Ciliwung River Cleanup

USAID's logo wasn't meant to be there but they already printed the banners.

The Ciliwung River is 97 km (60 miles) long and flows through from the mountains through much of Jakarta.  This river has a reputation for being one of the most polluted in the world and is filled with industrial and agricultural runoff, pollution, and waste.  Many urban poor have unofficial settlements and housing near the banks of the river and use the river for household purposes, bathing, trash disposal, and even drinking.  The pollution of the river is also a contributor to the river's frequent flooding which occurs annually during the rainy season.

Since coming to Indonesia, I've been working with the the Embassy's Green Team on various activities to lessen the negative environmental impact of the US Embassy community but also work with the external community to to improve the environment.  Timed near Earth Day on April 27th, we teamed up with a local NGO and community organizations to organize a river cleanup event to raise awareness and attempt to kick-start the government and community to take action in managing the health of the river and demonstrate the US Government's commitment to environmental stewardship.

The Ambassador speaking at the start of the event.

US Ambassador Blake joined the Green Team in the cleanup adventure as we rafted down several kilometers picking up trash along the banks.  Since many of the people living along the river were doing so unofficially, they had little to no access to public services.  Thus, the river served as their source of water as well their location for waste disposal.  Even as we were rafting by picking up trash from the river, we could see people throwing garbage bags into the water.  The problem is complicated since public services can't be provided to people who shouldn't be living there in the first place so alternative housing would have to be found to even begin moving people.  Definitely a long term effort but I believe we at least put more attention to the issue in the media and received positive press.

Community unites to clear garbage from Ciliwung River (Jakarta Post)
Pemerintah AS Beri Perhatian Serius atas Kondisi Sungai Ciliwung (VOA)

Shanty housing under the train tracks.

That's actually plastic hanging from the trees.

More unofficial housing settlements.

A traditional raft and rope used to cross the river.

Local community observing by a trash heap.

Aceh

Aceh, believed to be the area of the spread of Islam in Indonesia, it was also home to the Free Aceh Movement striving for independence.  More recently, it became a location of great international interest following the earthquake and tsunami of 2004 in which an estimated 170,000 people perished. 

Following the tsunami of 2004, Aceh received much assistance from the international community, including from USAID.  The largest investment from USAID was the reconstruction of the Aceh road which links the city with many of their natural resource production areas.  Other investments include the Aceh Polytechnic college which was funded jointly by private-public sector partnership with corporations and USAID.  Today, much of the development assistance has ended with efforts going to other areas.

Islam is very widely practiced in Aceh and the province is occasionally heard in the news as the one province in Indonesia which incorporates Sharia law in legal administration.  The area is sometimes mentioned every so often also for discriminatory or extremist laws or regulations being brought up by local administrations.  However, from just my short time there, life appeared similar to any other smaller town in Indonesia.

I had the opportunity to take my first field trip since joining USAID for a short 3 day trip to Banda Aceh as we accompanied an implementing partner in conducting a survey on banking inclusion and credit access for often under served populations in Indonesia.  For this stage of the survey, we went to banks and credit unions (cooperatives) in the area to interview about their lending practices and the clients whom they serve. 

Banda Aceh's Sultan Iskandar Muda Airport

The interviews were an interesting and daunting exercise of my Indonesian language abilities.  Thankfully, I was with some good Indonesian colleagues that helped with debriefings going over the day's interviews to make sure I was able to capture everything that was discussed.  I also had the chance to discuss project implementation with the implementing partner as a sub-grantee to better understand and learn about the challenges in implementation and develop some ideas and things to consider for the future.

Following this trip, I believe I do need to definitely try to make time to get out to the field more often.  I learned much about this particularly part of the project and developed a lot of understanding on the survey's topic which can greatly help in deciding direction for where this project or future projects should target and consider.  I also learned a lot about how current development projects are implemented and have several ideas on different ways things could be done and some of the problems for how things are implemented today.  And finally, it was nice to be able to see for the first time the results of what our development projects are funding beyond the paperwork.

Below, some pictures of the places we were able to visit and sites we were able to see during the evenings.

This ship was originally used for power generation before the tsunami. The ship was dislocated 3 miles (5 km) from the ocean where it now sits.

This is a displaced fishing boat the landed on a house during the tsunami.

This is the largest mosque in Banda Aceh.

The US-Indonesia Aceh road.

Aceh Polytechnic

Aceh Polytechnic was jointly funded.  Large amounts came from Chevron and USAID.

Trying some famous Aceh coffee.

A Values Based Foreign Policy

  

This week, the USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah hosted an All-Hands with Deputy Administrator Donald Steinberg to showcase various initiatives and innovations going on in the Agency and address any employee concerns or questions.

