Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2022 Budget and Appropriations

Changes from April 1, 2022 to June 27, 2022

This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with ~~red strikethrough~~ and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.

Department of State, Foreign Operations, and
~~April 1~~June 27, 2022 , 2022
Related Programs: FY2022 Budget and
Cory R. Gill
Appropriations
Analyst in Foreign Affairs Analyst in Foreign Affairs

Each year, Congress considers 12 distinct appropriations measures to fund federal Each year, Congress considers 12 distinct appropriations measures to fund federal
Marian L. Lawson
programs and activities. One of these is the Department of State, Foreign Operations, programs and activities. One of these is the Department of State, Foreign Operations,
Section Research Manager Section Research Manager
and Related Programs (SFOPS) bill, which includes funding for U.S. diplomatic and Related Programs (SFOPS) bill, which includes funding for U.S. diplomatic

activities, cultural exchanges, development and security assistance, and participation in activities, cultural exchanges, development and security assistance, and participation in
Emily M. Morgenstern
multilateral organizations, among other international activities. multilateral organizations, among other international activities.
Analyst in Foreign Analyst in Foreign
Assistance and Foreign Assistance and Foreign
On May 28, 2021, the Biden Administration released its proposed FY2022 budget On May 28, 2021, the Biden Administration released its proposed FY2022 budget
Policy Policy
request, which called for $62.121 billion, after rescissions of prior year funds, for request, which called for $62.121 billion, after rescissions of prior year funds, for

SFOPS accounts. The original FY2022 request was about 13% less than the total SFOPS accounts. The original FY2022 request was about 13% less than the total
FY2021-enacted level, which included nearly $16 billion in emergency funds, but 11.5% FY2021-enacted level, which included nearly $16 billion in emergency funds, but 11.5%

more than enacted FY2021 levels when emergency funding was excluded. The more than enacted FY2021 levels when emergency funding was excluded. The
Administration submitted a supplemental emergency budget request that included $9.35 billion in SFOPS Administration submitted a supplemental emergency budget request that included $9.35 billion in SFOPS
accounts on March 2, 2022, to address Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the ongoing global COVID-19 response. accounts on March 2, 2022, to address Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the ongoing global COVID-19 response.
The Administration made a second supplemental funding request on April 28, 2022, calling for an additional $14.76 billion in SFOPS funding related to Ukraine. This brought the total FY2022 SFOPS request to $This brought the total FY2022 SFOPS request to $~~71.371~~ 86.131 billion, net of rescissions. billion, net of rescissions.
The House of Representatives passed a FY2022 SFOPS bill, H.R. 4373, on July 28, 2021. The bill would have The House of Representatives passed a FY2022 SFOPS bill, H.R. 4373, on July 28, 2021. The bill would have
provided a total of $62.401 billion in net budget authority for SFOPS accounts. FY2022 SFOPS legislation, S. provided a total of $62.401 billion in net budget authority for SFOPS accounts. FY2022 SFOPS legislation, S.
3075, was introduced in the Senate on October 26, 2021; no further action was taken. Congress enacted four 3075, was introduced in the Senate on October 26, 2021; no further action was taken. Congress enacted four
continuing resolutions to fund federal agencies in FY2022, largely at FY2021 levels but including $3.448 billion continuing resolutions to fund federal agencies in FY2022, largely at FY2021 levels but including $3.448 billion
in additional emergency SFOPS funding, before enacting in additional emergency SFOPS funding, before enacting ~~an omnibus~~a consolidated appropriations bill, P.L. 117-103, which the appropriations bill, P.L. 117-103, which the
President signed into law on March 15, 2022. The legislation provided $63.059 billion in net SFOPS funding, of President signed into law on March 15, 2022. The legislation provided $63.059 billion in net SFOPS funding, of
which $6.80 billion was emergency funding for Ukraine. which $6.80 billion was emergency funding for Ukraine. Congress enacted additional supplemental funding legislation on May 21, 2022, the Additional Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act (AUSAA, P.L. 117-128), which included $18.946 billion for SFOPS accounts. Total enacted SFOPS funding for FY2022Total enacted SFOPS funding for FY2022 to date, including , including
P.L. 117-103P.L. 117-103, P.L. 117-128, and emergency funding in continuing resolutions, is $ and emergency funding in continuing resolutions, is $~~66.507~~85.453 billion after rescissions, or about billion after rescissions, or about 7%
~~below both~~19% above the FY2021 total enacted level and the FY2021 total enacted level and 1% below the Administration’s amended FY2022 request. the Administration’s amended FY2022 request.
Within Within Department of State and Related Agencies accounts, total accounts, total FY2022-enacted funding enacted funding ~~levels for the core operations~~
~~and security accounts were similar in FY2021 and FY2022, to date~~for the Diplomatic Programs account and Embassy Security, Construction and Maintenance account increased by 2% and 7%, respectively, over FY2021 funding levels. Significant changes were seen within some . Significant changes were seen within some
smaller State Department accounts, including the Capital Investment Fund (+smaller State Department accounts, including the Capital Investment Fund (+2024%), Emergencies in the %), Emergencies in the
Diplomatic and Consular Service (+3968%), and Repatriation Loans (-48%), and in related accounts, including Diplomatic and Consular Service (+3968%), and Repatriation Loans (-48%), and in related accounts, including
Contributions to International Organizations (+10%), International Broadcasting Operations (+10%), and the U.S. Contributions to International Organizations (+10%), International Broadcasting Operations (+10%), and the U.S.
Institute for Peace (+20%). Institute for Peace (+20%).
Within Within Foreign Operations accounts, accounts, ~~there were several notable~~ enacted FY2022 funding is 27% higher than FY2021 funding. Notable changes between FY2021- and FY2022-enacted changes between FY2021- and FY2022-enacted
funding levelsfunding levels~~, largely reflecting~~ for specific accounts largely reflect a shift in the focus of emergency funding from addressing COVID-19 to a shift in the focus of emergency funding from addressing COVID-19 to
addressing the crises in Afghanistan and Ukraine. Funding increased significantly for the Assistance to Europe, addressing the crises in Afghanistan and Ukraine. Funding increased significantly for the Assistance to Europe,
Eurasia and Central Asia (+110Eurasia and Central Asia (+110%), International Disaster Assistance (+157%), Migration and Refugee Assistance (+%), Migration and Refugee Assistance (+1726%), Emergency Refugee and Migration %), Emergency Refugee and Migration
Assistance (+355%), and Assistance (+355%), and ~~the~~ International Development Finance Corporation (+65%) accounts, among others, International Development Finance Corporation (+65%) accounts, among others,
while decreasing substantially for Global Health Programs (-26%), while decreasing substantially for Global Health Programs (-26%), ~~Economic Support Fund (-62%), and~~
~~International Organizations and Programs (-56%), among others.~~
International Organizations and Programs (-56%), and Debt Restructuring (-79%), among others. Congressional Research Service link to page 34 link to page 42 link to page 44 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appendix A presents an account-by-account comparison of the FY2022 SFOPS request; proposed, committee-presents an account-by-account comparison of the FY2022 SFOPS request; proposed, committee-
approved, and enacted FY2022 SFOPS legislation; and FY2021 SFOPS enacted fundingapproved, and enacted FY2022 SFOPS legislation; and FY2021 SFOPS enacted funding. Appendix B provides a provides a
similar comparison focused specifically on the International Affairs budgetsimilar comparison focused specifically on the International Affairs budget function. Appendix C depicts the organization depicts the organization
of the SFOPS appropriation. of the SFOPS appropriation.
~~Congressional Research Service~~

~~Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs~~

This report tracks SFOPS appropriations, comparing funding levels for accounts and purposes across proposals This report tracks SFOPS appropriations, comparing funding levels for accounts and purposes across proposals
and legislation. It does not provide extensive analysis of international affairs policy issues. For in-depth analysis and legislation. It does not provide extensive analysis of international affairs policy issues. For in-depth analysis
and contextual information on international affairs issues, consult the wide range of CRS reports on specific and contextual information on international affairs issues, consult the wide range of CRS reports on specific
subjects, such as global health, diplomatic security, and U.S. participation in the United Nations. For more subjects, such as global health, diplomatic security, and U.S. participation in the United Nations. For more
information on SFOPS accounts, see CRS Report R40482, information on SFOPS accounts, see CRS Report R40482, Department of State, Foreign Operations Appropriations: A
Guide to Component Accounts, by Nick M. Brown and Cory R. Gill. , by Nick M. Brown and Cory R. Gill.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

link to page 6 link to page 6

Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

Overview
Department of State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs (SFOPS) appropriations support a Department of State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs (SFOPS) appropriations support a
wide range of U.S. activities around the world, including the operation of U.S. embassies; wide range of U.S. activities around the world, including the operation of U.S. embassies;
diplomatic activities; educational and cultural exchanges; international development, security, and diplomatic activities; educational and cultural exchanges; international development, security, and
humanitarian assistance; and U.S. participation in multilateral organizations. The SFOPS humanitarian assistance; and U.S. participation in multilateral organizations. The SFOPS
appropriation closely aligns with the International Affairs budget function, which typically appropriation closely aligns with the International Affairs budget function, which typically
represents about 1% of the annual federal budget (represents about 1% of the annual federal budget (see Figure 1).1 1
Figure 1. International Affairs as a Portion of the Federal Budget, FY2022 Est.

Sources: FY2022 Budget Historic Table 5.1; CRS calculations. FY2022 Budget Historic Table 5.1; CRS calculations.
Note: Reflects estimated budget authority, FY2022. Reflects estimated budget authority, FY2022.

On May 28, 2021, the Biden Administration released its proposed FY2022 budget request, which On May 28, 2021, the Biden Administration released its proposed FY2022 budget request, which
called for $62.656 billion in new budget authority for SFOPS accounts ($62.121 billion if called for $62.656 billion in new budget authority for SFOPS accounts ($62.121 billion if
proposed rescissions of prior year funding are subtracted).2 The Administration submitted a proposed rescissions of prior year funding are subtracted).2 The Administration submitted a
supplemental budget request on March 2, 2022, including $9.35 billion in SFOPS accounts to supplemental budget request on March 2, 2022, including $9.35 billion in SFOPS accounts to
address needs related to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the global Coronavirus Disease 2019 address needs related to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the global Coronavirus Disease 2019
(COVID-19) response. The (COVID-19) response. The ~~supplemental request brought the total FY2022 SFOPS request to~~
~~$71.906 billion before rescissions, $71.371 billion after rescissions~~Administration made a second supplemental funding request on April 28, 2022, calling for an additional $14.76 billion in SFOPS funding related to the war in Ukraine. This brought the total FY2022 SFOPS request to $86.131 billion, net of rescissions ($86.666 before rescissions).3 .3
The Administration’s original FY2022 request was 13% less than the total FY2021-enacted level, The Administration’s original FY2022 request was 13% less than the total FY2021-enacted level,
which included almost $16 billion in emergency funds, and 11% more than the enacted FY2021 which included almost $16 billion in emergency funds, and 11% more than the enacted FY2021
~~level when emergency funding, used primarily for COVID-19 response, was excluded.4 This first~~

1 The SFOPS budget aligns closely but not exactly with Function 150 (International Affairs) of the federal budget. The 1 The SFOPS budget aligns closely but not exactly with Function 150 (International Affairs) of the federal budget. The
primary exception is international food aid programs, which are part of Function 150 but funded through the agriculture primary exception is international food aid programs, which are part of Function 150 but funded through the agriculture
appropriation. SFOPS also includes funding for international commissions in the Function 300 budget. appropriation. SFOPS also includes funding for international commissions in the Function 300 budget.
2 Rescissions of prior year funding do not affect new funding levels, but are considered when calculating the total 2 Rescissions of prior year funding do not affect new funding levels, but are considered when calculating the total
budget impact of a proposal for purposes such as compliance with the subcommittee’s 302(b) allocation or spending budget impact of a proposal for purposes such as compliance with the subcommittee’s 302(b) allocation or spending
caps imposed by law. caps imposed by law.
3 See 3 See ~~letter~~letters from OMB Acting Director Shalanda Young to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, at from OMB Acting Director Shalanda Young to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/COVID-and-Ukraine-Supplemental-Funding-Request-https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/COVID-and-Ukraine-Supplemental-Funding-Request-
Pelosi.pdfPelosi.pdf.
~~4 For information on international affairs funding for COVID-19 response, see CRS In Focus IF11496,~~ ~~COVID-19 and~~
~~Foreign Assistance: Issues for Congress, by Nick M. Brown, Marian L. Lawson, and Emily M. Morgenstern, and CRS~~
~~Report R46319, Novel Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19): Q&A on Global Implications and Responses, coordinated by~~
~~Tiaji Salaam-Blyther.~~
and https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/FY_2022_Emergency_Supplemental_Assistance-to-Ukraine_4.28.2022.pdf. Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1 1

link to page 7 link to page link to page 7 link to page 89 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

level when emergency funding, used primarily for COVID-19 response, was excluded.4 This first SFOPS budget request of the Biden Administration was significantly higher, even before the SFOPS budget request of the Biden Administration was significantly higher, even before the
supplemental request, than all Trump Administration SFOPS budget requests. It was also higher supplemental request, than all Trump Administration SFOPS budget requests. It was also higher
than SFOPS annual funding levels enacted in the past decade, in current dollars, with the than SFOPS annual funding levels enacted in the past decade, in current dollars, with the
exception of FY2021 exception of FY2021 (Table 1). With the $. With the $~~9.25 billion supplemental request~~ 24.01 billion in supplemental funding requests included, the included, the
Administration’s total FY2022 request was about Administration’s total FY2022 request was about ~~2.9% less~~20% more than FY2021 total enacted funding. than FY2021 total enacted funding.
Congress has enacted Congress has enacted ~~five~~six FY2022 appropriations bills FY2022 appropriations bills (including continuing resolutions) funding SFOPS accounts to date (see funding SFOPS accounts to date (see
“Congressional Action,” below), totaling $ below), totaling $~~66.507~~85.453 billion, after rescissions, or about billion, after rescissions, or about ~~6.8~~1% less % less
than the Administration’s requestthan the Administration’s request (including supplemental requests) and 19% more than FY2021-enacted funding. .
Table 1. SFOPS Requests and Actual/Enacted Funding, FY2013-FY2022
(In billions of current U.S. dollars) (In billions of current U.S. dollars)

FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 FY2019
FY2020 FY2021
FY2022
Request Request
56.41 56.41
51.96 51.96
55.01 55.01
54.83 54.83
60.21 60.21
40.21 40.21
41.66 41.66
43.10 43.10
44.12 44.12
~~71.37~~86.13
Actual/Enac. Actual/Enac.
51.91 51.91
50.89 50.89
54.39 54.39
54.52 54.52
59.78 59.78
54.18 54.18
54.38 54.38
57.37 57.37
71.58 71.58
~~66.51~~85.45
Difference Difference
-8.0% -8.0%
-2.1% -2.1%
-1.1% -1.1%
-0.6% -0.6%
-0.7% -0.7%
+34.7% +34.7%
+30.5% +30.5%
+33.1% +33.1%
+62.2% +62.2%
- -~~6.81~~0.8% %
Sources: Annual SFOPS Congressional Budget Justifications (CBJs) prepared by the Department of State and Annual SFOPS Congressional Budget Justifications (CBJs) prepared by the Department of State and
U.S. Agency of International Development; P.L. 116-6; P.L. 116-94; P.L. 116-123; P.L. 116-136; P.L. 116-260; P.L. U.S. Agency of International Development; P.L. 116-6; P.L. 116-94; P.L. 116-123; P.L. 116-136; P.L. 116-260; P.L.
117-2; P.L. 117-31; P.L. 117-43; P.L. 117-70; P.L. 117-103117-2; P.L. 117-31; P.L. 117-43; P.L. 117-70; P.L. 117-103, P.L. 117-128. The FY2022 supplemental funding request is accessible . The FY2022 supplemental funding request is accessible
at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/COVID-and-Ukraine-Supplemental-Funding-at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/COVID-and-Ukraine-Supplemental-Funding-
~~Request-Pelosi.pdf.~~
~~Note:~~ ~~Includes supplemental and emergency funds~~Request-Pelosi.pdf and https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/FY_2022_Emergency_Supplemental_Assistance-to-Ukraine_4.28.2022.pdf. Note: Includes OCO, emergency supplemental funds, and rescissions. FY2021 and FY2022 actual/enacted figures and rescissions. FY2021 and FY2022 actual/enacted figures
are enacted, while FY2013-FY2020 figures are actual. are enacted, while FY2013-FY2020 figures are actual.
Overseas Contingency Operations and Emergency Funds
From FY2012 to FY2021, the appropriations process was shaped by discretionary spending caps From FY2012 to FY2021, the appropriations process was shaped by discretionary spending caps
put in place by the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA; P.L. 112-25). Congress managed the put in place by the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA; P.L. 112-25). Congress managed the
constraints imposed by the BCA in part by repeatedly amending the BCA to raise the caps, and constraints imposed by the BCA in part by repeatedly amending the BCA to raise the caps, and
also by designating a portion of annual SFOPS appropriations as “Overseas Contingency also by designating a portion of annual SFOPS appropriations as “Overseas Contingency
Operations” (OCO) or “emergency” funding, both of which were excluded from BCA Operations” (OCO) or “emergency” funding, both of which were excluded from BCA
discretionary budget limits. Congress began using the OCO designation in SFOPS appropriations discretionary budget limits. Congress began using the OCO designation in SFOPS appropriations
in FY2012. OCO’s use expanded considerably in funding level and scope until FY2017, when in FY2012. OCO’s use expanded considerably in funding level and scope until FY2017, when
OCO-designated SFOPS funding peaked at $20.80 billion (nearly 35% of SFOPS funds that OCO-designated SFOPS funding peaked at $20.80 billion (nearly 35% of SFOPS funds that
year), before leveling off at $8 billion annually between FY2019 and FY2021.5 year), before leveling off at $8 billion annually between FY2019 and FY2021.5
In addition to OCO funds, Congress has periodically used funding designated as “emergency” to In addition to OCO funds, Congress has periodically used funding designated as “emergency” to
address a range of unanticipated needs. Congress used this designation in FY2020 and FY2021 address a range of unanticipated needs. Congress used this designation in FY2020 and FY2021
primarily to address needs related to the COVID-19 pandemic abroad and humanitarian primarily to address needs related to the COVID-19 pandemic abroad and humanitarian
4 For information on international affairs funding for COVID-19 response, see CRS In Focus IF11496, COVID-19 and Foreign Assistance: Issues for Congress, by Nick M. Brown, Marian L. Lawson, and Emily M. Morgenstern, and CRS Report R46319, Novel Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19): Q&A on Global Implications and Responses, coordinated by Tiaji Salaam-Blyther. 5 For more information on the use of OCO in the international affairs budget, see CRS In Focus IF10143, Foreign Affairs Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) Funding: Background and Current Status, by Emily M. Morgenstern. Congressional Research Service 2 link to page 8 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs assistance for Afghanistan and Afghan refugees. Like OCO-designated funding, emergency-assistance for Afghanistan and Afghan refugees. Like OCO-designated funding, emergency-
designated funding did not count toward the BCA discretionary spending caps and could designated funding did not count toward the BCA discretionary spending caps and could
therefore serve as an alternative to the OCO designation. Before the use of OCO in SFOPS, therefore serve as an alternative to the OCO designation. Before the use of OCO in SFOPS,
supplemental emergency appropriations were the primary mechanism for funding contingency supplemental emergency appropriations were the primary mechanism for funding contingency
activities. activities.
The FY2022 appropriations cycle was the first in a decade for which the BCA was not a factor, The FY2022 appropriations cycle was the first in a decade for which the BCA was not a factor,
and may mark the end of the OCO designation within SFOPS legislation. While Administrations and may mark the end of the OCO designation within SFOPS legislation. While Administrations

