Supporting work in more than 100 countries, run by 1,211 employees, and with grant payments totaling $30.1 billion, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has become a modern figurehead for advocacy. “Inside the Gates” is a podcast series that provides a glimpse into the grants facilitating the organization’s impactful work.
The grants given by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation range from assisting global development to keeping kids in school in the United States. GAVI Alliance was granted $1.5 billion for expanding childhood immunizations. Gateway to College received $7.28 billion to expand a program that enables colleges to serve students who need remedial academic help.
How does the Foundation decide to whom they want to give their grants? Insights from “Inside the Gates,” as well as a newly streamlined evaluation structure, reveal this process.
The Foundation develops all of their grants and contracts using a four-phase process: (1) concept development, (2) pre-proposal, (3) investment development, and (4) management & close.
Concept development happens within the organization, “in consultation with foundation colleagues, researchers, policymakers, and other partners in the field.” Strategies –such as financial services for the poor, tobacco control and emergency response –are developed. More than two-dozen strategies have emerged from the goal of having the greatest possible impact with the greatest number of people.
Once strategic goals are set, the Foundation approaches organizations that they feel are well suited to the work. Request for proposals are also available online if the Foundation wishes to broaden their network or fund multiple organizations for a project.
The third phase, investment development, involves the legal and financial analysis teams from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. After a proposal, a budget, results framework and tracker are approved, the funded organization can begin their aid activities.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation prides itself on “maintaining quality interactions and clear and consistent communication” between a program officer and the grantee. The final step in the grant process is a final report that serves as a summary of the results achieved and lessons learned.
Since the premiere episode in 2012, the monthly “Inside the Gates” podcasts have highlighted grantees and employees of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Listening to these podcasts reveals the ins and outs of this organization and the projects it sponsors. People like Trevor Mundel, President of the Global Health Program, discuss the impact of effective grantee engagement on the foundation’s work. Others, such as Peter Kithene, an intern at the Gates Foundation, share their stories about working in third world countries and pursuing their dreams in the nonprofit community.
Overall, this podcast series, as well as the recently overhauled grant process give the public a better idea of what the Gates Foundation is doing to change the world. To listen to the podcasts and read in more detail about Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Grants, visit Inside the Gates.
– Grace Flaherty
Sources: Sustainable Sanitation Alliance, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Photo: Gavi Alliance
Special Interests and the Food Aid Program
In terms of volume, the United States is the largest international humanitarian donor. The U.S. contributed approximately $8 billion in emergency aid in the last five years. Yet, how efficiently is this funding being allocated, and are taxpayers getting their money’s worth?
According to Jared Pincin and Brian Brenberg, both professors at The King’s College, U.S. foreign aid works to benefit special interests and its full extent does not reach those who need it the most.
In their recent USA Today article, Pincin and Brenberg explain the relation between food aid and politically connected businesses. In their words, the reason for this is that food aid is “tied, which means that it must be sourced from U.S. producers and transported on U.S. ships.”
“Even though reforming such tied aid programs would help the needy and save money for U.S. taxpayers, Congress is unlikely to change the system. Foreign aid is a lucrative business for interest groups, which aggressively lobby political leaders for pieces of the foreign aid pie, i.e. contracts. Elected officials often reward these powerful industries or companies in exchange for help with re-election, sometimes even lobbying on their behalf.”
While this sounds like the works of shady operation, in Washington D.C. this practice is perfectly legal. Allocating funds in a way that benefits special interests ensures that the fundraising machine continues to operate without problems.
Through the food aid program, the U.S. buys produce and other farm commodities from U.S. farms. Then all this foodstuff is shipped to villages in poor countries in U.S. ships. While this practice greatly benefits U.S. corporations, indeed it has a negative impact on local farmers across the globe.
Since foodstuff can be obtained for free from an outside source, the market and therefore the incentive for local farmers to produce is nullified. This means that not only farmers in developing countries are loosing demand for their product, but they are not able to hire locals and expand their business, which curtails economic growth.