The event began with the Shah giving an opening address where he said that the U.S. is a nation of values and USAID must serve as the face of America abroad.
That USAID's core is a "values based" foreign policy.  I thought this was an interesting perspective of the role of the US's humanitarian assistance and development assistance strategy.

This got me thinking to two things: one, what are the US's values, and two, how do US values relate to the efforts of USAID?

U.S. foreign assistance has always had the twofold purpose of furthering America's interests while improving lives in the developing world. USAID carries out U.S. foreign policy by promoting broad-scale human progress at the same time it expands stable, free societies, creates markets and trade partners for the United States, and fosters good will abroad." (USAID - Who We Are)

Late last year, Thomas Nides, Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources, wrote an opinion piece in Politico titled "Pursuing U.S. values and self-interest".  In this piece, he mentions various examples of the U.S. exercising a value based diplomacy with examples in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya.  In Tunisia and Egypt, he explains how we work to support open governments that respect the rights and voices of its people as well as stability and conditions that may become economic and national security opportunities for the U.S.  And in Libya, he talks about how we provide support to local institutions and civil society groups in advocating for less corruption and free political speech. 

We don’t spend money on diplomacy and development just to feel good about ourselves. We fight hunger, stop oppression, prevent global pandemics and respond to crises abroad, because that is the most cost-effective way to enhance U.S. national security – to protect America and the American people – and to create jobs here at home. It has the additional benefit of also being the right thing to do. (Thomas Nides, Pursuing U.S. values and self-interest)

So an interesting exercise is to then try to understand what American values are and how those are conveyed in the programs that we do.  Really, foreign assistance is a very interesting strategy for implementing foreign policy.  It's not just helping others abroad, but providing real benefits to the U.S. while showcasing values of America.  Foreign assistance is such a useful instrument in foreign policy that traditional recipients of assistance are now moving to becoming donors to take advantage, as indicated by India working to setup its own foreign assistance agency.  Nides ends the piece stating that with foreign assistance, "Our national values, moral compass and self-interest are all perfectly aligned."

Besides just thoughts on the opening remarks at the All-Hands, presentations were given from various Bureaus on new alliances and initiatives they were working on.  Notably, there were several newer people to USAID that shared their experiences of being with the Agency so far and the importance of being proactive in taking on responsibilities and ownership in work, and not to be afraid to suggest new ways to do things or implement our programs.  It was a common theme to push through bureaucracy to bring about better ways of doing things as that will be the best way of bringing the Agency forward. 

One interesting question that Shah and Steinberg addressed was "when was the Agency going to stop adding additional initiatives so that the work could be actually done?"  They addressed the question saying that they don't see these as new initiatives or work, but rather see them as better or different ways of doing work and bringing a focus to specific programs versus being too spread out and diverse.

In terms of the Agency's current efforts to seek new ways of doing programs and to take every effort to ensure sustainability and capacity building, I really agree with Shah.  If we are truly influencing and changing conditions in the places we operate, it must be sustainable, and if the status-quo isn't working, let's find a different way.  And in terms of initiatives like Feed-the-Future or early child-care health, it's really just outlining the focus areas for where U.S. foreign policy is hoping to make an impact.  All programs can bring about meaningful benefits, but to really make a measurable contribution, we need to focus our efforts on specific objectives. 

I met with the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Asia a few weeks ago to discuss Indonesia and he mentioned how the Mission will soon be working to setup its strategy for the country.  He said to consider a way to think about the objectives in terms of leaving a legacy and what impact the U.S. would want to be able to take credit for and where we could make the most difference.  I think that's how we might really need to approach all of high-level strategic planning, when feasible.

The past month

 Been very busy since departing language training.  Finished Indonesian with my test on a Thursday, ran around the office to complete my annual evaluation, and then departed to Thailand for a rotation in the Regional Development Mission for Asia.

This rotation will last a month and a half a will be a great experience to get to understand the operations of a regional mission as well as just how USAID operates outside of DC.  So far, my impressions have been pretty positive.  The office is pretty friendly and it's interesting having the the added dynamic of the mix of cultures on a daily basis having both US staff and local staff.  It's always interesting to ask people where they've been posted to before, talk to the local staff about Bangkok, and adapt to the new location and people.

However, working here seems like the office environment of any other.  People come to work and go home to families afterward.  Perhaps its the fact of being a fairly large mission in lively city environment.  Before arriving, I had this idea of an environment of a close, tight-knit embassy community where life revolves around the embassy activities and events.  I think that type of environment exists only in the small missions in much more remote locations.  Not that I don't mind the city environment, it's just a very different reality than what I originally thought.  I'm very curious to find out the environment in Jakarta.

It also makes me think I'll want to try an assignment in a small Mission in the future.  I think it would be a very interesting experience.  But then again, it really depends on who your colleagues will be as that will always make or break it.