~~5 For more information on the use of OCO in the international affairs budget, see CRS In Focus IF10143,~~ ~~Foreign~~
~~Affairs Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) Funding: Background and Current Status, by Emily M. Morgenstern.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

2

~~link to page 8~~

~~Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs~~

have not requested OCO funding in the international affairs budget since FY2018, the FY2022-have not requested OCO funding in the international affairs budget since FY2018, the FY2022-
enacted SFOPS appropriations are the first since FY2012 to not include OCO-designated funds enacted SFOPS appropriations are the first since FY2012 to not include OCO-designated funds
(Figure 2). Although BCA spending caps no longer apply, SFOPS spending is limited by the . Although BCA spending caps no longer apply, SFOPS spending is limited by the
subcommittee allocation approved in the annual budget resolution or by the Appropriations subcommittee allocation approved in the annual budget resolution or by the Appropriations
Committee. Emergency-designated funding Committee. Emergency-designated funding ~~does~~is not not ~~count~~counted toward this allocation, so the toward this allocation, so the
designation continues to be an important budgetary tool. Congress designated $designation continues to be an important budgetary tool. Congress designated $~~10.25~~29.19 billion, or billion, or
about about 1534% of enacted FY2022 SFOPS funds, as emergency funding. % of enacted FY2022 SFOPS funds, as emergency funding.
Figure 2. SFOPS Funding, FY2012-FY2022
(In billions of current U.S. dollars) (In billions of current U.S. dollars)

Note: FY2021 and FY2022 FY2021 and FY2022 emergency, OCO, and base numbers are enacted funding levels; earlier year data are actual funding as reported numbers are enacted funding levels; earlier year data are actual funding as reported
in annual SFOPS CBJs. in annual SFOPS CBJs.
Sources: Annual SFOPS CBJs; P.L. 116-94; P.L. 116-123; P.L. 116-136; P.L. 116-260; P.L. 117-2; P.L. 117-31; P.L. Annual SFOPS CBJs; P.L. 116-94; P.L. 116-123; P.L. 116-136; P.L. 116-260; P.L. 117-2; P.L. 117-31; P.L.
117-43; P.L. 117-70; P.L. 117-103117-43; P.L. 117-70; P.L. 117-103; P.L. 117-128; supplemental request letters from OMB; CRS calculations.; CRS calculations.
OCO-designated funding became largely indistinguishable in recent years from base funding in OCO-designated funding became largely indistinguishable in recent years from base funding in
terms of the activities it supported, whereas emergency-designated funding continues to be used terms of the activities it supported, whereas emergency-designated funding continues to be used
primarily for short-term needs arising from unanticipated events. For this reason, this report primarily for short-term needs arising from unanticipated events. For this reason, this report
generally groups base and OCO funding from prior years together, comparing FY2022 requested generally groups base and OCO funding from prior years together, comparing FY2022 requested
funding levels with total FY2021 enacted funding (base + OCO + emergency) as well as to funding levels with total FY2021 enacted funding (base + OCO + emergency) as well as to
nonemergency funding (base + OCO) to serve various analytic purposes. nonemergency funding (base + OCO) to serve various analytic purposes.
Congressional Research Service 3 link to page 34 link to page 34 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 18 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Congressional Action
Congressional action on FY2022 appropriations began with subcommittee hearings before the Congressional action on FY2022 appropriations began with subcommittee hearings before the
Administration transmitted its full request to Congress in late May, 2021—months later than is Administration transmitted its full request to Congress in late May, 2021—months later than is
typical, although late submissions are not unusual at the start of a new Administration. typical, although late submissions are not unusual at the start of a new Administration.
Subsequent congressional action is detailed below. Subsequent congressional action is detailed below.
House Legislation. The House SFOPS subcommittee approved a FY2022 bill, H.R. 4373, by The House SFOPS subcommittee approved a FY2022 bill, H.R. 4373, by
voice vote on June 18, 2021. The legislation, which included $62.976 billion in new SFOPS voice vote on June 18, 2021. The legislation, which included $62.976 billion in new SFOPS
budget authority ($62.401 billion after rescissions), was approved by the full Appropriations budget authority ($62.401 billion after rescissions), was approved by the full Appropriations
Committee on July 1, 2021, and by the House of Representatives on July 28, 2021. Committee on July 1, 2021, and by the House of Representatives on July 28, 2021.
~~Congressional Research Service~~

3

~~link to page 33 link to page 33 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 18~~ ~~Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs~~

Senate Legislation. FY2022 SFOPS legislation, S. 3075, was introduced in the Senate on FY2022 SFOPS legislation, S. 3075, was introduced in the Senate on
October 26. The proposal was not considered or approved by Congress at any level, and is not October 26. The proposal was not considered or approved by Congress at any level, and is not
included in the tables and figures in this report, with the exception ofincluded in the tables and figures in this report, with the exception of Table A-1 inin Appendix A.
Continuing Resolutions. No appropriations legislation for FY2022, including for SFOPS, was No appropriations legislation for FY2022, including for SFOPS, was
enacted before FY2022 began on October 1, 2021. To prevent a lapse in appropriations, a enacted before FY2022 began on October 1, 2021. To prevent a lapse in appropriations, a
continuing resolution, the Extending Government Funding and Delivering Emergency Assistance continuing resolution, the Extending Government Funding and Delivering Emergency Assistance
Act (P.L. 117-43), was enacted on September 30, 2021, to continue funding federal agencies until Act (P.L. 117-43), was enacted on September 30, 2021, to continue funding federal agencies until
December 3, 2021. Funding was largely continued at FY2021 levels, but the legislation provided December 3, 2021. Funding was largely continued at FY2021 levels, but the legislation provided
an additional $2.17 billion in SFOPS accounts for activities related to assisting individuals at risk an additional $2.17 billion in SFOPS accounts for activities related to assisting individuals at risk
in Afghanistan.6 A second continuing resolution, the Further Extending Government Funding Act in Afghanistan.6 A second continuing resolution, the Further Extending Government Funding Act
(P.L. 117-70), was enacted and signed into law on December 3, extending appropriations through (P.L. 117-70), was enacted and signed into law on December 3, extending appropriations through
February 18, 2022. This legislation also largely continued SFOPS funding at the FY2021 level, February 18, 2022. This legislation also largely continued SFOPS funding at the FY2021 level,
while including an additional $1.28 billion within SFOPS accounts to support evacuation and while including an additional $1.28 billion within SFOPS accounts to support evacuation and
resettlement activities related to the crisis in Afghanistan.7 Third and fourth continuing resettlement activities related to the crisis in Afghanistan.7 Third and fourth continuing
resolutions, P.L. 117-86 and P.L. 117-95, extended funding for SFOPS accounts through March resolutions, P.L. 117-86 and P.L. 117-95, extended funding for SFOPS accounts through March
11 and March 15, respectively, at the P.L. 117-70 level without additional funds. 11 and March 15, respectively, at the P.L. 117-70 level without additional funds.
~~Omnibus Legislation~~Consolidated Appropriations Act. The House and Senate, on March 9 and 10, respectively, passed the The House and Senate, on March 9 and 10, respectively, passed the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, which was signed by President Biden on March 15 and Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, which was signed by President Biden on March 15 and
became P.L. 117-103. The act included $58.163 billion in SFOPS base funding in Division K became P.L. 117-103. The act included $58.163 billion in SFOPS base funding in Division K
($56.259 billion after rescissions) and $6.800 billion in supplemental emergency funding related ($56.259 billion after rescissions) and $6.800 billion in supplemental emergency funding related
~~to Ukraine in Division N, for a total of $64.963 billion before rescissions. The omnibus funding,~~
~~together with the supplemental funding included in continuing resolutions (discussed above),~~
~~brought the enacted FY2022 SFOPS funding total to $68.411 billion ($66.507 billion after~~
~~rescissions).~~
~~State Department Operations and Related Agency~~
~~Funding Highlights~~
~~The Biden Administration’s FY2022 request sought $18.35 billion in funding for the Department~~
~~of State and Related Agency appropriations accounts, or approximately 5% more than the~~
~~FY2021 enacted level of $17.49 billion (including emergency funds). Priorities the~~
~~Administration intended to fund through these accounts in FY2022 included~~
~~ revitalizing the foreign policy workforce and broadening diversity, equity, and~~
~~inclusion;~~
~~ modernizing the State Department’s information technology and enhancing~~
~~cybersecurity;~~
to Ukraine in Division N, for a total of $64.963 billion before rescissions. Second Ukraine Supplemental. Congress enacted the Additional Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act (AUSAA, P.L. 117-128) on May 21, 2022, which included $18.946 billion for SFOPS accounts. Total enacted SFOPS funding for FY2022 to date, including P.L. 117-103, P.L. 117-128, and emergency funding in continuing resolutions, is $85.453 billion after rescissions, or about 19% above the FY2021 total enacted level and 1% below the Administration’s amended FY2022 request.
6 P.L. 117-43 included FY2022 SFOPS account emergency funding in Division C, Title IV: $276.9 million for 6 P.L. 117-43 included FY2022 SFOPS account emergency funding in Division C, Title IV: $276.9 million for
Emergency Diplomatic and Consular Services, $400 million for International Disaster Assistance, and $1,076.1 million Emergency Diplomatic and Consular Services, $400 million for International Disaster Assistance, and $1,076.1 million
for Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance. for Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance.
7 P.L. 117-70 included the following SFOPS emergency funding, all in Division B, which provided supplemental 7 P.L. 117-70 included the following SFOPS emergency funding, all in Division B, which provided supplemental
appropriations to address the situation in Afghanistan: $44.3 million for Diplomatic Programs, $36 million for appropriations to address the situation in Afghanistan: $44.3 million for Diplomatic Programs, $36 million for
Emergencies in the Diplomatic and Consular Service, and $1.200 billion for Emergency Refugee and Migration Emergencies in the Diplomatic and Consular Service, and $1.200 billion for Emergency Refugee and Migration
Assistance. Account details for the supplemental funding in the continuing resolutions is provided in the Assistance. Account details for the supplemental funding in the continuing resolutions is provided in the “State
Department Operations and Related Agency Funding Highlights” and and “Foreign Operations Highlights” sections of this sections of this
report. report.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

4 4

link to page link to page 1011 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs State Department Operations and Related Agency Funding Highlights The Biden Administration’s initial FY2022 request sought $18.35 billion in funding for the Department of State and Related Agency appropriations accounts, or approximately 5% more than the FY2021 enacted level of $17.49 billion (including emergency funds). Priorities the Administration intended to fund through these accounts in FY2022 included  revitalizing the foreign policy workforce and broadening diversity, equity, and inclusion;  modernizing the State Department’s information technology and enhancing cybersecurity; ~~Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs~~

 supporting international organizations and peacekeeping; and  supporting international organizations and peacekeeping; and
 sustaining security operations and consular services.8  sustaining security operations and consular services.8
House Legislation. H.R. 4373, the House-passed measure, would have provided $18.20 billion H.R. 4373, the House-passed measure, would have provided $18.20 billion
for the State Department and Related Agency appropriations accounts. This would have been an for the State Department and Related Agency appropriations accounts. This would have been an
increase of over 8% relative to FY2021-enacted nonemergency funds, a 4% increase over total increase of over 8% relative to FY2021-enacted nonemergency funds, a 4% increase over total
FY2021-enacted funding, and a nearly 1% decrease from the Biden Administration’s request. FY2021-enacted funding, and a nearly 1% decrease from the Biden Administration’s request.
Continuing Resolutions. P.L. 117-43, the continuing resolution that funded federal agencies in P.L. 117-43, the continuing resolution that funded federal agencies in
FY2022 through December 3, 2021, included an additional $276.9 million for the Emergencies in FY2022 through December 3, 2021, included an additional $276.9 million for the Emergencies in
the Diplomatic and Consular Service (EDCS) account. The law specified that such funding was the Diplomatic and Consular Service (EDCS) account. The law specified that such funding was
for “support for Operation Allies Welcome and related efforts by the Department of State, for “support for Operation Allies Welcome and related efforts by the Department of State,
including additional relocations of individuals at risk as a result of the situation in Afghanistan including additional relocations of individuals at risk as a result of the situation in Afghanistan
and related expenses” and to reimburse the account for previous obligations. The subsequent and related expenses” and to reimburse the account for previous obligations. The subsequent
continuing resolution, P.L. 117-70, expired on February 18, 2022. It provided an additional $44.3 continuing resolution, P.L. 117-70, expired on February 18, 2022. It provided an additional $44.3
million for the Diplomatic Programs account and $36 million for EDCS for the same purposes as million for the Diplomatic Programs account and $36 million for EDCS for the same purposes as
those specified in P.L. 117-43. The two subsequent continuing resolutions (P.L. 117-86 and P.L. those specified in P.L. 117-43. The two subsequent continuing resolutions (P.L. 117-86 and P.L.
117-95), the latter of which expired on March 15, 2022, provided budget authority for the 117-95), the latter of which expired on March 15, 2022, provided budget authority for the
Department of State and Related Agency appropriations accounts at the FY2021 level and did not Department of State and Related Agency appropriations accounts at the FY2021 level and did not
include supplemental funds. include supplemental funds.
Table 2. State Department and Related Agency: Selected Accounts, FY2020-FY2022
(In billions of current U.S. dollars; includes OCO (In billions of current U.S. dollars; includes OCO and Emergency Supplemental funds) funds)
% Change,
% Change,
FY21
FY21
Enacted
Enacted to
FY2020
FY2021
FY2022
to FY22
FY2022
FY2022
FY22
Account
Actual
Enacted
Request
Request
House
Enacteda
Enacted
Diplomatic Programs
9.51 9.51
9.37 9.37
9.49 9.49
1.2% 1.2%
9.48 9.48
9. 9.35
~~-0.3~~54 1.8% %
Worldwide Security Protection
4.10
4.12
4.08
-1.1% -1.1%
4.08
3.79
-8.1%
Embassy Security, Construction &
1.98 1.98
1.95 1.95
1.98 1.98
1.7% 1.7%
2.00 2.00
~~1.98~~
~~1.7~~2.10 7.3% %
Maintenance
Educational & Cultural Exchange
0.74 0.74
0.74 0.74
0.74 0.74
0.1% 0.1%
0.75 0.75
0.75 0.75
1.7% 1.7%
Programs
8 U.S. Department of State, FY2022 Budget Request, slide presentation, May 28, 2021, p. 10. Congressional Research Service 5 link to page 11 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs % Change, % Change, FY21 FY21 Enacted Enacted to FY2020 FY2021 FY2022 to FY22 FY2022 FY2022 FY22 Account Actual Enacted Request Request House Enacteda Enacted International Organizations
3.00 3.00
2.96 2.96
3.59 3.59
21.2% 21.2%
3.59 3.59
3.16 3.16
6.7% 6.7%
U.S. Agency for Global Media
0.81 0.81
0.80 0.80
0.81 0.81
0.9% 0.9%
0.82 0.82
0.89 0.89
10% 10%
State and Related Agency Total
17.64
17.49
18.35
4.9%
18.20
~~17.72~~
~~1.3~~18.04 3.1%
(includes Function 300 funding and other
commissions)
Sources: FY2022 SFOPS CBJ; H.R. 4373; P.L. 116-260; P.L. 117-43; P.L. 117-70; P.L. 117-103FY2022 SFOPS CBJ; H.R. 4373; P.L. 116-260; P.L. 117-43; P.L. 117-70; P.L. 117-103; P.L. 117-128; CRS calculations. ; CRS calculations.
State and Related Agency totals include additional funding for accounts not listed above. State and Related Agency totals include additional funding for accounts not listed above.
a. Includes supplemental funding provided in P.L. 117-43 and P.L. 117-70. a. Includes supplemental funding provided in P.L. 117-43 and P.L. 117-70.
~~Omnibus Appropriation~~Consolidated and Supplemental Appropriations. P.L. 117-103 included $17.21 billion in base State Department and P.L. 117-103 included $17.21 billion in base State Department and
Related Agency funding and $154 million in Related Agency funding and $154 million in emergency supplemental funds to address the crisis in Ukraine, supplemental funds to address the crisis in Ukraine,
bringing the total enacted funding for these accounts in bringing the total enacted funding for these accounts in FY2022 to nearly $17.73 billion (prior to passage of the AUSAA, which is discussed in the following subsection). This ~~FY2022 to nearly $17.73 billion~~
~~(including supplemental funding provided in the aforementioned continuing resolutions). This~~

~~8 U.S. Department of State, FY2022 Budget Request, slide presentation, May 28, 2021, p. 10.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

5

~~Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs~~

funding level is about a 1% increase from the aggregate funding provided for these accounts in funding level is about a 1% increase from the aggregate funding provided for these accounts in
FY2021. When comparing nonemergency funding only, FY2022 appropriations FY2021. When comparing nonemergency funding only, FY2022 appropriations ~~comprise~~comprised a 2% a 2%
increase from FY2021 funds. When all funding is considered, among the most significant funding increase from FY2021 funds. When all funding is considered, among the most significant funding
increases within these accounts is for the Emergencies in the Diplomatic and Consular Service increases within these accounts is for the Emergencies in the Diplomatic and Consular Service
account, for which appropriations increased nearly 4,000%, from $7.89 million in FY2021 to account, for which appropriations increased nearly 4,000%, from $7.89 million in FY2021 to
about $313 million in FY2022. Congress provided the entirety of this increase in P.L. 117-43 and about $313 million in FY2022. Congress provided the entirety of this increase in P.L. 117-43 and
P.L. 117-70, largely to fund relocations of individuals at risk in Afghanistan and related expenses. P.L. 117-70, largely to fund relocations of individuals at risk in Afghanistan and related expenses.
Among the accounts for which annual appropriations declined was Repatriations Loans, which is Among the accounts for which annual appropriations declined was Repatriations Loans, which is
used to provide direct emergency loans to assist U.S. citizens abroad who have no other source of used to provide direct emergency loans to assist U.S. citizens abroad who have no other source of
funds to return to the United States. Congress provided $1.3 million for this account in FY2022, a funds to return to the United States. Congress provided $1.3 million for this account in FY2022, a
48% decline from the $2.5 million included for this account in FY2021. This reflects a reduction 48% decline from the $2.5 million included for this account in FY2021. This reflects a reduction
in demand for these loans following a surge during the early months of the COVID-19 in demand for these loans following a surge during the early months of the COVID-19
pandemic.9 pandemic.9
AUSAA. The Administration’s second supplemental request for SFOPS Ukraine-related funding did not include any call for funds for the State Department and Related Agency appropriations accounts. However, Congress included a total of $314 million in the AUSAA (P.L. 117-128) for these accounts. As a result, FY2022 total enacted funding for the Department of State and Related Agency appropriations accounts equals $18.04 billion, or 3.1% more than FY2021 total enacted funding. Accounts to which Congress appropriated the largest shares of these funds in the AUSAA are Diplomatic Programs ($190 million) and Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance ($110 million), to which funding was provided “to respond to the situation in Ukraine and in countries impacted by the situation in Ukraine.” Congress appropriated an additional $4 million to the State Department’s Office of Inspector General account and $10 million to the Capital Investment Fund (CIF) account. Congress previously established the CIF account in statute to allow the State Department to carry out “the procurement and enhancement of information 9 U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Appendix 1: Department of State Diplomatic Engagement, Fiscal Year 2022, p. 353. Congressional Research Service 6 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs technology and other related capital investments” and to ensure the efficient management of such resources.10 Consular and Border Security Programs
The Consular and Border Security Programs (CBSP) account funds many of the State Department’s core The Consular and Border Security Programs (CBSP) account funds many of the State Department’s core
consular functions, including the adjudication of visa and passport applications. While CBSP typically is funded consular functions, including the adjudication of visa and passport applications. While CBSP typically is funded
through consular fees and surcharges, fee col ections have declined considerably amid global travel restrictions through consular fees and surcharges, fee col ections have declined considerably amid global travel restrictions
imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic.imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic.1011 The Biden Administration forecasted that fee col ections would The Biden Administration forecasted that fee col ections would
remain below pre-COVID-19 levels during FY2022. It therefore requested that Congress provide a $320 mil ion remain below pre-COVID-19 levels during FY2022. It therefore requested that Congress provide a $320 mil ion
appropriation for the CBSP account, extend broadened fee expenditure and transfer authorities enacted during appropriation for the CBSP account, extend broadened fee expenditure and transfer authorities enacted during
the COVID-19 pandemic, and authorize new or increased consular fees or surcharges.the COVID-19 pandemic, and authorize new or increased consular fees or surcharges.1112 Had it been enacted, the Had it been enacted, the
House bil would have appropriated $320 mil ion for CBSP and included some, but not all, of the fee-related House bil would have appropriated $320 mil ion for CBSP and included some, but not all, of the fee-related
legislative provisions the Biden Administration requested. Congress did not include an annual appropriation for legislative provisions the Biden Administration requested. Congress did not include an annual appropriation for
CBSP in P.L. 117-103. However, this law provided the State Department the authority, which the Biden CBSP in P.L. 117-103. However, this law provided the State Department the authority, which the Biden
Administration did not request, to deposit passport fees currently transferred to the General Fund of the Administration did not request, to deposit passport fees currently transferred to the General Fund of the
Treasury to the CBSP account. Congress estimates that this wil provide at least $340 mil ion in additional Treasury to the CBSP account. Congress estimates that this wil provide at least $340 mil ion in additional
resources for consular operations in FY2022.resources for consular operations in FY2022.1213 P.L. 117-103 further contained some of the fee-related legislative P.L. 117-103 further contained some of the fee-related legislative
provisions the Biden Administration requested, including an extension of broadened authority for the State provisions the Biden Administration requested, including an extension of broadened authority for the State
Department to expend passport and immigrant visa surcharge col ections to provide consular services. Congress Department to expend passport and immigrant visa surcharge col ections to provide consular services. Congress
originally included this authority in the CARES Act.originally included this authority in the CARES Act.1314
Diplomatic Programs
The Diplomatic Programs account is the State Department’s principal operating appropriation and The Diplomatic Programs account is the State Department’s principal operating appropriation and
funds several programs and functions, including funds several programs and functions, including
 most domestic and overseas Foreign Service and Civil Service personnel salaries;  most domestic and overseas Foreign Service and Civil Service personnel salaries;
 the State Department’s recruitment, diversity, and inclusion programs;  the State Department’s recruitment, diversity, and inclusion programs;
 public diplomacy programs; and  public diplomacy programs; and
 the operations and programs of the State Department’s strategic and managerial  the operations and programs of the State Department’s strategic and managerial
units, including the Bureaus of Administration, Budget and Planning, Information units, including the Bureaus of Administration, Budget and Planning, Information