As Pincin and Brenberg conclude, foreign aid’s primary goal is to help those in need and not to pad the pockets of special interests. This is not to say that benefiting U.S. farmers and corporations is an entirely bad thing. But when foreign assistance funding is allocated based on who provides better fundraising, than the real needs of each program, it is not only a waste of taxpayer’s money, but it is a waste of world resources.
– Sahar Abi Hassan
Sources: Capitol Hill Daily, USA Today
Photo: Food for the Hungry
Malian Refugees Face Drought and Uncertainty
If faced with a choice between remaining in the relative safety of a refugee camp but being hungry, or returning to your home country to face violence and uncertainty, which would you choose?
The increasingly severe drought conditions that are affecting several countries in the West African Sahel states has forced many Malian refugees to consider this very question. Lack of food, shelter and other basic resources at refugee camps in nearby Mauritania, Burkina Faso and Niger have many considering a return to Mali, which continues to be wracked by violence.
Since the violence that pitted the government against rebel groups (mainly the Tuareg) began in Mali in 2012, nearly 146,000 Malians have been displaced both internally and abroad. Thousands fled to nearby Burkina Faso, further stretching the resources of a country that is consistently listed at the bottom of the Human Development Index (183 of 186 in 2013). Burkina Faso, which already faces its own high rates of poverty, has seen its food security become dramatically more uncertain due to both the drought and influx of refugees.
The drought affects seven West African countries (including Mali and Burkina Faso) and is mainly due to poor weather conditions – exacerbated by poor governance. Nearly 15 million people are affected, many of whom rely on good weather for strong harvests that serve as their livelihoods.
Malian refugees who fled during the past two years are making difficult choices between remaining in the safety of camps abroad, where there is no longer enough basic resources for them, or returning to their war-torn homes to try and make a new life. Mali has a population of 16 million, where 50% live below the poverty line and 47.6% fall between the ages of 0 and 14. Considering these statistics and the violence that continues, many needs of the young population that will allow it to grow in the future are not being met.
Both choices that the refugees face leave a strong possibility of falling into poverty and facing difficulty in securing a livelihood. The combination of food insecurity, conflict and displaced populations is and will continue to be a source of concern for countries throughout the world as this mixture is often at the root of instability that spills into further conflict and terrorism.
– Andrea Blinkhorn
Sources: VICE, The World Bank, Al Jazeera, Al Jazeera, Central Intelligence Agency, Google Drive, BBC News
Photo: The Guardian
How to Work for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
If there is any one charity organization most people have heard of, it might very well be the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Conceived in 2000, the B&MGF is widely considered one of the largest private foundations in the world. It is known for its robust endowment, its thorough transparency and its unwavering commitment to creating and sustaining a high quality of life in some of the world’s worst conditions, especially in Africa, the Middle East and India. Its celebrity-business-magnate-co-chair, Bill Gates, is pretty well known, too.
All of this makes for an attractive working environment; employees relentlessly fight against poverty and have the opportunity to work alongside driven and accomplished coworkers. These jobs, however, are difficult ones to land. Here is some advice geared toward the future Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation employee.
Know your potential position, inside and out
It is a good idea to familiarize yourself with the job’s perks – the designated quiet areas, the spacious atrium, the walls made of whiteboards and carefully crafted environment – but it is even more important to understand your place within the B&MGF process and why it is so critical. Whether you want a communications job advocating and publicizing policy or a vaccines job administering lifesaving shots in Africa, know why you would be integral to the larger picture. This deepened understanding will enable you to recognize the skills and passions you possess that are job-relevant. It will also test your commitment; are you really devoted to the B&MGF project, or do you just really like luxurious atriums? “Both” is an acceptable answer.
