# State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3AR41228

## Record

- **Collection:** Congressional research report
- **Document type:** CRS Report
- **Published:** April 22, 2011
- **Citation:** R41228

## Text

State, Foreign Operations, and Related
Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations
Marian Leonardo Lawson
Analyst in Foreign Assistance
(name redacted)
Specialist in Foreign Policy
(name redacted)
Analyst in Foreign Affairs
April 22, 2011

Congressional Research Service
7-....
www.crs.gov
R41228

CRS Report for Congress
Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Summary
The annual State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs appropriations bill has been the
primary legislative vehicle through which Congress reviews the U.S. international affairs budget
and influences executive branch foreign policy making in recent years, as Congress has not
regularly considered these issues through a complete authorization process for State Department
diplomatic activities since 2003 and for foreign aid programs since 1985. Funding for Foreign
Operations and State Department/Broadcasting programs has been steadily rising since FY2002,
after a period of decline in the 1980s and 1990s. Ongoing assistance to Iraq and Afghanistan, as
well as large new global health programs and rapidly increasing assistance to Pakistan, has kept
the international affairs budget at historically high levels in recent years. The change of
Administration in 2009 did not disrupt this trend. However, increasing concern about the federal
budget deficit and accountability for funds already provided has halted this growth in FY2011.
On February 1, 2010, President Obama submitted a budget proposal for FY2011 that requested
$58.68 billion for the international affairs budget, a 3% increase over the enacted FY2010
funding level, including supplementals. If $1.8 billion in “forward funding” of FY2010 priorities
appropriated in FY2009 supplemental legislation is counted toward FY2010 rather than FY2009
totals, as it was by the Administration, and the enacted FY2010 supplemental is factored in, the
FY2011 request would represent a slight decrease from FY2010-enacted levels.
This report focuses only on the $56.82 billion requested for programs and activities funded
through the State-Foreign Operations appropriations bill, which excludes some portions of the
International Affairs request and includes funding for certain commissions requested as part of
other budget functions. The Administration requested significant increases for Global Health and
Child Survival, Development Assistance, technical assistance and debt restructuring through the
Treasury Department, Foreign Military Financing, and various multilateral environmental
accounts. Programs for which the Administration recommended significantly reduced funding,
compared with enacted FY2010 levels, are contributions to international organizations,
commissions and foundations, and peacekeeping operations.
The House State-Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee approved a draft FY2011 bill
on June 30, which totaled $52.81 billion. On the Senate side, the full Appropriations Committee
marked up and approved its FY2011 State-Foreign Operations bill, S. 3676, on July 27, totaling
$54.22 billion. Neither bill progressed further, however, and State Department and Foreign
Operations activities, along with all federal programs, have been funded since October 1, 2010,
through a series of continuing resolutions. On April 14, 2011, the House and Senate approved
H.R. 1473, legislation embodying an agreement between the Administration and House and
Senate leaders to fund the government for the remainder of FY2011. Signed into law on April 15,
2011, H.R. 1473 (P.L. 112-10) funds State and Foreign Operations accounts at $48.98 billion.
This report analyzes the FY2011 request, recent-year funding trends, and congressional action
related to FY2011 State-Foreign Operations legislation.

Congressional Research Service

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Contents
Continuing Resolution ................................................................................................................1
Past Year Developments ..............................................................................................................2
House Legislation .................................................................................................................3
Senate Legislation.................................................................................................................4
State-Foreign Operations Overview.............................................................................................6
Background and Trends.........................................................................................................7
Use of Supplemental and Forward Funding .....................................................................8
FY2011 Budget Request............................................................................................................ 10
FY2011 Budget Request: State Department and Related Programs ...................................... 11
Key State Department Issues ......................................................................................... 13
FY2011 Budget Request: Foreign Operations ...................................................................... 14
Top 10 U.S. Foreign Aid Recipient Countries ................................................................ 15
Regional Distribution .................................................................................................... 16
Sector Distribution ........................................................................................................ 17
Key Foreign Operations Issues ...................................................................................... 19

Figures
Figure 1. State-Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY2001-FY2011 ..........................................7
Figure 2. FY2011 State-Foreign Operations Request Compared to Various
Representations of FY2010 and FY2009 Appropriations ..........................................................9
Figure 3. Composition of the State-Foreign Operations Budget Request, FY2011 ...................... 10
Figure 4. Graphic Representation of the FY2011 Request for State, Foreign Operations,
and Related Programs, by Major Accounts ............................................................................. 11
Figure 5. State Department and Related Programs Appropriations, FY2001-FY2011 ................. 12
Figure 6. Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY2001-FY2011................................................. 15
Figure 7. Regional Distribution of Foreign Aid, FY2009-FY2011 Request ................................ 17

Tables
Table 1. Status of State-Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY2011 ...........................................3
Table 2. State-Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY2001-FY2011............................................6
Table 3. State Department and Related Programs Appropriations, FY2001-FY2011................... 12
Table 4. Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY2001-FY2011 .................................................. 15
Table 5. Top 10 Recipients of U.S. Foreign Aid in FY2010, FY2011 Request ............................ 16
Table 6. Selected Sector Funding, FY2010 Request and FY2011 Request .................................. 18
Table C-1. State Department and Related Programs Appropriations, FY2010-FY2011 ............... 24
Table D-1. Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY2010-FY2011 .............................................. 27
Table E-1. International Affairs (150) Budget Account, FY2010-FY2011 .................................. 31
Congressional Research Service

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Appendixes
Appendix A. Structure of State-Foreign Operations Appropriations ........................................... 22
Appendix B. Abbreviations ....................................................................................................... 23
Appendix C. State Department and Related Programs Appropriations........................................ 24
Appendix D. Foreign Operations Appropriations ....................................................................... 27
Appendix E. International Affairs (150) Budget Account ........................................................... 31

Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 32
Key Policy Staff........................................................................................................................ 32
Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................... 34

Congressional Research Service

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Continuing Resolution
Congress has passed a series of continuing resolutions (CRs) to fund government programs since
FY2011 began on October 1, 2010. In the meantime, the House and Senate majority leadership
each proposed comprehensive legislation, H.R. 1 and Senate Amendment #149 to H.R. 1,
respectively, to fund the government for the remainder of FY2011. Both proposals were rejected
by the Senate on March 9, 2011. Ensuing negotiations between the Administration and House and
Senate leaders resulted in an agreement that was introduced in the House on April 11 as H.R.
1473. The legislation became P.L. 112-10, approved by the House and Senate on April 14 and
signed by the President on April 15.
P.L. 112-10 establishes FY2011 funding levels for State Department and Foreign Operations
accounts at a total annual rate of $48.98 billion.1 This represents a 14% decrease from the
Administration’s FY2011 request, and an 11% decrease from the total FY2010-enacted
appropriation, including supplementals. The legislation had no accompanying report and provides
limited details about country-level funding. The legislation directs the Administration to report
back to Congress in 30 days on how it proposes to allocate the appropriated funds at the program,
project, and activity level.
State Department and Foreign Operations highlights of P.L. 112-10 include the following:
•

The State Department appropriation for Administration of Foreign Affairs, at
$11.41 billion, is a 9% cut from the FY2010 total enacted level, but slightly
higher than the pre-supplemental funding level. Within this title, Diplomatic and
Consular Programs are cut 8% from the total FY2010-enacted level, including
supplementals, the Embassy Security, Construction and Maintenance account is
cut by 10%, and Educational and Cultural Exchange programs are cut 6%. The
legislation also terminates overseas comparability pay adjustment for foreign
service officers.

•

The legislation provides $747 million for International Broadcasting, including
$10 million provided specifically to fight Internet access restrictions.

•

U.S. Institute of Peace funding is cut 20% from the total enacted FY2010 level,
to $39.4 million.

•

USAID receives $1.66 billion for administrative accounts, an 8% reduction from
FY2010.

•

Bilateral economic assistance is funded at $25.03 billion, a 15% reduction from
the total FY2010-enacted level. The Global Health & Child Survival and

1
This figure reflects CRS calculation of the 0.2% rescission across all non-defense accounts for FY2011 funds, in
accordance with sec. 1119(a) of P.L. 112-10. It does not reflect rescissions of prior year funding, which do not affect
agency funding levels in FY2011. Prior year rescissions in the legislation total $645.9 million. Some House
Appropriations Committee documents subtract this amount from the new budget authority in the bill to show a net total
of $48.3 billion. These rescissions are from the following accounts: Buying Power and Maintenance - $17 million;
Diplomatic and Consular Programs - $55 million; Immigration and Nationality Act funds - $140 million; ExportImport Bank - $17 million; Development Assistance - $1 million; Assistance to Former Soviet States - $11.7 million;
International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement - $7.2 million; Economic Support Fund - $120 million;
Assistance to Europe, Eurasia and Central Asia - $19 million.