~~9 U.S. Department of State,~~ ~~Congressional Budget Justification, Appendix 1: Department of State Diplomatic~~
~~Engagement, Fiscal Year 2022, p. 353.~~
10Resource Management (the State Department’s information technology bureau), and Legislative Affairs, as well as the Office of the Chief of Protocol.15 The Biden Administration’s FY2022 request for the Diplomatic Programs account totaled $9.49 billion, approximately 1% more than the $9.37 billion Congress provided in FY2021. As part of the Biden Administration’s stated commitment to revitalizing the foreign policy workforce, it requested funding for an additional 485 Foreign Service and Civil Service positions, 337 of which would have been funded through Diplomatic Programs.16 Within this request were 130 new Foreign Service Officer positions the Administration indicated would have been focused on 10 See 22 U.S.C. §2684a. 11 To review the statutory authorization for the CBSP account, see Division J, Title VII, Section 7081 of P.L. 115-31. To review the statutory authorization for the CBSP account, see Division J, Title VII, Section 7081 of P.L. 115-31.
1112 U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Appendix 1, pp. 68-79. , pp. 68-79.
1213 See Section 7069(e) of Division K of P.L. 117-103 and Joint Explanatory Statement Accompanying Division K of See Section 7069(e) of Division K of P.L. 117-103 and Joint Explanatory Statement Accompanying Division K of
P.L. 117-103, p. 101. P.L. 117-103, p. 101.
1314 See Section 7069(b) of Division K of P.L. 117-103. See Section 7069(b) of Division K of P.L. 117-103.
~~Congressional Research Service~~

6

~~link to page 10~~ 15 U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification: Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, Fiscal Year 2022, pp. 16-20. 16 Congressional Budget Justification, Appendix 1: Department of State Diplomatic Engagement, Fiscal Year 2022, p. 6. Congressional Research Service 7 link to page 10 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs ~~Related Programs~~

~~Resource Management (the State Department’s information technology bureau),~~
~~and Legislative Affairs, as well as the Office of the Chief of Protocol.14~~
~~The Biden Administration’s FY2022 request for the Diplomatic Programs account totaled $9.49~~
~~billion, approximately 1% more than the $9.37 billion Congress provided in FY2021. As part of~~
~~the Biden Administration’s stated commitment to revitalizing the foreign policy workforce, it~~
~~requested funding for an additional 485 Foreign Service and Civil Service positions, 337 of which~~
~~would have been funded through Diplomatic Programs.15 Within this request were 130 new~~
~~Foreign Service Officer positions the Administration indicated would have been focused on~~
advancing U.S. prosperity and countering Chinese economic influence, defending U.S. interests advancing U.S. prosperity and countering Chinese economic influence, defending U.S. interests
against malign influence from Russia and other foreign actors, and engaging with the United against malign influence from Russia and other foreign actors, and engaging with the United
Nations and other organizations.Nations and other organizations.1617 The request included funding for 20 new Civil Service The request included funding for 20 new Civil Service
positions to support the Bureau of Information Resource Management’s cybersecurity and risk positions to support the Bureau of Information Resource Management’s cybersecurity and risk
management programs.management programs.1718
The Biden Administration’s Diplomatic Programs request also sought $46.5 million for diversity The Biden Administration’s Diplomatic Programs request also sought $46.5 million for diversity
and inclusion resources, which would have been $25.1 million more than the funding provided and inclusion resources, which would have been $25.1 million more than the funding provided
for these purposes in FY2021.for these purposes in FY2021.1819 Among other priorities, the request proposed language for Among other priorities, the request proposed language for
inclusion in the FY2022 SFOPS appropriations measure that the State Department maintained inclusion in the FY2022 SFOPS appropriations measure that the State Department maintained
would have expanded its ability to offer paid internships and $10 million to fund such internships. would have expanded its ability to offer paid internships and $10 million to fund such internships.
The State Department noted that providing compensation for interns would “ensure that all The State Department noted that providing compensation for interns would “ensure that all
eligible candidates can take advantage of [internship programs], regardless of background.”eligible candidates can take advantage of [internship programs], regardless of background.”1920 The The
request also prioritized disability hiring programs; additional diversity and inclusion content request also prioritized disability hiring programs; additional diversity and inclusion content
within orientation, leadership, and tradecraft classes for State Department personnel; and within orientation, leadership, and tradecraft classes for State Department personnel; and
coaching services for employees from under-represented groups.coaching services for employees from under-represented groups.2021
House Legislation. H.R. 4373 would have appropriated approximately $9.48 billion for H.R. 4373 would have appropriated approximately $9.48 billion for
Diplomatic Programs. This overall funding level was less than the Biden Administration’s request Diplomatic Programs. This overall funding level was less than the Biden Administration’s request
(se(see Table 2). The House bill sought to provide $3.22 billion for the Diplomatic Programs . The House bill sought to provide $3.22 billion for the Diplomatic Programs
account’s Human Resources funding category (through which funds are directed toward salaries account’s Human Resources funding category (through which funds are directed toward salaries
for domestic and overseas U.S. direct hire employees), identical to the Biden Administration’s for domestic and overseas U.S. direct hire employees), identical to the Biden Administration’s
request for Human Resources.request for Human Resources.2122 Additionally, the House Appropriations Committee report Additionally, the House Appropriations Committee report
accompanying this bill stated that it provided sufficient resources for the Administration to accompanying this bill stated that it provided sufficient resources for the Administration to
“restore and expand” the State Department’s workforce.“restore and expand” the State Department’s workforce.2223 With respect to diversity and inclusion, With respect to diversity and inclusion,
the committee report noted that the bill included funding for the State Department “to prioritize the committee report noted that the bill included funding for the State Department “to prioritize
initiatives aimed at making real and sustainable progress in diversifying our foreign policy initiatives aimed at making real and sustainable progress in diversifying our foreign policy

~~14 U.S. Department of State,~~ ~~Congressional Budget Justification: Department of State, Foreign Operations, and~~
~~Related Programs, Fiscal Year 2022, pp. 16-20.~~
~~15 Congressional Budget Justification, Appendix 1: Department of State Diplomatic Engagement, Fiscal Year 2022, p.~~
6.
~~16 Ibid., p. 48~~
~~17 Ibid., p. 50.~~
~~18 Ibid., p. 46.~~
~~19 Ibid., pp. 41, 95.~~
~~20 Ibid., pp. 90, 95-96.~~
21workforce.”24 Furthermore, H.R. 4373 included language similar to what the State Department requested that would have enabled the State Department to offer additional paid internships. The committee report recommended not less than $10 million for this purpose, in line with the Administration’s request.25 Consolidated and Supplemental Appropriations (including AUSAA). The FY2022-enacted appropriations for the Diplomatic Programs account (including all supplemental funding) total $9.54 billion, or around 0.5% more than the Biden Administration request.26 Excluding all supplemental funding, which comprises approximately $9.18 billion, the FY2022 appropriation is 17 Ibid., p. 48 18 Ibid., p. 50. 19 Ibid., p. 46. 20 Ibid., pp. 41, 95. 21 Ibid., pp. 90, 95-96. 22 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, State Foreign Operations, and Related Programs
Appropriations Bill, 2022, report to accompany H.R. 4373, 117th Cong., 1st sess., H.Rept. 117-84, (Washington, DC: , report to accompany H.R. 4373, 117th Cong., 1st sess., H.Rept. 117-84, (Washington, DC:
GPO, 2020), p. 10; U.S. Department of State, GPO, 2020), p. 10; U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Appendix 1, pp. 48, 53. , pp. 48, 53.
2223 House Committee on Appropriations, House Committee on Appropriations, State Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Bill, 2022, p. , p.
4. 4.
~~Congressional Research Service~~

7

~~Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs~~

~~workforce.”23 Furthermore, H.R. 4373 included language similar to what the State Department~~
~~requested that would have enabled the State Department to offer additional paid internships. The~~
~~committee report recommended not less than $10 million for this purpose, in line with the~~
~~Administration’s request.24~~
Omnibus and Supplemental Appropriations. The FY2022-enacted appropriations for the
~~Diplomatic Programs account (including supplemental funding) total $9.35 billion, or around~~
~~1.5% less than the Biden Administration request.25 Excluding all supplemental funding, which~~
~~comprises approximately $9.18 billion, the FY2022 appropriation is~~ 24 Ibid., p. 6. 25 Ibid., p. 12. See also Section 7063(d)(4) of H.R. 4373. 26 In this context, “supplemental funding” means funding Congress provided for the Department of State and Related Agency appropriations accounts in P.L. 117-43, P.L. 117-70, and Division N of P.L. 117-103. Congressional Research Service 8 link to page 15 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs about 3% less than the Biden about 3% less than the Biden
Administration’s FY2022 request. Division K of P.L. 117-103Administration’s FY2022 request. Division K of P.L. 117-103~~, which included the annual~~
~~appropriation for Diplomatic Programs,~~ provided the entirety of the $3.22 billion the Biden provided the entirety of the $3.22 billion the Biden
Administration requested for the account’s Human Resources component. The joint explanatory Administration requested for the account’s Human Resources component. The joint explanatory
statement (JES) accompanying this law stated that it includes funding for additional State statement (JES) accompanying this law stated that it includes funding for additional State
Department Foreign Service and Civil Service positions. The JES further instructed the Secretary Department Foreign Service and Civil Service positions. The JES further instructed the Secretary
of State to consult with Congress regarding staffing levels prior to submitting an operating plan to of State to consult with Congress regarding staffing levels prior to submitting an operating plan to
Congress detailing the specific uses of these funds.Congress detailing the specific uses of these funds.2627
The JES also stated that the FY2022 The JES also stated that the FY2022 consolidated appropriation “includes funding above the fiscal year 2021 appropriation “includes funding above the fiscal year 2021
level for workforce diversity initiatives.”level for workforce diversity initiatives.”2728 However, it did not fund all of the Biden However, it did not fund all of the Biden
Administration’s diversity and inclusion priorities at requested levels. For example, the law Administration’s diversity and inclusion priorities at requested levels. For example, the law
authorized the State Department to provide up to $8 million for paid internships, which is less authorized the State Department to provide up to $8 million for paid internships, which is less
than the requested figure of $10 million.than the requested figure of $10 million.2829 In other diversity and inclusion-related areas, the law In other diversity and inclusion-related areas, the law
included funding above what the Biden Administration requested. In one case, the JES expressed included funding above what the Biden Administration requested. In one case, the JES expressed
support for the State Department’s establishment of its Office of Diversity and Inclusion and support for the State Department’s establishment of its Office of Diversity and Inclusion and
provided the Office $4 million in funding, which exceeded the Biden Administration’s request of provided the Office $4 million in funding, which exceeded the Biden Administration’s request of
$3 million.$3 million.29
30 While neither P.L. 117-103 nor the JES included line item funding or directives for all of the diversity and inclusion programs the State Department highlighted in its request, the law provided the State Department the flexibility to fund these programs with available resources. Furthermore, the JES included a reporting requirement instructing the State Department to share information regarding its diversity and inclusion priorities, including funding and staff allocated to these efforts.31 Diplomatic Security
The Worldwide Security Protection (WSP) allocation within the Diplomatic Programs account The Worldwide Security Protection (WSP) allocation within the Diplomatic Programs account
and the Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance (ESCM) account are often referred to and the Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance (ESCM) account are often referred to
as the “diplomatic security accounts” within SFOPS. WSP funds the Bureau of Diplomatic as the “diplomatic security accounts” within SFOPS. WSP funds the Bureau of Diplomatic
Security (DS), which is responsible for implementing the State Department’s security programs Security (DS), which is responsible for implementing the State Department’s security programs
to protect U.S. embassies and other overseas posts, diplomatic residences, and domestic State to protect U.S. embassies and other overseas posts, diplomatic residences, and domestic State
Department offices.Department offices.3032 The ESCM account funds the Bureau of Overseas The ESCM account funds the Bureau of Overseas ~~Building~~Buildings Operations, Operations,
which is tasked with providing U.S. diplomatic and consular missions overseas with secure, which is tasked with providing U.S. diplomatic and consular missions overseas with secure,
functional, and resilient facilities and serving as the single manager for nonmilitary U.S. functional, and resilient facilities and serving as the single manager for nonmilitary U.S.
Government real property abroad.Government real property abroad.31

~~23 Ibid., p. 6.~~
~~24 Ibid., p. 12. See also Section 7063(d)(4) of H.R. 4373.~~
~~25 In this context, “supplemental funding” means funding Congress provided for the Department of State and Related~~
~~Agency appropriations accounts in P.L. 117-43, P.L. 117-70, and Division M of P.L. 117-103.~~
2633 For FY2022, the Administration requested approximately $6.06 billion for the diplomatic security accounts: $4.08 billion for WSP and $1.98 billion for ESCM. The Administration’s request was less than the funding Congress provided for these accounts in FY2021 (see Table 3). 27 Joint Explanatory Statement Accompanying Division K of P.L. 117-103, p. 7. Joint Explanatory Statement Accompanying Division K of P.L. 117-103, p. 7.
2728 Ibid., p. 10. Ibid., p. 10.
2829 Ibid., p. 10 and Section 7064(c) of Division K of P.L. 117-103. Ibid., p. 10 and Section 7064(c) of Division K of P.L. 117-103.
2930 Joint Explanatory Statement Accompanying Division K of P.L. 117-103, pp. 7, 9; U.S. Department of State, Joint Explanatory Statement Accompanying Division K of P.L. 117-103, pp. 7, 9; U.S. Department of State,
Congressional Budget Justification, Appendix 1, p. 47 , p. 47
3031 Ibid., p. 9. 32 U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, p. 20. , p. 20.
3133 U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Appendix 1, pp. 2, 321. , pp. 2, 321.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

8

~~link to page 14~~ 9 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

~~For FY2022, the Administration requested approximately $6.06 billion for the diplomatic security~~
~~accounts: $4.08 billion for WSP and $1.98 billion for ESCM. The Administration’s request was~~
~~less than the funding Congress provided for these accounts in FY2021 (see Table 3).~~
Table 3. Diplomatic Security Annual Appropriations, FY2020-FY2022
(In billions of current U.S. dollars, includes OCO (In billions of current U.S. dollars, includes OCO and Emergency Supplemental funds) funds)
% Change,
FY21
% Change, FY21
Enacted
FY2020
FY2021
FY2022
Enacted to
FY2022
FY2022
to FY22
Account
Actual
Enacted
Request
FY22 Request
House
Enacted
Enacted
Worldwide Security Worldwide Security
4.10 4.10
4.12 4.12
4.08 4.08
-1.1% -1.1%
4.08 4.08
3.79 3.79
-8.1% -8.1%
Protection Protection
Embassy Security, Embassy Security,
1.98 1.98
1.95 1.95
1.98 1.98
1.7% 1.7%
2.00 2.00
~~1.98~~
~~1.7~~2.10 7.3% %
Construction, and Construction, and
Maintenance Maintenance
Diplomatic
6.08
6.07
6.06
-0.2%
6.08
5.7789
-~~4.9~~3.1%
Security (total)
Sources: FY2022 SFOPS CBJ; H.R. 4373; P.L. 116-260; P.L. 117-103FY2022 SFOPS CBJ; H.R. 4373; P.L. 116-260; P.L. 117-103; P.L. 117-128; CRS calculations. ; CRS calculations.
Notes: Percentage changes may not reflect numbers included in this table due to rounding. Annual Percentage changes may not reflect numbers included in this table due to rounding. Annual
appropriations data do not reflect available carryover funds.appropriations data do not reflect available carryover funds.3234
The Administration’s FY2022 WSP-funded priorities included 70 new DS overseas special agent The Administration’s FY2022 WSP-funded priorities included 70 new DS overseas special agent
positions, which it maintained were “instrumental to reducing overseas staffing gaps and positions, which it maintained were “instrumental to reducing overseas staffing gaps and
mitigating future year retirement trends.”mitigating future year retirement trends.”3335 The request also sought funding for expanding the The request also sought funding for expanding the
Assistant Regional Security Officer Investigator (ARSO-I) program to combat visa and passport Assistant Regional Security Officer Investigator (ARSO-I) program to combat visa and passport
fraud and related human trafficking concerns, among other priorities.fraud and related human trafficking concerns, among other priorities.3436 With regard to ESCM, the With regard to ESCM, the
request called for request called for ~~around $1 billion for the State Department’s share of~~$2.2 billion in funding (which includes contributions from other agencies with personnel assigned abroad that are not part of the State Department’s budget) for the Capital Security Cost the Capital Security Cost
Sharing and Maintenance Cost Sharing Programs (CSCS/MCS), which fund the planning, design, Sharing and Maintenance Cost Sharing Programs (CSCS/MCS), which fund the planning, design,
construction, and maintenance of the United States’ overseas diplomatic posts.construction, and maintenance of the United States’ overseas diplomatic posts. ~~The~~
~~Administration maintained that this request, when combined with contributions from other~~
~~agencies with overseas personnel, would have funded these programs at the $2.2 billion level~~
~~recommended by the Benghazi Accountability Review Board.35~~37
House Legislation. H.R. 4373 would have appropriated funding for WSP at a level identical to H.R. 4373 would have appropriated funding for WSP at a level identical to
the Biden Administration’s request and included slightly more ($12.3 million) funding for the Biden Administration’s request and included slightly more ($12.3 million) funding for
ESCM.ESCM.3638 H.R. 4373 did not directly address the Administration’s request for additional overseas H.R. 4373 did not directly address the Administration’s request for additional overseas
DS special agents. The report accompanying this bill stated that it included the funding the Administration required to hire additional State Department personnel more generally.39 Neither the bill nor the committee report specifically addressed the proposed ARSO-I expansion.
3234 Over the past several years, Congress provided no-year appropriations for both WSP and ESCM, thereby authorizing Over the past several years, Congress provided no-year appropriations for both WSP and ESCM, thereby authorizing
the State Department to indefinitely retain appropriated funds beyond the fiscal year for which they were appropriated. the State Department to indefinitely retain appropriated funds beyond the fiscal year for which they were appropriated.
As a result, the department has carried over balances of unexpired, unobligated WSP and ESCM funds each year that it As a result, the department has carried over balances of unexpired, unobligated WSP and ESCM funds each year that it
is authorized to obligate for purposes including multiyear construction projects and unexpected security contingencies. is authorized to obligate for purposes including multiyear construction projects and unexpected security contingencies.
3335 U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Appendix 1, p. 51. , p. 51.
3436 U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Appendix 1, pp. 304-305. For background on ARSO-I, , pp. 304-305. For background on ARSO-I,
see U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Diplomatic Security, “The Investigative Global Force Multiplier: Diplomatic see U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Diplomatic Security, “The Investigative Global Force Multiplier: Diplomatic
Security Service’s Assistant Regional Security Officer-Investigators,” May 27, 2020, at https://www.state.gov/the-Security Service’s Assistant Regional Security Officer-Investigators,” May 27, 2020, at https://www.state.gov/the-
investigative-global-force-multiplier-diplomatic-security-services-assistant-regional-security-officer-investigators/. investigative-global-force-multiplier-diplomatic-security-services-assistant-regional-security-officer-investigators/.
3537 Ibid., p. 322-323. Ibid., p. 322-323.
3638 The Biden Administration’s precise requests for WSP and ESCM, as provided in the State Department’s FY2022 The Biden Administration’s precise requests for WSP and ESCM, as provided in the State Department’s FY2022
Congressional Budget Justification, total $4,075,899,000 and $1,983,149,000, respectively. The funding totals in the Congressional Budget Justification, total $4,075,899,000 and $1,983,149,000, respectively. The funding totals in the
~~Congressional Research Service~~