Don’t think of it as a nine to five gig
While there is a huge variety of workweek schedules among Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation jobs, it is best to partially ignore the logistics, placing extra emphasis on the organization’s humanitarian vision. There may be tasks to complete and mundane paperwork to file, but the fight against global inequality and extreme poverty is not something relegated to eight hours on weekdays. During “off-hours,” for example, problem solving, studying and teaching can be accomplished to fuel workday endeavors. Anyone dedicated enough to relieving global poverty to work tirelessly for the B&MGF might consider such activities perfectly typical anyway.
Know the issues
Working for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation requires that your passion for global poverty reduction has led you to a deep understanding of the issues. It takes accumulated knowledge and a commitment to continued learning.
“It is work that not only relies upon candidates with solid educations and related experience,” begins some advice found on the B&MGF website, “but also a rare dedication to the greater good that exceeds the importance of a specific title.” As is additionally noted on the site, one needs to demonstrate experience, discipline and humility before being seriously considered for the job. Fortunately for you, hanging around The Borgen Project, getting familiar with points of concern and topics of interest, is a great way to build the vocabulary and the mental framework necessary to talk fluently about global poverty and its eradication. You are already on your way.
— Adam Kaminski
Sources: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation 1, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation 2, Seattlepi
Photo: NBBJ
How Many People Go Hungry?
Hunger and malnutrition plague millions of people globally, but just how many people go hungry?
Statistics show that 842 million people in the world do not have enough to eat. The vast majority of these hungry people, about 827 million, live in developing countries, where 14 percent of the population is undernourished. Asia currently has the largest number of hungry people, over 500 million, but it is Sub-Saharan Africa that has the highest prevalence of hunger and malnutrition. One out of six children, 100 million children in developing countries, is underweight. Throughout the world, one in four children’s growth is stunted from malnutrition, particularly in these developing countries. Poor nutrition causes nearly half of deaths under the age of five, totaling 3.1 million children a year.
Since 1990, global hunger has been reduced by more than 34 percent, but roughly one billion men, women, and children are still food-insecure. Since the federal government began Food for Peace in 1954, more than three billion people in over 150 countries have benefited directly from U.S. food aid. An increase in this assistance would make substantial changes throughout the world. WFP calculates that $3.2 billion is needed per year to reach all 66 million hungry school-age children.
The world produces enough calories for every person on earth to eat around 2700 per day for each human. Millions of people go hungry not because food is lacking. Rather, many of these calories are not used to feed humans. One-third is used to feed animals, 5 percent is used in the production of biofuels, and up to a third is simply wasted. The current system in place allows the wealthy half of the planet to eat well while the rest of the world struggles to eat at all.
Many organizations and programs aim to reduce global hunger. Supporting peasant farming is one key factor in this goal, but it is equally important to rein in Western-style culture and the standard the American diet creates.
-Elizabeth Malfaro
Sources: World Food Programme, Bread for the World
Photo: USAID
World Refugee Day
If the current refugees made up their own country, it would be the 26th largest in the world.
Commemorating World Refugee Day, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees stated that there are currently 51.2 million asylum-seekers, internally displaced people and refugees worldwide.
The United Nations said that over 50 million people, an increase of six million from previous years, were forced from their homes by the end of 2013, which surpasses World War II peak numbers. Tensions in South Sudan, the Central African Republic and Syria have caused the increase, but the figure is expected to rise even further as the situation in Iraq worsens.
Currently, there are 1.2 million people searching for asylum, 33.3 million internally displaced people and 16.7 million refugees worldwide. About half of these uprooted people are children.
This has put much pressure on UNHCR and other efforts to provide refugees with food, education and healthcare. During 2013, conflict and violence drove about 32,200 people every day out of their homes, as opposed to 14,200 in 2011 and 23,400 in 2012.
In a report on the refugee crisis, UNHCR stressed the problems that host countries are having dealing with the flood of refugees. 86 percent of refugees worldwide find shelter in developing countries, which causes increased strain on those countries’ resources.
