Sunday, March 24, 2019

Foreign Agent Registration & Funding Restrictions for NGOs. March 2019

https://www.nonprofitrisk.org/resources/articles/foreign-agent-registration-funding-restrictions-for-ngos/



Foreign Agent Registration & Funding Restrictions for NGOs

By Erin Gloeckner
Any U.S.-based nonprofit that operates internationally must cling to a complex web of regulations in each country where its presence is felt. Local labor laws, restrictions on financial transactions and banking, and restrictions on the use of foreign consultants are just a few of the hoops that U.S. non-governmental organizations (NGOs) must jump through to support grantees and programs in other countries.
While most NGOs exist for completely altruistic reasons—in the hopes of advancing human rights, health, economic prosperity, democracy, and conservation—many governments across the world place a high level of scrutiny on NGOs, due to concerns that foreign entities and their foreign funding suggest political influence from outside nations. Some governments might also be wary of cultural influences from visiting NGOs, which potentially threaten to alter local customs and power structures. To continue operating internationally, NGO leaders must stay informed of changing laws that require foreign entities to jump through hoops—some purposefully difficult—before providing aid in specific countries.
Due to the scrutiny around foreign funding and potential political influence entering a nation by way of its NGO host, most nations require NGOs and other foreign entities to register with the local government—and often abide by additional stipulations—before they can legally operate in that state. Depending on which nation an outside NGO wishes to operate in, registration could be relatively simple or complex. While on its face, a nation’s foreign entity registration law is likely directed at organizations engaging in ‘political activities,’ many of these laws are so broadly written that they apply to the work of NGOs— especially those that receive funding from outside the nation.
Russia recently received perhaps the loudest international outcry against its registration laws, called ‘foreign agent laws’—a title which, as assumed by NGO advocates around the world, means to evoke Cold War-like feelings aimed to galvanize the nation’s citizens against the presence of NGOs. Since instituting its foreign agent law in 2012, Russia amended the law to allow the state to register NGOs without their consent, after NGOs around the world initially pushed back against registration and its stigma. In 2015 Russia restricted NGO activity further by instating a law that enabled the state to identify and shut down ‘undesirable’ organizations. The law prohibits these blacklisted organizations from holding public events, distributing promotional materials and mass media messages, and cooperating with Russian financial institutions. Persecution is said to be heavy for organizations that refuse to disband, as well as for any cooperative Russian individuals or entities. This law effectively struck at a group of prominent NGOs operating in Russia, and also forced some international funders to cut ties with their local grantees.
Both governmental and NGO critics across the world have voiced concern that rather than promoting transparency between NGOs and its government, Russia’s foreign agent laws aim to quiet the voices of Russian citizens while further isolating them from the world. Amendments made to the law in 2016 were said to clarify the definition of ‘political activity’ in order to exempt most NGOs from foreign agent registration, but many international critics believe that the adapted language more broadly encompassed most NGOs, promising an ongoing struggle between Russian authorities and local NGO leaders.
Russia is but one example of a nation electing to tighten the noose around NGOs. Since the time of the Second Industrial Revolution when the presence of NGOs began to expand around the world, countries have enacted registration laws to regulate NGO activity. Along with foreign agent registration and scrutiny or limitations on the use of foreign funding, many countries demand additional conditions of registration.
Penalties for failure to comply with foreign agent requirements differ from country to country, but often include heavy fines or—in extreme cases—the imprisonment of NGO staff. For example, a nation that requires foreign agent registration might also require an NGO to:
  • Pay a registration fee
  • Seek approval of the organization name, logo and brand identity
  • Brand all documentation and publications according to local regulations
  • Seek approval of individual projects and related foreign funding
  • Seek licenses for specific programmatic activities (e.g., provision of healthcare or education)
  • Receive and manage all funding through specific banks or a single bank account
  • Submit to ongoing financial review by a national oversight body
  • Limit the number of foreign consultants used
  • Submit annual reports of all activities
  • Submit an annual audit report and, in some cases, appoint an auditor from a list approved by a national oversight body
  • Submit to the inspection of bank accounts, financial records, and other organizational documents (some states retain the right to inspect NGO accounts and materials at any time)
  • Notify a national oversight body at the time of disbandment (or even temporary closure of offices or programs)
Foreign agent registration requirements can typically be researched through a nation’s relevant government agency—oftentimes the Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Internal Affairs, NGO Affairs Agency, or Registrar of Societies. Another helpful starting point is the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL), which maintains a Civic Freedom Monitorthat provides up-to-date information on legal issues affecting civil society in roughly 50 countries. For most countries listed, the Civic Freedom Monitor comments on the relevant NGO registration body and known barriers to entry.
The United States itself passed the 1938 Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), which is sometimes confused with seemingly parallel laws that aim to restrict NGO activity in other nations. The purpose of FARA, according to The U.S. Department of Justice, is to inform Americans and the U.S. Government of the source of information and the identity of people/organizations attempting to influence U.S. public opinion, policy and laws. FARA was a direct response to German propaganda agents present in the U.S. prior to World War II. After the fall of the Third Reich, FARA was amended to require organizations to register as foreign agents if they engage in specified activities—namely in a political or quasi-political capacity—at the order, request, or under the direction or control of a foreign principal. The U.S. Department of Justice states that foreign entities that engage in these activities in the U.S. must ‘make periodic disclosure of their relationship with the foreign principal, as well as activities, receipts and disbursements in support of those activities.’
According to the US Embassy in Israel, ‘U.S. law imposes no limits, restrictions, or transparency requirements on the receipt of foreign funding by NGOs operating in the United States, other than those generally applicable to all Americans.’ Unlike foreign agent laws in some other countries, U.S. law does not specifically target NGOs simply because they are funded by foreign government entities or other foreign principals.
In regards to foreign agent registration, critics exist at both ends of the spectrum. NGO advocates believe that these laws bar humanitarian workers from providing much-needed support to communities around the globe, while others assert that NGO activity is a form of foreign interference that each nation has a right to scrutinize and regulate. NGO leaders must continue to be mindful of changing registration laws in each country in which they operate. Even when operating under the watch of unfriendly governments, an NGO’s presence and impact is validated by the reaction of the local community that it serves.
Erin Gloeckner is the former Director of Consulting Services at the Nonprofit Risk Management Center. The NRMC team welcomes your questions about the topics in this article or our work with NGOs, at 703.777.3504 or info@nonprofitrisk.org.

