0.824 AGENCY or PROGRAM 7.425 2014 HOUSE MARK 1.074 0.718 0.824 0.050 Agricultural Research Service 0.825 4.78 0.316 5.676 6.994 National Science Foundation 0.947 0.88 Operations & Research 4.653 Last night’s passage by the U.S. House of Representatives of a 2-year budget agreement brings the country one step closer to a temporary end of the across-the-board cuts known as sequestration. That’s a victory for U.S. researchers who say the universally scorned cuts have undermined U.S. leadership in science.But even if the Senate, as expected, approves the agreement next week, the scientific community will still be a long way from achieving its long-term goal of sustained growth in federal research spending. And it could be a month before scientists learn the extent to which federal research agencies will benefit from the deal.The agreement, announced on 10 December, provides $22 billion more in 2014 for the slice of the federal budget that supports all civilian research than would have been available if sequestration had stayed in place. That account, called nondefense discretionary spending, will grow by 4.7%, to $491 billion, in the 2014 fiscal year. In 2015, the pot gets an additional $9 billion bump over what it would have been under sequestration, although the total creeps up by less than $1 billion.Sign up for our daily newsletterGet more great content like this delivered right to you!Country *AfghanistanAland IslandsAlbaniaAlgeriaAndorraAngolaAnguillaAntarcticaAntigua and BarbudaArgentinaArmeniaArubaAustraliaAustriaAzerbaijanBahamasBahrainBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBeninBermudaBhutanBolivia, Plurinational State ofBonaire, Sint Eustatius and SabaBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswanaBouvet IslandBrazilBritish Indian Ocean TerritoryBrunei DarussalamBulgariaBurkina FasoBurundiCambodiaCameroonCanadaCape VerdeCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChadChileChinaChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombiaComorosCongoCongo, The Democratic Republic of theCook IslandsCosta RicaCote D’IvoireCroatiaCubaCuraçaoCyprusCzech RepublicDenmarkDjiboutiDominicaDominican RepublicEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEquatorial GuineaEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Faroe IslandsFijiFinlandFranceFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabonGambiaGeorgiaGermanyGhanaGibraltarGreeceGreenlandGrenadaGuadeloupeGuatemalaGuernseyGuineaGuinea-BissauGuyanaHaitiHeard Island and Mcdonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)HondurasHong KongHungaryIcelandIndiaIndonesiaIran, Islamic Republic ofIraqIrelandIsle of ManIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJerseyJordanKazakhstanKenyaKiribatiKorea, Democratic People’s Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwaitKyrgyzstanLao People’s Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanonLesothoLiberiaLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtensteinLithuaniaLuxembourgMacaoMacedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascarMalawiMalaysiaMaldivesMaliMaltaMartiniqueMauritaniaMauritiusMayotteMexicoMoldova, Republic ofMonacoMongoliaMontenegroMontserratMoroccoMozambiqueMyanmarNamibiaNauruNepalNetherlandsNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaraguaNigerNigeriaNiueNorfolk IslandNorwayOmanPakistanPalestinianPanamaPapua New GuineaParaguayPeruPhilippinesPitcairnPolandPortugalQatarReunionRomaniaRussian FederationRWANDASaint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da CunhaSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint Martin (French part)Saint Pierre and MiquelonSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSamoaSan MarinoSao Tome and PrincipeSaudi ArabiaSenegalSerbiaSeychellesSierra LeoneSingaporeSint Maarten (Dutch part)SlovakiaSloveniaSolomon IslandsSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSouth SudanSpainSri LankaSudanSurinameSvalbard and Jan MayenSwazilandSwedenSwitzerlandSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwanTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailandTimor-LesteTogoTokelauTongaTrinidad and TobagoTunisiaTurkeyTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUgandaUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited KingdomUnited StatesUruguayUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofVietnamVirgin Islands, BritishWallis and FutunaWestern SaharaYemenZambiaZimbabweI also wish to receive emails from AAAS/Science and Science advertisers, including information on products, services and special offers which may include but are not limited to news, careers information & upcoming events.Required fields are included by an asterisk(*)Academic lobbyists have vociferously complained about sequestration, created under a 2011 law aimed at shrinking the federal deficit over the next decade. In March, it resulted in a 5% cut in agency budgets for the rest of the 2013 fiscal year, which ended on 30 September.Lobbyists say those cuts slowed research aimed at improving the nation’s health, economic prosperity, and national security, and that keeping them in place would do even more serious damage. So research advocates were unanimous in praising what Hunter Rawlings, president of the Association of American Universities, called “a modest but important easing of sequestration.”The budget agreement temporarily reconciles disparate political views on how to reduce an annual deficit that grew to $1.4 trillion in 2009 before dipping to $680 million in 2013. Most Republicans would like to cut spending, especially for mandatory programs like Medicare, without raising taxes. Most Democrats favor an increase in revenues to protect various domestic programs. There is bipartisan support for sparing the military, which bore one-half of the cuts under sequestration.The compromise struck this week will mean a bit more spending and a few revenue “enhancements,” along with a 2-year extension to 2023 of the original budget agreement. Sequestration remains a threat, but not until 2016.“As cynical and pessimistic as I’ve become about the process over the 29 years I’ve been doing this, there are some glimmers of hope,” says Dave Moore of the Association of American Medical Colleges in Washington, D.C. “One is that we’ll be able to be more certain about spending for next 2 years.”One reason for Moore’s optimism is the return of what is known as “regular order,” meaning allowing spending panels in both the House and Senate to specify the budgets of every federal agency. The work is parceled out to 12 appropriations subcommittees, and several of the subcommittees reported out bills earlier this year as part of that process.Without exception, the House bills awarded less money for research than their Senate counterparts (see table, below). That’s in large part because senators had $91 billion more to work with than their House counterparts.The budget agreement eliminates that difference by providing about $45 billion more in 2014 than the House level. “The final [budget] numbers came in higher than a lot of people would have predicted when they started negotiating,” Moore notes. “So it does give the appropriators some latitude in restoring the cuts” to the National Institutes of Health and other research agencies.Those earlier spending bills are expected to form the basis for a final agreement. But instead of having several months to work through the budget, appropriators will have only a few weeks to beat a 15 January deadline for avoiding another government shutdown.Legislators now have several options for completing work on the 2014 budget. They could simply split the differences between the House and Senate versions for the thousands of programs within each spending bill. But because budget bills are an ideal way for members to exert their influence, it’s more likely that there will be winners and losers among agency programs. And given the short time frame, lobbyists from the scientific community will have little chance to influence their deliberations.If Congress cannot pass separate appropriations bills, it could instead roll all spending into one package, called an omnibus bill. Or it could pass a few spending bills and wrap the rest into a smaller omnibus.If the process breaks down completely, the current continuing resolution (CR), which freezes spending at 2013 levels, could be extended for weeks or months until cooler heads prevail. However, CRs tend to treat all programs equally, making it harder for science advocates to argue for protecting research.Status of 2014 Appropriations for Select U.S. Science Agencies 1.123 (US$ in billions) Research Office of Atmospheric Research 3.296 Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy 0.348 0.609 0.290 Census Bureau DOE Office of Science 0.982 NASA 16.60 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 5.152 5.15 Joint Polar Satellite System Science Office 2014 SENATE MARK 0.446 3.037 0.784 0.772 Agriculture and Food Research Initiative National Institute of Food & Agriculture 30.95 Education 0.703 none 18.01 0.379 0.844 National Institute of Standards and Technology National Institutes of Health 6.018 Science & technology labs