Syria was once the world’s second largest refugee-hosting country. The current Syrian conflict has moved it to the second largest refugee-producing country. Neighbors of Syria, such as Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon, are now facing problems on how to deal with this influx of refugees. Jordan, which has been receiving up to a thousand refugees a day, has been attempting to decelerate the wave of refugees across its border, with little luck.
The current crisis in Iraq is also a major problem. UNICEF recently raised Iraq’s crisis to a level three humanitarian disaster, the most severe label. U.N. officials said they were rushing to prepare for the projected 1.5 million displaced people. U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees António Guterres stated that humanitarians can only do so much, and solutions lie within political systems.
“We are seeing here the immense costs of not ending wars, of failing to resolve or prevent conflict,” he said. “Peace is today dangerously in deficit. Humanitarians can help as a palliative, but political solutions are vitally needed. Without this, the alarming levels of conflict and the mass suffering that is reflected in these figures will continue.”
— Colleen Moore
Sources: Kuwait Times
Photo: Flickr
Philanthropy and Emotional Responses to Global Poverty
What is more valuable: $55 given now or $85 given in three months? Obviously, $85 has a higher monetary value than $55, but peoples’ perceptions of value take more into account than the number itself—for instance, people consider the value of getting paid immediately. What’s more, peoples’ emotional states also influence their perceptions of value.
For example, research has shown that people who feel sad tend to act impatiently, so sad people would more often choose the instant $55 over the delayed $85. As it might be in one’s best interest to wait for more money, sadness hinders one’s ability to make wise financial decisions.
So when making financial decisions, one should suppress all emotion! Right?
Not necessarily, argues a new study published in Psychological Science. One emotion, gratitude, actually improves our ability to factor long-term options into decision-making. This study found that people who felt gratitude chose the delayed $85 unless the instant payment was $63, rather than $55. By contrast, people who felt neutral or happy needed only the $55 to choose the instant cash option.
How do these psychological studies relate to philanthropy and emotional responses to global poverty, though?
Ending global poverty requires people to philanthropize, but philanthropy comes in different varieties. Consider two: On the one hand, a person can donate money to, say, have a freshwater well built for people who lack access to clean drinking water. This method of philanthropy—”direct aid,” for lack of a better name—gets real results quickly.
On the other hand, a person can donate money to policy groups that work to mobilize the resources of national governments. This is advocacy, a method of philanthropy that sees results less quickly but often sees bigger results than direct aid. Both methods of philanthropy have been indispensable in the fight against global poverty. Yet, advocacy seems to be a less favored method for givers; for instance, the revenues of the International Rescue Committee were roughly 29 times greater than those of the Center for Global Development, a major policy-shaping organization, in 2013.
Charitable donations are subject to the same time value of money questions that arose in the experiment on emotions and decision-making. “Is it more useful to take the $55 or $85?” becomes “is it more useful to build a well now or to shape policy that secures water for millions of people?” The answer to these questions depends on a number of factors: the desperation of those without the well, or the likelihood that policies will be changed, to name a few.
Philanthropists should probably consider both options, but certain emotions such as sadness seem to inhibit their ability to do so.
People are inundated with images or facts concerning poverty calculated to make them feel sad. To feel less sad, people then donate. However, by nature people want sadness to diminish quickly, which seems best achieved if their donations get quick results. Might this fact then cause them to overlook the potential of advocacy?
In the interest of preserving both direct aid and advocacy philanthropy, perhaps the potential philanthropist must approach global poverty in a certain way. Responding to the grim realities of poverty with gratitude for one’s own fortune might indeed be more useful than responding with sadness—to philanthropists seeking to make the best financial decision, at least.
-Ryan Yanke
Sources: Psyblog, Harvard Psychological Science Magazine, The Borgen Project, Center for Global Development, International Rescue Committee
Photo: Huffington Post
A Typical Gates Foundation Grant
Supporting work in more than 100 countries, run by 1,211 employees, and with grant payments totaling $30.1 billion, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has become a modern figurehead for advocacy. “Inside the Gates” is a podcast series that provides a glimpse into the grants facilitating the organization’s impactful work.
