two to four times more 

effective at reducing poverty than investments in any other sector. In addition, GAFSP advances 

U.S. national security interests by supporting economic and political stability, inclusive growth, 

and poverty reduction in fragile states such as Yemen, Mali, and Niger. GAFSP is an important 

tool for leveraging U.S. leadership in food security so as to mobilize political will and actions 

from other donors and developing countries, all with the goal of reducing global hunger and 

malnutrition. GAFSP resources are targeted toward generating sustainable and inclusive 

economic growth in the world’s poorest countries. 

Meeting GAFSP Commitments

The United States is the largest of 10 donors to GAFSP, having contributed $591.8 million since 

GAFSP’s inception. U.S. leadership has been crucial for mobilizing ongoing commitments from 

other donors including Canada, the United Kingdom, Spain, and the Bill & Melinda Gates 

Foundation. In FY 2015, Australia, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and Germany made 

contributions to GAFSP. During the course of FY 2016, significant financial commitments from 

new and existing GAFSP donors are expected. 

Achieving and Measuring Results

To date, GAFSP’s Public and Private Sector Windows have allocated approximately $1.3 billion 

to address food insecurity around the world. GAFSP financing is delivering a range of benefits 

to smallholder farmers in low-income countries across Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Over 

$328 million in funding was disbursed as of the end of June 2015. The results of these 

investments include the following: 

• GAFSP has reached about 2.15 million beneficiaries, representing 10 percent of its 

overall target of 20 million farmers; 

• GAFSP has rehabilitated over 19,200 hectares of land with improved irrigation and 

drainage infrastructure; and 

• Over 397,600 farmers have gained access to improved technologies, such as high yield 

seeds and processing equipment. 
Treasury International Programs

37

GAFSP has a monitoring and evaluation system that systematically tracks key output indicators, 

including measures of income gain, hunger, nutrition, and food security, across all GAFSP 

projects. GAFSP also employs impact evaluations for a subset of its projects to better 

understand the impact of GAFSP financing on food security, nutritional outcomes, and income at 

a household level. GAFSP partners are currently engaged in reviewing and updating key 

elements of the GAFSP monitoring and evaluation system, with the goal of ensuring that GAFSP 

is able to demonstrate to donors and recipient countries how GAFSP supports progress towards 

the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly those focusing on ending poverty and hunger. 

A first cohort of Public Sector Window projects will conclude in the coming year, which will 

allow GAFSP to share comprehensive reporting on the impacts on farmers and their families. 

Project Examples

Rwanda. In 2010, GAFSP awarded $50 million to Rwanda to increase the productivity and 

commercialization of hillside agriculture in target areas. The project addresses key constraints to 

agricultural growth in Rwanda, which include insufficient investment in larger scale communitybased infrastructure approaches, as well as deficits in extension services, rural finance, and 

marketing support. To date, improvements in farm productivity have increased the income of 

26,792 beneficiary households by a factor of five, and improvements in soil fertility have 

enabled farmers to increase yields by a factor of three for soybeans and maize, a factor of four 

for beans, and a factor of 10 for potatoes. The project has already reached 124,494 beneficiaries 

(including 61,144 women), surpassing the end of project goal of 120,000. 

Nepal. In 2011, GAFSP awarded $46.5 million to Nepal to enhance the food and nutritional 

security of vulnerable communities by increasing the productivity of crop and livestock 

agriculture, promoting diversified diets, and encouraging improved feeding and caring practices 

for pregnant and nursing women and children up to two years of age. The project also supports 

nutrition-sensitive agricultural activities, including the generation and adaptation of technology 

to increase yields of nutritious crops. To date, 169 trials of improved technologies have been 

conducted, and 54 tons of higher-yielding seeds have been produced. Farmer field schools in 34 

villages have started to disseminate and adopt new technology, and refresher trainings have been 

conducted for technicians and farmers. Food recipe development is underway following

completion of the nutrition analysis of locally available food. Overall, the project is expected to 

reach 112,000 beneficiaries, 70 percent of whom will be women. 
Treasury International Programs

38

International Fund for Agricultural Development

FY 2015 

Enacted

FY 2016 

Enacted

FY 2017 

Request

IFAD 30,000,000 31,930,000 30,000,000

Of which, payment toward 

unmet commitments - 1,930,000 - 

Treasury requests $30 million for the second of three installments to the International Fund for 

Agricultural Development’s (IFAD) tenth replenishment (IFAD-10). 

Program Description

IFAD is a small multilateral fund, supported by 176 member countries and dedicated to 

alleviating rural poverty in developing countries. IFAD’s mission is to eliminate poverty, 

hunger, and malnutrition, and to raise farmers’ productivity and incomes to improve the quality 

of their lives. Most IFAD-supported projects are in remote rural areas where few donors operate. 

In 2015, IFAD’s program of loans and grants was $1.352 billion, bringing the total program of 

loans and grants over the course of the 2013-2015 replenishment period to $3 billion. 

IFAD’s resources need to be replenished every three years. The United States is a founding 

member of IFAD and its largest single contributor, with contributions to the IFAD-10 

replenishment accounting for 8.8 percent of total contributions. IFAD-10, which runs from 

2016 to 2018, will focus on continuing to invest in smallholder farmers and rural communities, 

while consolidating operational reforms that the United States successfully promoted during past 

replenishments. U.S. priorities for the IFAD-10 replenishment include increasing IFAD support 

for climate resilience and adaptation activities, bolstering results in reducing malnutrition, 

improving performance in fragile, conflict-affected states, refining IFAD’s approach to 

partnering with the private sector, and leveraging innovative financing tools to support 

smallholder agriculture. The United States will also focus on enhancing the sustainability of 

IFAD activities and the institution’s ability to scale up successful projects, which IFAD has thus 

far achieved by building the capacity of local stakeholders and mobilizing additional public and 

private development finance. 