RESOURCES

Civic Freedom Monitor, The International Center for Not-For-Profit Law, www.icnl.org/research/monitor/
FAQs – Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, U.S. Department of Justice, www.fara.gov/fara-faq.html and www.fara.gov

Friday, March 22, 2019

Register...Drafting the NIST Privacy Framework: Workshop #2. Atlanta, GA


Be PROACTIVE now on privacy.

Privacy is an issue of concern for everyone.

If able to participate, participate.


BEMA International

Drafting the NIST Privacy Framework: Workshop #2

WORKSHOP
May 13, 2019 to May 14, 2019
Georgia Tech Scheller College of Business, Atlanta, Georgia
Registration closes on May 6, 2019. 

REMINDER: Register today for Drafting the NIST Privacy Framework: Workshop #2, on May 13-14, 2019, in Atlanta, Georgia! To learn more and to register, visit the event website here by May 6th, or until registration reaches capacity.

This is part of a series of workshops on the Privacy Framework, and will provide an opportunity for attendees to actively engage in facilitated discussions to respond to a discussion draft of the framework. NIST will use the breakout sessions at this workshop as input to validate or adjust the discussion draft to support the next stage of the process: releasing a draft framework. We are hoping to livestream the opening remarks, and will share more information about this soon. We thank the Georgia Tech Scheller College of Business in Atlanta, Georgia for hosting this event.

For more information about the Privacy Framework, including a working outline and summary analysis of Request for Information responses, please visit the NIST Privacy Framework website.

Best,

NIST Privacy Framework Team


NIST


Black Emergency Managers Association 
          International
1231  Good Hope Road  S.E.
Washington, D.C.  20020
Office:   202-618-9097 
bEMA International 

Hurricane Florence Long Term Recovery Grants Program. March 2019




We would like to introduce to you the Hurricane Florence Long Term Recovery Grants Program. The online application process is currently open and the deadline for application is April 14, 2019 at 5:00 pm EDT.