Congressional Research Service

1

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Development Assistance accounts remain level with the FY2010-enacted total, at
$7.83 billion and $2.52 billion, respectively. Cuts in this title come primarily
from strategic assistance accounts: Economic Support Fund is cut by 33% from
FY2010 total enacted to $5.95 billion, while the Assistance to Europe, Eurasia
and Central Asia account is cut 6%, to $696 million. International Disaster and
Famine Assistance, at $863 million, is 34% less than the total enacted FY2010
level, but slightly higher than the pre-supplemental funding level.
•

Among independent agencies, the Millennium Challenge Corporation receives
just under $900 million, a 19% cut from the FY2010-enacted level, while Peace
Corps funding, at just under $375 million, is cut 6% from the prior-year level.

•

Security assistance is reduced 2% overall from the total FY2010-enacted level,
including supplemental funding. The International Narcotics Control and Law
Enforcement account is cut by 43% from the FY2010 total, to $1.60 billion
(consistent with FY2010 pre-supplemental funding), while the Foreign Military
Finance account increases by 25% to $5.37 billion. No foreign operations
funding is provided for the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund, though
$800 million for a similar fund is included under the Department of Defense
section of the legislation.

•

Multilateral assistance is reduced 13% from FY2010 total enacted levels,
including supplementals. U.S. contributions to environmental funds are
particularly hard hit, including a 38% cut to the International Clean Technology
Fund, to $185 million, and a 33% cut to the Strategic Climate Fund, at $50
million. The Asian Development Bank receives no funding in the legislation, and
funds for the African Development Fund are reduced 29%, to about $110 million.

•

The legislation provides not less that $575 million for family
planning/reproductive health programs, a major point of contention during
negotiations, and further states that $40 million should be made available for the
U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA) under the International Organizations and
Programs (IO&P) account.

Past Year Developments
On February 1, 2010, the Obama Administration submitted its FY2011 budget request to
Congress, together with a request for supplemental FY2010 funding for foreign operations
activities. Later that month, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified before the House Foreign
Affairs Committee and Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and before each chamber’s StateForeign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee. Hearings on aspects of the international affairs
budget request were held throughout March and April 2010.
On April 22, 2010, the Senate Budget Committee passed a budget resolution recommending $4
billion less than the Administration requested for the International Affairs account, prompting
strong objections by foreign aid advocates, including a letter signed by all living former
Secretaries of State urging Congress to fully fund the Administration’s request.2
2
The letter is accessible at http://www.usglc.org/USGLCdocs/
Secretaries%20of%20State%20Letter%20to%20Congress%20April%202010.pdf.

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

On July 15 and July 20, 2010, respectively, the Senate and House approved FY2011 discretionary
funding allocations for each appropriations subcommittee, enabling work on appropriations
legislation to move forward in the absence of a budget resolution. For State and Foreign
Operations, the House allocation is $53.9 billion and the Senate allocation is $54.0 billion.
On July 29, 2010, the President signed into law (P.L. 111-212) the FY2010 supplemental, which
provides about $6.1 billion to the Department of State and Foreign Operations funding, largely
for State Department operations and foreign aid to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, and Haiti.
Table 1. Status of State-Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY2011
Subcomittee Markup
House

Senate

6/30/10

Full Committee
House

Floor

Senate

House

Senate

7/27/10
(S.Rept. 111327)

4/14/2011

4/14/2011

Public Law
Signed
4/15/2011
(P.L. 112-10)

House Legislation
On June 30, the House State-Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee marked up and
approved, by voice vote, a draft FY2011 funding bill. The measure would have provide $52.81
billion, $4 billion less than the Obama Administration request and $2.3 billion less than the
enacted FY2010 funding level. While funding tables from the draft were made available, the text
was not. Funding levels by account can be found in Appendix C and Appendix D. A press
release3 from the subcommittee following the bill’s passage highlighted, among others, that the
bill—

3

•

Did not allocate the $3.9 billion requested by the Administration for Afghanistan,
in keeping with Chairwoman Lowey’s June 28 statement that the subcommittee
would not appropriate funds to Afghanistan until recent reports of aid being
diverted out of the country by corrupt officials have been adequately
investigated. 4 The subcommittee requested that GAO audit all U.S. assistance to
Afghanistan for FY2008-FY2010, and included funds in the bill for a Special
Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction to establish a task force on
corruption.

•

For Pakistan, recommended $2.51 billion in assistance.

•

For Iraq, included $351 million to support the transition of security forces
training from military to civilian management.

•

Fully funded commitments to Israel, Egypt, and Jordan.

•

Recommended $735 million, or $20 million more than requested, for family
planning services, but did not change any provisions of law restricting funds to
organizations that provide abortions or advocate for abortion rights.

Available at http://appropriations.house.gov/images/stories/pdf/sfo/Lowey_Opening_Statement.6.30.10.pdf.
See Matthew Rosenberg, “Corruption Suspected in Airlift of Billions in Cash from Kabul,” The Wall Street Journal,
June 25, 2010.
4

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

•

Provided $825 million for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and
Malaria, which was $125 million above the Administration request.

•

Included $1 billion for food security and agricultural development, or 38% less
than the Administration request.

•

Recommended $1.34 billion for bilateral and multilateral activities to protect the
environment and address global climate change.

•

Recommended $925 million for basic education programs, with an emphasis on
providing alternatives to madrassas, which is almost 10% more than requested.

•

Matched the Administrations request of $446.2 million for the Peace Corps,
which is a 12% increase over the FY2010 funding.

Senate Legislation
On July 27, the Senate Appropriations Committee marked up and approved a FY2011 StateForeign Operations funding bill, S. 3676.5 The legislation would have appropriated $54.22
billion, which was $1.40 billion less than the House subcommittee draft and $2.61 billion below
the Administration’s request. Of the total provided for State operations, 18.7% was for
Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq. Of the total provided for foreign operations, 15.3% was for those
three countries. Funding levels by account can be found in Appendix C and Appendix D. The
bill6—
•

For Afghanistan, provided $2.6 billion in assistance, more than $1.2 billion
below the requested amount, and $660 million for State Department operations.

•

For Pakistan, provided $2.48 billion in assistance, which is $546 million below
the Administration’s request, as well as $92.6 million for State Department
operations.

•

For Iraq, provided $1.6 billion for State Department operations and $529 million
for assistance, or $183 million less than requested.

•

Provided the amounts requested for Israel, Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon.

•

For Colombia, provided $447 million, or $17.9 million less than requested.

•

Noted lack of authorization for State to retained consular fees, and increased
appropriations above the request, while also suggesting the use of unobligated
funds, to meet funding requests for Diplomatic & Consular Programs, Embassy
Construction & Maintenance, and Worldwide Security Protection accounts that
the Administration had proposed to meet through fee retention.

•

For State’s Civilian Stabilization Initiative (CSI), recommended $50.0 million,
which is more than a 50%, or $70 million, reduction from FY2010 levels. It
called for a reduced number of Active and Standby personnel and questioned

5
The committee report, S.Rept. 111-237, is available at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=
111_cong_reports&docid=f:sr237.111.pdf.
6
Selected highlights largely from the bill report S.Rept. 111-237 and from the Committee website.

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

State’s ability to deploy the proposed number of personnel. It provided no CSI
funds for USAID.
•

Proposed to maintain current funding levels for the Asia Foundation and
$100,000 more than FY2010 level for the East-West Center.

•

Proposed to increase National Endowment for Democracy (NED) funding from
$118.0 million to $125.0 million, which is $20 million above the Administration
request. Some funds are to be provided for NED programs in Egypt, North
Korea, Cuba, Pakistan, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo by
transferring democracy funds from the Economic Support Fund account to NED.

•

Provided $110 million for the Democracy Fund, which was not included in the
Administration’s budget. Many democracy assistance programs were requested
by the Administration under the Economic Support Fund account, however, for
which the committee recommended $655 million less than was requested.

•

Provided $14.4 million within the Diplomatic and Consular Programs account to
establish up to 10 new American Centers to improve public diplomacy efforts.

•

Recommended continuing the FY2010 level ($1.105 billion) for the Millennium
Challenge Corporation, which is $147.7 million below the President’s request of
$1.280 billion.

•

Provided $800 million for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and
Malaria, which is $100 million above the Administration request.

•

For bilateral and multilateral climate change programs funded through USAID,
State and Treasury, provided $1.45 billion, which was $130 million above the
FY2010 level but slightly below the request.

•

Provided $1.3 billion, or $344 million less than requested, for food security and
agriculture development programs under the Feed the Future initiative.

•

Recommended $700 million for family planning programs. The bill also
contained language that would reverse the Mexico City policy that bans U.S.
foreign assistance to any country or organization that performs or promotes
abortion. The language allowed aid for countries or organizations unless the
President certifies those recipients would use U.S. aid for promoting or
performing abortions.