How IFAD Promotes U.S. Interests

IFAD supports the President’s Feed the Future initiative, which advances global food security 

and nutrition. Through its singular focus on rural development, IFAD contributes to key U.S. 

priorities, including advancing inclusive growth and poverty reduction. Funding for IFAD also 

advances U.S. national security interests by supporting economic and political stability in fragile 

states around the world. 
Treasury International Programs

39

Meeting IFAD Commitments

As the largest contributor to IFAD, other member states look to the United States to guide their 

own contributions. Given the relatively small size of IFAD, therefore, failure to fully fund the 

U.S. commitments would have an immediate, negative impact on the institution’s delivery 

capacity, particularly its ability to offer highly concessional or grant financing to low-income 

countries with higher rates of poverty and hunger. 

Achieving and Measuring Results

External evaluations have consistently rated IFAD as providing good value for money. 

In 2014: 

• 114 million people received services from IFAD projects;

• 2.5 million farmers received training in crop production technologies and practices, and

over one million farmers received training in livestock production;

• Rural finance projects helped 20.8 million beneficiaries open voluntary savings accounts, 

of which 55 percent were women, mobilizing a total of $4.3 billion in savings; 

• Over one million beneficiaries received training in business and entrepreneurship, and 

over six million gained access to credit;

• IFAD projects constructed or rehabilitated nearly 10,800 miles of rural roads that helped 

connect smallholder farmers with markets; and 

• On average, women represented 49 percent of direct beneficiaries. 

IFAD management commits to delivering a specific set of results at the outset of each 

replenishment period and reports annually on achievements against its performance targets. The 

results framework incorporates a number of targets in the areas of: 1) global poverty reduction, 

food security, and investment outcomes; 2) outcomes delivered by IFAD-supported projects; 

3) outputs delivered by IFAD-supported projects; 4) IFAD operational effectiveness; and 

5) institutional effectiveness and efficiency. For example, one target for the IFAD-10 period is 

to improve the lives of between 110 and 130 million people. 

The United States continues to promote IFAD’s investments in female farmers. Among the 

multilateral development banks, IFAD is one of the leaders in assessing the impact of its projects

on a gender-specific basis and ensuring that women are direct beneficiaries. 

IFAD has an Independent Office of Evaluation (IOE) that reports directly to the Executive 

Board. The IOE validates project completion reports and conducts corporate-level reviews on 

governance and operational effectiveness. The IOE also conducts thematic reviews, such as an 

upcoming report that will assess IFAD’s efforts to increase its development impact by opening 

local country offices. The IOE issues an annual report on results and impact in order to present a 

synthesis of the performance of IFAD-supported programs and to highlight key lessons and 

development challenges. 

The 2015 IOE annual report highlighted improving trends as well as challenges. IFAD’s 

performance has improved in a number of areas, including in rural poverty impact and gender 

equality. These improvements are a result of ongoing efforts to bolster IFAD’s in-country 
Treasury International Programs

40

presence and strengthen project supervision. On average, IFAD activities are on-par with, or 

better than, the performance of other multilateral development banks in the agriculture sector. 

However, the IOE has highlighted the need to make IFAD results more sustainable even after 

project completion, and has underscored the need to bolster IFAD’s operational efficiency and 

environmental and natural resource management. 

Project Examples

Laos. IFAD completed a $29 million project in 2013 to promote economic growth and 

livelihood improvements among the rural poor, including women and other vulnerable groups in 

the target area, such as unemployed rural youth and upland ethnic groups. The project helped to 

promote food security and diminish food scarcity during lean months. Following the project’s 

mid-term review, additional focus was placed on agricultural value chains and marketing 

services delivery, which paved the way for the evolution of a marketing strategy with ensured 

outlets and guaranteed prices. By the time of project completion, 33,761 households benefitted 

from the project, 29 percent more than the initial appraisal target, comprising about 192,438 

people. The overall percentage of poorest and poor households decreased by 8.5 percent. The 

project also helped improve food security among beneficiaries: the percentage of households 

who had not experienced food scarcity went from 29 percent to 44 percent in one province, and 

from 70 percent to 87 percent in a second. 

Bangladesh. IFAD completed a $25 million project in 2014 to reduce the level of poverty of 

small traders (especially women), primary producers, and women laborers in coastal regions. 

The targeted districts were among the poorest in Bangladesh. The project focused on improving 

the facilities and terms of access for men and women to rural markets, increasing employment 

for poor women, increasing production and sale of products for the market, and moving poor 

producers up the value chain. It did this by supporting beneficiaries through the provision of 

new infrastructure, rural microfinance, marketing systems, and agro-technologies. By the time 

of project completion, the project had reached over 125,000 direct beneficiaries in 89,000 

households, and contributed to the lifting of 38,000 households out of poverty. 

Treasury International Programs

41

Infrastructure

Global Infrastructure Facility

FY 2015 

Enacted

FY 2016 

Enacted

FY 2017 

Request

- - 20,000,000

Treasury requests $20 million to join the World Bank’s Global Infrastructure Facility (GIF) as a 

Funding Partner. 

Program Description

The regional multilateral development banks estimate that long-term financing requirements for 

infrastructure in emerging markets will reach between $1.8 - 2.3 trillion per year by 2020, far 

exceeding available public resources and leading to an annual infrastructure financing gap of as 

much as $1 trillion per year. Infrastructure is vital to spur economic growth, jobs, and the 

delivery of basic services such as health, education, and energy. Indeed, the International 

Monetary Fund estimates that a 1 percent increase in quality infrastructure boosts a country’s 

economic output by nearly 0.5 percent in the short term and 1.5 percent within four years. 

Established by the World Bank in 2015, the goal of the GIF is to catalyze private investment in 

public infrastructure projects by addressing constraints arising from countries’ legal and 

regulatory regimes, project design and implementation, and project financing structures. In 

doing so, the GIF will seek to develop and promote best practices for infrastructure investment, 

particularly with regard to social and environmental standards. 

The GIF is supported by “Funding Partners” who are sovereign donors and multilateral 

institutions that provide a minimum of $10 million over the initial three-year pilot phase. 