COMMENT October 30, 2017 motorsport An ecstatic Lewis Hamilton became Britain’s first four-times Formula One world champion on Sunday after fighting back from last place following an opening-lap collision with arch-rival Sebastian Vettel at the Mexican Grand Prix.In a race won by 20 year-old Dutch prodigy Max Verstappen, in a Red Bull, the 32 year-old Mercedes driver finished ninth to cement his place as his country’s most successful driver of all time.Vettel, the only man who could have delayed the seemingly inevitable, ended up fourth after starting on pole position and then dropping to 19th following a pitstop to replace a broken front wing.Hamilton has an unassailable lead of 56 points with two races, worth a total of 50, remaining in Brazil and Abu Dhabi.“It doesn’t feel real. That’s not the kind of race that you want but I never gave up. I kept going right to the end,” said a jubilant Hamilton, the British flag proudly draped over his shoulders. He had raised both hands to his helmet as he took the chequered flag, with the crowd rising to applaud.“Lewis has done a superb job all year and deserves to win the title,” said Vettel. “Congratulations to him. It is his day.”Sunday’s race was both the best and worst of afternoons for the sport’s biggest star, who ended up sprinting down the pitlane chased by fans.A winner nine times this season, including five of the six before Mexico, ninth was Hamilton’s lowest placing of the campaign and he did it despite having a badly damaged car at a track where overtaking is difficult enough anyway.Hamilton’s team mate Valtteri Bottas finished second at the Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez with Ferrari’s Kimi Raikkonen third.Aggressive moveVettel had needed to be in the top two to have any chance of taking the title fight down to Brazil in two weeks’ time but his already slim hopes seemed to have disappeared within seconds of the start.Verstappen, with nothing to lose and everything to gain from his front row position, seized the lead with an aggressive move through the opening right-left-right corners and the Red Bull bumping wheels with Vettel as he went through.Hamilton, starting in third place, tried to follow Verstappen but the Ferrari’s front wing sliced Hamilton’s rear right tyre as they made contact at turn three.“Did he hit me deliberately?” asked Hamilton over the radio, limping back to the pits and fully aware that Vettel’s only real hope of getting back into the reckoning would be if the Briton went out.“Not sure, Lewis,” his race engineer Peter Bonnington said in reply. It looked far from deliberate and stewards swiftly decided that no further investigation of the incident was necessary.Vettel pitted while Hamilton, who had started the day 66 points clear of his rival, had a longer stop while mechanics inspected his car for further damage.The incident robbed the crowd of the prospect of a real duel between the two contenders, who will both be four-times champions when next season starts, but they still provided thrills as they fought back.High fiveHamilton, who had a thrilling wheel-to-wheel tussle with former McLaren team mate Fernando Alonso in the latter stages that could have cost him dear, had hoped to celebrate by spraying the winner’s champagne from the top of the podium.Instead, there was the considerable consolation of being one of only five men—Germany’s Michael Schumacher, Argentina’s Juan Manuel Fangio, France’s Alain Prost and Vettel—to win four titles or more since the championship started in 1950.Prost and Vettel both have four, with the late Fangio on five and Schumacher seven.Hamilton’s tally of titles took him above fellow-Briton Jackie Stewart and also his late Brazilian idol Ayrton Senna in the all-time lists.“An unusual way to be world champion but you are world champion very simple. Nobody cares how you do it,” said Mercedes’ non-executive chairman Niki Lauda, himself a triple champion.“Who cares? It’s about the result,” said team boss Toto Wolff, when asked how it had felt to see Hamilton lapped by Verstappen. “He was lapped because he was crashed into.”The victory was the third of Verstappen’s career and second of the season, cementing the youngster’s position as the rising star of the sport.France’s Esteban Ocon was fifth for Force India, with his Mexican team mate Sergio Perez seventh and behind the Williams of Canadian rookie Lance Stroll.Danish driver Kevin Magnussen was eighth for Haas with Alonso taking the final point. sport SHARE SHARE EMAIL Published on COMMENTS SHARE ×
Pakistan Cricket Board has appointed former captain Inzamam-ul-Haq as the head of the new selection committee, which also includes former test off-spinner Tauseef Ahmed.”We are happy that Inzamam has accepted to be the chief selector and we will give him full authority in selecting the teams,” chairman PCB Shaharyar Khan told reporters in Lahore on Monday.Former international fast bowler Wasim Haider and batsman Wajahatullah Wasti are the other members of the new selection committee.Inzamam was the Afghanistan cricket team coach for the past six months, but said he was released by Afghanistan Cricket Board to perform national duty.”I want to thank ACB that they allowed me to do national duty,” Inzamam said. “I worked for them for six months, I am thankful to their players and their cricket board officials for the cooperation.”Under Inzamam’s coaching, Afghanistan defeated Zimbabwe in both one-day and Twenty20 series and also qualified for the Super 10 stage of the World Twenty20, where it beat eventual champion West Indies in a group match.Inzamam replaced Haroon Rasheed as chief selector after the PCB dissolved the selection committee when Pakistan won only one of its three group matches at the World Twenty20 in India.”I have picked one spinner, one fast bowler and a batsman in my team (of selectors) to cover all the areas,” Inzamam said. “I don’t have a magic wand to improve the performance of the team, it will take some time and you have to be patient.”Soon after the World Twenty20, coach Waqar Younis quit and wicketkeeper Sarfraz Ahmed replaced Shahid Afridi as Twenty20 captain.advertisementKhan said the PCB was in touch with several foreign and local coaches and hoped the new coach will be appointed this month.Inzamam said the coach and captains of all the three formats of the game – Tests, one-day internationals and Twenty20s – will be consulted before he finalizes Pakistan squads.”When I was the captain, I used to give my suggestion to the selectors. Similarly I will give importance to what captains and coach will have to say because they are the ones who ultimately matter,” he said.Pakistan is currently ranked No. 4 in test matches, but has slipped to eighth and seventh in ODIs and Twenty20s.”Our cricket is not at its peak,” Inzamam said. “If we have to improve, selectors, captains and coaches have to work on the same page otherwise we will face the same problems.”Mushtaq Ahmed appointed as NCA headTest leg-spinner Mushtaq Ahmed as the new head coach of their National Cricket Academy (NCA).Mushtaq, who was until recently the bowling coach of the national team, has been tasked with the responsibility of running the NCA affairs.PCB Chairman Shaharyar Khan told reporters in Lahore that the Board wanted to make the NCA a separate entity so that total focus would be on cricket and players. Pakistan travel to England in July for four test matches, five one-day internationals and a Twenty20.