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

State-Foreign Operations Overview
Forward Funding
The State-Foreign Operations appropriations
bill funds most programs and activities within
There is disagreement among appropriators and the
Administration about how to treat certain funds
the international affairs budget account,
provided under the FY2009 supplemental (P.L. 111-32)
known as Function 150, including foreign
to address in advance a portion of the FY2010
economic and military assistance,
international affairs request. Unless otherwise noted, the
contributions to international organizations
numbers in this report reflect funding enacted in each
and multilateral financial institutions, State
fiscal year, so this “forward funding” is accounted for in
FY2009 totals. Throughout this report, footnotes will
Department and U.S. Agency for International
indicate when these funds are relevant to the analysis and
Development (USAID) operations, public
how the comparative analysis would change if these funds
diplomacy, and international broadcasting
were attributed to FY2010. Affected accounts include
programs. However, the bill does not align
Diplomatic & Consular Programs; Embassy Security,
perfectly with the international affairs budget.
Construction & Maintenance; Global Health & Child
Survival; International Narcotics Control & Law
Food aid, which is appropriated through the
Enforcement; and Foreign Military Financing.
Agriculture appropriations bill, and the
International Trade Commission and Foreign
Claims Settlement Commission, both funded through the Commerce-Science-Justice
appropriation, are international affairs (Function 150) programs not funded through the StateForeign Operations appropriations bill. Furthermore, a number of international commissions that
are not part of the Function 150, such as the International Boundary and Water Commission, are
funded through the State-Foreign Operations bill. A chart illustrating the organizational structure
of the State-Foreign Operations appropriations bill is provided in Appendix A.
This report focuses only on accounts funded through the State-Foreign Operations appropriations
bill, but provides appropriations figures for the entire international affairs (Function 150) budget
in Appendix E.
Table 2 and Figure 1 show State-Foreign Operations appropriations for the past decade in both
current and constant dollars.
Table 2. State-Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY2001-FY2011
(in billions of current and 2011 constant dollars)
FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

FY06

FY07

FY08

FY09

FY10
Est.

FY11
Req.

Current $

23.22

24.25

31.72

48.34

34.23

34.25

37.28

40.47

50.50

55.11

56.82

Constant
2011 $

29.40

30.22

38.51

57.04

38.95

37.64

39.89

41.77

52.07

55.88

56.82

Source: Summary and Highlights, International Affairs Function 150, FY2011 and CRS calculations.
Notes: Figures include all enacted appropriations, regular and supplemental. The $1.8 billion for State/and
Foreign Operations that was considered forward funding for FY2010 in P.L. 111-32, the Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2009, is included in the FY2009 total.

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Figure 1. State-Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY2001-FY2011
60
US$, in billions

50
40
30
20
10

FY
01
FY
02
FY
03
FY
04
FY
05
FY
06
FY
07
FY
08
FY
FY 09
10
e
FY st.
11
re
q.

0

current US$

constant 2010 US$

Source: Summary and Highlights, International Affairs Function 150, FY2011, and CRS calculations.

Background and Trends
U.S. national security, commercial, and humanitarian interests are the rationale for most
international affairs activities. During the Cold War, foreign aid and diplomatic programs had a
primarily anti-communist focus, while concurrently pursuing other U.S. policy interests, such as
promoting economic development, advancing U.S. trade, expanding access to basic education and
health care, promoting human rights, and protecting the environment. In the 1990s, with the Cold
War ended, distinct policy objectives—including stopping nuclear weapons proliferation, curbing
the production and trafficking of illegal drugs, expanding peace efforts in the Middle East,
achieving regional stability, protecting religious freedom, and countering trafficking in persons—
replaced the Cold War-shaped foreign policy objectives.
A defining change in focus came following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in the United
States. Since then, U.S. foreign aid and diplomatic programs have emphasized national security
objectives, frequently cast in terms of contributing to efforts to counter terrorism. In 2002,
President Bush released a National Security Strategy that for the first time established global
development as the third pillar of U.S. national security, along with defense and diplomacy.
Development was again underscored in the Administration’s re-statement of the National Security
Strategy released on March 16, 2006.
Also in 2002, foreign assistance budget justifications began to highlight the war on terrorism as
the top foreign aid priority, emphasizing U.S. assistance to 28 “front-line” states—countries that
cooperated with the United States in the war on terrorism or faced terrorist threats themselves.7
7

According to the State Department, these “front-line” states in 2002 included Afghanistan, Algeria, Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Colombia, Djibouti, Egypt, Ethiopia, Georgia, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kazakhstan,
Kenya, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Poland, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan,
(continued...)

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Large reconstruction programs in Afghanistan and Iraq exemplified the emphasis on using foreign
aid to combat terrorism. State Department efforts focused extensively on diplomatic security and
finding more effective ways of presenting American views and culture through public diplomacy,
particularly in Muslim communities.
The Obama Administration has carried forward many Bush foreign aid initiatives, including
USAID’s Development Leadership Initiative (DLI), the Millennium Challenge Corporation, and
robust assistance to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. The Obama Administration has also largely
sustained Bush Administration investments in global health and HIV/AIDS treatment, though its
Global Health Initiative shifts the emphasis away from a focus on discrete diseases and toward
comprehensive health systems. In the FY2011 request, the Administration further defines its
international priorities, with an emphasis on building State Department and USAID capacity,
supporting multilateral food security and global climate change initiatives, and shifting
responsibility for assistance programs in Iraq and elsewhere from military to civilian authorities.

Use of Supplemental and Forward Funding
Year-to-year comparison of funding levels has become increasingly complicated due to the use of
supplemental appropriations. Supplemental resources for State and Foreign Operations programs,
once used primarily to respond to unanticipated emergencies or natural disasters, became a
significant and continuous source of funds for ongoing international activities during the Bush
Administration, especially for programs related to reconstruction efforts and corresponding to
ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Some criticized this practice, which kept
significant funds separate from the annual budget cycle and made future-year planning difficult.
The Obama Administration requested $6.16 billion in supplemental funds for FY2010 to meet
needs in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, and Haiti. Congress approved $6.18 billion in FY2010
supplemental funds for these and other priorities on July 27.8
Year-to-year comparison has also been complicated by recent use of forward funding
mechanisms, whereby appropriations legislation may provide funding for multiple fiscal years.
One FY2008 supplemental,9 for example, included $3.68 billion within a section titled “Bridge
Fund Supplemental Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2009,” essentially providing a FY2009
supplement before the FY2009 base appropriation was enacted. These funds were clearly
designated as FY2009 funds, to be obligated between October 2008 and September 2009. Less
clear, however, is the appropriate designation for $1.8 billion10 included in an FY2009
supplemental appropriations measure11 that House and Senate appropriators considered forward
funding of priorities identified in the FY2010 request, but which were not clearly designated as

(...continued)
Uzbekistan, and Yemen.
8
P.L. 111-212.
9
P.L. 110-252.
10

The Administration cites $1.8 billion as the forward-funded level in the CBJ, while House appropriators reportedly
count $2.4 billion intended as forward funding. The discrepancy apparently relates to the treatment of the Pakistan
Counterinsurgency Contingency Fund and a portion of Foreign Military Financing funds to Mexico. Until the House
produces legislation for FY2011, clarifying their approach to accounting for these funds, “forward funding” in this
report will refer only to the $1.8 billion detailed in the CBJ.
11
P.L. 111-32.

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

FY2010 funds in the enacting legislation and accompanying report.12 In the FY2011
Congressional Budget Justification (CBJ), the Administration included these funds in FY2010
account totals in many instances, while the Congressional Budget Office is treating them as
FY2009 appropriations, as does this report.
The inclusion of supplemental funds and the accounting used for forward funds can significantly
affect year-to-year comparisons of appropriations levels. For example, the FY2011 request was
slightly less than the FY2010 total if the FY2010 supplemental and forward funding are included
in the FY2010 column, but represented a 16% increase if the supplemental funds are excluded
and the forward funding is counted in FY2009 rather than FY2010. Figure 2 compares the
FY2011 State-Foreign Operations budget request with various representations of FY2010 and
FY2009 appropriations.
Figure 2. FY2011 State-Foreign Operations Request Compared to Various
Representations of FY2010 and FY2009 Appropriations
(in billions of current dollars)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

FY2011 Req.

56.81

FY2010 w/FF & Supp.

56.94

FY2010 w/Supp

55.11

FY2010 w/FF

70

50.76
48.93

FY2010 Base
FY2009 w/FF & Supp.

50.66

FY2009 w/ Supp.

48.83
36.78

FY2009 Base
Base

Forward Fund

Enacted Supp.

Source: State Department data; CRS calculations.
Note: FF = forward funding. These figures reflect the composition of the State-Foreign Operations
appropriations bill, not the 150 budget account. FY2009 supplemental funding legislation includes P.L. 110-252,
P.L. 111-5, and P.L. 111-32.