Current Funding Partners are the World Bank ($10 million), China ($20 million), Canada ($16 

million), Australia ($15 million), Japan ($15 million), and Singapore ($10 million). A U.S. 

contribution will allow the GIF to consider more projects, or ones that are larger and have a 

greater development impact. 

During a three-year pilot phase, the GIF will focus on “upstream” activities that are necessary 

before a specific project can proceed. These upstream activities include technical assistance in

creating a regulatory and policy environment that is conducive to attracting private capital, 

project preparation, financial structuring, and credit enhancement. Once this first phase has been 

launched, the GIF will seek support from donors for a second phase of “downstream” activities. 

These will primarily consist of co-financing or credit enhancement support for the early-stages of 

projects where the risk is highest and traditional finance is harder to obtain. 

GIF resources are expected to be recovered through reimbursements or fees that will be collected

when an infrastructure project receives its financing through private investments. 

The GIF is currently reviewing its initial slate of potential projects. It plans to support at least 
Treasury International Programs

42

four significant and three to six smaller infrastructure projects across a range of countries and 

sectors during the first phase. To ensure a consistent focus, GIF will consolidate pockets of 

infrastructure expertise spread across the World Bank Group. 

How GIF Promotes U.S. Interests

As the global focus on infrastructure investment continues to grow, the United States must 

maintain its leadership in multilateral infrastructure initiatives to ensure infrastructure projects 

around the world are supportive of U.S. national interests, such as good governance, 

transparency, and social and environmental protection. Joining the GIF as a Funding Partner 

would gain a seat for the United States on the Governing Council. It would also allow the 

United States to significantly influence GIF activities by shaping strategies and policies, helping 

to develop the process for selecting technical implementing partners, and selecting projects and 

financing. U.S. investment in the GIF would allow for regular engagement with other emerging 

donors, ensuring that support for the UN Sustainable Development Goals is achieved. Finally, as 

a Funding Partner, the United States could urge the GIF to work with U.S. partners, such as the 

Overseas Private Investment Corporation, which helps support U.S. investment abroad and 

selects projects that support U.S. national security interests. 

Achieving and Measuring Results

The GIF will measure results based on the number of infrastructure projects it helps bring to 

financial close. Since the GIF’s activities will be tailored to each infrastructure project, each will 

have its own individual metrics of success. The GIF will report its activities and progress to the 

Funding Partners on a regular basis, at least annually. 

 

Treasury International Programs

43

Environmental Trust Funds

Global Environment Facility

FY 2015 

Enacted

FY 2016 

Enacted

FY 2017 

Request

GEF 136,563,000 168,263,000 146,563,000

Of which, payment toward 

unmet commitments 76,990,000 31,700,000 10,000,000 

Treasury requests $146.6 million for the Global Environment Facility (GEF). This amount 

includes $136.6 million for the third of four installments of the sixth replenishment of the GEF

(GEF-6), which will run from FY 2015-2018, and $10 million for earlier GEF-6 commitments. 

The United States pledged $546 million to GEF-6 as part of a $4.43 billion replenishment that 

concluded in April 2014. 

Program Description

Funding for the GEF supports environmental projects that advance U.S. interests abroad, such as 

pollution reduction that prevents toxic chemicals from making their way into the air, water, and 

U.S. food supply. With almost 4,000 projects approved since 1991, the GEF has strengthened

management of 33 major river basins and one-third of the world’s large marine ecosystems. 

GEF projects have increased food security, protected wildlife habitats, and enriched the 

livelihoods of millions of people worldwide. 

The GEF is being asked to do more than ever, including implementing the Minamata Convention 

on Mercury and projects supporting the President’s Executive Order on Combating Wildlife 

Trafficking. Seeking to achieve greater impacts and recognizing that many crucial 

environmental challenges are not confined to particular countries or sectors, the GEF has 

introduced three “integrated approach programs.” These programs address environmental 

problems that cross sectors and international borders, specifically the environmental degradation 

caused by global commodity supply chains, inefficient city planning, and food insecurity in 

Africa. 

How the GEF Promotes U.S. Interests

The GEF benefits the U.S. economy and environment by addressing many external 

environmental problems that affect American health, safety, and prosperity. For example, the 

GEF has supported efforts to conserve important fish stocks through habitat protection outside 

U.S. waters. These efforts contribute to more sustainable global fisheries, which are critically 

important to the U.S. food supply chain (the United States imports approximately 94 percent of 

its seafood) and to U.S. companies. Similarly, the GEF’s sustainable forest management projects 

support our domestic logging industry, and the jobs it creates, by curbing illegal logging abroad. 

In some cases, U.S. companies and workers benefit directly from GEF activities. Given the 

wealth of technical expertise in the environment and energy sectors in the United States, many 
Treasury International Programs

44

American companies have been involved in GEF projects overseas. For example, a GEF grant 

of $5 million for a disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation project in the Caribbean 

involved procurement of sea level monitoring equipment and supplies from a small business in 

Tallahassee, Florida. U.S. companies from 23 states and the District of Columbia have received 

contracts to participate in GEF-backed projects. 

Meeting GEF Commitments

This request includes $10 million to catch up on GEF-6 commitments, consistent with the multiyear payment plan. The United States applied $77 million of our FY 2015 appropriations to 

fulfill the GEF-5 commitment and generate a $36 million encashment credit, resulting in a 

payment of only $60 million (or 44 percent) of the first GEF-6 installment of $136.6 million. 

The $10 million will help put GEF-6 payments back on track and will help position the United 

States to capture a $32 million encashment credit in FY 2018. Keeping current on GEF-6 

commitments will have a strong positive impact on other donors and will maintain U.S. influence 

to promote policy changes at the GEF. The United States has $135 million in unmet 

commitments from GEF-2 and $45 million in earlier commitments from GEF-6. 

U.S. annual contributions have a direct impact on how many projects can be approved by the 

GEF Council each year. Failing to make a contribution in FY 2017 may stall many projects. 