Documentation Links:  

1.  Request for Proposals   
2.  Using the GMIS (Grants Management Information System) as an applicant.

The American Red Cross is addressing the needs of Hurricane Florence survivors by reserving $3.8 million for a grant program that supports recovery services and extends the impact of current direct relief and financial assistance programs. This phase of recovery will prioritize the most vulnerable survivors in communities with the fewest recovery funding and service resources. These populations include, but are not limited to:
       Children, school-aged and younger
       Seniors
       Low-income households
       Culturally isolated communities, i.e., racial, ethnic or socio-economic groups
       Immigrants of all statuses
       Those with limited English proficiency
       Those with physical, cognitive or emotional disabilities
       Those living in rural or unincorporated areas with limited services
       Those not eligible for Red Cross individual assistance
       Those who lack access to Federal recovery resources

Applicant organizations may propose other populations and needs not yet identified by the Red Cross.

The priority of this Request for Proposals is to support established non-profit organizations with demonstrated experience in assisting individuals impacted by Hurricane Florence in federally-declared counties in North and South Carolina.

Program areas of support include:
       Home rebuild and repair
       Mold remediation
       Debris removal
       Temporary housing (i.e., rental housing)
       Access to licensed contractors
       Assistive/adaptive devices
       Health and mental health services
       Other essential social services

Additional detailed information is provided in the attached documents.

Please feel free to reach out to your relationship manager or me if you have any questions.

Thank you for your consideration.

Regards,

________________________________________________________________
Earl R. Brown | National Partner Relations & Agreements| National Disaster Partnerships

American Red Cross | National Headquarters | 431 18th . St. NW (3243) | Washington, DC 20006










Thursday, March 21, 2019

New Report: Climate Change Affects Every Step of the Food Value Chain. March 2019

A new IFPRI report examines climate change’s effect on global nutrition, and how mitigation and adaptation strategies throughout the food system can help.

  
Researchers from the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) have published an extensive report highlighting the effects of climate change on agriculture and global nutrition. The report, Climate Change and Variability: What are the Risks for Nutrition, Diets, and Food Systems?, compiles evidence-based research to provide a detailed look at food security, agriculture, and food systems in relation to climate change. The authors also examine future projections in these areas, seeking to acknowledge the complexity and importance of those relationships as both global population and global temperatures rise.

The report frames the food system as both a victim and a driver of climate change: while climate change negatively affects agriculture and the ability to feed the world, the food system intensifies climate change by significantly contributing to global greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs).

In an introductory post, the reports’ authors urge more research and action, calling the task of ensuring adequate global nutrition for all “the challenge of our lifetime.” The authors cite research projecting that at current rates of climate change, “it is likely that global food production will decline by two percent every decade until at least 2050, just as the world’s population is expected to reach 9.7 billion people.”

Persistent drought and other changes in weather patterns are already resulting in famine for millions of vulnerable people.

A 2016 report modeled the effects of this climate change on global health, estimating “excess mortality attributable to agriculturally mediated changes in dietary and weight-related risk factors,” and predicted half a million agricultural climate-related deaths in this time period.

The IFPRI authors state that nutritional status, ultimately leading to morbidity and mortality, “can be exacerbated by the effects of climate change at all stages of the food value chain.”

Featuring seven focal areas through a food system lens, the report brings together research on each piece of the food value chain and anticipated challenges posed by climate change. The authors suggests both climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies using a nutrition-sensitive approach that is also climate-aware.

The food system lens begins with agricultural input—elements like seeds, agricultural extension services, fertilizer use, soil quality, irrigation—and the importance of understanding how crop productivity and nutritional value can be simultaneously maximized. Next, food production and food storage are considered, stressing that increasing global temperatures and changing precipitation patterns cause changes in what food is grown, where it is grown, how it is stored, and whether it is nutritionally valuable and safe from pathogens.

Citing research by Colin Khoury and colleagues at the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the report asserts “food supplies are becoming increasingly homogeneous and dependent on a couple of truly ‘global crops.’” According to Khoury, “reliance worldwide on these crops heightens interdependence among countries in their food supplies, plant genetic resources, and nutritional priorities.”