12

Reports accompanying the House-passed and Senate committee-approved FY2010 State-Foreign Operations
appropriations bills (H.Rept. 111-187 and S.Rept. 111-44, respectively) indicate what each subcommittee considered
forward funding for FY2010. The legislative language was rolled into an omnibus bill; the statement accompanying the
omnibus legislation (H.Rept. 111-366) did not include the forward-funding language, but did note that the reports were
to be used as guidance.

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

FY2011 Budget Request
On February 1, 2010, the Obama Administration sent its FY2011 international affairs (Function
150 account) budget request to Congress, corresponding to a total of $56.81 billion requested for
the Department of State, foreign operations, and related programs. This represented a 3% increase
from enacted FY2010 funding, 13 and 4.5% of the total discretionary budget authority requested by
the Administration for FY2011. Figure 3 provides a breakout of the request by assistance type.
Figure 3. Composition of the State-Foreign Operations Budget Request, FY2011

State Admin.
22%
Other
MCC
1%
2%
Multilateral Aid
6%

Military Aid
12%

International
Orgs.
7%
International
Broadcasting
1%

USAID Admin.
3%

Bilateral
Economic Aid
46%
Source: Fiscal Year 2011 Budget of the United States Government and CRS calculations.

Figure 4 shows the major accounts in the bill in proportion to the whole request, and indicates for
each account whether the requested funding level represented an increase or decrease over the
FY2010-enacted appropriation level. Just five accounts—Diplomatic and Consular Programs,
Economic Support Fund, Global Health and Child Survival, Foreign Military Financing, and
Development Assistance—make up more than 60% of the total funding requested. While the
request for several of these accounts is less than the enacted FY2010 level, such apparent
decreases are the result of significant FY2010 supplemental appropriations being enacted after the
FY2011 request was submitted, and do not necessarily reflect an intention to reduce spending in
those accounts. For example, the Economic Support Fund request was 23% above the enacted
FY2010 level at the time it was submitted, but is 12% below the current enacted level, after
Congress approved $2.5 billion in supplemental funds for that account. For a full listing of funds
requested for State, Foreign Operations and Related Agency accounts, see Appendix C and
Appendix D.

13
If the $1.8 billion in “forward funds” are included in the FY2010 total, rather than FY2009, the FY2011 request
represents a 12% increase over the FY2010-enacted level, or a 4% decrease from the enacted plus requested
supplemental level.

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Figure 4. Graphic Representation of the FY2011 Request for State, Foreign
Operations, and Related Programs, by Major Accounts

Source: FY2011 State-Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justification; CRS calculations.
Notes: Accounts for which the amount requested was less than 0.5% of the total request are represented in
aggregate as “other.” WB = World Bank; AEECA = Assistance to Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia.
* No funds have been enacted for the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Fund or the Global Food Security Fund in
FY2010, making a comparison to FY2010 not applicable. If FY2009 supplemental funds for the Pakistan
Counterinsurgency Fund are considered forward funding for FY2010, the increase from FY2010-enacted to
FY2011-requested would be 58%.

FY2011 Budget Request: State Department and Related Programs14
The Administration’s FY2011 budget request for the Department of State, international
broadcasting, and related programs was $17.41 billion, a 1.2% decrease from the FY2010-enacted
level of $17.62 billion, including the mandatory Foreign Service Retirement Fund15 and $1.52
14
Ken Nakamura wrote this section, but has since retired from CRS. Tamara Resler will be following the updates of the
Department of State and Related Agency appropriations and can be reached at 7-.....
15
If forward funding of $374.38 million for Diplomatic and Consular Programs and $90.9 million for Embassy
Security, Construction & Maintenance, provided in the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-32), are
included in the FY2010 total, the FY2011 increase would be 5%.

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

billion in supplemental funds. Related programs funded in the State portion of the bill include the
Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), contributions to International Organizations (CIO),
including the United Nations (U.N.), U.N. Peacekeeping (CIPA), and funding for several
International Commissions and the U.S. Institute for Peace. Also included are funding for The
Asia Foundation, the National Endowment for Democracy, and several other independent nonprofit educational and exchange organizations which help advance U.S. interests. (For a
description of all the accounts within the State Department segment of the bill, see CRS Report
R40482, State, Foreign Operations Appropriations: A Guide to Component Accounts, by (name
redacted) and (name redacted).)
Table 3 and Figure 5 show appropriations for the State Department and related programs over
the past decade in both current and constant dollars.
Table 3. State Department and Related Programs Appropriations, FY2001-FY2011
(discretionary budget authority in billions of current and 2011 constant dollars)
FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

FY06

FY07

FY08

FY09

FY10 est.

FY11
Req.

Current $

6.91

7.71

8.05

9.29

10.78

11.12

10.90

13.57

16.18

17.62

17.41

Constant
2011 $

8.75

9.61

9.77

10.96

12.27

12.22

11.66

14.00

16.66

17.87

17.41

Source: The Department of State Congressional Budget Justifications, FY2001-FY2011, and CRS calculations.
Notes: Figures include all enacted appropriations, regular and supplemental. The $465.3 million for
State/Related Programs accounts that was forward funding for FY2010 priorities in P.L. 111-32, the Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2009, is included in the FY2009 total rather than the FY2010 estimate.

4

5

6

7

FY
0

FY
0

FY
0

FY
0

FY
09
FY
10
es
t.
FY
11
re
q.

3
FY
0

8

2

Current $

FY
0

1

FY
0

20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
FY
0

US $, in billions

Figure 5. State Department and Related Programs Appropriations, FY2001-FY2011

Constant 2010 $

Source: The Department of State Congressional Budget Justifications, FY2001-FY2011, and CRS calculations.

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Key State Department Issues
Within the FY2011 State Department budget request, the following issues stood out as being
Administration priorities or representing significant changes from existing policy or funding
levels.

Support Missions in Iraq and Other Front-Line States
The FY2011 request included significant funding to support U.S. missions in Iraq, Afghanistan,
and Pakistan, where additional logistics support, security, and information technology are needed
to keep up with increasing staff levels and program responsibilities. The Administration requested
$1.79 billion to support the U.S. mission in Iraq, for the abovementioned purposes as well as
support for Provincial Reconstruction Teams transitioning from military to State management,16
exchange programs, and the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction. The
Administration also requested $754 million to support 1,500 civilian staff from various agencies
in Afghanistan, and $102 million for operational support of public diplomacy activities in
Pakistan.

Growth in Foreign Service Capacity
The Administration requested $9.55 billion for Diplomatic & Consular Programs (D&CP) in
FY2011, which would have maintained the high funding level reached in FY2010 through a
$1.33 billion supplemental appropriation for the account.17 D&CP funds most State Department
salaries and expenses, and growth in FY2010 and the FY2011 request reflected the
Administration’s strategic plan to increase Foreign Service capacity by 25% over FY2008 levels
by FY2014. Secretary of State Clinton described the strategy as a means to reduce the State
Department’s reliance on contractors, which she believed would improve accountability and save
money in the long term. The FY2011 request would have funded 599 new positions, including
410 foreign service officers and 189 civil service personnel, and expanded and improved training
in critical languages.

Retention of Consular Fees
The State Department sought authority in the FY2011 request to retain all passport and consular
fees, some of which are currently retained by the Treasury. The Administration viewed this as a
mechanism to cover the full cost of consular services more efficiently. Congress, however,
expressed concern about this new funding mechanism, which would operate outside of the regular
appropriations process and could no longer be used to off-set expenditures in the budgeting
process. If the request had been granted, State anticipated an additional $2.59 billion in available
fees, a 45% increase over the FY2010 estimate.
16
The Department is realigning infrastructure in FY2011 by closing 11of the 16 current PRTs . Four of the five
remaining PRTs are co-located with the military with much of the support costs assumed by the military. As the
military withdrawals during the transition, the State Department will assume greater responsibility for these costs,
which include utilities, storage, housing, furniture, IT infrastructure and equipment, building leases, and general
support costs.
17
The Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009, P.L. 111-32, forward funded $374.38 million for Diplomatic and
Consular Programs for FY2010.

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Proposed Reductions in Funding
The Administration proposed reductions in funding for voluntary contributions to international
organizations and foundations, among others. The request for international organizations was $1.6
billion, a 5% decrease from FY2010, reflecting reduced or eliminated contributions to several
U.N. organizations, including the U.N. High Commission on Refugees, U.N. Development Fund
for Women, U.N. Development Program, U.N. Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and the U.N.
Population Fund (UNFPA). Contributions to several foundations supported by the bill would have
been reduced from FY2010 levels as well. The Asia Foundation request was 17% lower than the
FY2010 level, at $15.7 million; the East-West Center faced a 50% reduction, to $11.4 million;
and the National Endowment for Democracy would have seen an 11% cut, to $105 million.