Achieving and Measuring Results

In FY 2015, the GEF Council approved a total of $1.1 billion for 130 projects covering 

biodiversity, climate change mitigation, chemicals and waste, land degradation, international 

waters, and sustainable forest management. These projects are expected to achieve the following 

results: 

• Protection and planning of 70 million hectares of productive landscapes and seascapes to 

promote both conservation and development; 

• Investments in multi-country collaborations to improve management of six shared 

freshwater systems; 

• Safe disposal of 2,700 metric tons of pesticides and reduction of more than 360 metric 

tons of mercury emissions; 

• Reduction of 460.6 million metric tons of carbon dioxide pollution; and 

• Stabilization of nine percent of globally over-exploited fisheries and encouragement of 

more sustainable levels of fishing. 

The GEF is effective at setting goals, learning from experience and measuring impact and 

success. Every four years, the GEF’s Independent Evaluation Office produces a comprehensive 

public evaluation of the previous period. These evaluations feed into the development of the 

qualitative and quantitative programming objectives for each programming area, which the GEF 

strives to meet over the four-year replenishment period. 

Project Examples

Biodiversity and Forest Conservation in the Congo. In 2011, the GEF funded an $8 million

regional project across the Congo River Basin to remove barriers to sustainable finance for the 
Treasury International Programs

45

region’s protected area system, home to the African elephant, African buffalo, okapi, bongo, 

bonobo and gorilla. The project funded trainings and seminars to build local knowledge and 

capacity, set up innovative financial systems to generate revenue for the local people, and helped 

governments put in place regulatory and legal systems to promote protected area financing. 

Through these activities, the project protected various endemic species (including those 

mentioned above), reduced illegal logging, discouraged erosion-causing land conversion, and 

mitigated environmental changes through enhanced protection of the region’s vast carbon sinks. 

Snow Leopard Conservation. In 2012, the GEF completed a $2.5 million project in 

Kazakhstan to demonstrate approaches to sustainable and replicable conservation of the snow 

leopard. The project expanded the protected area network in Kazakhstan, raised awareness of 

and support for biodiversity conservation among all stakeholders, and increased opportunities for 

alternative livelihoods for locals living in and around protected areas. Of critical importance was 

expanding capacity to respond to forest fires, a significant threat to a snow leopard habitat in 

Kazakhstan. The project constructed fire detection towers in areas that are more prone to fires, 

usually near communities; improved the local fire detection and control capacity; and established 

and trained community-based rapid response fire brigades. Best practices and lessons learned 

from this project were disseminated and replicated in other countries. 

Chemicals Management. In 2012, the GEF implemented a project in the Philippines to 

improve the health of people in small scale gold mining communities by reducing mercury 

emissions. Mercury can cause permanent damage to fetuses, resulting in miscarriages, chronic 

diseases, and developmental problems. Mercury emissions from gold mining can also travel 

long distances around the globe, contaminating the world’s fisheries and the U.S. food supply. 

Building on the Philippine government’s national plan, the project reduced mercury use in gold 

mining through the demonstration and replication of mercury reduction and elimination projects. 

Additionally, the GEF project provided trainings to local and national stakeholders on mercuryfree gold mining techniques and technologies. 
Treasury International Programs

46

Green Climate Fund

FY 2015 

Enacted

FY 2016 

Enacted

FY 2017 

Request

- - 250,000,000

Treasury is requesting $250 million for the Green Climate Fund (GCF) in FY 2017 as part of a 

combined Treasury Department and State Department request of $750 million in FY 2017. In 

2014, the United States made a multi-year pledge of $3 billion to the initial resource 

mobilization of the GCF. 

Program Description

The GCF is a multilateral trust fund designed to foster resilient, low-emission development in 

developing countries. The GCF uses a range of financial instruments to support projects across all 

sectors, including transport, water and other infrastructure, energy generation and efficiency, 

agriculture, and forestry. The GCF also helps countries mobilize private sector capital and 

strengthen policy environments. Key features of the GCF include:

 

• A dedicated Private Sector Facility (PSF). The GCF will dedicate a significant portion of 

its resources to private sector projects and mobilizing private finance. As an initial step, the 

GCF has allocated up to $700 million to competitively-selected funding proposals that will 

target two strategic objectives: 1) supporting micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises in 

developing countries that provide innovative products and services, and 2) supporting 

innovative financial structures that mobilize capital from institutional investors. 

• Broad donor base. As a core institution in the global effort to increase resilience and reduce 

emissions, the GCF is supported by a broad donor base, with $10.2 billion pledged by 46 

governments, including nine developing countries, ranging from Mexico to Mongolia, and 

four cities and provinces. The GCF will develop policies to accept contributions from 

foundations and the private sector. 

• Global reach. The GCF will work through a large network of public and private partners—

including multilateral development banks, private sector entities, non-governmental 

organizations, and government agencies—to help it reach communities in developing 

countries worldwide. The GCF’s partners or Implementing Entities are required to pass a 

comprehensive and rigorous accreditation process to ensure that their financial management, 

fiduciary standards, and environment and social safeguards meet GCF requirements. 

• Transparency. The GCF is one of the most transparent organizations of its kind. The vast 

majority of Board documents, including project proposals, are publicly available on the GCF

website, and over two hundred civil society and business organizations are accredited to view 

Board meetings live. Recordings of all Board meetings are put in the public domain after the 

proceedings. The Board includes active observers from both the private sector and civil 

society. 
Treasury International Programs

47

• Efficient setup. The GCF is an independent fund based in South Korea with the World 

Bank serving as its interim trustee, and is designed to work through a network of existing 

institutions. As such, it can maintain a relatively lean Secretariat and keep overhead costs 

low.

How the GCF Promotes U.S. Interests

Supporting the GCF advances U.S. interests in four key areas:

• Supporting national security. Climate change is a threat multiplier that can exacerbate 

existing threats to international security, such as competition for natural resources, disease, 

and civil strife. Many of the world’s poorest countries are vulnerable to conflict and 

among the most vulnerable to climate change. By enabling these countries to build 

resilience and adapt to changing weather patterns, sea level rise, and extreme events, the 

GCF will help counter security threats that otherwise could require more costly, reactive 

interventions. The GCF’s resilience investments will also help safeguard billions of dollars 

of U.S. development support in other sectors, especially health, food security, and 

infrastructure.