The work has been interesting.  Different yet similar to that of Washington.  Similar in that contracting and grants pretty much will always abide by the same rules and procedures no matter where you go.  Different in that the awards are smaller, though still not that small, and there is more chance of providing awards to local organizations rather the typical large international NGO's or development companies.  Perhaps it's that the RDMA is regional, but a lot of the tenets of USAID Forward are still difficult to achieve in working closely with local organizations since USAID doesn't really do much in terms of bilateral assistance to Thailand.  Much of the work is support to other Missions or to non-presence countries (places where USAID doesn't have a Mission).  I think the work will be even more different in a bilateral Mission.

The type of work I'm really looking for is to do more of small grants with local organizations.  I want to do the time consuming work of walking new organizations through the US grant process, developing their capabilities as an organization, and really allow the places we work to gain the capabilities to make a difference.  An interesting blog post at AidSpeak speculates about the need for a fundamental rethinking of how international development is performed.  While I really have no idea what the best solution is, I think USAID is really taking the right steps in moving away, at least somewhat, from the large contracts and grants to the biggest players in this field of work that has been done over and over.  I think America's interests can best be achieved through the more focused efforts of development that USAID is working to achieve.

At one of the Bangkok temples.

In the meantime, I'm hoping to get out of Bangkok at least once to one of the many beaches at least one weekend.  Though I'm not really a beach or outdoorsy person, it would be a shame if I came back and said I didn't visit any.  Also, I plan to try some of the many varieties of foods while here.  Bangkok has pretty much every type of cuisine you can imagine.  Malls are filled with restaurants galore.  There's also a "4D" movie experience that I've heard about and hope to find the time to try.

Pork patty with spinach and curry sauce.

More curry!  Omelet over rice in curry sauce with beef.

Fried rice with egg on top.  In Indonesian, it's called nasi goreng dan mata sapi.

Tom yum soup with shrimp.

Understanding Foreign Assistance Part 1: Why does the US participate?

Foreign assistance from the US is part of the foreign policy strategy.  The foreign policy strategy is derived at a high-level from a document called the National Security Strategy.  And from this, we have 3 key documents on foreign assistance in US.  All of these are developed jointly with the Department of State. 

The State/USAID Strategic Plan is formulated every 5 years.

The QDDR is a 2010 review of State Department and USAID operations and review for priority improvements for the future.

The CBJ for Foreign Operations is the proposed budget for State and USAID.

USAID's Goals for foreign assistance are then:

1. Transformation Development
• USAID works to support far-reaching institutional changes of governance, health and human services, education, and economic growth.  All striving to build capacity to sustain progress.
2. Strengthening Fragile States
• Poverty, weak institutions, and corruption can weaken states.  Failed states can lead to the prevalence of terrorism or drug trafficking ultimately impacting the security of the United States.
3. Supporting US Geostrategic Goals
• Foreign Assistance is a leveraging instrument with US partners, but more than that, it's a method to help move partners to becoming more stable, prosperous, and democratic societies.  This can result in new allies and new trade partners as well.
4. Addressing Transnational Problems
• There are many global issues that can only be managed through collective efforts.  For these issues, no single country could bring the resources and clout necessary to adequately address them.  USAID thus seeks partnerships and cooperation on such issues like infectious diseases, international trade, criminal activities, and trafficking in persons.
5. Providing Humanitarian Relief
• Foreign assistance is a way to show the generosity and compassion of the American people.  It is a way for the US to assist in crises around the world such recent events such as the Japanese Earthquake, the Bangkok floods, or the drought in East Africa.

From the above, foreign assistance is a powerful tool in US foreign policy to fulfill numerous objectives of US strategic interest.  Working for USAID, it is important to understand the picture on the how/why the organization does what it does.  It is also good to know that by doing the job well, helping other people around the world achieve health, prosperity, and freedom, we are meeting the foreign policy objectives.

CFO/OAA Conference

Last week, I was able to make it out for bit to the CFO/OAA joint conference.  Much of the conference was in regard to implementing procurement reform and the USAID Forward initiatives.  It was a very good conference and I was excited to see the initiative still very much alive and progressing.  Many sessions dealt with best practices for implementation as well as brain-storming/sharing sessions on lessons learned in the field and understanding the challenges and roadblocks.

One of the best parts about the conference was the opportunity to meet many of the FSO's from the Missions overseas as well as reunite with colleagues from my DLI class who are already at post.  I had the opportunity to meet colleagues and supervisors whom I will be working with in my onward assignments which is invaluable IMO to be able to meet people in person.

Not sure if another conference will be able to be held next year due to the many government budgetary pressures which is a shame since I think it was so useful.

In other news, a State colleague picked up some fun lapel pins for me from Main State.