FY2011 Budget Request: Foreign Operations
The Foreign Operations budget comprises the majority of U.S. foreign assistance programs, both
bilateral and multilateral. (See Appendix D for Foreign Operations accounts and funding levels.)
The annual State-Foreign Operations Appropriations bill funds most U.S. bilateral development
assistance programs, with the main exception being food assistance appropriated through the
Agriculture Appropriations bill (for which $1.89 billion was appropriated in FY2010 and the
same amount requested for FY2011). These funds are managed primarily by USAID and the State
Department, together with several smaller independent foreign assistance agencies such as the
Millennium Challenge Corporation, the Peace Corps, and the Inter-American and African
Development Foundations. The legislation also supports U.S. contributions to major multilateral
financial institutions, such as the World Bank and U.N. entities, and includes funds for the
Export-Import Bank and Overseas Private Investment Corporation, whose activities are regarded
more as trade promotion than foreign aid. On occasion, the bill replenishes U.S. financial
commitments to international financial institutions, such as the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund.18
The foreign operations budget request for FY2011 totaled $39.40 billion, representing a 5%
increase from the enacted FY2010 level of $37.49 billion, excluding forward funding from the
Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009.19 Table 4 and Figure 6 provide funding levels for
foreign operations over the past decade, including enacted supplemental appropriations, in both
current and constant dollars. If the FY2011 request is had been enacted, foreign operations
funding would have increased by 142% in current dollars, and by 91% in constant dollars, from
FY2001 to FY2011.

18

For a description of all the accounts within the Foreign Operations section of the bill, see CRS Report R40482, State,
Foreign Operations Appropriations: A Guide to Component Accounts, by (name redacted) and (name redacted).
19
If the Appropriations Act, 2009, is included in the FY2010 estimate rather than the FY2009 total, the increase is
15%.

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Table 4. Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY2001-FY2011
(discretionary budget authority in billions of current and 2011 constant dollars)
FY01

FY02

FY03

FY04

FY05

FY06

FY07

FY08

FY09

FY10
est.

FY11
req.

Current $

16.31

16.54

23.67

39.05

23.45

23.13

26.38

26.89

34.32

37.49

39.40

Constant
2011 $

20.65

20.61

28.74

46.08

26.69

25.42

28.23

27.75

35.48

38.01

39.4

Source: The Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justifications, FY2001-FY2011, and CRS calculations.
Notes: Figures include all enacted appropriations, regular and supplemental. The $1.37 billion for Foreign
Operations accounts that the Administration considers forward funding for FY2010 in P.L. 111-32, the
Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009, is included in the FY2009 total.

Current $

FY
09
FY
10
es
t.
FY
11
re
q.

FY
08

FY
07

FY
06

FY
05

FY
04

FY
03

FY
02

50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
FY
01

US$, in billions

Figure 6. Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY2001-FY2011

Constant 2009 $

Source: The Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justification, FY2001-FY2011, and CRS calculations.

Top 10 U.S. Foreign Aid Recipient Countries
Prior to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, Israel and Egypt typically received the largest amounts
of U.S. foreign aid every year since the Camp David Peace Accords in 1978.20 The reconstruction
efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan moved those countries into the top five, though assistance to Iraq
has declined significantly in the past couple of years, with the completion of many reconstruction
activities. Meanwhile, a combination of security assistance and economic aid designed to limit
the appeal of Islamic extremist organizations has moved Pakistan up the list in recent years.

20

For more information on historic aid trends, see CRS Report R40213, Foreign Aid: An Introduction to U.S.
Programs and Policy, by (name redacted) and Marian Leonardo Lawson.

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Table 5.Top 10 Recipients of U.S. Foreign Aid in FY2010, FY2011 Request
(in millions of current dollars)
FY2010 Est.
Country

FY2011 Request

Estimated
Allocation

Country

Requested
Allocation

Afghanistan

$4,102.1

Afghanistan

$3,923.7

Israel

2,775.0

Pakistan

3,053.6

Pakistan

1,806.9

Israel

3,000.0

Haiti

1,778.8

Egypt

1,558.0

Egypt

1,555.7

Iraq

729.3

Iraq

1.116.8

Kenya

714.0

Jordan

843.0

Jordan

682.7

Mexico

757.7

Nigeria

647.7

Kenya

687.7

South Africa

586.1

Nigeria

614.7

Ethiopia

583.5

Note: FY2010 figures are preliminary estimates from the State Department/F Bureau. They include forward
funding for FY2010, in the GHCS and FMF accounts, that was provided through FY2009 supplemental
appropriations legislation. They also include supplemental funding from P.L. 111-212.

In the FY2011 request, Afghanistan topped the list at nearly $4 billion, followed by Pakistan at $3
billion. Israel and Egypt would have continued to receive significant funds, primarily for Foreign
Military Financing, at $3 billion and $1.56 billion, respectively. Jordan would also have ranked
high on the list, with $682.7 million requested. Iraq would have been the fifth-largest recipient of
aid in FY2011, under the Administration request. Assistance to the other top recipients—Kenya,
Nigeria, Ethiopia, and South Africa—was targeted primarily at HIV/AIDS and other health
programs. Haiti, which was a top recipient in FY2010 as a result of supplemental funds for postearthquake relief and reconstruction, would not have been a lead recipient in FY2011 under the
Administration’s proposal.

Regional Distribution
As shown in Figure 7, under the FY2011 proposal, Africa and South Central Asia would have
received the most U.S. foreign assistance, with about $7.6 billion requested for each. The aid to
Africa primarily supports HIV/AIDS and other health-related programs while nearly $7 billion of
the $7.6 billion in aid to South Central Asia was requested for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Almost
as high was aid to the Near East region, which continued to be dominated by assistance to Israel,
Iraq, Egypt, and Jordan. The sharp increase in Western Hemisphere totals in FY2010 could
largely be attributed to nearly $1.4 billion in supplemental funds for Haiti. Assistance to Europe
and Eurasia, and to East Asia and Pacific, remained relatively low and consistent, reflecting the
economic gains in these regions as well as strategic priorities.

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Figure 7. Regional Distribution of Foreign Aid, FY2009-FY2011 Request

billions of current US$

9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Africa

EAP
FY2009 Actual

EE

NE

FY2010 Est.

SCA

WH

FY2011 Req.

Source: Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justification, FY2011, P.L. 111-212.
Note: FY2010 figures represent the Administrations request. EAP = East Asia and Pacific; EE = Europe and
Eurasia; NE = Near East; SCA = South and Central Asia; WH = Western Hemisphere.

Sector Distribution
Over the years, Congress has expressed interest in various discrete aid sectors, such as education,
trade, maternal and child health, and biodiversity, that are funded across multiple accounts and/or
agencies. Administrations have begun presenting their respective budget requests with a section
showing what portion of the request would address some of these “key interest areas.” Unlike the
account funding tables in the budget request, however, the key interest area breakout does not
show prior year allocations, limiting year-to-year comparison to requested funds rather than
actual funding. This provides an indication of the Administration’s interests and priorities, but not
necessarily those of congressional appropriators.
Table 6 compares the FY2010 and FY2011 budget requests for key interest areas identified by
the Administration. In keeping with the Administration’s major initiatives, the FY2011 request for
several non-HIV/AIDS health activities increased significantly over the FY2010 request, as did
the request for global climate change, food security, and microfinance programs. The
Administration also emphasized two new focus areas, adding neglected tropical diseases and
nutrition to the key interests list. Meanwhile, pandemic flu appears to have been a lower
Administration priority than in the prior year, along with basic education, biodiversity, and TransSaharan Counter Terrorism (an initiative from the Obama Administration’s first budget request).

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Table 6. Selected Sector Funding, FY2010 Request and FY2011 Request
(millions of current dollars)
Sector

FY2010 Req.

FY2011 Req.

% Change

$125

$75

-40%

$1,001

$844

-16%

$184

$114

-38%

$217

($203, included
within the
Global Climate
Change request
in FY2011)

-6%

$593

$716

+21%

Food Security

$1,363

$1,644

+21%

Global Climate Change

$579

$1,391

+140%

Higher Education

$188

$249

+32%

HIV/AIDS

$5,609

$5,850

+4%

Malaria

$585

$680

+16%

Maternal and Child Health

$954

$983

+3%

Microenterprise and
Microfinance

$168

$230

+37%

Neglected Tropical Diseases

—

$155

N/A

Nutrition

—

$231

N/A

Other Public Health Threats

$128

$225

+76%

Polio

$32

$33

+3%

Trade Capacity Building

$316

$323

+2%

Trafficking in Persons

$32

$36

+13%

Trans-Sahara CounterTerrorism

$80

$61

-24%

Tuberculosis

$191

$251

+31%

Water

$176

$256

+45%

Avian/Pandemic Influenza
Basic Education
Biodiversity
Clean Energy

Family Planning/Reproductive
Health

Source: U.S. Department of State Foreign Operations Congressional Budget Justification, FY2010 and FY2011,
and CRS calculations.
Note: Totals for Water, Basic Education, Maternal and Child Health, and Food Security do not include related
funding through the P.L. 480/Food for Peace program, which is funded through Agriculture appropriations.