• Leveraging global action on climate change and clean growth. Many emerging markets 

are already among the largest emitters of greenhouse gases (GHGs), and their emissions 

are growing quickly. Enabling them to transition to cleaner energy sources and increased 

resource efficiency is essential for the success of our collective effort to keep GHG 

emissions below dangerous levels under the recent Paris Agreement on climate 

change. The GCF will help support the implementation of the recently adopted Paris 

Agreement, in which all countries commit to putting forward successive and ambitious, 

nationally determined climate targets and reporting on their progress towards them using a 

rigorous, standardized process of review.

• Developing new markets and reducing risk of economic shocks. Fast-growing 

developing economies are engines of global economic growth, and key trade and 

investment partners of the United States. By helping countries to secure needed electricity 

and increase resource efficiency, the GCF will help to develop markets that are ripe for 

U.S. export and investment. By improving resilience to extreme weather events in more 

vulnerable economies, the GCF will contribute to reducing risks of economic shocks that 

can create humanitarian crises.

• Supporting U.S. firms. In addition to opening new markets for U.S. exports and 

investment, the GCF can directly support U.S. companies that are well-placed to participate 

in the particular sectors in which it invests. For example, of the top 30 markets for U.S. 

renewable energy exports—as determined by the Commerce Department—more than half 

are eligible for GCF investments. As has occurred in other multilateral environment funds, 

the GCF is beginning to directly finance some projects that have U.S. sponsors or use U.S. 

equipment and services. 
Treasury International Programs

48

Meeting GCF Commitment

The Treasury Department and the State Department request a total of $750 million for the GCF 

in FY 2017. It is important for the United States to meet its pledge to the GCF for three key 

reasons:

• U.S. leadership. The United States currently has a GCF Board seat and is well-positioned 

to help make the GCF an effective, well-governed institution with strong fiduciary 

standards and environmental and social safeguards. Failure to meet our funding pledge

would impede U.S. efforts to significantly shape the direction of the new institution. 

• Financing the GCF pipeline. As of late 2015, the GCF had received funding proposals 

totaling $1.6 billion, and demand for GCF resources continues to grow. A lack of support 

from the United States would mean that the GCF would be less likely to prioritize and fund 

the types of projects that are U.S. priorities.

• Mobilizing other contributors. U.S. leadership in the GCF is critical to securing resources 

from other contributors. In 2016, the GCF aims to develop policies to accept contributions 

from foundations and the private sector, and U.S. leadership is key to garnering their 

support. 

Achieving and Measuring Results

The GCF results management framework includes three core indicators—emissions reductions, 

beneficiaries of resilience investments, and additional finance mobilized—plus additional 

sector-specific indicators. The GCF will continuously improve its performance by learning 

from regular results reporting as well as evaluations undertaken by its Independent Evaluation 

Unit, which reports directly to the GCF Board.

The GCF has committed $168 million to its first eight projects and programs. Although that is 

only a small fraction of what the GCF is likely to commit in 2016, the expected results from 

these projects demonstrate what the GCF is designed to do in the future. The first eight projects 

are expected to:

• Reduce cumulative emissions by 6.7 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent 

in aggregate; 

• Improve resilience of over 3.5 million individuals who are direct and indirect beneficiaries; 

and

• Help mobilize $243 million in public co-financing and $235 million in private finance. 

Project Examples

East Africa. In Rwanda, Kenya, and Ethiopia, more than 59 million people lack access to 

clean, reliable, and affordable electricity. The GCF worked with Acumen Fund—a U.S.-based 

impact investor—to establish a private equity fund that will invest in early-stage small- and 

medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in East Africa’s off-grid solar sector. The GCF is providing 

an anchor $20 million equity investment in the fund that has a $100 million target size. The 

equity fund aims to invest in SMEs that collectively will provide clean energy to 15 million 
Treasury International Programs

49

people, at least half of whom live on less than $2.50 per day, and reduce emissions by 1.5 

million metric tons of CO2 equivalent. 

Latin America and the Caribbean. Increasing energy efficiency is one of the most effective 

options for reducing emissions and boosting productivity, but a lack of available financing has 

stunted energy efficiency efforts in Latin America and the Caribbean. Led by the InterAmerican Development Bank, an energy efficiency green bond program will issue bonds 

backed by energy efficiency lending portfolios to attract a new source of finance for efficiency 

projects. Phase I will support projects in Mexico; Phase II will expand the program to 

Colombia, the Dominican Republic, and Jamaica. The GCF approved $20 million in financing 

for Phase I and a $2 million technical assistance grant to develop Phase II. The GCF may 

allocate up to $215 million in partial credit guarantees and loans to support future phases of 

this innovative financial structure. 

Malawi. Communities and farmers throughout Malawi are highly vulnerable to the impacts of 

climate change, particularly droughts. Implemented by the United Nations Development 

Programme (UNDP), a GCF project will invest in early-warning systems and boost the capacity 

of Malawi’s meteorological service to integrate climate data into its forecasts and to disseminate 

this information to vulnerable farmers and communities. The project aims to increase the 

incomes and resilience of more than three million Malawians and increase productivity in the 

agriculture and fisheries sectors. The GCF is providing a $12.3 million grant, supplemented 

with $3.8 million from UNDP and the Government of Malawi. 
Treasury International Programs

50

Central America and Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Program

FY 2015 

Enacted

FY 2016 

Enacted

FY 2017 

Request

- - 12,500,000

Treasury requests $12.5 million for a contribution to the Central America and Caribbean 

Catastrophe Risk Insurance Program multi-donor trust fund set up at the World Bank to support 

the expansion of sovereign catastrophe risk insurance coverage to Central America under the 

CCRIF Segregated Portfolio Company. 

 

Program Description

This contribution will support the provision of affordable insurance against natural disasters to as 

many as six Central American countries and the Dominican Republic, by expanding coverage 

under the CCRIF model. Established in 2007, CCRIF was designed as a regional mechanism to 

limit the financial impact of natural disasters on Caribbean governments. It is now expanding to 

provide insurance coverage to Central American countries as well. 