For the second straight time in the Copa America at home, Brazil was jeered by its fans.The hosts followed a lackluster win over Bolivia with a scoreless draw against Venezuela in the Copa America on Tuesday, prompting another wave of boos from the home crowd.This time, Brazil even endured chants of “ole” by the local fans when the Venezuelans touched the ball near the end of the match.”Obviously it doesn’t help when the fans are against us, chanting ‘ole’ for our opponent,” Brazil left-back Filipe Luis said. “In the end, that doesn’t help anybody. We need to keep fighting and keep giving our best to try to change things.”Brazil played better than it did in the opener against Bolivia, but it was not able to break through the stout Venezuelan defense at the Arena Fonte Nova.”It’s frustrating,” Filipe Luis said. “We did everything we could to try to win this match. We had many scoring chances, we controlled the game, but we couldn’t come away with the victory.”Brazil had two goals reversed by video review because of offside calls, one by Gabriel Jesus early in the second half and another by Philippe Coutinho near the end of the match.Despite the setback, the hosts stayed at the top of Group A with four points, tied with Peru, which earlier Tuesday defeated Bolivia 3-1 in Rio de Janeiro. Venezuela, which opened with a 0-0 draw against Peru, has two points.The group will be decided on Saturday with Brazil facing Peru in Sao Paulo and Venezuela taking on Bolivia in Belo Horizonte. The top two teams in each group advance to the next round, along with the two best third-place finishers.advertisementBrazil thought it had scored with substitute Gabriel Jesus shortly after halftime, but the goal was disallowed after a review showed that Roberto Firmino, who made the pass to the Manchester City striker, was offside when the ball deflected off a Venezuela defender. The Brazilians complained, arguing that it was a pass not a deflection by the defender.”Welcome to the VAR, long live the VAR,” Venezuela coach Rafael Dudamel said. “No one gifted anything to us. Justice was made and you have to keep believing in those who do justice.”Coutinho’s goal with about five minutes left in regulation was reversed because his close-range shot deflected off Firmino, who was in an offside position in front of the net. The goal would have stood had the ball not touched the Liverpool forward.”We can’t complain about the VAR,” Brazil coach Tite said. “Justice was made.”Firmino had a goal disallowed late in the first half for pulling a defender inside the area before he scored.Brazil’s first goal in the 3-0 win over Bolivia on Friday had come from a penalty awarded by video review.It was Venezuela which had the best scoring opportunity in the first half with a close-range header by striker Salomon Rondon that missed just wide.Brazil nearly got the winner in second-half stoppage time with a header by Fernandinho that nearly found the far corner.Brazil hadn’t been held scoreless in a match at home since the 3-0 loss to the Netherlands in the third-place match in the 2014 World Cup.Brazil is seeking a ninth Copa America title. It won the tournament all four previous times it hosted the event, the last time in 1989.Venezuela’s best Copa finish was a fourth place in 2011.Also Read | Ex-UEFA boss Michel Platini arrested as part of 2022 World Cup investigationAlso Read | Chile begin Copa America title defense by trouncing Japan 4-0Also See
Barcelona Barcelona’s Deulofeu in doubt for Clasico after training injury Russell Greaves 03:20 12/16/17 FacebookTwitterRedditcopy Comments(2) Getty Images Barcelona Real Madrid v Barcelona Barcelona v Deportivo La Coruña Real Madrid Deportivo La Coruña Primera División The Catalan side face bitter rivals Real Madrid next week, but may do so without the 23-year-old foward Gerard Deulofeu’s participation in El Clasico is in doubt after the forward suffered an injury in training on Friday.The 23-year-old strained ligaments in his left knee as Barcelona prepared for Sunday’s visit of Deportivo La Coruna.Barca confirmed he will be out for up to 10 days, which could rule him out of the showdown with Real Madrid on December 23, as well as this weekend’s Liga clash. Article continues below Editors’ Picks Lyon treble & England heartbreak: The full story behind Lucy Bronze’s dramatic 2019 Liverpool v Man City is now the league’s biggest rivalry and the bitterness is growing Megan Rapinoe: Born & brilliant in the U.S.A. A Liverpool legend in the making: Behind Virgil van Dijk’s remarkable rise to world’s best player Deulofeu has struggled for form this season, but coach Ernesto Valverde said last month that he was “not worried” about the Spain international.Deulofeu has made nine appearances in La Liga this season, scoring on one occasion.