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Key Foreign Operations Issues
Within the FY2011 Foreign Operations budget request, the following issues stood out as being
Administration priorities or representing significant changes from existing policy or funding
levels.

USAID Capacity Building
USAID continues to expand its Foreign Service staff through the Development Leadership
Initiative (DLI), established in 2008 to double the number of Foreign Service officers at USAID
in order to more effectively implement assistance programs that have expanded significantly in
recent years. As with personnel increases at State, the Administration views this plan as an
investment that will lead to reduced reliance on contractors and greater accountability and cost
savings over time. The Administration requested $1.48 billion for USAID Operating Expenses for
FY2011, a 6% increase over the enacted FY2010 level. Of that amount, $354.8 million was
designated for recruiting and hiring 200 new Foreign Service Officers at USAID, as well as
supporting the annualized recurring costs of DLI positions filled since FY2008.

Military/Civilian Transition
The Department of Defense (DOD) greatly expanded its foreign aid activities in the wake of the
Iraq and Afghanistan invasions, when high levels of security and economic aid flowed into those
countries even while instability and relatively low personnel capacity limited the role of civilian
aid agencies. As conditions on the ground have stabilized and both State and USAID have begun
building their capacity, both the Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense have expressed
support for stronger civilian control of these activities. The FY2011 foreign operations request
addressed this issue by including the following funding for activities that were previously funded
through the Defense Appropriations bill:

21

•

The Complex Crisis Fund, for which $100 million was requested for FY2011,
would replace funding for reconstruction, security, and stabilization activities
previously provided through DOD’s Section 1207 authority.

•

The Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund, for which $1.2 billion was
requested for FY2011, would move ongoing activities to improve the capabilities
of Pakistan’s security forces from DOD control to the purview of the Secretary of
State.

•

For Iraq, $314.6 million was included in the International Narcotics Control and
Law Enforcement (INCLE) account request for FY2011 (along with $650 million
provided for this purpose in FY2010 supplemental funds) to enable State to take
control of Iraqi police training programs now funded through the DOD. Secretary
of State Clinton has claimed that this shift from military to civilian control would
allow the defense budget for Iraq to decrease by $16 billion. 21

Secretary Clinton’s testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Hearing on “Foreign Policy Priorities
in the FY2011 International Affairs Budget,” February 24, 2010.

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Front-Line States
As demonstrated in Table 5, proposed funding for FY2011 would have largely continued the
FY2010 flow of assistance to countries of strategic interest in the fight against terrorism. The
request included $12.22 billion, or 34% of the total bilateral aid requested, for “front-line”
states.22 For Afghanistan, $3.92 billion was requested for FY2011, primarily to increase U.S.
civilian resources to balance the recent troop surge. For Pakistan, $3.05 billion was requested for
FY2011, primarily to build the capacity of the government of Pakistan and support infrastructure
and economic development projects that provide tangible benefits to communities and reduce the
appeal of extremism. For Iraq, $729 million was requested for FY2011, on top of $650 million
provided in FY2010 supplemental funds, to support the aforementioned civilian takeover of
security training programs.

Global Health
The Administration requested $8.5 billion in the Global Health and Child Survival account for
Global Health Initiative (GHI) activities in FY2011. The request represented an 8.8% increase
over the FY2010-enacted level, or 8.1% if $50 million the Administration considered forward
funding from the FY2009 supplemental was counted toward the FY2010 total. The six-year, $63
billion GHI is intended to be a comprehensive approach to global health problems that builds on
the previous Administration’s focus on global HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria, but prioritizes
building strong and sustainable health systems through an emphasis on maternal and pediatric
programs, as well as strategic coordination. Some advocates for HIV/AIDS programs have
expressed concern about the shift in focus, noting that funding requested for HIV/AIDS programs
in FY2011, while slightly above the FY2010 level, was less than amounts authorized by Congress
and, some argue, inadequate to sustain U.S. global commitments. However, Ambassador Eric
Goosby, the U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator, has stated that GHI maternal health programs will
include significant activities addressing HIV/AIDS, which is the leading cause of death
worldwide for women of child bearing age.23

Food Security
Food security, first addressed as a key issue in the FY2010 budget request, continues to be a
priority for the Obama Administration, which requested $1.64 billion for related programs in the
FY2011 budget. This amount did not include P.L. 480 food assistance funds, provided through the
Agriculture appropriation. The Administration’s new Global Hunger and Food Security Initiative
is intended to address root causes of food insecurity and proposes to target funding to countries
with widespread hunger, an agriculture-based economy, and comprehensive strategies for food
security already in place. The request also emphasized the benefits of working multilaterally and
in partnership with other stakeholders to leverage resources. The request included $408.4 million
for the new multi-donor Global Food Security Trust Fund, managed by the World Bank, which
would have supported large-scale transportation and irrigation infrastructure, commercial
financing, and research.

22

See footnote 7 for a list of “front-line” states.
Testimony of Ambassador Eric Goosby, United States Global AIDS Coordinator, before the House Appropriations
Subcommittee on State-Foreign Operations, March 23, 2010.
23

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Climate Change
The Administration requested $1.39 billion in FY2011 to support activities relating to climate
change, with an emphasis on adaptation, deployment of clean energy technologies, and reduction
of greenhouse gas emissions through sustainable landscapes. A significant portion of this climate
change funding would have been channeled through international financial institutions. The $400
million requested for contribution to the International Clean Technology Fund represented a 33%
increase over the FY2010-enacted level. The request also included $235 million for the
International Strategic Climate Fund, a 213.3% increase over the estimated FY2010 contribution.
Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner explained this emphasis on multilateral funding, both
for climate change and food security, as a fiscally responsible approach intended to leverage
commitments from other donors and increase the impact of U.S. funds.24

24

Remarks of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, testifying before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on
State-Foreign Operations, March 25, 2010.

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Appendix A. Structure of State-Foreign Operations Appropriations

Source: CRS.

CRS-22

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Appendix B. Abbreviations
Funding Accounts
ACI

Andean Counterdrug Initiative

AEECA

Assistance for Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia

CSH

Child Survival and Health

DA

Development Assistance

DF

Democracy Fund

ERMA

Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance

ESF

Economic Support Fund

FMF

Foreign Military Financing

GHAI

Global HIV/AIDS Initiative

IDFA

International Disaster and Famine Assistance

IMET

International Military Education and Training

INCLE

International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement

MCC

Millennium Challenge Corporation

MRA

Migration and Refugee Assistance

NADR

Non-proliferation, Anti-Terrorism, Demining, and Related Programs

PEPFAR

President’s Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief

PKO

Peacekeeping Operations

PL 480

Food aid

PMI

President’s Malaria Initiative

TI

Transition Initiatives

Other:
DFA

Director of Foreign Assistance

AFR

Africa

EAP

East Asia and Pacific

EE

Europe and Eurasia

LAC

Latin America and Caribbean

NE

Near East

SCA

South and Central Asia

USAID

U.S. Agency for International Development

Congressional Research Service

23

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Appendix C. State Department and Related
Programs Appropriations
Table C-1. State Department and Related Programs Appropriations, FY2010-FY2011
(in millions of current dollars)
FY2010
Base
Enacted
(H.R.
3288/div
F; P.L.
111-117)

FY2010
Supp.
Enacted
(H.R.
4899;
P.L. 111212)

Total,
FY2010
Enacted

FY2011
Request

P.L. 11210a

Change
between
FY2010
total and
P.L. 11210

11,183.4

1,415.8

12,599.2

12,536.4

11,410.6

-9%

Diplomatic & Consular
Program

8,227.0

1,326.0

9,553.0

9,545.2

8,772.4

-8%

Capital Investment Fund

139.0

139.0

144.1

59.4

-57%

1,803.1

1,681.5

1,616.8

-10%

120.0

184.0

34.9

-71%
-4%

Title I. State Department
Administration of Foreign
Affairs, Subtotal

Embassy Security, Construction
& Maintenance

1,724.1

Civilian Stabilization Initiative

120.0

79.0

Office of Inspector General

102.0

3.6

105.6

120.2

101.8b

Special Inspector General for
Afghanistan Reconstruction

—

7.2c

7.2

—

[24.0]

+233%

Ed. & Cultural Exchange
Programs

635.0

635.0

633.2

598.8

-6%

Representation Allowances

8.2

8.2

8.2

7.5

-9%

Protection of Foreign
Missions & Officials

28.0

28.0

27.2

27.9

0%

Emergency-Diplomatic &
Consular Services

10.0

10.0

11.0

9.5

-5%

Buying Power and
Maintenance

8.5

8.5

—

0

-100%

Repatriation Loans

1.5

1.5

1.5

1.5

0%

Payment American Institute
Taiwan

21.2

21.2

21.4

21.2

0%

Foreign Service Retirement
(mandatory)

158.9

158.9

158.9

158.9

0%

International
Organizations, Subtotal

3,807.5

3,904.0

3,777.7

3,462.5

-11%

Contributions to Int’l Orgs

1,682.5

1,682.5

1,595.4

1,578.6

-6%

Contributions to International
Peacekeeping

2,125.0

96.5

2,221.5

2,182.3

1,883.9

-15%

International
Commissionsd

142.9

0.0

142.9

130.3

120.1

-16%

Congressional Research Service

96.5

24

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

FY2010
Base
Enacted
(H.R.
3288/div
F; P.L.
111-117)

FY2010
Supp.
Enacted
(H.R.
4899;
P.L. 111212)

Total,
FY2010
Enacted

FY2011
Request

P.L. 11210a

Change
between
FY2010
total and
P.L. 11210

Int’l Boundary;/U.S.-Mexico

76.3

76.3

74.3

69.7

-9%

American Sections

12.6

12.6

12.4

-

n.a.