 

CCRIF is the world’s first multi-country risk pooling facility. It offers participating governments 

parametric insurance products, providing fast-disbursing liquidity in case they are affected by 

tropical cyclones, earthquakes, or excess rainfall of a certain magnitude. Rather than conducting

an extensive on-the-ground assessment of individual losses, CCRIF provides insurance coverage 

– called “parametric” insurance – in which payouts are made based on a pre-agreed trigger, such 

as wind speed, or the amount of loss calculated in a pre-agreed model. This approach allows 

CCRIF to settle insurance claims very quickly and provide quick cash payouts to help recipient 

governments manage the immediate aftermath of a disaster. This enables a more effective postdisaster response and reduces long-term economic damages.

 

By joining together, participating governments are able to purchase insurance at more affordable 

rates than if they approached the market individually. 

 

Donor support for the CCRIF Central American expansion is provided through a multi-donor 

trust fund housed at the World Bank. Donor funds are necessary initially to provide capital to 

make payouts as needed, purchase reinsurance, provide technical assistance, and cover necessary 

start-up costs until sufficient capital is amassed from premium payments. Over the longer term, 

participating country premiums will build capital, and the facility is expected to become selfsustaining. 

How the CCRIF Promotes U.S. Interests

Countries in Central America are highly vulnerable to natural disasters. Shocks to these 

countries, when combined with other factors, can result in security challenges for the region and 

for the United States, including the displacement of people and mass migrations. The use of 

parametric insurance can be a sustainable and cost-effective way to increase resilience in 
Treasury International Programs

51

vulnerable developing countries. In addition, by better understanding potential losses associated 

with natural disasters, governments can also plan better and institute policies that reduce risks 

over the longer term.

The CCRIF expansion to Central America is also part of the broader U.S. Government effort to 

address the root causes of poverty and insecurity that are underpinning increased migration from 

the region to the United States. The funding for the CCRIF expansion will contribute to the 

continued implementation in FY 2017 of a comprehensive whole-of-government strategy that 

aims to strengthen security, improve governance, and broaden economic prosperity in Central 

America. In response to the milestones outlined in this strategy, Central American governments 

have committed their own resources toward the implementation of related programs and reforms, 

including under the Plan of the Alliance for Prosperity in the Northern Triangle. The CCRIF 

expansion will provide a critical fiscal buffer for these governments that will help mitigate the 

disruptive impact of natural disasters on their ability to advance the strategy’s objectives.

Results and Accountability

CCRIF will report on a semi-annual basis to the World Bank on the use of grant proceeds and 

project performance. CCRIF will also provide its unaudited quarterly financial statements and 

externally audited annual financial statements to the World Bank. 

Since its inception, CCRIF has made a total of 13 payouts to eight member governments, 

amounting to approximately $38 million. For the 2014-2015 policy years, CCRIF issued 36 

annual policies to 15 Caribbean countries and made four payouts totaling $3.4 million, to three 

countries on excess rainfall policies. To ensure transparency and accountability, CCRIF 

conducts regular reporting against its strategic objectives, soliciting internal auditing services 

from independent auditors. It is also subject to ex-post assessment and evaluation by the World 

Bank. 

Project Example 

Anguilla. On October 13, 2014, Tropical Cyclone Gonzalo became a Category 1 hurricane and

hit Anguilla. Under Anguilla’s excess rainfall policy and consistent with CCRIF’s policy of 

providing payouts within two weeks of a qualifying event, CCRIF provided a payout of 

$493,465 to Anguilla two weeks later. 

Treasury International Programs

52

Technical Assistance

Office of Technical Assistance

FY 2015 

Enacted

FY 2016 

Enacted

FY 2017 

Request

23,500,000 23,500,000 33,500,000

Treasury is seeking $33.5 million for its Office of Technical Assistance (OTA), an increase of 

$10 million over the FY 2016 enacted level. The request supports a commitment made by 

Secretary Lew at the Financing for Development conference in 2015 to double OTA’s assistance 

and significantly increase U.S. Government support for Domestic Resource Mobilization (DRM) 

by 2020, helping countries to better raise and manage their own financial resources. This 

significant and critical investment will enable OTA to respond more quickly to the growing 

demand for financial technical assistance in support of U.S. foreign policy, economic 

development, and national security priorities. 

Program Description

Now in its 25th year, OTA enjoys a reputation of providing timely, expert, well-targeted, sound, 

and cost-effective technical assistance to developing and transitional countries. OTA operates in 

five core areas: helping countries build efficient revenue collection, well-planned and executed 

budgets, judicious debt management, sound banking systems, and strong controls to combat 

money laundering and other economic crimes. This work is critical for meeting broader strategic 

goals, such as private sector-led economic growth, reduction in corruption, increased 

accountability and transparency, and reduced dependence on foreign assistance. 

OTA is a small, cost-effective program that leverages a cadre of highly experienced technical 

advisors who work side-by-side with host country counterparts in central banks, finance 

ministries and financial enforcement authorities. Projects are centered on providing countries 

with the knowledge and skills required to move toward financial self-sufficiency and security —

including the capability to generate and better manage their own government finances and 

safeguard their financial system from abuse. OTA supports host-country designed, and mutually 

approved, objectives that help to safeguard scarce public resources, deliver critical services, and 

achieve other sustainable and tangible outcomes.

Since 2009, with the exception of one year, OTA’s direct appropriation has generally fluctuated

between $23 and $27 million per year. However, during this time, the demand for OTA 

assistance around the world has significantly increased. As a result, OTA is increasingly obliged 

to turn down promising requests or prematurely curtail existing projects. 
Treasury International Programs

53

OTA would use the increased budget resources in FY 2017 to initiate and expand engagements 

in support of DRM and to strengthen public financial management in those areas where OTA’s 

expertise would have the most impact, including: 

• Mobilizing domestic resources through improved tax administration and sustainable debt 

management; 

• Improving the quality and accountability of public spending through better and more 

transparent budget systems; and 

• Strengthening financial sector oversight and combating corruption and illicit finance 

flows. 