9

~~link to page 11~~ ~~Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs~~

~~DS special agents. The report accompanying this bill stated that it included the funding the~~
~~Administration required to hire additional State Department personnel more generally.37 Neither~~
~~the bill nor the committee report specifically addressed the proposed ARSO-I expansion.~~
House bill for WSP and ESCM total $4,075,899,000 and $1,995,449,000, respectively. 39 House Committee on Appropriations, State Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Bill, 2022, p. 4. Congressional Research Service 10 link to page 12 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs However, the bill appeared to include sufficient funding to expand the program, as the overall However, the bill appeared to include sufficient funding to expand the program, as the overall
funding it would have appropriated for WSP was equal to the Administration’s request. Regarding funding it would have appropriated for WSP was equal to the Administration’s request. Regarding
the ESCM account, the House bill would have provided around $2.12 billion for the CSCS/MCS the ESCM account, the House bill would have provided around $2.12 billion for the CSCS/MCS
programs (when factoring in programs (when factoring in ~~all funding sources~~funding from other agencies), or nearly 4% less than the Biden ), or nearly 4% less than the Biden
Administration’s request.Administration’s request.3840 The House bill would have also appropriated $12.3 million more than The House bill would have also appropriated $12.3 million more than
the Biden Administration requested in overall funding for ESCM. Had it been enacted, the bill the Biden Administration requested in overall funding for ESCM. Had it been enacted, the bill
would have thus included more funding than requested for other ESCM-funded priorities.would have thus included more funding than requested for other ESCM-funded priorities.39
Omnibus Appropriation. The FY2022 omnibus appropriations law, P.L. 117-103, included
~~$3.79 billion for WSP and $1.98~~41 Consolidated and Supplemental Appropriations (including AUSAA). The FY2022 consolidated appropriations law (P.L. 117-103) and the AUSAA (P.L. 117-128) included a combined $3.79 billion for WSP and $2.10 billion for ESCM, for a total of approximately $5. billion for ESCM, for a total of approximately $5.77 89 billion in billion in
diplomatic security funding. This aggregate funding level is nearly diplomatic security funding. This aggregate funding level is nearly 53% less than the Biden % less than the Biden
Administration’s request. The funding Congress provided for WSP (around $290 million, or 7%, Administration’s request. The funding Congress provided for WSP (around $290 million, or 7%,
less than the Administration’s request) may partially reflect reduced Afghanistan-related WSP less than the Administration’s request) may partially reflect reduced Afghanistan-related WSP
costs, for which the Administration requested nearly $580 million prior to the U.S. withdrawal costs, for which the Administration requested nearly $580 million prior to the U.S. withdrawal
from that country.from that country.4042 P.L. 117-103 also included funding for the WSP Human Resources P.L. 117-103 also included funding for the WSP Human Resources
component equal to the Biden Administration’s request. The law therefore likely provided component equal to the Biden Administration’s request. The law therefore likely provided
sufficient resources for the State Department to bring on the 70 additional DS special agents it sufficient resources for the State Department to bring on the 70 additional DS special agents it
requested pending consultation with Congress (see the “requested pending consultation with Congress (see the “~~Omnibus~~Consolidated and Supplemental and Supplemental
Appropriations” analysis under the Appropriations” analysis under the “Diplomatic Programs” subsection of this report for more subsection of this report for more
detail regarding these consultation requirements). P.L. 117-103 did not specifically address detail regarding these consultation requirements). P.L. 117-103 did not specifically address
ARSO-I expansion but appears to have included sufficient resources for the State Department to ARSO-I expansion but appears to have included sufficient resources for the State Department to
expand the program. expand the program.
P.L. 117-103 P.L. 117-103 and P.L. 117-128 also appropriated $ also appropriated $~~1.98~~2.10 billion in funding for ESCM, which is billion in funding for ESCM, which is ~~the same figure as~~6% more than the the
Biden Administration’s overall request. Biden Administration’s overall request. ~~The law~~P.L. 117-103 provided resources for the CSCS/MCS program provided resources for the CSCS/MCS program
and other programs funded through ESCM, including repair and construction projects that the and other programs funded through ESCM, including repair and construction projects that the
State Department maintains will address “critical maintenance requirements at existing legacy State Department maintains will address “critical maintenance requirements at existing legacy
facilities,” at levels identical to the Biden Administration’s request.facilities,” at levels identical to the Biden Administration’s request.4143
Assessed Contributions to International Organizations and
Peacekeeping Missions
The Contributions to International Organizations (CIO) account is the funding vehicle for the The Contributions to International Organizations (CIO) account is the funding vehicle for the
United States’ payments of its assessed contributions (membership dues) to 43 international United States’ payments of its assessed contributions (membership dues) to 43 international

~~House bill for WSP and ESCM total $4,075,899,000 and $1,995,449,000, respectively.~~
~~37 House Committee on Appropriations, State Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Bill, 2022, p.~~
4.
38organizations. These include the United Nations (U.N.) and organizations in the U.N. system (among them the World Health Organization, or WHO), inter-American organizations such as the Organization of American States, and regional organizations including the North Atlantic Treaty 40 The Biden Administration’s request totaled $2,204,997,000. If enacted, the House bill would provide The Biden Administration’s request totaled $2,204,997,000. If enacted, the House bill would provide
$2,124,000,000. See $2,124,000,000. See Congressional Budget Justification, Appendix 1, p. 323, and House Committee on Appropriations, , p. 323, and House Committee on Appropriations,
State Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Bill, 2022, p. 24. , p. 24.
3941 Such priorities may include the Compound Security Upgrade Program, which funds comprehensive security upgrade Such priorities may include the Compound Security Upgrade Program, which funds comprehensive security upgrade
projects at U.S. overseas posts and anti-ram vehicle barrier installations, among other projects. See U.S. Department of projects at U.S. overseas posts and anti-ram vehicle barrier installations, among other projects. See U.S. Department of
State, State, Congressional Budget Justification, Appendix 1, p. 323. , p. 323.
4042 U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Appendix 1, p. 307. , p. 307.
4143 Ibid., p. 324 and Joint Explanatory Statement Accompanying Division K of P.L. 117-103, p. 16. While the State Ibid., p. 324 and Joint Explanatory Statement Accompanying Division K of P.L. 117-103, p. 16. While the State
Department’s budget request includes a transfer of around $42.5 million from the Consular and Border Security Department’s budget request includes a transfer of around $42.5 million from the Consular and Border Security
Programs account to CSCS/MCS, Congress does not address this proposed transfer in the Programs account to CSCS/MCS, Congress does not address this proposed transfer in the ~~omnibus~~consolidated appropriations law. appropriations law.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1011

link to page 18 link to page link to page 18 link to page 1617 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

~~organizations. These include the United Nations (U.N.) and organizations in the U.N. system~~
~~(among them the World Health Organization, or WHO), inter-American organizations such as the~~
~~Organization of American States, and regional organizations including the North Atlantic Treaty~~
~~Organization (NATO).42~~Organization (NATO).44 Separately, the United States pays its assessed contributions to U.N. Separately, the United States pays its assessed contributions to U.N.
peacekeeping missions through the Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities peacekeeping missions through the Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities
(CIPA) account.(CIPA) account.4345 U.S. funding to international organizations is also provided through various U.S. funding to international organizations is also provided through various
SFOPS multilateral assistance accounts (see SFOPS multilateral assistance accounts (see “Foreign Operations Highlights,” below). below).
The Biden Administration requested a combined $3.592 billion for these accounts for FY2022. The Biden Administration requested a combined $3.592 billion for these accounts for FY2022.
This funding level would have totaled a 21% increase from the funds Congress appropriated for This funding level would have totaled a 21% increase from the funds Congress appropriated for
FYFY2021. Table 4 shows recent funding levels for each account. shows recent funding levels for each account.
Table 4. U.S. Payments of Assessments to International Organizations and
Peacekeeping Missions, FY2020-FY2022
(In billions of current U.S. dollars; includes OCO funds) (In billions of current U.S. dollars; includes OCO funds)
% Change,
% Change,
FY21
FY21 Enacted
Enacted to
FY2020
FY2021
FY2022
to FY22
FY2022
FY2022
FY22
Account
Actual
Enacted
Request
Request
House
Enacted
Enacted
Contributions to International Contributions to International
1.47 1.47
1.51 1.51
1.66 1.66
10.4% 10.4%
1.66 1.66
1.66 1.66
10.4% 10.4%
Organizations Organizations
Contributions for International Contributions for International
1.53 1.53
1.46 1.46
1.93 1.93
32.4% 32.4%
1.93 1.93
1.50 1.50
2.9% 2.9%
Peacekeeping Activities Peacekeeping Activities
Total
3.00
2.97
3.59
21.2%
3.59
3.16
6.7%
Sources: FY2022 SFOPS CBJ; H.R. 4373; P.L. 116-260; P.L. 117-103; CRS calculations. FY2022 SFOPS CBJ; H.R. 4373; P.L. 116-260; P.L. 117-103; CRS calculations.
Notes: Percentage changes may not reflect numbers included in this table due to rounding. Percentage changes may not reflect numbers included in this table due to rounding.
The Biden Administration maintained that its CIO request sought funding for “international The Biden Administration maintained that its CIO request sought funding for “international
programs and organizations whose missions substantially advance U.S. foreign policy interests.” programs and organizations whose missions substantially advance U.S. foreign policy interests.”
The Administration further noted that the request reflected its expectation that international The Administration further noted that the request reflected its expectation that international
organizations should “rein in costs,” improve their efficiency and effectiveness, enhance their organizations should “rein in costs,” improve their efficiency and effectiveness, enhance their
accountability and transparency, and share funding burdens more equitably among member accountability and transparency, and share funding burdens more equitably among member
states.states.4446 Among other priorities, the request asked for $75 million for payments to the U.N. Among other priorities, the request asked for $75 million for payments to the U.N.
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).4547 The Administration also The Administration also
requested authority for the United States to rejoin UNESCO.requested authority for the United States to rejoin UNESCO.4648 The Trump Administration The Trump Administration
withdrew the United States from UNESCO in 2018.withdrew the United States from UNESCO in 2018.4749
For CIPA, the Biden Administration asserted that its FY2022 request advanced its intent to fully For CIPA, the Biden Administration asserted that its FY2022 request advanced its intent to fully
fund the United States’ U.N. peacekeeping commitments and pay down over $900 million in fund the United States’ U.N. peacekeeping commitments and pay down over $900 million in
arrears that had accumulated over the past four years (this figure excluded previously accumulated arrears).50 The accumulation of such arrears owed in part to the United Nations’
4244 U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, pp. 48-49. , pp. 48-49.
4345 Ibid., pp. 51-53. Ibid., pp. 51-53.
4446 U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, pp. 48-49. , pp. 48-49.
4547 U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of State, Congressional Budget Justification, Appendix 1, p. 363 , p. 363
4648 For additional background, see CRS In Focus IF10354, For additional background, see CRS In Focus IF10354, United Nations Issues: U.S. Funding to the U.N. System, by , by
Luisa Blanchfield. Luisa Blanchfield.
4749 For more information, see CRS Insight IN10802, For more information, see CRS Insight IN10802, U.S. Withdrawal from the United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), by Luisa Blanchfield. , by Luisa Blanchfield.
50 For an overview of U.N. peacekeeping arrears accumulated prior to 2017, see CRS In Focus IF10597, United Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1112

Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

~~arrears that had accumulated over the past four years (this figure excluded previously~~
~~accumulated arrears).48 The accumulation of such arrears owed in part to the United Nations’~~
current assessment of the U.S. share of U.N. peacekeeping budgets, which totals 27.89%. This current assessment of the U.S. share of U.N. peacekeeping budgets, which totals 27.89%. This
exceeds the 25% congressional cap on payments for this purpose that Congress has kept in place exceeds the 25% congressional cap on payments for this purpose that Congress has kept in place
since 1994 due to concerns that U.S. assessments are too high.since 1994 due to concerns that U.S. assessments are too high.4951 The Biden Administration’s The Biden Administration’s
request asked for $300 million to begin paying down such arrears; the Administration added its request asked for $300 million to begin paying down such arrears; the Administration added its
intention to pay down the remainder in FY2023.intention to pay down the remainder in FY2023.5052 The request also proposed language that, if The request also proposed language that, if
enacted, would have authorized the State Department to make funds appropriated in FY2022 enacted, would have authorized the State Department to make funds appropriated in FY2022
available for U.N. peacekeeping missions above the aforementioned 25% statutory cap.available for U.N. peacekeeping missions above the aforementioned 25% statutory cap.5153
House Legislation. The House bill would have funded CIO and CIPA at the levels the Biden The House bill would have funded CIO and CIPA at the levels the Biden
Administration requested. While the bill sought to provide an appropriation for CIO that was Administration requested. While the bill sought to provide an appropriation for CIO that was
equal to the Biden Administration’s request, which incorporated requested funding for UNESCO, equal to the Biden Administration’s request, which incorporated requested funding for UNESCO,
the bill did not include the waiver authority the Biden Administration called for that would have the bill did not include the waiver authority the Biden Administration called for that would have
allowed the United States to rejoin the organization. The House bill included both the $300 allowed the United States to rejoin the organization. The House bill included both the $300
million the Biden Administration requested for the payment of peacekeeping arrears and million the Biden Administration requested for the payment of peacekeeping arrears and
requested legislative language to allow the State Department to make funds available for U.N. requested legislative language to allow the State Department to make funds available for U.N.
peacekeeping missions in excess of the 25% statutory cap.peacekeeping missions in excess of the 25% statutory cap.52
~~Omnibus~~54 Consolidated Appropriation. Like the House bill, P.L. 117-103 funded CIO at a level equal to the Like the House bill, P.L. 117-103 funded CIO at a level equal to the
Biden Administration’s $1.66 billion request. While this included the funding the Biden Biden Administration’s $1.66 billion request. While this included the funding the Biden
Administration sought for UNESCO, the bill did not include the aforementioned waiver authority Administration sought for UNESCO, the bill did not include the aforementioned waiver authority
the Biden Administration said was necessary for the United States to rejoin UNESCO.the Biden Administration said was necessary for the United States to rejoin UNESCO. The law The law
also appropriated $1.50 billion for CIPA, or about 22% less than both the Biden Administration’s also appropriated $1.50 billion for CIPA, or about 22% less than both the Biden Administration’s
request and the amount the House bill included. While P.L. 117-103 provided nearly 3% more for request and the amount the House bill included. While P.L. 117-103 provided nearly 3% more for
CIPA than Congress appropriated in FY2021, this increase may not be sufficient for the Biden CIPA than Congress appropriated in FY2021, this increase may not be sufficient for the Biden
Administration to use $300 million of such funding to begin paying peacekeeping arrears, as Administration to use $300 million of such funding to begin paying peacekeeping arrears, as
envisioned in the Administration’s request. The law also did not include the authorizing language envisioned in the Administration’s request. The law also did not include the authorizing language
the Administration requested that would have allowed the State Department to fund U.N. the Administration requested that would have allowed the State Department to fund U.N.
peacekeeping missions at levels exceeding the 25% statutory cap on the U.S. share of U.N. peacekeeping missions at levels exceeding the 25% statutory cap on the U.S. share of U.N.
peacekeeping mission budgets. peacekeeping mission budgets.