Premier League Who is Amanda Staveley? Newcastle United’s potential new owner profiled Goal Last updated 1 year ago 18:30 12/15/17 FacebookTwitterRedditcopy Comments(0) Getty Premier League Newcastle United WTF Goal takes a look at the woman who is looking to strike a deal for the takeover of the Premier League club, as well as who else is in the running Amanda Staveley remains interested in taking over Newcastle United, according to the Chronicle.Current owner Mike Ashley put the Premier League club up for sale at the end of last year and businesswoman Staveley has been attempting to negotiate an agreement for the past five months.The 44-year-old looks ready to end Ashley’s 10-year reign with the Magpies, which has been fraught with controversy and two relegations, should the club remain a Premier League outfit for the 2018-19 campaign. Article continues below Editors’ Picks Lyon treble & England heartbreak: The full story behind Lucy Bronze’s dramatic 2019 Liverpool v Man City is now the league’s biggest rivalry and the bitterness is growing Megan Rapinoe: Born & brilliant in the U.S.A. A Liverpool legend in the making: Behind Virgil van Dijk’s remarkable rise to world’s best player A deal worth around £300 million was previously tabled by Staveley’s group, according to the BBC, though the purchase price will be reduced dramatically should Rafa Benitez fail in his attempt to steer the club away from a return to the Championship.As the speculation continues to rumble quietly around St James’ Park, Goal takes a look at what we know about one of the leading candidates.WHO IS AMANDA STAVELEY?Amanda Staveley is a British businesswoman and is currently a senior partner with the financial advisory firm PCP Capital Partners.Born in Yorkshire in April 11, 1973, Staveley was educated at Queen Margaret’s School before enrolling at St Catharine’s College, Cambridge, where she read modern languages. During her time at university, Staveley worked a number of different jobs, including a stint as a model.Prior to her work with PCP Capital Partners, Staveley had business interests in the hospitality and telecommunications industries.Her net worth is reported to be in the region of £100m.Personal lifeThe moniker ‘Queen of British football’ became fashionable when Staveley was famously dating royalty in the form of Pince Andrew, the Duke of York.However, the romance did not last and Staveley is now married to Mehrdad Ghodoussi, a man who worked with her firm PCP Capital Partners. The pair got hitched in 2011 and have one child.IS STAVELEY INVOLVED WITH OTHER CLUBS?While she does not own any other clubs, Staveley’s name is also associated with Premier League giants Manchester City and Liverpool due to role she played in separate deals involving both clubs back in the mid to late 2000s.She was once described by the Daily Telegraph as ‘the most powerful woman in British football’ when she played a key role in brokering Sheikh Mansour’s famous takeover of Manchester City in 2008, which made the English club one of the richest in world football.Around the same time, Staveley was also involved Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al Maktoum’s proposal to purchase a 49 per cent stake in Liverpool, a deal that would have seen her become involved with the Merseyside club at boardroom level. However, that deal ultimately did not materialise.WHO ELSE COULD TAKE OVER?Staveley is not the only person who is said to have their eye on Newcastle.Andrew Henderson, who is the lawyer of the club’s current owner Mike Ashley, told the BBC in October 2017 that they were in negotiations with a number of “credible” parties regarding the potential sale.”A number of additional parties have come forward which we believe to be credible,” said Henderson. “We are continuing to engage in conversation with a number of parties with whom we were engaged in negotiations prior to Monday’s announcement [that the club is for sale].”As well as Staveley, Turkish billionaire and popularly dubbed ‘biscuit king’ Murat Ulker had been linked with a bid by the Evening Standard. Check out Goal’s Premier League 2019-20 fantasy football podcast for game tips, debate and rivalries.
This, dear readers, is my 500th post here on Katya’s Nonprofit Marketing Blog. I wanted to make it extra special and wise, so I decided I’d better not be the one writing it. A couple of weeks ago here and on Twitter, I asked you to contribute to this post with the one piece of wisdom that you wish you’d known at the start of your nonprofit marketing and fundraising efforts – or the lesson you keep finding yourself forgetting. Here are 16 gems from you – each of which I’ve named in honor of the contributor. If some of these sound like common sense, good. That’s the funny thing about common sense – it’s rather uncommon in this world. Thanks for sharing everyone – and for reminding me of some things that are far too easy to forget amidst the daily grind.Nancy’s rule: Reflect first.Think before you act! It’ll save you endless frustration, time and money… and ensure you’re doing the most with the marketing & fundraising resources you have.Nancy SchwartzJoel’s rule: But don’t reflect too long. It’s never going to be perfect anyway.You can’t get good without practice. If you stay behind your desk, waiting to “get good” before going out to tell your story, you’ll never “get good.” You MUST go out and present people with the chance to get involved with your cause, way before you’re comfortable doing so, and certainly before you’re “good” at it.Joel PrestonThomas’s rule: Pay attention to what you do right – and wrong.My input for your 500th post is my personal philosophy about life in general and fundraising in particular: “Do what works.” If you don’t know what works, research what has worked (and not worked) for others. Once you start trying things, pay attention to what brings positive results and what brings negative results. Hang onto the things that bring positive results and let go the ones that bring negative results. Finally, remember that everything changes, so what worked today may not work tomorrow. You must always keep your eye on the ball.Thomas RobinsonTony’s law of targetingIt’s not about being everything to everyone; It’s about crafting a clear, concise, and radically different organization that means much to a select few.Tony PantelloTamsen’s rule of originalityKnow what and who you are, and be the best of that you can be. So many non-profits spend all their time trying to be some other non-profit. But why be a copycat? Copies always lose resolution.Tamsen McMahonLaws of the Audience by Amy, Taryn and ZanMy piece of wisdom is that in direct mail fundraising, you, the mailer, are not the audience.Amy TripiKnow your audience and adapt your message to them to maximize effect.Taryn BaranowskiAudience, audience, audience. Always think about what they care about, are dealing with, are motivated by. You (communications pro) might be part of that audience, but you must always be thinking outside of yourself. Start every email, every newsletter article or blog post, with an a specific person in mind that you are trying to reach.Zan McColloch-Lussier Jeremy’s rule of relationshipsDon’t just market and fundraise to people, connect with their passions and forge relationships—a donation to your cause is nice, but a supporter of your cause is better.Jeremy Sony Elizabeth on StorytellingTell a good story. I can’t emphasize enough to my nonprofit clients how important it is to tell stories about their work instead of talk about themselves. Here are some ideas on what makes a good story.Elizabeth TurnbullNiels’ Advice: Think like a 14 year old.I learned this when I was fourteen and then I forgot again. Don’t ask me why. Go door to door, explain why you are knocking on their door and ask for their help. I you believe in your cause, you will find many other who do too. What advantage does a fourteen year old have? When you say you believe in something, people tend to believe you. So, what do you need to do to make people believe you? I don’t think it is about the clever packaging, but about the passion of your conviction.Niels TeunisSergio: Be passionate.Giving is not only talking about money. Giving is also doing something with your heart.Sergio FelterAmy’s Rule of constructive dispassionA nonprofit organization is still a business. Don’t ignore those business “tru-isms” because you think they don’t apply to a charity. One of my professors once said that most nonprofits fail because its run by someone who has great passion for the cause–but little business sense. If you’ve got passion – that’s the hard part, just bring some business skills into it and you’ve got the major pieces for success!Amy ShropshireClover: Forever young (or dead)Reach out to young people (for volunteers, board members, staff, etc.) or you will surely die as your supporters do.Clover FrederickKaren’s Rule: Don’t try to do it all.Twitter, Facebook, blogging, newsletters, e-mail blasts, brochures, press releases, internal communication, etc. You can’t do it all. Figure out what you must do and what you can do well that will set you apart, master those, and stay focused.Karen WashbushBarb’s Last Word: Take the long view.It takes time. I keep forgetting that.Barb McMahon
Network for Good is hiring. Let me know if you’re interested in these positions. We have sales positions and an opening for a user interfact/front-end engineer. Terrific people, please apply!