In addition, OTA would increase its investment in two economic development priorities that are 

part and parcel to the goal of mobilizing and putting to good use financial resources: financial 

inclusion and infrastructure finance. Both areas are Treasury and U.S. Government priorities 

where OTA has comparative advantages as an assistance provider and where there is strong and 

growing demand for high-quality technical assistance from countries in sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, 

Latin America, and the Middle East/North Africa. 

How OTA Promotes U.S. Interests

Treasury’s technical assistance program is one of the most cost-effective investments in 

promoting international stability, U.S. national security, the development of foreign markets for 

U.S. exports, and, in turn, U.S. job creation. Unless developing countries can exercise the core 

functions of government, including raising and marshaling their own revenues and setting the 

stage for a vibrant market economy, they will remain dependent on foreign assistance, including 

from the United States. A capable country contributes to a growing international market and 

international stability, both of which benefit the United States. 

OTA performs an important role in national security by helping countries combat financial 

crimes, money laundering, and terrorist financing, while enabling them to better fulfill their 

international commitments. OTA also performs an important public diplomacy and leadership 

role as the program works on a direct ministry-to-ministry basis, building goodwill and crossborder ties. OTA is an important investment that complements other U.S. foreign assistance, 

making such assistance more effective. For example, an OTA project that improves the 

regulatory and supervisory environment for mobile money complements other projects that focus 

on improved mobile money platforms and financial inclusion. 

Achieving and Measuring Results

OTA implements a well-crafted system to monitor and evaluate program performance, from 

project initiation, through execution, to post-project evaluation. For each project, OTA and the 

relevant foreign ministry or central bank identify the high-level aims of the engagement, which 

are reflected in signed terms of reference. The terms of reference are complemented by a

detailed work plan specifying the activities, deliverables, and timelines for achieving those goals, 

as well as the outcomes that will provide evidence that the goals have been met. In addition, 

OTA advisors provide monthly reports and trip reports to Treasury leadership and other 

stakeholders on the execution of the work plan, including progress against project objectives. 
Treasury International Programs

54

These reports are validated through ongoing dialogue with advisors coupled with on-site project 

reviews conducted by OTA management. In addition, post-project reports evaluate the results of 

completed technical assistance, and are used as a basis to improve the planning and execution of 

future projects. 

Each year OTA evaluates the level of “traction,” or the degree to which changes in partner 

governments’ behavior occur as a result of OTA assistance (e.g., the number of foreign officials 

who are taking an active role in pursuing change, or interim deliverables that are on time or 

ahead of schedule). OTA also evaluates “impact,” or the extent to which the objectives are 

actually achieved for each technical assistance project. Levels of traction and impact are 

measured by OTA advisors and headquarters staff according to specific indicators that are 

relevant to each of the five OTA core areas. For example, an evaluation of a revenue 

administration project may consider the extent to which the engagement improved the capacity 

of the partner country to audit tax returns, including in specialized sectors such as financial 

services. In the budget area, the evaluation may measure the extent to which the project helped 

to enhance transparency, accountability, and control over financial resources through the 

implementation of a new budget classification system.

Finally, OTA uses a customer survey instrument to collect information directly from country 

counterparts who have first-hand knowledge of OTA engagements. OTA monitoring and 

evaluation have consequences: projects showing results receive continued investment of OTA 

resources, while poorly performing projects, such as those where OTA’s counterparts lack

political will to implement reform, are terminated and the resources reallocated to other projects.

Project Examples

Crisis Response in Ukraine. Shortly after the fall of the Yanukovych Administration in early 

2014, the interim Ukrainian government requested Treasury technical assistance as part of the 

U.S. government’s rapid response. Over the ensuing months, OTA initiated a range of projects 

to stabilize the banking sector and strengthen government finances. One of the greatest risks 

during the transition was Ukraine’s shaky financial sector. OTA expertise was sought to help 

manage problem bank resolution and to create a more sustainable public debt portfolio. Through 

intense, intermittent engagements with senior management of the National Bank of Ukraine 

(NBU), Deposit Guarantee Fund (DGF), and Ministry of Finance (MoF) in the areas of banking 

supervision, government fiscal operations, and debt and liability management, OTA advisors 

were a key component of the broader U.S. strategy to support the Ukrainian government. While 

the Government of Ukraine still faces many financial challenges, OTA’s initial response was 

important in helping to limit the negative impact of Ukraine’s financial crisis. The response also 

laid the groundwork for a robust, ongoing Treasury technical assistance engagement aimed at 

implementing fiscal and financial sector reforms under International Monetary Fund (IMF) and 

World Bank programs, promoting economic growth, and fighting corruption. OTA has initiated 

additional engagements in Ukraine in the areas of infrastructure finance and development, 

Treasury cash management, and tax administration. OTA’s work in Ukraine is coordinated

closely with the World Bank, the IMF, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, 

and USAID. Along with these and other U.S. and international stakeholders, OTA will continue 

to be an important part of the efforts to stabilize the Ukrainian economy and implement 
Treasury International Programs

55

economic reforms with the goal of building a foundation for sustainable post-crisis economic 

growth.

Zambia Strengthens Coordination on Corruption Investigations. Improved cooperation 

brokered by OTA between the Zambia Revenue Authority’s (ZRA) internal affairs and internal 

audit units resulted in the identification by these units of the loss of significant fees that should 

have been paid to the government from transport operators. In 2014, the Zambian government’s 

internal audit unit (similar to the Government Accountability Office in the United States) 

compared records of the ZRA and of the road safety agency regarding tax certificates for 

minibus operators. A number of discrepancies were found, including issuance of certificates by 

unauthorized employees, and the loss of up to $166,000 in fees that were not turned over to the 

ZRA. The internal audit unit referred the findings to the internal affairs unit, following both 

working-level cooperation and a formal written agreement, resulting in the suspension of seven 

employees. While the amount of money at stake in this specific case is relatively small, the 

demonstration effect of a strengthened internal audit unit should pay far greater dividends in 

terms of deterring corrupt activities.