Experts like Khoury say homogenization of crops grown reduces biological diversity, making crops more susceptible to climate events and pests, and reduces dietary diversity by limiting the variety of foods available to consumers. Dietary diversity is commonly associated with nutritional status, in particular with adequate consumption of micronutrients.

By decreasing crop variety or negatively affecting nutrient content of foods, climate change also has implications for food processing. The report explains increased need for food processing to fortify foods for populations with decreasing access to adequate nutrients, and to help ensure nutrient quality or stability nutritious foods if food storage and transport are challenged by climate change.

Among other distribution challenges, the report cites that rising temperatures will increase need for more refrigerated storage and transport, therefore increasing food system GHGs.

The IFPRI authors also address rising animal-source food consumption, citing World Resources Institute (WRI) research on the importance of animal-source protein in vulnerable populations’ food supplies, while urging that “those eating more [animal-source food] than is nutritionally necessary decrease their consumption.”

The final component of the food system lens is consumption and utilization of food, which involves consumer knowledge and food preparation skills. Utilization also depends on general health and absence of disease that affects nutrient absorption or increases nutritional needs.

Reduced food access will most affect consumption, the report says, because “climate change is expected to increase [food] prices as well as price volatility due to decreased production and increased loss.” The IFPRI authors cite evidence for the negative effect of food price increases on increased micronutrient deficiencies and other forms of undernutrition.

Reduced food access also increases incidence of obesity and noncommunicable diseases, the report says, referencing findings that “increasing food prices may lower the nutritional quality of dietary intakes, exacerbate obesity, and amplify health inequalities.”

As climate change decreases agricultural productivity and access, the authors argue, it will intensify inequity: the rural poor will be least equipped to adapt. The IFPRI report concludes that a food system that is both climate- and nutrition-sensitive is necessary to be sure nutrition is a key consideration in the development of climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies.

According to the authors, the strategies encompassed in the nutrition-sensitive and climate-aware food value chain must both “maximize nutrition entering the food value chain” and “minimize nutrition exiting the value chain.”

The report includes many recommendations, such as an adoption of agricultural practices that “maintain necessary levels of nutritious food production while minimizing the environmental effects of agriculture.” In addition, the report recommends working to enhance food storage and processing to address food safety concerns and maintain nutritional value of foods, arguing that, in addition to decreasing undernutrition, this could reduce food waste in low- and middle-income countries.

Other recommendations include improved infrastructure and transportation for improving smallholder farmer access to markets, and the creation and dissemination of public health campaigns for promoting the need for sustainability considerations in dietary guidelines. Prior research has recommended public health campaigns for mitigating the negative health effects of climate change.

For safeguarding vulnerable populations from climate change, the report suggests social services “to protect the most vulnerable from long-term stresses and short- term shocks that threaten food security.” It also emphasizes the importance of addressing and decreasing disease in these populations for increased utilization and absorption of nutrients consumed, as well as the importance of dietary diversity.

The authors also emphasize a need for improved early warning systems for detecting both slowly shifting patterns of rainfall or temperature and for extreme weather events.

IFPRI published this report in the days before the Trump administration announced that the United States will back out of the 2016 Paris Climate Agreement. The report’s authors suggest that collaboration and cooperation between the private sector, NGOs, and governments is key to improving nutrition using climate-conscious methods to “[protect] the health of people and the planet.”

Tuesday, March 19, 2019

March 31 Deadline for YOUTH Preparedness Council Application


Youth Preparedness Council Application Period ends on March 31

All applications and supporting materials for the Youth Preparedness Council (YPC) must be received no later than 11:59 p.m. PDT, March 31. The YPC brings teens together from across the country who are interested and engaged in community preparedness. Council members are selected based on their dedication to public service, their efforts in making a difference in their communities and their potential to expand their impact as national leaders for emergency preparedness. Students in 8th through 11th grade are eligible to apply.

To access the application materials, read about the current Council members, and for more general information about the Youth Preparedness Council visit www.ready.gov/youth-preparedness-council.

RECOMMENDED READING LIST

Search This Blog

ARCHIVE List 2011 - Present