From UNFPA:Increasing women’s access to quality midwifery has become a focus of global efforts to realize the right of every woman to the best possible health care during pregnancy and childbirth. A first step is assessing the situation. The report provides new information and data gathered from 58 countries in all regions of the world. Its analysis confirms that the world lacks some 350,000 skilled midwives — 112,000 in the neediest 38 countries surveyed — to fully meet the needs of women around the world. The report explores a range of issues related to building up this key health workforce.Share this: The State of World’s Midwifery 2011: Delivering Health, Saving Lives, supported by 30 partners, provides the first comprehensive analysis of midwifery services and issues in countries where the needs are greatest. ShareEmailPrint To learn more, read: Posted on June 20, 2011August 17, 2016Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Earlier today, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) released “The State of the World’s Midwifery 2011: Delivering Health, Saving Lives.” In addition to the formal report, UNFPA has included interactive tools, data, country profiles and stories from the field for people to learn more about midwifery.
Posted on September 1, 2011June 19, 2017By: Mikkel Oestergaard and Colin Mathers, World Health OrganizationClick to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)The following post originally appeared on the Healthy Newborn Network blog. It is reposted here with permission.Where you are born matters tremendously for your risk of dying within the first four weeks of life – for example, if your mother gave birth to you today in Mali, you would be more than 30 times more likely to die within the first four weeks of life compared to someone being born today in Sweden. And compared to a generation ago – in 1990 – your chances of dying within this period of life has reduced by only 13% in Mali, but by 54% in Sweden. ShareEmailPrint To learn more, read: These are some of the sad realities in global newborn health coming to light by new estimates of newborn mortality produced by the World Health Organization (WHO) in collaboration with other United Nations agencies, academic researchers from the Child Health Epidemiology Reference Group and Save the Children. The work is part of an ongoing international collaboration led by the WHO and UNICEF to understand levels and causes of child mortality in the world – both in newborn and in children under the age of five.Estimates build on the largest publicly available database of newborn mortality, and on novel analytical methods for predicting trends and levels of newborn mortality risk, including the development of a statistical model to predict for the 155 countries (92% of global live births in 2009) without reliable civil registration systems to capture the birth and death of newborn.The new evidence includes annual time series for the period 1990-2009 of newborn mortality risk and deaths for 193 countries – the first ever United Nations estimates of levels and trends of global newborn mortality – and provides new key data for national and international efforts in setting priorities for improving newborn health.With this work, it is becoming clear that progress in reducing newborn mortality is trailing further and further behind advancements being made in reducing mortality in older children and in maternal mortality, which calls for increased explicit focus on newborn health to meet the increasing relative burden of newborn mortality in the world.A total of 79 million babies died in the first month of life over the 20 years from 1990 to 2009, with a reduction in annual number of deaths from 4.6 million in 1990 to 3.3 million newborn deaths in 2009.Between the years 1990 and 2009, the average annual rate of reduction in the risk of newborn mortality was 1.7% per year globally, but almost 25% faster for child mortality (at 2.1% per year) and more than 35% faster for maternal mortality (at 2.3% per year). In the same time period, the proportion of annual child deaths that occur in newborn has increased by 8% globally, from 37% to 41%.The global numbers hide large regional and country differences in reducing newborn mortality risk. Africa is clearly falling further and further behind the rest of the world in improving care for newborn and is today the region with the highest mortality risk for newborn – for every 1000 live births in Africa today, close to 36 babies will die in the first month of life. If current rates of progress continues in Africa, it will take the region more than 150 years to catch up to newborn survival rates experienced today in high-income countries such as Sweden where less than 4 babies die per 1000 live births.We all want to see our babies having the best possible chances of survival no matter where the mother is giving birth. We hope that everyone will make use of this new evidence base to help set priorities in newborn health to help develop conditions and care that allow all babies the same high chances of survival.Photo: Laurent Duvillier/Save the ChildrenShare this:
RH Vouchers is a project of the Population Council. Follow RH Vouchers (@RHVouchers) and the Population Council (@Pop_Council) on Twitter for regular updates on this project and others! ShareEmailPrint To learn more, read: Take a look at the Resources section of the RH Vouchers site and access the Quick Guide to Developing Voucher Programmes, World Bank: A Guide to Competitive Vouchers in Health, and other resources. Abstract:This paper examines community-level association between exposure to the reproductive health vouchers programme in Kenya and utilization of services. The data are from a household survey conducted among 2527 women (15–49 years) from voucher and comparable non-voucher sites. Analysis entails cross-tabulations with Chi-square tests and significant tests of proportions as well as estimation of multi-level logit models to predict service utilization by exposure to the programme. The results show that for births occurring after the voucher programme began, women from communities that had been exposed to the programme since 2006 were significantly more likely to have delivered at a health facility and to have received skilled care during delivery compared with those from communities that had not been exposed to the programme at all. There were, however, no significant differences in the timing of first trimester utilization of antenatal care (ANC) and making four or more ANC visits by exposure to the programme. In addition, poor women were significantly less likely to have used safe motherhood services (health facility delivery, skilled delivery care and postnatal care) compared with their non-poor counterparts regardless of exposure to the programme. Nonetheless, a significantly higher proportion of poor women from communities that had been exposed to the programme since 2006 used the services compared with their poor counterparts from communities that had not been exposed to the programme at all. The findings suggest that the programme is associated with increased health facility deliveries and skilled delivery care especially among poor women. However, it has had limited community-level impact on the first trimester timing of antenatal care use and making four or more visits, which remain a challenge despite the high proportion of women in the country that make at least one antenatal care visit during pregnancy. Posted on April 30, 2012Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)According to a recent post on the RH Vouchers Blog, a new study in Health Policy and Planning , Community-level impact of the reproductive health vouchers programme on service utilization in Kenya, suggests that a recent voucher program was associated with an increase in institutional deliveries and skilled care at the time of delivery–especially among poor women. Read the full article here. Share this:
What are they? There’s a nifty free white paper out from Infusionsoft (here) on this topicIt’s written for small businesses, but it certainly applies to nonprofits, too.Here are the three tips with my commentary – check out the white paper for more details.1. You almost certainly need better segmentation. Stop worrying about subject lines and first make sure you’re emailing relevant content to people who really want it!2. Keep your email marketing consistent and predictable. That means steady, valuable messages over time – preferably about the great work your supporters are making possible!3. Don’t leave it all to email – remember: many channels together work best. There is a lot of nonprofit research showing this is the case, so integrate your online and offline communications!
Here’s an example: Integrated online/offline messages will yield higher results in regard to money raised, average gift, and response rate (both online and offline) than will unrelated online and offline messages. Finally, don’t be afraid to fumble. We’ve learned a lot about testing through failed tests. Being data-driven is a daily practice that you must exercise to excel. Don’t just trust your gut; run experiments. We’re doing our causes a disservice each time we don’t test — potentially leaving donations, actions, and opportunities on the table. Your test results are the voice of your donors and activists. Listen to what they are saying even if it’s not what you expected to hear. Keep a “testing bible” that brings together your organization’s learnings over time. Step 3: Outline your testing methodology.Test group: 50% of donors (who have given both online and offline) for whom we have an email and mailing address.Control group: Remaining 50% of donors (who have given both online and offline) for whom we have an email and mailing address.Test group segments will receive:Pre-email mirroring messaging of direct mailOffline letterControl group segments will receive: Here’s a quick primer on how effective testing works: 5. The data you generate is only as good as your analysis of it. The key word here is testable. You will perform a test of how two variables might be related. This is when you are doing a real experiment. 2. Avoid samples sizes that are too small to produce statistically significant results. 3. Don’t ignore past test results. Testing 101 Test content.Test treatments across segments.Test a long-term cultivation program on a test cell.Test messengers.Test channels.Get creative and bold — but make sure your creativity and boldness can be tested. 1. When looking for breakthrough results, skip the small things. We strongly advocate testing well. A poorly run test isn’t worth the effort you and your staff will invest in it. Here are some testing pitfalls to avoid: We recommend creating an annual testing calendar in line with the scientific method so you can optimize your learning. For instance, by December (the biggest fundraising month of the year), you’ll want to have tested your donation forms thoroughly so you are serving the most optimized version. Step 1: Be clear on your goals. It’s not how many people you solicit; it’s how many responses you receive. A statistically valid test requires 100 responses for each test cell. You’ll need 200 responses for a simple A/B test. For a donor renewal effort with a projected 5% response rate, this means soliciting 4,000 names (2,000 per cell) for a valid test. In a new donor acquisition effort with a 1% response rate, you’d need to solicit 20,000 names (10,000 per cell).If you don’t have a large list size, here are some suggestions: Beware: Common Testing Pitfalls What are your objectives with this campaign or effort? If you are unclear on your goals, you won’t know how to measure success. Control online treatmentOffline letter Testing small items such as subject lines and the color of your call-to-action button may uncover low-hanging fruit. When looking for a big breakthrough, however, think big with your tests. 4. Don’t think that what worked for a competitor or another campaign will work for you.You must test it with your audience. Enough said. People are influenced by innumerable whims, impulses, and values. You never know what marketing and fundraising strategies and tactics will work best until you test them. That is why testing is a must for nonprofits. Step 2: Outline a testable hypothesis. Test fewer elements. Ditch the four-way test and try a 50/50 split test.Carry the test across multiple efforts until a statistically significant number is reached.Don’t extrapolate. When you don’t test a statistically valid quantity, you can’t assume a larger group will behave the same way.Retest. Always retest to see if you replicate your results. Step 4: Outline the metrics you will measure.Total money raised (measured separately by channel and then combined) Average gift (measured separately by channel and then combined) Response rate (measured separately by channel and then combined) Set up systems to accurately measure your test and incorporate that learning into future campaigns. Photo credit: Big Stock Photo
As the Olympics get underway, prepare for the onslaught of odd promotional tie-ins.(Image from Things Real People Don’t Say About Advertising, one of my favorite sites in the world.)This satire a good reminder that marketing works best when it makes sense — and shows a credible, authentic link between the promotional message and the heart of the product (or cause). You can’t slap a pink ribbon – or Olympic rings – on a brand and expect that to work magic. People won’t buy it – metaphorically or literally.Marketing should be an extension of who you are and a celebration of those you serve — as opposed to what you wish people thought. In this day and age, everyone can tell the difference. Here is a fine example of that in action. (If you are a parent, get out the Kleenex.) I wish all causes were as good at telling stories as P&G!