The grants given by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation range from assisting global development to keeping kids in school in the United States. GAVI Alliance was granted $1.5 billion for expanding childhood immunizations. Gateway to College received $7.28 billion to expand a program that enables colleges to serve students who need remedial academic help.
How does the Foundation decide to whom they want to give their grants? Insights from “Inside the Gates,” as well as a newly streamlined evaluation structure, reveal this process.
The Foundation develops all of their grants and contracts using a four-phase process: (1) concept development, (2) pre-proposal, (3) investment development, and (4) management & close.
Concept development happens within the organization, “in consultation with foundation colleagues, researchers, policymakers, and other partners in the field.” Strategies –such as financial services for the poor, tobacco control and emergency response –are developed. More than two-dozen strategies have emerged from the goal of having the greatest possible impact with the greatest number of people.
Once strategic goals are set, the Foundation approaches organizations that they feel are well suited to the work. Request for proposals are also available online if the Foundation wishes to broaden their network or fund multiple organizations for a project.
The third phase, investment development, involves the legal and financial analysis teams from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. After a proposal, a budget, results framework and tracker are approved, the funded organization can begin their aid activities.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation prides itself on “maintaining quality interactions and clear and consistent communication” between a program officer and the grantee. The final step in the grant process is a final report that serves as a summary of the results achieved and lessons learned.
Since the premiere episode in 2012, the monthly “Inside the Gates” podcasts have highlighted grantees and employees of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Listening to these podcasts reveals the ins and outs of this organization and the projects it sponsors. People like Trevor Mundel, President of the Global Health Program, discuss the impact of effective grantee engagement on the foundation’s work. Others, such as Peter Kithene, an intern at the Gates Foundation, share their stories about working in third world countries and pursuing their dreams in the nonprofit community.
Overall, this podcast series, as well as the recently overhauled grant process give the public a better idea of what the Gates Foundation is doing to change the world. To listen to the podcasts and read in more detail about Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Grants, visit Inside the Gates.
– Grace Flaherty
Sources: Sustainable Sanitation Alliance, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Photo: Gavi Alliance
3 Most Infectious Diseases Among Children
Every year, more than six million children die before they reach their fifth birthday due to preventable infectious diseases according to the U.N. In a recent report, USAID revealed that the following three diseases are the greatest contributors to that statistic:
3 Most Infectious Diseases Among Children
Pneumonia, diarrhea and malaria together account for about a third of all child deaths globally. The symptoms and effects of these diseases can become severe if the infected person is malnourished or does not receive the proper necessary treatment. As a result, these three diseases are all the more rampant in developing countries.
Similarly to the U.N.’s goal to reduce the child mortality rate by two-thirds, WHO and UNICEF staff members worked together to create the Global Action Plan for Pneumonia and Diarrhea (GAPPD). This integrated plan seeks to end child deaths caused by these two preventable diseases by 2025. The GAPPD will also combine the practices for treating both pneumonia and diarrhea since the causes and treatment for these two diseases are interrelated.
Global poverty is directly related to the spread of infectious diseases in developing countries. This is why The Borgen Project along with so many other organizations work to decrease the multi-layered issue of poverty across the globe.
– Meghan Orner
Sources: Daily Times, WebMD, World Health Organization, World Health Organization
Photo: UNICEF
UC Global Food Initiative
University of California is determined to downsize hunger and make the world a healthier place. UC will research what is causing world hunger, how it could be solved, and then it will put its findings to work.
It is estimated that by the year 2025, the world’s population will reach eight billion, and UC wants to nutritiously feed all of the eight billion people.
President Janet Napolitano announced the launch of the UC Global Food Initiative at the Edible Schoolyard in Berkeley, CA on July 1, 2014. This program will be directed by Napolitano and the 10 UC chancellors.