~~48 For an overview of U.N. peacekeeping arrears accumulated prior to 2017, see CRS In Focus IF10597,~~ ~~United~~
Foreign Operations Highlights The SFOPS appropriation’s foreign operations accounts comprise the majority of U.S. foreign assistance included in the international affairs budget; the remainder is enacted in the agriculture appropriation, which provides funding for the Food for Peace Act, Title II and McGovern-Dole Nations Issues: U.S. Funding of U.N. Peacekeeping, by Luisa Blanchfield. , by Luisa Blanchfield.
4951 Over the years, the gap between the actual U.S. assessment and the cap led to funding shortfalls. The State Over the years, the gap between the actual U.S. assessment and the cap led to funding shortfalls. The State
Department and Congress often covered these shortfalls by raising the cap for limited periods and allowing for the Department and Congress often covered these shortfalls by raising the cap for limited periods and allowing for the
application of U.N. peacekeeping credits (excess U.N. funds from previous missions) to fund outstanding U.S. application of U.N. peacekeeping credits (excess U.N. funds from previous missions) to fund outstanding U.S.
balances. For several years, these actions allowed the United States to pay its peacekeeping assessments in full. balances. For several years, these actions allowed the United States to pay its peacekeeping assessments in full.
However, since FY2017 Congress has declined to raise the cap, and in mid-2017, the Trump Administration allowed However, since FY2017 Congress has declined to raise the cap, and in mid-2017, the Trump Administration allowed
for the application of peacekeeping credits up to, but not beyond, the 25% cap—which has led to the accumulation of for the application of peacekeeping credits up to, but not beyond, the 25% cap—which has led to the accumulation of
about $920 million in U.S. arrears from FY2017 to FY2020. For more information, see CRS In Focus IF10597, about $920 million in U.S. arrears from FY2017 to FY2020. For more information, see CRS In Focus IF10597, United
Nations Issues: U.S. Funding of U.N. Peacekeeping, by Luisa Blanchfield. See also U.S. Department of State, , by Luisa Blanchfield. See also U.S. Department of State,
Congressional Budget Justification, p. 51. , p. 51.
5052 U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of State, FY2022 Budget Request, slide presentation, p. 42. , slide presentation, p. 42.
5153 SFOPS CBJ for FY2022 Appendix 1, p. 397. See also 22 U.S.C. §287e note. SFOPS CBJ for FY2022 Appendix 1, p. 397. See also 22 U.S.C. §287e note.
5254 House Committee on Appropriations, House Committee on Appropriations, State Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Bill, 2022, p. , p.
6. 6.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1213

link to page link to page 1819 link to page link to page 1920 link to page link to page 1920 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

~~Foreign Operations Highlights~~
~~The SFOPS appropriation’s foreign operations accounts comprise the majority of U.S. foreign~~
~~assistance included in the international affairs budget; the remainder is enacted in the agriculture~~
~~appropriation, which provides funding for the Food for Peace Act, Title II and McGovern-Dole~~
International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Programs.International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Programs.5355 The Biden Administration’s The Biden Administration’s
initial FY2022 request for Foreign Operations accounts totaled $44.307 billion. The total foreign initial FY2022 request for Foreign Operations accounts totaled $44.307 billion. The total foreign
assistance request, including the food assistance provided in the agriculture appropriation, totaled assistance request, including the food assistance provided in the agriculture appropriation, totaled
$46.107 billion, which represented an 11% increase from FY2021-enacted nonemergency funds $46.107 billion, which represented an 11% increase from FY2021-enacted nonemergency funds
(i.e., base and OCO) and a nearly 20% decrease from total enacted FY2021 appropriations (i.e., (i.e., base and OCO) and a nearly 20% decrease from total enacted FY2021 appropriations (i.e.,
base, OCO, and emergency funds to address COVID-19 abroad, certain assistance for Sudan, and base, OCO, and emergency funds to address COVID-19 abroad, certain assistance for Sudan, and
humanitarian assistance for Afghanistan and Afghan refugees). humanitarian assistance for Afghanistan and Afghan refugees).
On March 2, 2022, the Administration requested supplemental foreign operations funding to On March 2, 2022, the Administration requested supplemental foreign operations funding to
support needs related to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, as well as the continued COVID-19 support needs related to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, as well as the continued COVID-19
response abroad.response abroad.5456 For Ukraine, the request included a total of $5.0 billion, of which $2.75 billion For Ukraine, the request included a total of $5.0 billion, of which $2.75 billion
~~would have been~~was proposed for humanitarian assistance, $1.75 billion for economic assistance, and $500 for humanitarian assistance, $1.75 billion for economic assistance, and $500
million for security assistance.million for security assistance.5557 For COVID-19, the Administration requested a total of $4.25 For COVID-19, the Administration requested a total of $4.25
billion in additional foreign operations funding, of which $3.50 billion billion in additional foreign operations funding, of which $3.50 billion ~~would have been~~was for for
certain global health initiatives and $750 million for humanitarian assistance. certain global health initiatives and $750 million for humanitarian assistance. ~~With the~~
~~supplemental request~~On April 28, 2022, the Administration requested additional supplemental foreign operations funding related to Ukraine and U.S. allies and partners in the surrounding region. Of the requested funds, $14.76 billion was for foreign operations accounts, of which $8.76 billion was proposed for economic assistance, $4.5 billion for security assistance, $850 million for humanitarian assistance, and $650 million for multilateral assistance. With the supplemental requests, the Administration’s FY2022 foreign operations request totaled $, the Administration’s FY2022 foreign operations request totaled $~~53.56~~
68.32 billion, and the total foreign assistance request was $billion, and the total foreign assistance request was $~~55.36~~ 70.12 billion, or billion, or ~~3.5% less~~22.2% higher than the than the total FY2021-FY2021-
enacted funding level. Seenacted funding level. See Table 5 for a more detailed breakdown. for a more detailed breakdown.
Table 5. Foreign Assistance, by Type, FY2020-FY2022
(In millions of current U.S. dollars) (In millions of current U.S. dollars)
% Change,
% Change,
FY2021
FY2021
Total
Total
Enacted
Enacted
FY2021
vs. Total
vs.
FY2020
Enacted
FY2022
FY2022
FY2022
FY2022
FY2022
Type
Actual
Totala
Request
Request
House
Enacted
Enacted
USAID Administration
1,766.05 1,766.05
1,752.45 1,752.45
1,862.65 1,862.65
6.3% 6.3%
1,790.62 1,790.62
2, 2,~~003~~021.15 .15
1415.3% .3%
Global Health Programs
9,559.95 9,559.95
13,195.95 13,195.95
13,550.95 13,550.95
2.7% 2.7%
10,641.45 10,641.45
9,830.00 9,830.00
-25.5% -25.5%
Non-health Development Assistance
8,119.08 8,119.08
17,797.04 17,797.04
~~11,652~~20,412.11 .11
~~-34.5~~14.7% %
9,272.00 9,272.00
~~11,449~~20,215.19 .19
~~-35.7~~13.6%
(includes Treasury Technical Assistance) (includes Treasury Technical Assistance)
Humanitarian Assistanceb
10,460.46 10,460.46
11,467.46 11,467.46
~~13,597~~14,447.46 .46
~~18.6~~26.0% %
10,267.46 10,267.46
~~15,798~~20,496.85 .85
~~37.8~~78.7% %
Independent Agencies
1,474.00 1,474.00
1,393.50 1,393.50
1,393.50 1,393.50
0.0% 0.0%
1,430.00 1,430.00
1,404.50 1,404.50
0.8% 0.8%
Security Assistance
9,013.95 9,013.95
9,004.03 9,004.03
~~9,683~~14,183.89 .89
757.5% .5%
9,034.03 9,034.03
~~9,579~~14,079.35 .35
656.4% .4%

5355 For more on international food assistance programs, see CRS Report R45422, For more on international food assistance programs, see CRS Report R45422, U.S. International Food Assistance:
An Overview, by Alyssa R. Casey and Emily M. Morgenstern. , by Alyssa R. Casey and Emily M. Morgenstern.
5456 See letter from OMB Acting Director Shalanda Young to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, at See letter from OMB Acting Director Shalanda Young to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/COVID-and-Ukraine-Supplemental-Funding-Request-https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/COVID-and-Ukraine-Supplemental-Funding-Request-
Pelosi.pdf. Pelosi.pdf.
5557 For more on the Ukraine portion of the Administration’s supplemental request, see CRS Insight IN11877, For more on the Ukraine portion of the Administration’s supplemental request, see CRS Insight IN11877,
Supplemental Funding for Ukraine: Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs (SFOPS), by , by
Emily M. Morgenstern. Emily M. Morgenstern.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1314

link to page link to page 1920 link to page link to page 1920 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

% Change,
% Change,
FY2021
FY2021
Total
Total
Enacted
Enacted
FY2021
vs. Total
vs.
FY2020
Enacted
FY2022
FY2022
FY2022
FY2022
FY2022
Type
Actual
Totala
Request
Request
House
Enacted
Enacted
Multilateral Assistance
2,049.78 2,049.78
2,620.82 2,620.82
~~3,630~~4,280.13 .13
~~38.5~~63.3% %
4,098.56 4,098.56
~~2,374~~3,024.46 .46
-915.4% .4%
Export Promotionc
59.16 59.16
159.00 159.00
-13.61 -13.61
-108.6% -108.6%
223.80 223.80
323.80 323.80
103.6% 103.6%
Foreign Assistance Total
42,502.42 42,502.42
57,390.25 57,390.25
~~55,357.05~~
~~-3.5~~70,117.09 22.2% %
46,757.92 46,757.92
~~52,763~~71,395.30 .30
~~-8.1~~24.4% %
Sources: SFOPS CBJ for FY2022; H.R. 4373; H.R. 4356; P.L. 117-103; SFOPS CBJ for FY2022; H.R. 4373; H.R. 4356; P.L. 117-103; ~~supplemental request~~ P.L. 117-128; supplemental requests submitted to submitted to
Congress on March 2, 2022Congress on March 2, 2022, and April 28, 2022; CRS calculations. ; CRS calculations.
a. FY2021 enacted total includes emergency funding to address COVID-19 abroad, select assistance for Sudan, a. FY2021 enacted total includes emergency funding to address COVID-19 abroad, select assistance for Sudan,
and humanitarian assistance for Afghanistan and Afghan refugees. and humanitarian assistance for Afghanistan and Afghan refugees.
b. Includes Food for Peace Act, Title II funds appropriated in annual Agriculture appropriations. b. Includes Food for Peace Act, Title II funds appropriated in annual Agriculture appropriations.
c. Export Promotion numbers are negative when anticipated receipts and other offsetting col ections are c. Export Promotion numbers are negative when anticipated receipts and other offsetting col ections are
expected to exceed appropriations, resulting in a net gain to the Treasury. expected to exceed appropriations, resulting in a net gain to the Treasury.
House Legislation. The House FY2022 legislation provided a total of $46.76 billion for foreign The House FY2022 legislation provided a total of $46.76 billion for foreign
assistance (includes food aid in the Agriculture appropriation, H.R. 4356). This represented a assistance (includes food aid in the Agriculture appropriation, H.R. 4356). This represented a
nearly 19% increase from FY2021-enacted nonemergency funds, a 14% decrease from total nearly 19% increase from FY2021-enacted nonemergency funds, a 14% decrease from total
FY2021-enacted funding, and a 5% increase over the Biden Administration’s initial request. FY2021-enacted funding, and a 5% increase over the Biden Administration’s initial request.
Continuing Resolutions. The first continuing resolution for FY2022 (P.L. 117-43), which The first continuing resolution for FY2022 (P.L. 117-43), which
expired on December 3, 2021, included a total of $1.89 billion in emergency funding to address expired on December 3, 2021, included a total of $1.89 billion in emergency funding to address
humanitarian needs in Afghanistan and to assist Afghan refugees, among other objectives. The humanitarian needs in Afghanistan and to assist Afghan refugees, among other objectives. The
funds were provided through three accounts: International Disaster Assistance (IDA, $400 funds were provided through three accounts: International Disaster Assistance (IDA, $400
million), Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA, $415 million), and Emergency Refugee and million), Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA, $415 million), and Emergency Refugee and
Migration Assistance (ERMA, $1.08 billion). The second continuing resolution for FY2022 (P.L. Migration Assistance (ERMA, $1.08 billion). The second continuing resolution for FY2022 (P.L.
117-70), which expired on February 18, 2022, included $1.20 billion in supplemental ERMA 117-70), which expired on February 18, 2022, included $1.20 billion in supplemental ERMA
funds “for support for Operation Allies Welcome and related efforts by the Department of State, funds “for support for Operation Allies Welcome and related efforts by the Department of State,
including additional relocations of individuals at risk as a result of the situation in Afghanistan including additional relocations of individuals at risk as a result of the situation in Afghanistan
and related expenses.” The CR also included a provision that required the Director of the Office and related expenses.” The CR also included a provision that required the Director of the Office
of Management and Budget to provide a report to Congress no later than January 15, 2022, on of Management and Budget to provide a report to Congress no later than January 15, 2022, on
Operation Allies Welcome that includes “a strategy and transition plan leading to the conclusion” Operation Allies Welcome that includes “a strategy and transition plan leading to the conclusion”
of the operation, among other details. of the operation, among other details.
~~Omnibus~~Consolidated Appropriation. P.L. 117-103 provided $40.95 billion in base foreign operations P.L. 117-103 provided $40.95 billion in base foreign operations
funding and $9.74 billion in supplemental funds to address the crisis in Ukraine, bringing the total funding and $9.74 billion in supplemental funds to address the crisis in Ukraine, bringing the total
foreign operations funding for FY2022 to nearly $50.69 billion, and foreign assistance funding to foreign operations funding for FY2022 to nearly $50.69 billion, and foreign assistance funding to
$52.76 billion. This foreign assistance funding level represents an 8% decrease from total $52.76 billion. This foreign assistance funding level represents an 8% decrease from total
FY2021 foreign assistance funding. However, when comparing nonemergency funding, FY2022-FY2021 foreign assistance funding. However, when comparing nonemergency funding, FY2022-
enacted funding represents a 4% increase from the FY2021 funding level. The largest increase enacted funding represents a 4% increase from the FY2021 funding level. The largest increase
among the foreign assistance funding categoriesamong the foreign assistance funding categories, by percentage, was for export assistance, for which FY2022- was for export assistance, for which FY2022-
enacted appropriations are more than double the FY2021 funding. The largest funding reduction enacted appropriations are more than double the FY2021 funding. The largest funding reduction
when comparing FY2021- and FY2022-enacted appropriations was for non-health development when comparing FY2021- and FY2022-enacted appropriations was for non-health development
assistance accounts, which decreased by nearly 36% in total. assistance accounts, which decreased by nearly 36% in total.
AUSAA. P.L. 117-128 provided a total of $18.63 billion in supplemental funds for Ukraine and countries affected by the crisis in Ukraine. The measure brings total enacted FY2022 foreign operations funding to $69.32 billion, and foreign assistance funding to $71.40 billion. The foreign assistance funding level represents a 24.4% increase from FY2021 total enacted funding. Congressional Research Service 15~~Congressional Research Service~~

14

Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

Cross-Cutting Issues
The Biden Administration’s budget request articulated certain global priorities for FY2022. These The Biden Administration’s budget request articulated certain global priorities for FY2022. These
included responding to climate change through bilateral and multilateral efforts, addressing the included responding to climate change through bilateral and multilateral efforts, addressing the
first- and second-order effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and combating rising first- and second-order effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and combating rising
authoritarianism. authoritarianism.
Climate Change
The Biden Administration identified climate change response as a top priority. Multilaterally, the The Biden Administration identified climate change response as a top priority. Multilaterally, the
Biden Administration proposed a $625 million contribution to the Green Climate Fund, which Biden Administration proposed a $625 million contribution to the Green Climate Fund, which
would be the first U.S. contribution since FY2017. The request also included $300 million for the would be the first U.S. contribution since FY2017. The request also included $300 million for the
Clean Technology Fund and $100 million for Multilateral Climate Change Adaptation Funds. Clean Technology Fund and $100 million for Multilateral Climate Change Adaptation Funds.
Bilaterally, the Administration asserted that the request “increas[es] investments in systemic Bilaterally, the Administration asserted that the request “increas[es] investments in systemic
change that promotes adaptation resilience, renewable energy, and sustainable landscapes.”change that promotes adaptation resilience, renewable energy, and sustainable landscapes.”5658 The The
Administration included climate considerations in all regional-specific requests as well as certain Administration included climate considerations in all regional-specific requests as well as certain
sector-specific requests such as those for food security and gender.sector-specific requests such as those for food security and gender.5759 The budget request also The budget request also
incorporated climate-related priorities into independent agency requests, such as those for the incorporated climate-related priorities into independent agency requests, such as those for the
Peace Corps, Millennium Challenge Corporation, and the U.S. African Development Foundation. Peace Corps, Millennium Challenge Corporation, and the U.S. African Development Foundation.
House Legislation. The House bill, H.R. 4373, provided funds for both multilateral and bilateral The House bill, H.R. 4373, provided funds for both multilateral and bilateral
efforts to combat climate change. The bill included $1.60 billion for the Green Climate Fund and efforts to combat climate change. The bill included $1.60 billion for the Green Climate Fund and
$200 million for the Clean Technology Fund. The report designated additional funds for climate $200 million for the Clean Technology Fund. The report designated additional funds for climate
efforts and directed agencies to incorporate climate into foreign assistance activities. For efforts and directed agencies to incorporate climate into foreign assistance activities. For
example, it listed climate change as a key issue in a number of regions, including the Indo-example, it listed climate change as a key issue in a number of regions, including the Indo-
Pacific, Central America, and sub-Saharan Africa. The committee further directed that funds be Pacific, Central America, and sub-Saharan Africa. The committee further directed that funds be
made available for “climate change integration at the activity level at USAID, especially to made available for “climate change integration at the activity level at USAID, especially to
increase the technical expertise of USAID staff related to climate change mitigation and increase the technical expertise of USAID staff related to climate change mitigation and
adaptation.” adaptation.”
~~Omnibus~~Consolidated Appropriation. P.L. 117-103 included selected funding for climate change efforts but P.L. 117-103 included selected funding for climate change efforts but
not at the levels requested by the Administration or proposed in the House legislation. The bill not at the levels requested by the Administration or proposed in the House legislation. The bill
included $125 million for a Clean Technology Fund and $149 million for the Global Environment included $125 million for a Clean Technology Fund and $149 million for the Global Environment
Facility. The bill also directed that $185 million be made available for sustainable landscapes Facility. The bill also directed that $185 million be made available for sustainable landscapes
programs, $270 million for adaptation programs, and $260 million for clean energy programs, programs, $270 million for adaptation programs, and $260 million for clean energy programs,
among other environmental initiatives. As in prior year appropriations, the legislation did not among other environmental initiatives. As in prior year appropriations, the legislation did not
include a contribution to the Green Climate Fund.include a contribution to the Green Climate Fund.5860
COVID-19
The FY2022 request proposed funds to address the first-order effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, The FY2022 request proposed funds to address the first-order effects of the COVID-19 pandemic,
including global health and humanitarian needs; second- and third-order effects, such as food including global health and humanitarian needs; second- and third-order effects, such as food
security, education, and economic challenges; and long-term pandemic preparedness efforts. The security, education, and economic challenges; and long-term pandemic preparedness efforts. The
proposed investments for COVID-19 response included, among others, proposed investments for COVID-19 response included, among others,

5658 SFOPS CBJ for FY2022, p. 80. SFOPS CBJ for FY2022, p. 80.
5759 Ibid. Ibid.
5860 For more detailed information on U.S. funding for international climate programs, see CRS In Focus IF12036, For more detailed information on U.S. funding for international climate programs, see CRS In Focus IF12036, U.S.
International Climate Finance: ~~FY2022~~FY2023, by Richard K. Lattanzio. , by Richard K. Lattanzio.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1516

Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

 $995 million for Global Health Security to “enhance the global COVID response  $995 million for Global Health Security to “enhance the global COVID response
and strengthen global health security”; and strengthen global health security”;5961
 humanitarian assistance funds through the International Disaster Assistance  humanitarian assistance funds through the International Disaster Assistance
(IDA) and Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA) accounts to aid the most (IDA) and Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA) accounts to aid the most
vulnerable populations and maintain “global response capacity” in the wake of vulnerable populations and maintain “global response capacity” in the wake of
COVID-19;COVID-19;6062
 Development Assistance (DA) education funds to “address the global learning  Development Assistance (DA) education funds to “address the global learning
crisis and respond to the impact of COVID-19 on education”; crisis and respond to the impact of COVID-19 on education”;6163 and and
 Economic Support Fund (ESF) monies to help regions recover from the  Economic Support Fund (ESF) monies to help regions recover from the
economic effects of COVID-19. economic effects of COVID-19.6264
The Administration’s supplemental request for COVID-19, submitted on March 2, 2022, included The Administration’s supplemental request for COVID-19, submitted on March 2, 2022, included
an additional $4.25 billion for foreign operations accounts. According to the request, $3.5 billion an additional $4.25 billion for foreign operations accounts. According to the request, $3.5 billion
would have been for global health programs—including $1.8 billion for the U.S. Global VAX would have been for global health programs—including $1.8 billion for the U.S. Global VAX
initiative and $1.7 billion for other COVID-19 global health interventions (e.g., therapeutics and initiative and $1.7 billion for other COVID-19 global health interventions (e.g., therapeutics and
supplies)—and $750 million would have been for humanitarian assistance, including the supplies)—and $750 million would have been for humanitarian assistance, including the
provision of emergency food assistance. provision of emergency food assistance.
House Legislation. The report accompanying the House measure (H.Rept. 117-84) noted that the The report accompanying the House measure (H.Rept. 117-84) noted that the
bill bill
makes a strong commitment to a global health architecture where every country has the makes a strong commitment to a global health architecture where every country has the
systems and policies to proactively respond to, and mitigate, emerging health threats ... systems and policies to proactively respond to, and mitigate, emerging health threats ...
[and] provides a renewed commitment to development and the economic security of [and] provides a renewed commitment to development and the economic security of
countries seeking to recover from the ravages of the pandemic including closed schools, countries seeking to recover from the ravages of the pandemic including closed schools,
lost livelihoods, and rising levels of gender-based violence and discrimination. lost livelihoods, and rising levels of gender-based violence and discrimination.
The measure and accompanying report provided $1 billion for Global Health Security; directed The measure and accompanying report provided $1 billion for Global Health Security; directed
the USAID Administrator to address learning loss due to COVID-19, including through the USAID Administrator to address learning loss due to COVID-19, including through
expanding access to distance learning materials and technology; and recommended that USAID expanding access to distance learning materials and technology; and recommended that USAID
design COVID-19-sensitive water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) programs, among other design COVID-19-sensitive water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) programs, among other
provisions. provisions.
~~Omnibus~~Consolidated Appropriation. The draft The draft ~~omnibus~~consolidated appropriation included a division with appropriation included a division with
supplemental funding for COVID-19, including for select SFOPS accounts. However, the supplemental funding for COVID-19, including for select SFOPS accounts. However, the
division was removed from the bill prior to its enactment.division was removed from the bill prior to its enactment.6365 The enacted bill, P.L. 117-103, The enacted bill, P.L. 117-103,
included directives related to pandemics and other infectious disease outbreaks but did not included directives related to pandemics and other infectious disease outbreaks but did not
designate specific funding levels for such purposes, with the exception of the Emergency Reserve designate specific funding levels for such purposes, with the exception of the Emergency Reserve
Fund, which may receive up to $100 million. Fund, which may receive up to $100 million.
Rising Authoritarianism
The Biden Administration’s budget proposed funds to address rising authoritarianism and The Biden Administration’s budget proposed funds to address rising authoritarianism and
democratic backsliding, including in the context of COVID-19. A proposed $100 million for democratic backsliding, including in the context of COVID-19. A proposed $100 million for

5961 Ibid., p. 77. Ibid., p. 77.
6062 Ibid., pp. 84 and 95. Ibid., pp. 84 and 95.
6163 Ibid., p. 81. Ibid., p. 81.
6264 Ibid., pp. 87-88. Ibid., pp. 87-88.
6365 Laura Weiss, David Lerman, Lindsey McPherson, et al., “Pandemic aid bill pulled as House aims to wrap up Laura Weiss, David Lerman, Lindsey McPherson, et al., “Pandemic aid bill pulled as House aims to wrap up
omnibus,” omnibus,” Roll Call, March 9, 2022. , March 9, 2022.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1617

link to page link to page 2324 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

USAID’s Bureau for Democracy, Development, and Innovation (DDI)—which was level when USAID’s Bureau for Democracy, Development, and Innovation (DDI)—which was level when
compared to the FY2021 appropriation—was to elevate “anti-corruption, human rights, and compared to the FY2021 appropriation—was to elevate “anti-corruption, human rights, and
countering authoritarianism as strategic and programmatic priorities.”countering authoritarianism as strategic and programmatic priorities.”6466 The Administration also The Administration also
included these priorities in some of its regional requests. The Assistance to Europe, Eurasia, and included these priorities in some of its regional requests. The Assistance to Europe, Eurasia, and
Central Asia proposal for Europe and Eurasia, for example, was “focused on defending Central Asia proposal for Europe and Eurasia, for example, was “focused on defending
democracy, rule of law, advancing human rights and gender equality, fighting corruption, and democracy, rule of law, advancing human rights and gender equality, fighting corruption, and
countering authoritarianism.”countering authoritarianism.”6567
House Legislation. The House report accompanying H.R. 4373 asserted its support for the The House report accompanying H.R. 4373 asserted its support for the
Administration’s “commitment to strengthening and preserving democracies worldwide.” It Administration’s “commitment to strengthening and preserving democracies worldwide.” It
provided funds for the Democracy Fund at the level the Administration requested—which would provided funds for the Democracy Fund at the level the Administration requested—which would
have been even with the FY2021-enacted level—and provided additional funds for multilateral have been even with the FY2021-enacted level—and provided additional funds for multilateral
efforts, such as $4.5 million for the Organization of American States (OAS) Fund for efforts, such as $4.5 million for the Organization of American States (OAS) Fund for
Strengthening Democracy and $3.5 million for the U.N. Democracy Fund. Strengthening Democracy and $3.5 million for the U.N. Democracy Fund.
~~Omnibus~~Consolidated Appropriation. The FY2022 The FY2022 ~~omnibus~~consolidated legislation included a total of $340 million for legislation included a total of $340 million for
the Democracy Fund, a 17% increase over the FY2021-enacted level and the Administration’s the Democracy Fund, a 17% increase over the FY2021-enacted level and the Administration’s
request for FY2022. The bill also directed that not less than $2.60 billion be made available for request for FY2022. The bill also directed that not less than $2.60 billion be made available for
democracy programs in FY2022, an increase of $183 million from the amount designated in democracy programs in FY2022, an increase of $183 million from the amount designated in
FY2021. The Joint Explanatory Statement accompanying the legislation also designated $4.5 FY2021. The Joint Explanatory Statement accompanying the legislation also designated $4.5
million in the OAS Fund for Strengthening Democracy and $3.5 million for the U.N. Democracy million in the OAS Fund for Strengthening Democracy and $3.5 million for the U.N. Democracy
Fund, consistent with the House-passed legislation. Fund, consistent with the House-passed legislation.
Foreign Operations Sectors
Global Health Programs (GHP)6668
Most of the global health funding in the USAID and the Department of State budgets is used for Most of the global health funding in the USAID and the Department of State budgets is used for
the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and infectious disease control the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and infectious disease control
(se(see Table 6).6769 The Biden Administration initially requested $10.05 billion in total for global The Biden Administration initially requested $10.05 billion in total for global
health programs in FY2022, a nearly 24% decrease from total FY2021 Global Health Programs health programs in FY2022, a nearly 24% decrease from total FY2021 Global Health Programs
account funding but a 9% increase when FY2021 emergency funds are excluded. Funding for account funding but a 9% increase when FY2021 emergency funds are excluded. Funding for
global health security programs would have increased by $825 million, or more than 429%, from global health security programs would have increased by $825 million, or more than 429%, from
FY2021 enacted nonemergency funding. The increase appeared to reflect the Administration’s FY2021 enacted nonemergency funding. The increase appeared to reflect the Administration’s
interest in pandemic preparedness efforts in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.interest in pandemic preparedness efforts in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.6870 The Biden The Biden
Administration announced in January 2021 that it would reengage with WHO, and included “the Administration announced in January 2021 that it would reengage with WHO, and included “the
repayment of arrears” to WHO in the President’s FY2022 discretionary funding request repayment of arrears” to WHO in the President’s FY2022 discretionary funding request
summary.summary.6971 These actions reversed the Trump Administration’s decision to halt U.S. funding to These actions reversed the Trump Administration’s decision to halt U.S. funding to
the WHO and “terminate” the U.S. relationship with the organization.the WHO and “terminate” the U.S. relationship with the organization.7072

6466 Ibid., p. 91. Ibid., p. 91.
6567 Ibid., p. 92. Ibid., p. 92.
6668 Prepared by Sara Tharakan, Analyst in Global Health and International Development, and Tiaji Salaam-Blyther, Prepared by Sara Tharakan, Analyst in Global Health and International Development, and Tiaji Salaam-Blyther,
Specialist in Global Health. Specialist in Global Health.
6769 For more information, see CRS In Focus IF11758, For more information, see CRS In Focus IF11758, U.S. Global Health Funding: FY2017-FY2022 Request, by Tiaji , by Tiaji
Salaam-Blyther. Congress also appropriates global health funding to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Salaam-Blyther. Congress also appropriates global health funding to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
all of which is focused on infectious disease prevention and control. all of which is focused on infectious disease prevention and control.
6870 SFOPS CBJ for FY2022. SFOPS CBJ for FY2022.
6971 White House, White House, The President’s FY2022 Discretionary Budget Request, April 9, 2021, p. 26. April 9, 2021, p. 26.
7072 For more on the Trump Administration’s decisions regarding WHO, as well as the withdrawal process, see CRS For more on the Trump Administration’s decisions regarding WHO, as well as the withdrawal process, see CRS
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1718

Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

The Biden Administration also The Biden Administration also
 reversed the Mexico City Policy which, when invoked by previous presidents,  reversed the Mexico City Policy which, when invoked by previous presidents,
required nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) receiving U.S. foreign required nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) receiving U.S. foreign
assistance for family planning programs to certify that they would not promote or assistance for family planning programs to certify that they would not promote or
perform abortion as a method of family planning, even with non-U.S. funds; and perform abortion as a method of family planning, even with non-U.S. funds; and
 revoked the Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance policy, which expanded  revoked the Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance policy, which expanded
the Mexico City Policy on family planning and reproductive health (FP/RH) the Mexico City Policy on family planning and reproductive health (FP/RH)
funding to include all U.S. global health assistance.funding to include all U.S. global health assistance.7173
Additionally, the FY2022 budget request sought funding increases for FP/RH programs (+$26 Additionally, the FY2022 budget request sought funding increases for FP/RH programs (+$26
million), as well as for maternal and child health (+$24.5 million).million), as well as for maternal and child health (+$24.5 million).7274
As noted above, the Administration submitted to Congress a supplemental funding request in As noted above, the Administration submitted to Congress a supplemental funding request in
March 2022 to address COVID-19 abroad, including $3.5 billion for global health programs. This March 2022 to address COVID-19 abroad, including $3.5 billion for global health programs. This
brought the total FY2022 request for the Global Health Programs account to $13.55 billion, or brought the total FY2022 request for the Global Health Programs account to $13.55 billion, or
about 2.7% more than the FY2021 total enacted funding. about 2.7% more than the FY2021 total enacted funding.
Table 6. Global Health Appropriations, FY2018-FY2022
(In millions of current U.S. dollars) (In millions of current U.S. dollars)
FY2018
FY2019
FY2020
FY2021
FY2022
FY2022
FY2022

Enacted
Enacted
Enacted
Enacted
Request
House
Enacted
HIV/AIDS HIV/AIDS
4,320.0 4,320.0
4,370.0 4,370.0
4,370.0 4,370.0
4,370.0 4,370.0
4,370.0 4,370.0
4,520.0 4,520.0
4,390.0 4,390.0
Global Fund Global Fund
1,350.0 1,350.0
1,350.0 1,350.0
1,560.0 1,560.0
1,560.0 1,560.0
1,560.0 1,560.0
1,560.0 1,560.0
1,560.0 1,560.0
Total, State-GHP Total, State-GHP
5,670.0 5,670.0
5,720.0 5,720.0
5,930.0 5,930.0
5,930.0 5,930.0
5,930.0 5,930.0
6,080.0 6,080.0
5,950.0 5,950.0
HIV/AIDS HIV/AIDS
330.0 330.0
330.0 330.0
330.0 330.0
330.0 330.0
330.0 330.0
330.0 330.0
330.0 330.0
Tuberculosis Tuberculosis
261.0 261.0
302.0 302.0
310.0 310.0
319.0 319.0
319.0 319.0
469.0 469.0
371.1 371.1
Malaria Malaria
755.0 755.0
755.0 755.0
770.0 770.0
770.0 770.0
770.0 770.0
820.0 820.0
775.0 775.0
MCH MCH
829.5 829.5
835.0 835.0
851.0 851.0
855.0 855.0
879.5 879.5
880.0 880.0
890.0 890.0
Nutrition Nutrition
125.0 125.0
145.0 145.0
150.0 150.0
150.0 150.0
150.0 150.0
160.0 160.0
155.0 155.0
Vulnerable Vulnerable
23.0 23.0
24.0 24.0
25.0 25.0
25.0 25.0
25.0 25.0
30.0 30.0
27.5 27.5
Children Children
FP/RH FP/RH
524.0 524.0
524.0 524.0
524.0 524.0
524.0 524.0
550.0 550.0
760.0 760.0
524.0 524.0
NTDs NTDs
100.0 100.0
102.5 102.5
102.5 102.5
102.5 102.5
102.5 102.5
112.5 112.5
107.5 107.5
GHS GHS
72.5 72.5
100.0 100.0
100.0 100.0
190.0 190.0
995.0 995.0
1,000.0 1,000.0
700.0 700.0
Total, USAID- Total, USAID-
3,020.0 3,020.0
3,117.5 3,117.5
3,162.5 3,162.5
3,265.5 3,265.5
4,121.0 4,121.0
4,561.5 4,561.5
3,880.0 3,880.0
GHP GHP
Emergency GHP Emergency GHP

4,000.0 4,000.0
3,500.0 3,500.0

Total, GHP Total, GHP
8,690.0 8,690.0
8,837.5 8,837.5
9,092.5 9,092.5
13,195.5 13,195.5
13,551.0 13,551.0
10,641.5 10,641.5
9,830.0 9,830.0

Report R46575, Report R46575, U.S. Withdrawal from the World Health Organization: Process and Implications, coordinated by Tiaji , coordinated by Tiaji
Salaam-Blyther. Salaam-Blyther.
7173 For more information on the MCP see CRS Report R41360, For more information on the MCP see CRS Report R41360, Abortion and Family Planning-Related Provisions in
U.S. Foreign Assistance Law and Policy, by Luisa Blanchfield. , by Luisa Blanchfield.
7274 SFOPS CBJ for FY2022. SFOPS CBJ for FY2022.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1819

link to page link to page 3132 link to page link to page 2526 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

Sources: Created by Tiaji Salaam-Blyther, Specialist in Global Health, from appropriations legislation and Created by Tiaji Salaam-Blyther, Specialist in Global Health, from appropriations legislation and
engagement with USAID legislative affairs staff. engagement with USAID legislative affairs staff.
Notes: FY2021 emergency supplemental funding to combat COVID-19 abroad was enacted in Title IX of P.L. FY2021 emergency supplemental funding to combat COVID-19 abroad was enacted in Title IX of P.L.
116-260, but subaccount allocations were not specified. Table does not include funding for global health from 116-260, but subaccount allocations were not specified. Table does not include funding for global health from
other appropriations vehicles (e.g., CDC funding for global health activities appropriated through Labor-HHS). other appropriations vehicles (e.g., CDC funding for global health activities appropriated through Labor-HHS).
MCH = Maternal and Child Health; FP/RH = Family Planning and Reproductive Health; NTDs = Neglected MCH = Maternal and Child Health; FP/RH = Family Planning and Reproductive Health; NTDs = Neglected
Tropical Diseases; GHS = Global Health Security. Tropical Diseases; GHS = Global Health Security.
House Legislation. The House measure, H.R. 4373, provided $10.64 billion in global health The House measure, H.R. 4373, provided $10.64 billion in global health
funding for FY2022. The bill provided level or increased funding for each global health funding for FY2022. The bill provided level or increased funding for each global health
subaccount when compared with the Biden Administration’s initial request. Compared with the subaccount when compared with the Biden Administration’s initial request. Compared with the
Administration’s initial request, the bill provided the largest increase (in dollar amount) to Family Administration’s initial request, the bill provided the largest increase (in dollar amount) to Family
Planning/Reproductive Health programs and emphasized global health security and health Planning/Reproductive Health programs and emphasized global health security and health
systems strengthening. systems strengthening.
~~Omnibus~~Consolidated Appropriation. The The ~~omnibus~~consolidated appropriation, P.L. 117-103, provided $9.83 billion in appropriation, P.L. 117-103, provided $9.83 billion in
global health funding for FY2022 but did not include the emergency COVID-19 funding global health funding for FY2022 but did not include the emergency COVID-19 funding
requested by the Administration, which Congress continues to debate (see requested by the Administration, which Congress continues to debate (see “Outlook” section, section,
below). The enacted funding represents an increase of $634.5 million (7%) compared with below). The enacted funding represents an increase of $634.5 million (7%) compared with
FY2021-enacted nonemergency funding (i.e., excluding the $4 billion in FY2021 supplemental FY2021-enacted nonemergency funding (i.e., excluding the $4 billion in FY2021 supplemental
funding to combat COVID-19). The legislation provided level or increased funding for each funding to combat COVID-19). The legislation provided level or increased funding for each
global health subaccount compared with FY2021-enacted levels. However, compared with the global health subaccount compared with FY2021-enacted levels. However, compared with the
President’s amended request, the legislation decreased funding to FP/RH (-5%) and Global President’s amended request, the legislation decreased funding to FP/RH (-5%) and Global
Health Security (-30%), and total GHP funding by more than 27%. Health Security (-30%), and total GHP funding by more than 27%.
Humanitarian ~~Assistance73~~Assistance75
The U.S. government supports global efforts to assist people affected by conflict and natural The U.S. government supports global efforts to assist people affected by conflict and natural
disasters, consistently providing about one-third of total global humanitarian assistance. Such disasters, consistently providing about one-third of total global humanitarian assistance. Such
assistance is generally appropriated through global humanitarian accounts administered through assistance is generally appropriated through global humanitarian accounts administered through
the State Department and USAID, including the Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA), the State Department and USAID, including the Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA),
Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance (ERMA), and International Disaster Assistance Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance (ERMA), and International Disaster Assistance
(IDA) accounts in the SFOPS appropriation, and the Food for Peace, Title II account (FFP) in the (IDA) accounts in the SFOPS appropriation, and the Food for Peace, Title II account (FFP) in the
Agriculture appropriation. Continuing a long-standing trend across Administrations, Congress has Agriculture appropriation. Continuing a long-standing trend across Administrations, Congress has
supported global humanitarian efforts at appropriation levels well above the budget request (see supported global humanitarian efforts at appropriation levels well above the budget request (see
Figure 3). .
Data show that the scope of global humanitarian and displacement crises has significantly Data show that the scope of global humanitarian and displacement crises has significantly
worsened in the past 25 years. worsened in the past 25 years. 7476 According to the United Nations, the projected numbers of those According to the United Nations, the projected numbers of those
displaced or requiring humanitarian assistance in 2022 are the highest on record, in part due to the displaced or requiring humanitarian assistance in 2022 are the highest on record, in part due to the
ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, which continues to exacerbate drivers of humanitarian need.ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, which continues to exacerbate drivers of humanitarian need.7577 The The
U.N. 2022 global humanitarian appeal for $41.00 billion was the highest ever. Enacted FY2021 U.N. 2022 global humanitarian appeal for $41.00 billion was the highest ever. Enacted FY2021

7375 Prepared by Rhoda Margesson, Specialist in International Humanitarian Policy. Prepared by Rhoda Margesson, Specialist in International Humanitarian Policy.
7476 The New Humanitarian, “Change in the Humanitarian Sector, in Numbers,” September 9, 2020. The New Humanitarian, “Change in the Humanitarian Sector, in Numbers,” September 9, 2020.
7577 The United Nations estimates that in 2022, more than 274 million people will require humanitarian assistance and The United Nations estimates that in 2022, more than 274 million people will require humanitarian assistance and
protection and over 8.4 million persons will be forcibly displaced, the highest number on record. In addition, natural protection and over 8.4 million persons will be forcibly displaced, the highest number on record. In addition, natural
disasters and deepening environmental vulnerability due to climate change affect millions of people every year. U.N. disasters and deepening environmental vulnerability due to climate change affect millions of people every year. U.N.
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Global Humanitarian Overview 2022, December 2, 2021. U.N. , December 2, 2021. U.N.
humanitarian funding appeals are administered through UNOCHA and bring many aid organizations together to humanitarian funding appeals are administered through UNOCHA and bring many aid organizations together to
coordinate a response to major humanitarian crises and disasters worldwide, usually in the form of an appeal for funds coordinate a response to major humanitarian crises and disasters worldwide, usually in the form of an appeal for funds
through a collaborative plan. U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, through a collaborative plan. U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, Mid-Year Trends Report, November 2021 (latest , November 2021 (latest
available). available).
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1920

Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

U.S. humanitarian funding totaled $11.467 billion, which was also a record high. This total U.S. humanitarian funding totaled $11.467 billion, which was also a record high. This total
included emergency supplemental funds from P.L. 117-31 (comprising $500 million for ERMA included emergency supplemental funds from P.L. 117-31 (comprising $500 million for ERMA
and $100 million for MRA to address humanitarian needs in Afghanistan and to assist Afghan and $100 million for MRA to address humanitarian needs in Afghanistan and to assist Afghan
refugees) and at least $800 million in FFP funds and $500 million in MRA funds provided for a refugees) and at least $800 million in FFP funds and $500 million in MRA funds provided for a
broad range of needs through the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA, P.L. 117-2).broad range of needs through the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA, P.L. 117-2).7678
The Biden Administration’s initial budget request for FY2022 called for $10.10 billion in The Biden Administration’s initial budget request for FY2022 called for $10.10 billion in
humanitarian assistance to support displaced and vulnerable persons worldwide, or about 12% humanitarian assistance to support displaced and vulnerable persons worldwide, or about 12%
below the FY2021-enacted total. The request included $3.85 billion for MRA, $100 million for below the FY2021-enacted total. The request included $3.85 billion for MRA, $100 million for
ERMA, $4.68 billion for IDA, and $1.57 billion for FFP. It would have shifted $170.0 million ERMA, $4.68 billion for IDA, and $1.57 billion for FFP. It would have shifted $170.0 million
from FFP to IDA’s Emergency Food Security Program in a stated effort to increase flexibility in from FFP to IDA’s Emergency Food Security Program in a stated effort to increase flexibility in
addressing urgent and growing food insecurity. addressing urgent and growing food insecurity.
The Administration’s supplemental request for aid to Ukraine and assistance to address COVID- The Administration’s supplemental request for aid to Ukraine and assistance to address COVID-
19 abroad sought $3.50 billion in additional FY2022 humanitarian assistance ($2.75 billion for 19 abroad sought $3.50 billion in additional FY2022 humanitarian assistance ($2.75 billion for
Ukraine, $750 million for COVID-19), including the provision of emergency food assistance. Ukraine, $750 million for COVID-19), including the provision of emergency food assistance.
This supplemental request brought the Administration’s total FY2022 humanitarian assistance This supplemental request brought the Administration’s total FY2022 humanitarian assistance
request to $13.60 billion. request to $13.60 billion.
~~Figure 3. U.S. Humanitarian Assistance, by Account (FY2014-FY2022)~~

Sources: Annual SFOPS CBJs and Omnibus Funding Legislation.
Notes: MRA = Migration and Refugee Assistance, ERMA = Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance, IDA =
~~International Disaster Assistance, IHA = International Humanitarian Assistance, FFP = Food for Peace. FY2020~~
~~enacted funding includes supplemental COVID-19 relief appropriations. FY2021-enacted funding includes~~
~~emergency supplemental funds from P.L. 117-31 and ARPA. Figure produced with Edward Col ins-Chase, Analyst~~
~~in Foreign Policy.~~
*An IHA consolidated account was proposed under the Trump Administration. Congress did not enact the
~~proposed funding reductions or changes to the humanitarian account structure.~~

76The Administration’s second supplemental request for aid to Ukraine and countries affected by the war in Ukraine sought $850 million in additional FY2022 humanitarian assistance, including the provision of emergency food assistance, bringing the Administration’s total FY2022 humanitarian request to $14.45 billion. Figure 3. U.S. Humanitarian Assistance, Requested and Enacted, by Account (FY2014-FY2022) Sources: Annual SFOPS CBJs, P.L. 117-103, and P.L. 117-128. 78 Section 10003 of ARPA also included $3.09 billion under the Economic Support Fund authority “to be made Section 10003 of ARPA also included $3.09 billion under the Economic Support Fund authority “to be made
available to the United States Agency for International Development to prevent, prepare for, and respond to available to the United States Agency for International Development to prevent, prepare for, and respond to
coronavirus, which shall include support for international disaster relief, rehabilitation, and reconstruction, for coronavirus, which shall include support for international disaster relief, rehabilitation, and reconstruction, for
health activities, and to meet emergency food security needs.” It is unclear if any of these funds are to be administered health activities, and to meet emergency food security needs.” It is unclear if any of these funds are to be administered
through the global humanitarian accounts. through the global humanitarian accounts.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

2021

link to page link to page 928 link to page 10 link to page link to page 910 link to page 18 link to page 18 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

Notes: MRA = Migration and Refugee Assistance, ERMA = Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance, IDA = International Disaster Assistance, IHA = International Humanitarian Assistance, FFP = Food for Peace. FY2020 enacted funding includes supplemental COVID-19 relief appropriations. FY2021-enacted funding includes emergency supplemental funds from P.L. 117-31 and ARPA. Figure produced with Edward Col ins-Chase, Analyst in Foreign Policy. *An IHA consolidated account was proposed under the Trump Administration. Congress did not enact the proposed funding reductions or changes to the humanitarian account structure. House Legislation. The House measure, H.R. 4373, would have provided $8.53 billion in The House measure, H.R. 4373, would have provided $8.53 billion in
humanitarian funding through the MRA, ERMA, and IDA accounts. The House Agriculture humanitarian funding through the MRA, ERMA, and IDA accounts. The House Agriculture
appropriations bill, H.R. 4356, would have provided $1.74 billion in FFP funding, bringing the appropriations bill, H.R. 4356, would have provided $1.74 billion in FFP funding, bringing the
total for humanitarian assistance to nearly $10.27 billion for FY2022, which represented an total for humanitarian assistance to nearly $10.27 billion for FY2022, which represented an
increase of close to 2% over the Administration’s initial request. increase of close to 2% over the Administration’s initial request.
Continuing Resolutions. The first FY2022 CR, the Extending Government Funding and The first FY2022 CR, the Extending Government Funding and
Delivering Emergency Assistance Act (P.L. 117-43), provided an additional $1.89 billion in Delivering Emergency Assistance Act (P.L. 117-43), provided an additional $1.89 billion in
humanitarian assistance to address needs in, and assist refugees from, Afghanistan.humanitarian assistance to address needs in, and assist refugees from, Afghanistan.7779 A second A second
continuing resolution, the Further Extending Government Funding Act (P.L. 117-70), included an continuing resolution, the Further Extending Government Funding Act (P.L. 117-70), included an
additional $1.20 billion in humanitarian assistance through the ERMA account primarily to additional $1.20 billion in humanitarian assistance through the ERMA account primarily to
support relocation and resettlement activities related to the evacuation of Afghans from support relocation and resettlement activities related to the evacuation of Afghans from
Afghanistan.Afghanistan.7880
~~Omnibus~~Consolidated Appropriation. The FY2022 full year appropriation, P.L. 117-103, included $6.82 The FY2022 full year appropriation, P.L. 117-103, included $6.82
billion in regular SFOPS humanitarian assistance accounts ($3.90 billion for MRA, $0.01 million billion in regular SFOPS humanitarian assistance accounts ($3.90 billion for MRA, $0.01 million
for ERMA, $2.91 billion for IDA) and $1.74 billion in FFP, for a total of $8.56 billion in enduring for ERMA, $2.91 billion for IDA) and $1.74 billion in FFP, for a total of $8.56 billion in enduring
humanitarian assistance appropriations. In addition, Congress appropriated $4.15 billion in humanitarian assistance appropriations. In addition, Congress appropriated $4.15 billion in
humanitarian assistance for the Ukraine humanitarian assistance for the Ukraine ~~response79~~response81 (close to a 34% increase over the (close to a 34% increase over the
Administration’s Ukraine supplemental request for humanitarian assistance). This amount Administration’s Ukraine supplemental request for humanitarian assistance). This amount
included $4.05 billion for SFOPS accounts, ($1.4 billion for MRA and $2.65 billion for IDA), included $4.05 billion for SFOPS accounts, ($1.4 billion for MRA and $2.65 billion for IDA),
and $100 million for FFP. and $100 million for FFP.
AUSAA. The supplemental measure, P.L. 117-128, included nearly $4.70 billion for SFOPS humanitarian assistance accounts ($4.35 billion for IDA and $350 million for MRA). In sum, Congress has appropriated In sum, Congress has appropriated ~~$15.80~~nearly $20.50 billion for the humanitarian assistance accounts for billion for the humanitarian assistance accounts for
FY2022. This represents a near FY2022. This represents a near 3879% increase in total % increase in total ~~humanitarian appropriations compared with~~
~~total~~ enacted humanitarian assistance enacted humanitarian assistance ~~funding for~~compared with FY2021, largely due to the additional funding FY2021, largely due to the additional funding
provided for the humanitarian responses in Afghanistan and Ukraine. Excluding supplemental provided for the humanitarian responses in Afghanistan and Ukraine. Excluding supplemental
humanitarian funding, Congress has appropriated a total of $8.56 billion for humanitarian humanitarian funding, Congress has appropriated a total of $8.56 billion for humanitarian
assistance in FY2022, an 11% decrease from enacted FY2021 funding levels and approximately assistance in FY2022, an 11% decrease from enacted FY2021 funding levels and approximately
15% below the Administration’s initial 15% below the Administration’s initial FY2022 budget request. Security Assistance The Biden Administration’s initial request included $9.18 billion in security assistance, a 2% increase when compared with FY2021 enacted levels (see Figure 4). As in past years, Foreign Military Financing (FMF) accounted for the largest share of security assistance funding. The largest proposed increase was to the International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement ~~FY2022 budget request.~~

7779 P.L. 117-43, Division C, Title IV included $400 million for IDA, $415 million for MRA, and $1,076.1 million for P.L. 117-43, Division C, Title IV included $400 million for IDA, $415 million for MRA, and $1,076.1 million for
ERMA. ERMA.
7880 Account details for the supplemental funding in the continuing resolutions is provided in the Account details for the supplemental funding in the continuing resolutions is provided in the “State Department
Operations and Related Agency Funding Highlights” and and “Foreign Operations Highlights” sections of this report. sections of this report.
7981 See Division N of P.L. 117-103—the Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022. See Division N of P.L. 117-103—the Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

21

~~link to page 27~~

22 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

~~Security Assistance~~
~~The Biden Administration’s initial request~~
~~included $9.18 billion in security assistance, a~~
~~Figure 4. Security Assistance by Account,~~
~~2% increase when compared with FY2021~~
~~FY2020-FY2022~~
~~enacted levels (see Figure 4). As in past~~
~~(In billions of current U.S. dollars)~~
~~years, Foreign Military Financing (FMF)~~
~~accounted for the largest share of security~~
~~assistance funding. The largest proposed~~
~~increase was to the International Narcotics~~
~~Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE)~~
(INCLE) account. The Administration asserted that the account. The Administration asserted that the
10% proposed increase in INCLE would 10% proposed increase in INCLE would
largely help address the crime and violence largely help address the crime and violence
that contribute to irregular migration to the that contribute to irregular migration to the
United States, particularly from Central United States, particularly from Central
America. According to the request, $570 America. According to the request, $570
million, or 37% of proposed INCLE funding, million, or 37% of proposed INCLE funding,
would be allocated to these efforts in Central would be allocated to these efforts in Central
America. Other security assistance priorities America. Other security assistance priorities
identified in the request are countering identified in the request are countering
terrorist threats, including those posed by the terrorist threats, including those posed by the
Islamic State (IS) and Al Qaeda; supporting Islamic State (IS) and Al Qaeda; supporting
implementation of the Global Fragility Act of implementation of the Global Fragility Act of

2019 (Div. J, Title V of P.L. 116-94); and 2019 (Div. J, Title V of P.L. 116-94); and
Sources: FY2022 SFOPS CBJ; P.L. 116-260; P.L. 117-
~~103.~~
~~countering malign influences of China,~~
Notes: FMF = Foreign Military Financing; IMET =
countering malign influences of China, Russia, and Russia, and Iran. The Administration also sought to bolster regional stability in the Middle East through Peacekeeping Operations (PKO) support for the Multinational Force and Observers mission in the Sinai. The Administration’s March 2022 supplemental budget request, included an Figure 4. Security Assistance by Account, additional $500 million in FMF funds to FY2020-FY2022 support Ukraine, bringing the total FY2022 (In billions of current U.S. dollars) security assistance request to $9.68 billion. The second supplemental request in April 2022 included $4.5 billion in security assistance accounts to support Ukraine and the region, of which $4.0 billion would be for FMF, $400 million for INCLE, and $100 million for NADR. This request brought the ~~Iran. The Administration also~~
~~International Military Education and Training; INCLE~~
~~sought to bolster regional stability in the~~
~~= International Narcotics Control and Law~~
~~Middle East through Peacekeeping~~
~~Enforcement; NADR = Nonproliferation, Anti-~~
~~Operations (PKO) support for the~~
~~terrorism, Demining and Related Programs; PKO =~~
~~Multinational Force and Observers mission in~~
~~Peacekeeping Operations.~~
~~the Sinai.~~
~~The Administration’s supplemental budget request, made in March 2022, included an additional~~
~~$500 million in FMF funds to support Ukraine, bringing the~~ total FY2022 security assistance total FY2022 security assistance
request to request to ~~$9.68~~$14.18 billion. billion.
House Legislation. H.R. 4373 would have provided $9.0 billion in security assistance, H.R. 4373 would have provided $9.0 billion in security assistance,
representing a less than 1% increase from FY2021-enacted levels and a nearly 2% decrease from representing a less than 1% increase from FY2021-enacted levels and a nearly 2% decrease from
the Administration’s original request. the Administration’s original request.
~~Omnibus~~Consolidated Appropriation. For FY2022, Congress has appropriated a total of $9.58 billion in For FY2022, Congress has appropriated a total of $9.58 billion in
security assistance through P.L. 117-security assistance through P.L. 117- 103: $8.90 billion in enduring funds and $680 103: $8.90 billion in enduring funds and $680 Sources: FY2022 SFOPS CBJ; P.L. 116-260; P.L. 117- million in million in
supplemental funding for Ukraine supplemental funding for Ukraine 103; P.L. 117-128. ($650 million in FMF and $30 million in ($650 million in FMF and $30 million in Notes: FMF = Foreign Military Financing; IMET = International Military Education and Training; INCLE INCLE). The base INCLE). The base
security assistance funding security assistance funding ~~represents a 1% decrease in funding~~ = International Narcotics Control and Law represents a 1% decrease in funding Enforcement; NADR = Nonproliferation, Anti- compared with FY2021 levels compared with FY2021 levels
~~and a 3%~~ and a 3% terrorism, Demining and Related Programs; PKO = decrease from the President’s request. With decrease from the President’s request. With Peacekeeping Operations. emergency funding, the total amount emergency funding, the total amount
appropriated for security assistance represents a 6% increase over FY2021 funding and 1% less appropriated for security assistance represents a 6% increase over FY2021 funding and 1% less
~~than the President’s total request.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

22

~~link to page 28~~than the President’s total request. AUSAA. This second supplemental measure met the Administration’s April 2022 request for $4.5 billion in security assistance for Ukraine and U.S. partners in the region. The bill included the requested $4.0 billion for FMF, $400 million for INCLE, and $100 million for NADR. These supplemental funds bring total FY2022 security assistance appropriations to $14.079 billion, an increase of 56% over total enacted FY2021 levels. Congressional Research Service 23 link to page 29 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

Development Assistance, Export Promotion, and Related Assistance
The remaining third of the FY2022 foreign operations request proposed to allocate funds to non- The remaining third of the FY2022 foreign operations request proposed to allocate funds to non-
health development sectors, independent agencies, multilateral assistance, and export promotion health development sectors, independent agencies, multilateral assistance, and export promotion
agencies. agencies.
Development Sectors
The Biden Administration’s request for FY2022 did not specify dollar amounts for many non-The Biden Administration’s request for FY2022 did not specify dollar amounts for many non-
health development sectors but offered detail on program priorities within some sectors. For health development sectors but offered detail on program priorities within some sectors. For
example, the Administration highlighted investments in gender equality and equity, including example, the Administration highlighted investments in gender equality and equity, including
$200 million in proposed funds for the Gender Equity and Equality Action Fund, which the Biden $200 million in proposed funds for the Gender Equity and Equality Action Fund, which the Biden
Administration named as the successor to the Trump Administration’s Women’s Global Administration named as the successor to the Trump Administration’s Women’s Global
Development and Prosperity (W-GDP) Fund. Other key program areas included climate change Development and Prosperity (W-GDP) Fund. Other key program areas included climate change
and the environment, democracy promotion and countering the rise of global authoritarianism, and the environment, democracy promotion and countering the rise of global authoritarianism,
and food security—in particular the Feed the Future Initiative. and food security—in particular the Feed the Future Initiative.
House Legislation. When compared with FY2021-enacted levels, the House measure (H.R. When compared with FY2021-enacted levels, the House measure (H.R.
4373) would have provided level or increased funding for most non-health development sectors 4373) would have provided level or increased funding for most non-health development sectors
in FY2022 (sein FY2022 (see Table 7). The education sector would have seen a decrease of $35 million (3%). . The education sector would have seen a decrease of $35 million (3%).
The largest increase was proposed for environmental programs, which would have seen an The largest increase was proposed for environmental programs, which would have seen an
increase of $303.5 million (31%) over prior year appropriations. increase of $303.5 million (31%) over prior year appropriations.
Table 7. Select Development Sectors, FY2020-FY2022
(In millions of current U.S. dollars) (In millions of current U.S. dollars)
FY2020
FY2021
FY2022
FY2022
Sector
Enacted
Enacted
House
Enacted
Democracy Programs (excluding NED) Democracy Programs (excluding NED)
2,400.0 2,400.0
2,417.0 2,417.0
2,517.0 2,517.0
2,600.0 2,600.0
Education (basic and higher) Education (basic and higher)
1,110.0 1,110.0
1,235.0 1,235.0
1,200.0 1,200.0
1,200.0 1,200.0
Food Security Food Security
1,005.6 1,005.6
1,010.6 1,010.6
1,100.0 1,100.0
1,010.6 1,010.6
Environment Environment
906.7 906.7
986.7 986.7
1,290.2 1,290.2
1,295.0 1,295.0
Water and Sanitation Water and Sanitation
450.0 450.0
450.0 450.0
475.0 475.0
475.0 475.0
Gender Gender
330.0 330.0
560.0 560.0
617.0 617.0
560.0 560.0
Trafficking in Persons Trafficking in Persons
67.0 67.0
99.0 99.0
106.4 106.4
106.4 106.4
Reconciliation Programs Reconciliation Programs
30.0 30.0
25.0 25.0
25.0 25.0
25.0 25.0
Micro and Small Enterprise Micro and Small Enterprise
265.0 265.0
265.0 265.0
265.0 265.0
265.0 265.0
Sources: P.L. 116-94; P.L. 116-260; H.R. 4373; P.L. 117-103P.L. 116-94; P.L. 116-260; H.R. 4373; P.L. 117-103.
Notes: NED = National Endowment for Democracy. NED = National Endowment for Democracy.
~~Omnibus~~Consolidated Appropriation. In the FY2022 In the FY2022 ~~omnibus~~consolidated appropriation, Congress largely provided level appropriation, Congress largely provided level
or increased funding for the non-health development sectors. The one exception was for or increased funding for the non-health development sectors. The one exception was for
education, which decreased by 3% compared with FY2021. Sectors receiving funding increases education, which decreased by 3% compared with FY2021. Sectors receiving funding increases
compared to prior-year funding include environmental programs (31%), Democracy Programs compared to prior-year funding include environmental programs (31%), Democracy Programs
(7.6%), Water and Sanitation (5.5%), and Trafficking in Persons (8%). (7.6%), Water and Sanitation (5.5%), and Trafficking in Persons (8%).
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