International Fisheries

54.0

54.0

43.6

50.4

-7%

International
Broadcasting, Subtotal

746.4

3.0

749.4

768.7

746.9

-1%

Broadcasting Operations

733.8

3.0

736.8

755.1

740.0

0%

Cuba Broadcasting

[30.5]

[30.5]

Capital Improvements

12.6

12.6

13.6

6.9

-45%

211.0

180.4

197.9

-6%

Related Appropriations,
Subtotal

211.0

0.0

n.a.

Asia Foundation

19.0

19.0

15.7

17.9

-6%

U.S. Institute of Peace

49.2

49.2

46.6

39.4

-20%

Center for Middle East-West
Dialogue-Trust & Program

0.9

0.9

0.8

0.9

0%

Eisenhower Exchange
Programs

0.5

0.5

0.5

0.5

0%

Israeli Arab Scholarship
Program

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

0%

East-West Center

23.0

23.0

11.4

21.0

-9%

National Endowment for
Democracy

118.0

118.0

105.0

117.8

0%

Other Commissions

13.0

13.0

13.2

13.0

0%

Preservation of America’s
Heritage

0.6

0.6

0.6

0.6

0%

Int’l Religious Freedom

4.3

4.3

4.4

4.3

0%

Security and Cooperation In
Europe

2.6

2.6

2.7

2.6

0%

Cong.-Exec. on People’s
Republic of China

2.0

2.0

2.0

2.0

0%

U.S.-China Economic and
Security Review

3.5

3.5

3.5

3.5

0%

17,619.5

17,406.7

15,951.0

-9%

State/Broadcasting/Relate
d Programs, TOTAL

16,104.2

0.0

1,515.3

Sources: U.S. Department of State budget documents, House and Senate Appropriations Committees, and CRS
calculations.
a.

Account funding levels in this column reflect CRS calculation of the 0.2% rescission across all non-defense
accounts for FY 2011 funds, in accordance with sec. 1119(a) of P.L. 112-10. Rescissions of prior year funding
are not reflected in account levels, but are noted in the last line of Table D-1. For the State Department,
these rescissions include Buying Power and Maintenance - $17 million; Diplomatic and Consular Programs $55 million; Immigration and Nationalist Act funds - $140 million.

Congressional Research Service

25

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

b.

Does not include $3 million in ESF funding designated for Afghanistan to be transferred to State IG for
oversight activities in Afghanistan.

c.

H.R. 4899 appropriates $7.2 million for SIGAR while simultaneously rescinding $7.2 million appropriated for
the State Inspector General in P.L. 111-32 which was authorized to be transferred to SIGAR.

d.

These activities are funded through the State-Foreign Operations bill, but are not part of Function 150 of
the budget.

Congressional Research Service

26

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Appendix D. Foreign Operations Appropriations
Table D-1. Foreign Operations Appropriations, FY2010-FY2011
(millions of current dollars)
FY2010
Base
Enacted
(H.R.
3288/div
F; P.L.
111117)

FY2010
Supp.
Enacted
(H.R.
4899; P.L.
111-212)

Total,
FY2010
Enacted

FY2011
Request

Title II. USAID Admin.,
Subtotal

1,650.3

7.9

1,658.2

1,695.5

1,526.9

-8%

USAID Operating Expenses

1,388.8

1,388.8

1,476.0

1,347.3

-3%

Civilian Stabilization Initiative

30.0

30.0

—

5.0

-83%

USAID Capital Investment
Fund

185.0

185.0

173.0

129.7

USAID Inspector General

46.5

7.9

54.4

46.5

44.9

-17%

Title III. Bilateral
Economic Assistance,
Subtotal

21,861.2

3,167.1

25,028.3

24,576.4

21,208.9

-15%

Global Health and Child
Survival, State + USAID

7,779.0

45.0b

7,824.0

8,513.0

7,829.3

0%

GHCS (State Dept.)

[5,359.0]

[5,359.0]

[5,500.0]

[5,334.3]

0%

GHCS (USAID)

[2,420.0]

[2,420.0]

[3,013.0]

[2,495.0]

+3%

Development Assistance

2,520.0

2,520.0

2,980.9

2,520.0

0%

International Disaster &
Famine Assistance

845.0

1,305.0

860.7

863.3

-34%

Transition Initiatives

55.0

55.0

48.0

54.9

0%

Complex Crises Fund

50.0

50.0

100.0

40.0

-20%

Development Credit Authority
– Admin

8.6

8.6

8.3

8.3

-3%

Development Credit Authority
Subsidy

[25.0]

[25.0]

[35.0]

[30.0]

+20%

Economic Support Fund

6,344.0

8,834.0

7,812.0

5,946.2

-33%

460.0

2,490.0

Change
between
FY2010
total and
P.L. 112-10

P.L. 11210a

-30%

Assistance for Europe; Eurasia
& Central Asia (AEECA)

741.6

741.6

716.4

695.7

-6%

Fund for Ireland

17.0

17.0

—

0

100%

Democracy Fund

120.0

120.0

—

114.8

-4%

Migration & Refugee
Assistance

1,693.0

1,858.0

1,605.4

1,686.6

-9%

Emergency Refugee and

45.0

45.0

45.0

49.9

+11%

Congressional Research Service

165.0

27

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

FY2010
Base
Enacted
(H.R.
3288/div
F; P.L.
111117)

FY2010
Supp.
Enacted
(H.R.
4899; P.L.
111-212)

Change
between
FY2010
total and
P.L. 112-10

Total,
FY2010
Enacted

FY2011
Request

1,558.0

1,558.0

1,778.7

1,324.5

-15%

Inter-American
Foundation

23.0

23.0

22.8

22.5

-2%

African Development
Foundation

30.0

30.0

30.0

29.5

-2%

Peace Corps

400.0

400.0

446.2

374.3

-6%

Millennium Challenge
Corporation

1,105.0

1,105.0

1,279.7

898.2

-19%

Department of Treasury, Subtotal

85.0

92.1

108.0

75.4

-17%

Treasury Department
Technical Assistance

25.0

32.1

38.0

25.5

-21%

Debt Restructuring

60.0

60.0

70.0

49.9

-17%

P.L. 11210a

Migration
Independent Agencies, Subtotal

7.1

Title IV. Military/Security
Assistance, Subtotal

6,985.5

1,281.7

8,267.2

9,962.9

8,116.7

-2%

International Narcotics
Control & Law Enforcement

1,597.0

1,181.7

2,778.7

2,136.0

1,593.8

-43%

Nonproliferation, AntiTerrorism, Demining

754.0

754.0

757.6

738.5

-2%

International Military Education
& Training

108.0

108.0

110.0

105.8

-2%

Foreign Military Financing

4,195.0

4,295.0

5,473.3

5,374.2

+25%

Peacekeeping Operations

331.5

331.5

286.0

304.4

-8%

Pakistan Counterinsurgency
Fund

—

—

1,200.0

0c

n.a.

2,649.7

3,307.8

2,302.6

-13%

Title V. Multilateral
Assistance, Subtotal

2,437.7

100.0

212.0

World Bank: Global
Environment Facility

86.5

86.5

175.0

89.8

+4%

International Clean Technology
Fund

300.0

300.0

400.0

184.6

-38%

Strategic Climate Fund

75.0

75.0

235.0

49.9

-33%

World Bank: Int’l.
Development Association

1,262.5

1,262.5

1,285.0

1,232.5

-2%

IADB: Enterprise for Americas
MIF

25.0

25.0

25.0

25.0

0%

IADB: Inter-American

4.7

4.7

21.0

21.0

+347%

Congressional Research Service

28

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

FY2010
Base
Enacted
(H.R.
3288/div
F; P.L.
111117)

FY2010
Supp.
Enacted
(H.R.
4899; P.L.
111-212)

Change
between
FY2010
total and
P.L. 112-10

Total,
FY2010
Enacted

FY2011
Request

105.0

115.3

0

-100%

106.6

106.4

n.a.