“Our goal is audacious, and it is far-reaching. It is our intent to do everything in our power to put the world on a pathway to feed itself in ways that are nutritious and sustainable,” said Napolitano during a press conference on July 1. Napolitano went on to explain that the issue of “food” does not just consist of what people eat, but it also has to deal with delivery systems, population growth, climate issues and policy. She went on to say that, every night, one billion people go to bed hungry, while half a billion people are suffering from obesity.
There is already so much research going on at the different UC labs. For example, at the Berkeley lab, researchers have developed a smart cookstove called the Darfur stove. This stove is able to address food security issues caused by misplaced people in Darfur. At the same time, the Darfur stove is able to decrease women’s exposure to violence while collecting firewood.
Napolitano went on to explain that the idea of this organization is not to come up with a solution to problems that have to deal with food but to provide information and examples for communities in California and around the world on how to provide food security and sustainable food.
Some of the smaller ways the initiative will address food issues is by incorporating these issues in undergraduate and graduate classes.
In addition to traditional research topics such as agriculture, health and the environment, the program will also research topics such as law, humanities, education and social science to help develop discussion about food issues.
– Priscilla Rodarte
Sources: Contra Costa Times, University of California Office of the President, University of California Office of the President, Cookstove Projects, University of California
Photo: UCR Today
Top 5 Philanthropic Soccer Players
When the fans are cheering for their favorite teams in Brazil, people also notice that many soccer players give back to the society by doing charity work. Many of these philanthropic soccer players use their fame and foundations to help those in need. These top five soccer players go to a great length to help the poor and the vulnerable.
Source : SoccerTimes
1. David Beckham
Beckham is probably one of the most famous soccer players in the world. The former England national soccer team captain is also dedicated to charity work. He is one of the founders of the Malaria No More UK leadership council. His launched his own charity, the Victoria and David Beckham Charitable Trust, to give wheelchairs to disabled children. In total the Victoria and David Beckham’s trust has given nearly 1 million pounds to help hundreds of children from 2005 to 2010.
2. Didier Drogba
Didier Drogba is the captain and top scorer of Côte d’Ivorie National team. His charity foundation, Didier Drogba Foundation, has main goal of to preventing malaria in Africa. Its campaign brings awareness of malaria through media, distributes medical materials and delivers life-saving prevention methods. Dider Drogba is also a pacifist. As a popular figure in Ivory Coast, he successfully helped to negotiate a cease-fire after five years of civil war in the country.
3. Nwankwo Kanu
Nwankwo Kanu was a legendary player in Nigeria. He was the Capitan of Nigerian National Team, and also a UNICEF (United Nations Children’s Fund) ambassador. Kanu was diagnosed with a heart defect, but he coped with his disease and showed his soccer talent. Kanu established his “Nwankwo Kanu Heart Foundation” (KHF) in 2000, to help children in Nigeria and other African countries obtain heart surgeries and cardinal treatment needed. KHF had over 415 heart surgeries with a surprising 98.5 percent success rate.
4. Craig Bellamy
Craig Bellamy was a former Welsh soccer player and played for Liverpool, West Ham United and Manchester City. His foundation “Craig Bellamy Foundation,” based in Sierra Leone, gives children living in poverty the chance to play soccer and build new lives. When Craig Bellamy visited Sierra Leone in 2007, he saw the desperate poverty and also the local children’s passion for soccer games. He decided to use sports and education to inspire change in the region.
5. Dirk Kuyt
Dirk Kuyt is a famous Dutch soccer forward. Dirk Kuyt launched his own charity, the Dirk Kuyt Foundation, which helps homeless children in Holland and around the world. The foundation also supports and organizes events for people with disabilities. It believes that sports fun is for everyone, including those with disabilities.
– Jing Xu
Sources: Mirror, Didier Drogba Foundation, KANU, Craig Bellamy Foundation, Dirk Kuyt Foundation
Photo: Mama Mia