One of the most persuasive ways to influence someone to give is through his or her social networks. There is ample research showing that giving is a social act, and when someone we know asks us to donate, that has a strong effect.So what does that truth mean on social media? An optimist would say the bigger the social network, the more we get social sharing — and the better for our cause. But not so fast.A new study sent via my colleague Caryn says people with more Facebook friends are less likely to share information about charitable causes. The study says the reason may be that social butterflies believe someone else will do the work of playing champion: According to Futurity:“Economist Kimberley Scharf, from the Centre for Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE) at the University of Warwick, claims when we have larger online social networks we rely on other people to pass on information about opportunities to give. This phenomenon is called ‘free riding.’”So what does this mean? Just because someone seems to have a big online following doesn’t mean they are your best messenger. What matters most is the commitment to the cause – not the sheer numbers of friends. When you are identifying the supporters who have the best shot at advancing your cause, focus on the level of commitment more than the level of fame.
About the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say Norwich football chief Stuart Webber delighted with new dealby Paul Vegas11 days agoSend to a friendShare the loveNorwich City football chief Stuart Webber is delighted with his new deal.Webber recently penned a new three-year contract.He told the club’s website: “We’ve achieved a lot and I was delighted to be offered a longer contract. I’m extremely grateful to Delia, Michael and the board for that. It’s a great club, but I think even though we’ve done some good things, we’ve got so much more to do.”What keeps me awake are the things we haven’t done right yet and the decisions we’ve got wrong more than the good bits. Maybe one day I’ll be an old man and I’ll look back and go ‘you know what, that was quite good,’ but promotion feels like it didn’t even happen now because we’re so deep into what we’re trying to do.”The most important thing is that we constantly strive to remember who we are, what we are, and remain humble to that. We can’t get carried away one way or the other. We’ve got a lot of work to do throughout the club.”
The Duchess of Cambridge, Patron of SportsAid, joined thirty 16 to 20-year-old athletes at a workshop this week designed to help them on their journey to the Olympic or Paralympic Games in Tokyo in 2020 or PyeongChang in 2018.The Duchess of Cambridge meets with a potential young athlete Emma Allen during a SportsAid workshopCredit/Copyright: DukeAndDuchessOfCambridge.orgHosted by GSK at its cutting-edge Human Performance Lab in west London, the athletes took part in a series of scientific assessments on respiration, temperature, power, cognition and body composition before joining a mentoring session with Olympic swimmer Keri-anne Payne and having the chance to meet Paralympic wheelchair athlete David Weir CBE.The Duchess of Cambridge took two cognitive tests to experience firsthand what the athletes had been doing. The tests measured reaction time and help facilitate skill acquisition and skill execution in athletes.David Weir said, “It’s been a privilege to meet the athletes here today and share their achievements and challenges with the Duchess. It’s a long road to Tokyo but her support will make a big difference and with the right approach, it’s achievable. It’s exciting to think these athletes could be part of the next generation of British sporting heroes and I wish all of them the very best of luck.”Another of the assessments seen by the Duchess took place in an environmental chamber set to the heat and humidity of Tokyo. Sprinter Shona Richards, 19 from Epsom in Surrey, who this summer won two silver medals at the junior world championships, described the opportunity as a “brilliant experience”.“It’s been really good, this is one of those places you hear about but you don’t really get an opportunity to go to. So being here is a huge deal and I’m so glad I was invited. It was incredible to meet the Duchess, it’s something I never thought I’d do.“We spoke about the day and the facilities, the support I’ve had from SportsAid and what I’m aiming for in the future. I’ve been supported by SportsAid for quite a few years now and I can honestly say that it’s one of those things that people don’t realise how much help it does give you as an athlete. There are a lot of places I couldn’t have been, a lot of places I couldn’t have raced without SportsAid, and that needs to be recognised as a huge influence in sport.”SportsAid’s Chief Executive Tim Lawler said, “We’re very grateful to GSK for opening the Human Performance Lab up to these athletes today and for the fantastic insight it’s given them. We’re also delighted to have the Duchess with us as her support will give a huge boost to these inspirational young people, acknowledging all the sacrifices that they and their families are making for the future of British sport.”Charles Leslie, Global Head of the GSK Human Performance Lab, added, “It was great to support these talented young athletes and their coaches today. We hope the research our science team carried out will help them achieve their goals and that the Duchess enjoyed finding out how science can help the next generation of British athletes.”The GSK Human Performance Lab carries out research with elite performers – athletes, sports teams, extreme explorers – to better understand how the body and brain function. This allows its scientists to help develop improved training, recovery, nutrition and competition programmes for partners. In return, the research helps GSK develop products that better meet the healthcare needs of consumers and informs wider GSK research.
Beijing- One of China’s top movie directors has admitted having three children with his current wife, according to a studio media posting, after months of speculation he broke the country’s controversial family planning laws several times.Zhang Yimou, the maker of “Raise the Red Lantern” and “Red Sorghum”, has two sons and a daughter with his current wife, the Yimou Studio said in its verified account on Sina Weibo, a Chinese equivalent of Twitter.That would mean Zhang, 62, has a total of four children including a daughter with his ex-wife, potentially violating China’s one-child policy. Zhang “would like to make a sincere apologies to the public for the negative ramifications caused”, said the posting by Yimou Studio, which says it is affiliated to the director.The disclosure comes after months of speculation that he has seven or eight children by three or four women.Yimou Studio dismissed those allegations as “untrue” and threatened to hold the rumourmongers legally responsible.“The false allegations have seriously affected the normal life of Zhang Yimou’s family and led to an egregious impact on society,” said the statement.“We are collecting and sorting out relevant evidence against the rumourmongers and preserve the right to pursue their legal liability.”China has implemented its family planning law for over 30 years, which currently restricts most parents to one child, with exceptions including some rural families whose first child is a girl, ethnic minorities, and couples who are both only children.It has been at times brutally enforced, say rights groups, while officials say it has been a key element of China’s rising prosperity.The ruling Communist Party said last month it would relax the rule by allowing couples to have two children if one of the parents is an only child.Family planning officials in the eastern city of Wuxi, where Zhang is registered as living, are investigating, reports in state-run media said.Zhang was willing to cooperate with the investigation and “accept commensurate penalties” according to national laws, said the Sina Weibo posting.If found guilty of breaching the policy, Zhang could be fined around $100,000, according to the per capita urban resident income in Wuxi and the number of children involved, the state-run Beijing News reported Monday.Many of Zhang’s early films were banned in China but he has since become close to authorities and was picked to direct the opening ceremony for the 2008 Beijing Olympics.His most recent work, 2011’s “The Flowers of War”, starred Christian Bale and was a historical drama set during the 1937 Nanjing Massacre.