P.L. 11210a

Investment Corporation
Asian Development Fund

105.0

Asian Development Bank
African Development Fund

155.0

155.0

155.9

109.8

-29%

International Fund for
Agricultural Development

30.0

30.0

30.0

29.5

-2%

Global Food Security Fund

—

—

408.4

99.8

n.a.

International Organizations &
Programs

394.0

394.0

350.6

354.3

-10%

-

n.a.

Haiti Response/Debt Reliefd
Title VI. Export Aid,
Subtotal

212.0

212.0

-113.9

-113.9

-142.7

-130.5

-15%

Export-Import Bank (net)e

2.4

2.4

-9.5

2.4

0%

Overseas Private Investment
Corporation (net)f

-171.5

-171.5

-189.4

-182.8

-7%

Trade & Development Agency

55.2

55.2

56.2

49.9

-10%

Foreign Operations, Total

32,820.8

4,668.7

37,489.5

39,399.9

33,024.6

-12%

State/Broadcasting/Related
Programs, Total

16,104.2

1,515.3

17,619.5

17,406.7

15,951.0

-9%

—

16.6

55,109.0

56,823.2

48,975.6

-11%

General Provisions
State-Foreign Operations,
Total

48,925.0

6,184.0

Rescissions of prior year funding

(645.9)

New State-Foreign Operations
appropriations less rescission of
prior year funds

48,329.7

Source: U.S. Department of State budget documents, House and Senate Appropriations Committees, and CRS
calculations.
a.

Account funding levels in this column reflect CRS calculation of the 0.2% rescission across all non-defense
accounts for FY 2011 funds, in accordance with sec. 1119(a) of P.L. 112-10. Rescissions of prior year funding
are not reflected in account levels, but the total amount of such rescissions is noted in the last line of the
table. For foreign operations, the rescissions include Export-Import Bank - $17 million; Development
Assistance - $1 million; Assistance to Former Soviet States - $11.7 million; International Narcotics Control
and Law Enforcement - $7.2 million; Economic Support Fund - $120 million; Assistance to Europe, Eurasia
and Central Asia - $19 million.

b.

The agency managing the supplemental GHCS funds was not specified in the legislation.

Congressional Research Service

29

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

c.

While no funding was included in the State-Foreign Operations provisions of P.L. 112-10 for the Pakistan
Counterinsurgency Capability Fund, $800 million was included in the Department of Defense section of the
legislation for a similar fund.

d.

These funds are requested for contributions to the Inter-American Development Bank, the International
Development Association, and the International Fund for Agricultural Development to cancel debts owed
by Haiti and for disaster response activities following the January 12 earthquake. These contributions are
part of a multi-donor debt cancellation deal to which the U.S. has agreed.

e.

Appropriated funds are for expenses of the Inspector General. Administration expenses and loan program
funds are covered by Bank receipts.

f.

These figures represent anticipated OPIC receipts, minus amounts requested for administrative expenses
and credit funding.

Congressional Research Service

30

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Appendix E. International Affairs (150) Budget
Account
Table E-1. International Affairs (150) Budget Account, FY2010-FY2011
(in millions of current dollars)

StateForeign
Operations,
excluding
commissionsc

FY2010
Base
Enacted
(P.L.
111-117)a

FY2010
Supp.
Enacted
(H.R. 4899;
P.L. 111-212)

FY2010
Enacted,
Total

FY2011
Request

P.L. 11210b

48,782.1

6,184.0

54,966.1

56,692.9

48,842.6

Change
between
FY2010
total and
P.L. 11210

CommerceJusticeScience
Foreign Claim
Settlement
Commission

2.1

2.1

2.2

2.1

Int’l Trade
Commission

81.9

81.9

87.0

81.7

P.L. 480 and
McGovernDole

1,899.5

1,899.5

1,899.5

1,695.7

Total
International
Affairs (150)

50,765.6

56,949.6

58,681.6

50,622.1

Agriculture

6,184.0

Source: U.S. Department of State budget documents, House and Senate Appropriations Committees, and CRS
calculations.
a.

P.L. 111-32, the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009, included $1.8 billion that the Administration
considers forward funding for FY2010. Those funds are included in the FY 2009 column of this table. If the
funds are included in the FY2010 total, rather than FY2009, the FY2011 request represents a 12% increase
over the FY2010-enacted level.

b.

Account funding levels in this column reflect the 0.2% rescission across all non-defense accounts for FY
2011 funds, in accordance with sec. 1119(a) of H.R. 1473. Rescissions of prior year funding are not reflected
in this column.

c.

While funding for international commissions are appropriated in State-Foreign Operations bill, they are not
part of the International Affairs Function 150 Account.

Congressional Research Service

31

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Author Contact Information
Marian Leonardo Lawson
Analyst in Foreign Assistance
#redacted#@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

(name redacted)
Analyst in Foreign Affairs
#redacted#@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

(name redacted)
Specialist in Foreign Policy
#redacted#@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

Key Policy Staff
Area of Expertise

Name

Phone

General: Foreign Operations Policy Issues/Budget

Susan
Epstein

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Marian
Lawson

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

(name redacted)

E-mail

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

General: State Dept & Foreign Service Issues/Budget

Tamara
Resler

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Afghanistan Assistance

(name
redacted)

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

(name redacted)

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Africa Assistance

(name redacted)

Agency for International Development

Susan
Epstein

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Marian
Lawson

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

(name redacted)

7-....

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Asia Assistance

(name r
edacted)

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Broadcasting, International

Tamara
Resler

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Central Asia Assistance

(name redacted)

Civilian Stabilization/Civilian Response Corps

Nina
Serafino

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Debt Relief

Marty Weiss

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Development Assistance (bilateral)

Susan
Epstein

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

(name redacted)
Marian
Lawson

Congressional Research Service

7-....

7-....

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov
[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

32

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Area of Expertise

Name

Phone

E-mail

Disaster/Humanitarian Aid/Refugees

(name
redacted)

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

DOD and Foreign Assistance

Nina
Serafino

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Export-Import Bank

James
Jackson

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Family Planning Programs

(name
redacted)

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Health Programs, including HIV/AIDS, Malaria,
Tuberculosis, Child and Maternal

Tiaji Salaam

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Alexandra
Kendall

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Human Rights

Tamara
Resler

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

International Affairs Budget

Susan
Epstein

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

International Crime & Narcotics

Liana Wyler

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

International Organizations/UN Funding

Tamara
Resler

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Marjorie
Browne

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Iraq Reconstruction

(name redacted)

Latin America Assistance

Mark
Sullivan

Microenterprise

(name redacted)

Middle East Assistance

Jeremy
Sharp

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Military Assistance

Richard
Grimmett

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Millennium Challenge Corporation

(name redacted)

Multilateral Development Banks

Jonathan
Sanford

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Marty Weiss

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Overseas Private Investment Corporation

James
Jackson

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Peace Corps

(name redacted)

Peacekeeping

Marjorie
Browne

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Nina
Serafino

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Tamara
Resler

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Matthew
Weed

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Public Diplomacy

Congressional Research Service

7-....

7-....
7-....

7-....

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov
[re

dacted]@crs.loc.gov
[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

33

State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2011 Budget and Appropriations

Area of Expertise

Name

Phone

Refugee Aid

(name
redacted)

7-....

Russia/East Europe Assistance

(name redacted)

Terrorism

John Rollins

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA)

(name
redacted)

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

U.S. Institute of Peace

Tamara
Resler

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

U.N. Voluntary Contributions

Marjorie
Browne

7-....

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

7-....

E-mail
[redacted]@crs.loc.gov
[redacted]@crs.loc.gov

Acknowledgments
Ken Nakamura, who retired from CRS, co-authored this report.

Congressional Research Service

34

EveryCRSReport.com
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) is a federal legislative branch agency, housed inside the
Library of Congress, charged with providing the United States Congress non-partisan advice on
issues that may come before Congress.
EveryCRSReport.com republishes CRS reports that are available to all Congressional staff. The
reports are not classified, and Members of Congress routinely make individual reports available to
the public.
Prior to our republication, we redacted names, phone numbers and email addresses of analysts
who produced the reports. We also added this page to the report. We have not intentionally made
any other changes to any report published on EveryCRSReport.com.
CRS reports, as a work of the United States government, are not subject to copyright protection in
the United States. Any CRS report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without
permission from CRS. However, as a CRS report may include copyrighted images or material from a
third party, you may need to obtain permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or
otherwise use copyrighted material.
Information in a CRS report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public
understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to members of Congress in
connection with CRS' institutional role.
EveryCRSReport.com is not a government website and is not affiliated with CRS. We do not claim
copyright on any CRS report we have republished.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3AR41228. Public record. Not legal advice.