Guatemala Prosecutes Complex Money Laundering Case. In 2014, a three judge panel ruled 

that a criminal organization operating through a shell import/export company had laundered 

more than $48 million in Guatemala. The ringleader and seven other currency exchange 

operators located on the border with Mexico were sentenced to six to ten years in prison for 

money laundering. OTA had helped to strengthen the financial intelligence, analytic, and 

investigative capabilities of the Guatemalan Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), all of which 

contributed to the development of this case. OTA had also worked closely with the Public 

Ministry to help prosecutors understand and manage financial crimes cases, including how to 

utilize information from the FIU and other sources, and how to present financial crimes cases in 

court. OTA had also facilitated interagency coordination among the FIU, Public Ministry, and 

U.S. and Mexican law enforcement counterparts, to fully develop the case.

Treasury International Programs

56

Annex 1: FY 2017 Appropriations Language and Authorization 

Request

Below is a summary of proposed appropriations language and authorizations request. Brackets 

indicate proposed deletions from the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016. Italics indicate 

insertions. 

FY 2017 Appropriations Language

CONTRIBUTION TO THE INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION

For payment to the International Development Association by the Secretary of the Treasury 

[$1,197,128,000] $1,384,072,000, to remain available until expended. 

CONTRIBUTION TO THE INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND 

DEVELOPMENT

For payment to the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development by the Secretary of 

the Treasury for the United States share of the paid-in portion of the increases in capital stock, 

[$186,957,000] $5,963,421, to remain available until expended. 

CONTRIBUTION TO THE INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK

For payment to the Inter-American Development Bank by the Secretary of the Treasury for the 

United States share of the paid-in portion of the increase in capital stock, [$102,020,448] 

$21,939,727, to remain available until expended. 

CONTRIBUTION TO THE NORTH AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK

For payment to the North American Development Bank by the Secretary of the Treasury for the 

United States share of the paid-in portion of the increase in capital stock, [$10,000,000] 

$45,000,000, to remain available until expended. 

LIMITATION ON CALLABLE CAPITAL SUBSCRIPTIONS

The Secretary of the Treasury may subscribe without fiscal year limitation to the callable capital 

portion of the United States share of such capital stock in an amount not to exceed $255,000,000.

CONTRIBUTION TO THE ASIAN DEVELOPMENT FUND 

For payment to the Asian Development Bank’s Asian Development Fund by the Secretary of the 

Treasury, [$104,977,000] $99,233,000, to remain available until expended. 

CONTRIBUTION TO THE AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK 

For payment to the African Development Bank by the Secretary of the Treasury for the United 

States share of the paid-in portion of the increase in capital stock, [$34,118,027] $32,418,000, to 

remain available until expended. 
Treasury International Programs

57

LIMITATION ON CALLABLE CAPITAL SUBSCRIPTIONS

The United States Governor of the African Development Bank may subscribe without fiscal year 

limitation to the callable capital portion of the United States share of such capital stock in an 

amount not to exceed $507,860,808. 

CONTRIBUTION TO THE AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT FUND

For payment to the African Development Fund by the Secretary of the Treasury [$175,668,000] 

$214,332,000, to remain available until expended. 

GLOBAL AGRICULTURE AND FOOD SECURITY PROGRAM

For payment to the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program by the Secretary of the 

Treasury [$43,000,000] $23,000,000, to remain available until expended. 

CONTRIBUTION TO THE INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR AGRICULTURAL 

DEVELOPMENT

For payment to the International Fund for Agricultural Development by the Secretary of the 

Treasury [$31,930,000] $30,000,000, to remain available until expended. 

CONTRIBUTION TO THE GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITY

For payment to the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development as trustee for the 

Global Infrastructure Facility by the Secretary of the Treasury, $20,000,000, to remain available 

until expended. 

GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY

For payment to the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development as trustee for the 

Global Environment Facility by the Secretary of the Treasury, [$168,263,000] $146,563,000, to 

remain available until expended. 

GREEN CLIMATE FUND

For payment to the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development as trustee for the 

Green Climate Fund by the Secretary of the Treasury, $250,000,000, to remain available until 

expended. 

CONTRIBUTION FOR CENTRAL AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN CATASTROPHE 

RISK INSURANCE PROGRAM 

For payment to the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development as trustee for the 

Central America and Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Program multi-donor trust fund by 

the Secretary of the Treasury, for the support of catastrophe risk insurance and related technical 

assistance for CCRIF Segregated Portfolio Company participating countries, $12,500,000, to 

remain available until expended. 
Treasury International Programs

58

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of section 129 of the Foreign Assistance Act 

of 1961, [$23,500,000] $33,500,000, to remain available until September 30, [2018] 2019, which 

shall be available notwithstanding any other provisions of law. 

FY 2017 Authorization Request

NORTH AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK GENERAL CAPITAL INCREASE

NORTH AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK

SEC.___. (a) Part 2 of subtitle D of title V of Public Law 103–182, as amended (22 U.S.C. 290m 

et seq.), is further amended by adding at the end thereof the following new section: 

"Sec. 547. First Capital Increase. 

“(a) Subscription Authorized.— 

“(1) The Secretary of the Treasury may subscribe on behalf of the United States to 150,000 

additional shares of the capital stock of the Bank. 

“(2) Any subscription by the United States to the capital stock of the Bank shall be effective only 

to such extent and in such amounts as are provided in advance in appropriations Acts. 

“(b) Limitations on Authorization of Appropriations.— 

“(1) In order to pay for the increase in the United States subscription to the Bank under 

subsection (a), there are authorized to be appropriated, without fiscal year limitation, 

$1,500,000,000 for payment by the Secretary of the Treasury. 

“(2) Of the amount authorized to be appropriated under paragraph (1)— 

“(A) $225,000,000 shall be for paid in shares of the Bank; and 

“(B) $1,275,000,000 shall be for callable shares of the Bank.”.