MONTREAL — The Caisse de depot is partnering with Mexican institutional investors as the Quebec pension fund manager pursues its goal of doubling infrastructure investments by 2018.The Caisse says it will invest $1.43 billion on infrastructure projects in Mexico after teaming with a newly created consortium that manages 62 per cent of that country’s pension fund assets.The group plans to spend $2.8 billion over five years in what the Caisse de depot says is the first such partnership in North America between Mexican financial institutions and a large international pension fund manager.“It is going to position both the Caisse and our partner … to benefit and invest in the unique opportunities that Mexico will provide in infrastructure in the coming years,” said Macky Tall, senior vice-president infrastructure, private equity.Caisse chief Michael Sabia warns of global turbulence as fund tops benchmarks in first halfThe Caisse and Goldman Sachs invest in background screening companyThe Caisse sees large investment opportunities in Mexico because the government plans to spend about $614 billion over four years on infrastructure investments, targeting mainly energy and transportation projects.It will hold a 51 per cent stake in the unnamed investment vehicle. The Mexican investors will hold the remaining 49 per cent.The co-investment platform will focus on energy generation, including renewable energy, transmission and distribution, as well as water, transportation and public transit projects.As part of the Mexican transaction, the pension plan partners called CKD Infraestructura Mexico, are acquiring 49 per cent of the Caisse’s equity investment with the country’s largest construction firm that owns four toll road concessions.Tall said the co-investment platform being created in Mexico could be used in other emerging markets in Latin America such as Colombia, India or South East Asia.“This is certainly a model we would like to replicate in other countries,” he said in an interview.The Caisse hopes emerging markets will eventually account for 10 to 15 per cent of its infrastructure portfolio, up from the current level of less than five per cent.It has been a major infrastructure investor in the United States and other developed markets for 15 years, building a portfolio worth more than $11 billion. Assets include the Port of Brisbane, Heathrow Airport in London, Eurostar and Colonial Pipeline in the United States.The Caisse is also analyzing two large infrastructure projects in Montreal with an estimated value of about $5 billion. A final recommendation on options is expected to be sent to the Quebec government within 18 months on downtown transit links to Trudeau International Airport and across the new Champlain Bridge to the south shore of Montreal.The Caisse is Canada’s second-largest pension fund manager with $240.8 billion in net assets as of June 30. It primarily manages funds for the pension and insurance plans of the public and parapublic sector, which includes doctors and other professions paid by but not directly employed by the government.The Canadian Press
A caucus of developing countries showed its muscle on the United Nations budget committee this evening by pushing through a draft resolution that would effectively slow a series of reform proposals aimed at overhauling the world organization’s management structures which was put forward by Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who immediately voiced regret at the vote and vowed to continue trying to forge an agreement among UN Member States. Breaking a longstanding tradition of consensus action, the Administrative and Budgetary (Fifth) Committee approved the lengthy and contentious resolution sponsored by the “Group of 77” developing countries by a vote of 108 States in favour to 50 against with 3 abstentions. The measure will not take effect until it is formally adopted by the General Assembly plenary, a body which has the same membership as the Committee. The draft resolution responds to Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s report, “Investing in the United Nations: For a Stronger Organization Worldwide,” submitted in March to enable the UN to accommodate its own shift from largely bureaucratic tasks to life-saving work in the field. The proposals encompass a revamped version of how to recruit, contract, train, assign and compensate staff, and include a redefined post of Deputy Secretary-General. Other recommendations call for exploring options for alternative service delivery, including relocating and possible outsourcing of functions.In a reflection of the Group of 77’s concern about governance of the UN, the draft resolution would reaffirm the Assembly’s oversight role – and that of its Fifth Committee – in administrative and budgetary matters, and in carrying out a thorough analysis and approval of the human and financial resources and policies. Other provisions of the text would mandate that any changes to the role of the Deputy Secretary-General must be in accord with the original Assembly resolution that established the post. Proposals to amend the UN’s overall departmental structure would be subject to the Assembly’s review.The resolution would have the Assembly request a series of detailed reports that could slow the reform momentum as the Secretary-General’s second – and final – five-year term nears its close at the end of 2006. These include studies on the impact of previous and ongoing reforms as they relate to the proposals; on investing in information and communications technology, new sourcing options, financial management practices and performance evaluation and reporting; and on a comprehensive review of procurement rules, regulations and policies.In an effort to forestall a confrontation, Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Thursday had appealed to Member States to set aside the most controversial proposals – 20 and 21 – which relate to interaction between the Secretariat and the key General Assembly budget committees. Instead of doing so, the approved draft resolution would have the Assembly reaffirm that no changes to the budget methodology, to established budgetary procedures or to the financial regulations can be implemented without prior review and approval by the Assembly.“The Secretary-General deeply regrets that Member States were unable to reach consensus in the Fifth Committee deliberations on his management reform proposals,” a spokesman for Mr. Annan said in a statement released following the vote.“He urges Member States to seek to work together to rebuild the spirit of mutual trust that underpins consensus and is essential to the smooth functioning of the United Nations,” the spokesman added, voicing Mr. Annan’s conviction that all Member States remain committed to the principles of UN reform.“He will begin the process of seeking mutually agreed ways to pursue this agenda,” the statement said.The Secretary-General’s comprehensive reform blueprint was called for in the Outcome Document adopted by national leaders at last September’s World Summit in New York. It builds on a package of reforms Mr. Annan launched last year to enhance ethics and accountability and to address weaknesses exposed by the Independent Inquiry on the Oil-for-Food Programme as well as evidence of sexual exploitation in certain peacekeeping operations.The Fifth Committee is not expected to meet again until 22 May, when it will resume its session.