Language Midpoint, CO Conference, Development

Language training continues.  Reached the mid-point of my training and everyone had their first progress test.  I'm doing well and on-track to finish in early February.  The test was similar to the final assessment in that there was a large speaking component and exercises in discussing at length various topics.  However, they also used a written test as well for the progress test, whereas in the final exam, there will only be speaking and reading components.

In December, I'm hoping to take a day off from training in order to attend the Controller/Contracting Officer Conference.  In this conference, Finance Officers and Contracting Officers will gather to attend sessions on the further execution of Procurement Reform and other pertinent topics related to our field.  I hope to gain some insight into the execution of direct government transfers as well as learn more about successfully awarding directly to small, local NGOs in the field.  Also, the conference should be a good opportunity to get to meet Officers from all over the world, particularly my future supervisors and colleagues with whom I'll be working with once I go to post.

Aside from the above, I've also been reading a lot of blogs on development work.  A lot of blogs on this area tends to be cynical of their work and its effects.  It has also made me consider my role in USAID as well as how development work is done.  I feel that, as an FSO, it's best to concentrate on the two main objectives of USAID being that, first and foremost, the work we do is to further the US's foreign policy, and second, to fulfill the humanitarian goals of the American people.  Foreign assistance will always have political undertones that mean to benefit the donor country, we just need to work hard to ensure it will always benefit the receiving country as well.  Thus by helping other countries, the US is also helping itself.

I also now tend to believe that real change really only comes through governmental reform.  Despite the efforts of for-profit development companies, international NGO's, or local NGO's, governmental change is the real key to creating sustainable, beneficial change for the citizens thereof.  I mean, in cases of societal dissatisfaction and bringing about change, the main objective is usually to bring about some governmental reform (either in governance/leadership, regulation, policy, etc). 

This leads me to believe that the priority of change agents for countries are (from greatest to least):
<< internal government reform - local NGO's - international NGO's - for-profit development companies >>
This priority listing can even be thought of the priority sourcing list the US government uses in the FAR for supplies and services being to first review internal agency capabilities, then other agencies, and so on until lastly, looking outside at commercial sources.  So really, in so many cases, are contractors the only source for the work they do (caveat, this hyperlink article is definitely written by a lobbyist) or is that just the nature of how government work is now so much contracted out?

So I think, that where possible, by providing direct investment into partner governments to bolster, say, education, this would have to greatest affect in improving that target area since the partner government will gain the ability and skill to manage these programs.  FSO's can then work directly with the receiving partner government to implement that program.

This model just sounds so much better than the continuous contracting to an expat organization to send so many people to that country to do some work, maybe hold a seminar or two and call that capacity building, and leave with no real sustainable change and half of the assistance funds going to those companies and not the societies USAID wants to impact.  It reminds me of the trickle-down theory whereas by giving money to the wealthy, it'll eventually reach the intended target.  It'll be interesting to get to the field and really start to see and understand how things work to then be able to begin pondering better ways that things can be done.

And yes, I hyper-linked an excessive amount in this posting on the development stuff but there was just a lot of interesting discussion out there on this subject.

Administrator Shah with Liberian President Sirleaf

USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah, Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, and USAID Chief Economist Steve Radelet

On Friday, I attended a Development Forum event featuring a discussion between the USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah with the President of Liberia Ellen Johnson Sirleaf.

This was a great event and opportunity to learn about the development challenges and successes in Liberia and Africa.  President Sirleaf gave a brief history of some of the struggles Liberia has gone through in the past three decades and then spoke of how far they have come.

In terms of development assistance, she mentioned the need for direct foreign assistance into host country systems.  Essentially, this means we provide funding directly into the host countries Ministry budget to support their programs and operations.  USAID would then provide some stipulations and guidance on using that funding.  So it would be like another government giving our Department of Education funding to increase teachers and training, or something like that.  The idea behind this is that in countries where the host government systems are capable of managing this assistance money, then investing in their systems and government would then be a more effective way to build their own capacity and develop their countries.

On Thursday, I attended a discussion with the Mission Director of Tanzania Robert Cunnane.  He mentioned that USAID's push to do more direct assistance, like what President Sirleaf suggested, was how many other development programs of other countries used to be done while USAID in the past preferred implementing and controlling our own programs.  And now, other donor countries have begun moving the other way and now USAID is switching.  The controversy behind this type of foreign assistance is that it's difficult sometimes to trace exactly how funding is used (making it more difficult to show the development outcomes to Congress or your home constituents) and you must be able to have good confidence in the host country.  So this has to be carefully implemented but the sustainable impact can be much more profound when done right.

Another intriguing comment that President Sirleaf said was that a goal she has set for Liberia was graduating from any foreign assistance in 10 years and becoming a "middle income" country in 20 years.  Liberia still is a relatively impoverished nation but I find it inspiring that they are taking stretch goals to improve.  I think it would be fantastic if they truly can achieve foreign assistance independence in the time frame she set.