2324

link to page link to page 2021 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

Independent Agencies
The Administration’s request for FY2022 would have maintained level funding for the Peace The Administration’s request for FY2022 would have maintained level funding for the Peace
Corps, Inter-American Foundation (IAF), U.S. African Development Foundation (USADF), and Corps, Inter-American Foundation (IAF), U.S. African Development Foundation (USADF), and
the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) when compared with FY2021-enacted levels. The the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) when compared with FY2021-enacted levels. The
House measure, H.R. 4373, provided increases to the Peace Corps (5%), IAF (17%), and USADF House measure, H.R. 4373, provided increases to the Peace Corps (5%), IAF (17%), and USADF
(30%), and maintained level funding for MCC for FY2022 when compared with FY2021-enacted (30%), and maintained level funding for MCC for FY2022 when compared with FY2021-enacted
levels. The FY2022 levels. The FY2022 ~~Omnibus~~consolidated appropriation, P.L. 117-103, keeps level funding for both the Peace Corps and , P.L. 117-103, keeps level funding for both the Peace Corps and
MCC compared with FY2021 but increases funding for the IAF (11%) and USADF (21%). MCC compared with FY2021 but increases funding for the IAF (11%) and USADF (21%).
Multilateral Assistance
As part of its stated efforts to strengthen U.S. multilateral engagement, the Administration’s As part of its stated efforts to strengthen U.S. multilateral engagement, the Administration’s
budget request included increases to multilateral assistance for FY2022 when compared with total budget request included increases to multilateral assistance for FY2022 when compared with total
enacted funding for FY2021. The largest proposed increase was to the International Development enacted funding for FY2021. The largest proposed increase was to the International Development
Association, a World Bank agency that provides grants and loans to the world’s least developed Association, a World Bank agency that provides grants and loans to the world’s least developed
countries; it would have been a nearly 43% increase over the FY2021-enacted level. As stated countries; it would have been a nearly 43% increase over the FY2021-enacted level. As stated
above, the request also proposed funds for climate efforts including the Green Climate Fund (see above, the request also proposed funds for climate efforts including the Green Climate Fund (see
“Climate Change”). .
House Legislation. H.R. 4373 would have provided a total of $4.1 billion for multilateral H.R. 4373 would have provided a total of $4.1 billion for multilateral
assistance accounts for FY2022, representing a 13% increase from the Biden Administration’s assistance accounts for FY2022, representing a 13% increase from the Biden Administration’s
request. The House measure emphasized the Green Climate Fund, providing $1.60 billion for request. The House measure emphasized the Green Climate Fund, providing $1.60 billion for
FY2022, a 156% increase from the Administration’s proposed $625 million. The House bill did FY2022, a 156% increase from the Administration’s proposed $625 million. The House bill did
not increase funding for the International Development Association, instead appropriating level not increase funding for the International Development Association, instead appropriating level
funding when compared to FY2021. funding when compared to FY2021.
~~Omnibus~~Consolidated Appropriation. P.L. 117-103 provided a total of $2.37 billion for multilateral P.L. 117-103 provided a total of $2.37 billion for multilateral
assistance accounts for FY2022, which represented an increase of 16% compared with enduring assistance accounts for FY2022, which represented an increase of 16% compared with enduring
(nonemergency) funds for such accounts for FY2021 and a decrease of 35% compared with the (nonemergency) funds for such accounts for FY2021 and a decrease of 35% compared with the
Administration’s request. Compared with FY2021 enduring funds, all multilateral accounts Administration’s request. Compared with FY2021 enduring funds, all multilateral accounts
received level or increased funding with the International Fund for Agriculture and Development received level or increased funding with the International Fund for Agriculture and Development
(IFAD) receiving the largest increase (32%). (IFAD) receiving the largest increase (32%).
Export Promotion
For FY2022, the Administration proposed increases to the Export-Import (Ex-Im) Bank and the For FY2022, the Administration proposed increases to the Export-Import (Ex-Im) Bank and the
U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) operating accounts to support agency U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) operating accounts to support agency
priorities such as climate change response, clean energy, and sustainable infrastructure. In both priorities such as climate change response, clean energy, and sustainable infrastructure. In both
instances, the Administration asserted that offsetting collections would reduce the agencies’ instances, the Administration asserted that offsetting collections would reduce the agencies’
budget burden. The Administration stated its expectation that the Ex-Im Bank would return funds budget burden. The Administration stated its expectation that the Ex-Im Bank would return funds
to the Treasury at the end of the fiscal year, as it had in previous fiscal years. Similarly, while the to the Treasury at the end of the fiscal year, as it had in previous fiscal years. Similarly, while the
Administration stated that it does not expect the DFC to be entirely budget neutral, it asserted that Administration stated that it does not expect the DFC to be entirely budget neutral, it asserted that
collections would reduce the agency’s budget burden to $128.4 million with an estimated $472.4 collections would reduce the agency’s budget burden to $128.4 million with an estimated $472.4
million in offsetting collections. million in offsetting collections.
House Legislation. H.R. 4373 largely met the Administration’s proposed funding for the Ex-Im H.R. 4373 largely met the Administration’s proposed funding for the Ex-Im
Bank and DFC. An exception was the Ex-Im Bank’s program budget, which would have seen a Bank and DFC. An exception was the Ex-Im Bank’s program budget, which would have seen a
decrease of $5 million (50%) from the Administration’s proposal. The House legislation provided decrease of $5 million (50%) from the Administration’s proposal. The House legislation provided
increased funding for Ex-Im Bank and DFC when compared with the FY2021-enacted levels. increased funding for Ex-Im Bank and DFC when compared with the FY2021-enacted levels.
~~Omnibus~~Congressional Research Service 25 link to page 31 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Consolidated Appropriation. In P.L. 117-103, Congress maintained level funding for the Ex-Im In P.L. 117-103, Congress maintained level funding for the Ex-Im
Bank and U.S. Trade and Development Agency in FY2022 but increased funding for the DFC by Bank and U.S. Trade and Development Agency in FY2022 but increased funding for the DFC by
~~Congressional Research Service~~

24

~~link to page 30~~

~~Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs~~

65% compared with FY2021 appropriations and by 148% compared with the Administration’s 65% compared with FY2021 appropriations and by 148% compared with the Administration’s
request. As in prior years, the Ex-Im Bank is expected to return funds to the Treasury at the end of request. As in prior years, the Ex-Im Bank is expected to return funds to the Treasury at the end of
the fiscal year. the fiscal year.
Regional Assistance
Similar to previous Administrations, the Biden Administration did not propose regional funding Similar to previous Administrations, the Biden Administration did not propose regional funding
that captured all appropriations accounts. For example, humanitarian funding was proposed and that captured all appropriations accounts. For example, humanitarian funding was proposed and
provided for in what are often referred to as “global” accounts, wherein funding is allocated on a provided for in what are often referred to as “global” accounts, wherein funding is allocated on a
needs basis throughout the fiscal year for which it is appropriated. As such, the entirety of foreign needs basis throughout the fiscal year for which it is appropriated. As such, the entirety of foreign
assistance funding for a particular country or region is assessed fully only after the close of a assistance funding for a particular country or region is assessed fully only after the close of a
fiscal year. fiscal year.
However, the Administration did propose regional funding for certain accounts. These included However, the Administration did propose regional funding for certain accounts. These included
Global Health Programs (GHP); DA; ESF; Assistance to Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia Global Health Programs (GHP); DA; ESF; Assistance to Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia
(AEECA); and all five security assistance accounts. For FY2022, the Administration initially (AEECA); and all five security assistance accounts. For FY2022, the Administration initially
proposed increases in all regions with the exception of Europe and Eurasia, which would have proposed increases in all regions with the exception of Europe and Eurasia, which would have
seen a nearly 4% decrease in funding when compared with FY2020 actual levels (seseen a nearly 4% decrease in funding when compared with FY2020 actual levels (see Figure 5).8082
The greatest proposed increase was for funding to the Western Hemisphere, largely to help the The greatest proposed increase was for funding to the Western Hemisphere, largely to help the
region address the root causes of migration to the United States. region address the root causes of migration to the United States.
Figure 5. Regional Assistance, FY2020 vs. FY2022 Request

Sources: FY2022 SFOPS Congressional Budget Justification; CRS calculations for FY2020. FY2022 SFOPS Congressional Budget Justification; CRS calculations for FY2020.
Notes: FY2020 is the most recent “actual” data available. Accounts included = GHP, DA, ESF, AEECA, INCLE, FY2020 is the most recent “actual” data available. Accounts included = GHP, DA, ESF, AEECA, INCLE,
NADR, PKO, IMET, and FMF. FY2020 Actual includes COVID-19 emergency funds. NADR, PKO, IMET, and FMF. FY2020 Actual includes COVID-19 emergency funds.
House Legislation. The House legislation and accompanying report did not provide The House legislation and accompanying report did not provide
comprehensive regional allocations, but did specify assistance levels for several countries and comprehensive regional allocations, but did specify assistance levels for several countries and
regions. For example, the measure directed that up to $860.6 million could have been made regions. For example, the measure directed that up to $860.6 million could have been made
~~available for assistance to Central American countries.81 The legislation also directed that not less~~

8082 FY2020 actuals are used as a comparison because comprehensive country- and regional-specific levels are not FY2020 actuals are used as a comparison because comprehensive country- and regional-specific levels are not
provided in annual appropriations measures. FY2021 total funding levels for most countries have not been reported. provided in annual appropriations measures. FY2021 total funding levels for most countries have not been reported.
~~81 Including Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama. Funds may also be~~
~~programmed through the Central America Regional Security Initiative (CARSI).~~
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

2526

Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

available for assistance to Central American countries.83 The legislation also directed that not less than $3.3 billion be made available for Israel, not less than $1.4 billion for Egypt, not less than than $3.3 billion be made available for Israel, not less than $1.4 billion for Egypt, not less than
$481.5 million for assistance for Ukraine, and not less than $132.0 million for assistance for $481.5 million for assistance for Ukraine, and not less than $132.0 million for assistance for
Georgia, among other designations. Georgia, among other designations.
~~Omnibus~~Consolidated Appropriation. The The ~~ominbus~~consolidated appropriation, P.L. 117-103, also did not include appropriation, P.L. 117-103, also did not include
comprehensive country- and region-specific allocations. As in prior year appropriations, though, comprehensive country- and region-specific allocations. As in prior year appropriations, though,
the measure did include directives for some countries and regions. For example, the law specified the measure did include directives for some countries and regions. For example, the law specified
that not less than $3.3 billion shall be made available for Israel, not less than $1.6 billion for the that not less than $3.3 billion shall be made available for Israel, not less than $1.6 billion for the
Indo-Pacific Strategy, and not less than $1.4 billion for Egypt, among other designations. As Indo-Pacific Strategy, and not less than $1.4 billion for Egypt, among other designations. As
noted above, Division N of the bill also provides supplemental appropriations for Ukraine, noted above, Division N of the bill also provides supplemental appropriations for Ukraine,
including $6.65 billion in foreign operations accounts. These funds were not allocated by country including $6.65 billion in foreign operations accounts. These funds were not allocated by country
or region but are likely to increase aid to Europe and Eurasia in FY2022 significantly relative to or region but are likely to increase aid to Europe and Eurasia in FY2022 significantly relative to
FY2021. FY2021.
AUSAA. As with the first supplemental appropriations for Ukraine (Division N of P.L. 117-103), the AUSAA (P.L. 117-128) does not include country-specific allocations but could increase aid to Europe and Eurasia in FY2022 significantly. Outlook
Although Congress enacted a full year SFOPS appropriation for FY2022 in March 2022, and the Although Congress enacted a full year SFOPS appropriation for FY2022 in March 2022, and the
FY2023 budget process is underway, appropriations for FY2022 may not be complete. Members FY2023 budget process is underway, appropriations for FY2022 may not be complete. Members
continue to debate the possible need for additional funding in the remaining months of FY2022, continue to debate the possible need for additional funding in the remaining months of FY2022,
primarily for the following purposes: primarily for the following purposes:
Ukraine. The Russian invasion of Ukraine prompted the Administration to ask Congress for The Russian invasion of Ukraine prompted the Administration to ask Congress for $5
$19.76 billion in additional FY2022 SFOPS funding to address military, economic, and humanitarian billion in additional FY2022 SFOPS funding to address military, economic, and humanitarian
needs in Ukraine and neighboring counties. Congress included needs in Ukraine and neighboring counties. Congress included ~~$6.8~~a combined total of $25.75 billion in emergency SFOPS billion in emergency SFOPS
funds in the FY2022 funds in the FY2022 ~~omnibus bill~~consolidated appropriations bill and the AUSAA for this purpose. As the fighting in Ukraine continues, and the for this purpose. As the fighting in Ukraine continues, and the
~~refugee~~ refugee and food security crisis worsens, Congress may consider crisis worsens, Congress may consider further supplemental appropriations to provide additional supplemental appropriations to provide additional
aid to aid to in the region. the region.
COVID-19. The Administration’s The Administration’s first supplemental budget request supplemental budget request ~~also~~ included $4.25 billion in included $4.25 billion in
additional FY2022 SFOPS funds to address COVID-19. A draft version of the additional FY2022 SFOPS funds to address COVID-19. A draft version of the ~~omnibus~~consolidated bill bill
included emergency COVID-19 funding within SFOPS accounts, but the funding was removed included emergency COVID-19 funding within SFOPS accounts, but the funding was removed
from the legislation during final negotiations. Members reportedly are still negotiating a potential from the legislation during final negotiations. Members reportedly are still negotiating a potential
COVID-19 emergency supplemental appropriations bill for FY2022.COVID-19 emergency supplemental appropriations bill for FY2022.8284
U.S. Diplomatic Presence in Afghanistan. The withdrawal of U.S. military and diplomatic The withdrawal of U.S. military and diplomatic
personnel from Afghanistan in August 2021 occurred after the State Department submitted its personnel from Afghanistan in August 2021 occurred after the State Department submitted its
initial FY2022 budget request to Congress and the House of Representatives passed its SFOPS initial FY2022 budget request to Congress and the House of Representatives passed its SFOPS
bill. For FY2022, the Biden Administration requested approximately $579.6 million for bill. For FY2022, the Biden Administration requested approximately $579.6 million for
diplomatic security-related priorities in Afghanistan, including the deployment of weaponry on diplomatic security-related priorities in Afghanistan, including the deployment of weaponry on
83 Including Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama. Funds may also be programmed through the Central America Regional Security Initiative (CARSI). 84 Lindsay McPherson, “Bipartisan talks on pandemic aid offsets underway in Senate,” Congressional Quarterly, March 22, 2022, available at https://plus.cq.com/doc/news-6491010?1&srcpage=home&srcsec=cqn. Congressional Research Service 27 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs new Embassy Air helicopters and armored vehicle replacements.85~~new Embassy Air helicopters and armored vehicle replacements.83~~ The Administration also The Administration also
requested an additional $70.8 million for diplomatic programs in Afghanistan, including mission requested an additional $70.8 million for diplomatic programs in Afghanistan, including mission
staffing and operations, along with information technology costs.staffing and operations, along with information technology costs.8486 Although the United States Although the United States
and Qatar reached an agreement to establish a U.S. Interests Section located within the Qatari and Qatar reached an agreement to establish a U.S. Interests Section located within the Qatari
Embassy in Kabul, it does not appear that this agreement involves the assignment of U.S. Embassy in Kabul, it does not appear that this agreement involves the assignment of U.S.
personnel to the Interests Section.personnel to the Interests Section.8587 It remains unclear when, or if, the United States will It remains unclear when, or if, the United States will

~~82 Lindsay McPherson, “Bipartisan talks on pandemic aid offsets underway in Senate,” Congressional Quarterly, March~~
~~22, 2022, available at https://plus.cq.com/doc/news-6491010?1&srcpage=home&srcsec=cqn.~~
83reestablish a larger diplomatic presence in Afghanistan, and what the funding requirements to sustain such a presence may look like. 85 SFOPS CBJ for FY2022 Appendix 1, p. 307. SFOPS CBJ for FY2022 Appendix 1, p. 307.
8486 Ibid., p. 154. Ibid., p. 154.
8587 Humeyra Pamuk and Jonathan Landay, “Blinken says Qatar to act as U.S. diplomatic representative in Afghanistan,” Humeyra Pamuk and Jonathan Landay, “Blinken says Qatar to act as U.S. diplomatic representative in Afghanistan,”
Reuters, November 12, 2021. , November 12, 2021.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

26

~~Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs~~

~~reestablish a larger diplomatic presence in Afghanistan, and what the funding requirements to~~
~~sustain such a presence may look like.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

27

28 link to page 41 link to page link to page 3941 link to page link to page 3941 link to page link to page 3941 link to page link to page 3941 link to page link to page 3941
Appendix A. SFOPS Funding, by Account
Table A-1. Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations: FY2021-FY2022
(In millions of U.S. dollars; numbers in parentheses are the portion of the account totals designated as OCO or emergency funds) (In millions of U.S. dollars; numbers in parentheses are the portion of the account totals designated as OCO or emergency funds)
~~FY2022 Omnibus~~
~~% Change % Change~~% % Change FY2022 FY2022 Change FY2021
FY2022
FY2022
FY2022
CR 2
Consolid.
FY2022 Enacted
FY2021
~~FY2021~~FY2022
House-
Senate
CR 1
P.L.
P.L. 117-
AUSAA FY2022
Req. to
~~Enacted~~to
Total
~~FY2022~~Req.,
Passed
Intro
P.L. 117-
117-70, 103, Div.
K, P.L. 117- Total
FY2022 to FY2022

Enacteda
~~Req~~.bTotalb
H.R. 4373 S. 3075c 43, Div. C Div. B
K, MdNd 128
Enactede
~~Enacted~~
Enacted Enacted
Title I. State, Broadcasting & Related
17,494.19 17,494.19
18,349.10 18,349.10
18,202.98 17,573.12 18,202.98 17,573.12
276.90 276.90
80.30 80.30
17,367.48 17,367.48
~~17,724.67~~
~~-3%~~
1(314.00) 18,038.68 -2% +3% %
Agencies, TOTAL
(4,561.54) (4,561.54)
(154.00) (154.00)
( (~~511~~825.20) .20)
Administration of Foreign Affairs, Subtotal Administration of Foreign Affairs, Subtotal
13,152.79 13,152.79
13,371.07 13,371.07
13,204.50 12,599.84 13,204.50 12,599.84
276.90 276.90
80.30 80.30
12,715.11 12,715.11
(314.00) 13,386~~13,072~~.31 .31
-20% %
-1+3% %
(3,759.31) (3,759.31)
(129.00) (129.00)
( (~~486.2~~800.20) )
Diplomatic Programs Diplomatic Programs
9,374.01 9,374.01
9,490.67 9,490.67
9,476.98 9,476.98
9,040.67 9,040.67

44.30 44.30
9,303.79 9,303.79
(190.00) 9,538~~9,348~~.09 .09
-20% %
0+2% %
(2,430.12) (2,430.12)
(125.00) (125.00)
( (~~169~~359.30) .30)
of which Worldwide Security Protection
4,120.90
4,075.90
4,075.90
3,625.90

3,788.20
3,788.20
-7% -7%
-8% -8%
(2,226.12)
Consular and Border Security Programs Consular and Border Security Programs
(300.00) (300.00)
320.00 320.00
320.00 320.00

0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
-100% -100%
-100% -100%
Capital Investment Fund Capital Investment Fund
250.00 250.00
448.88 448.88
275.00 275.00
448.88 448.88

300.00 300.00
~~300.00~~
~~-33%~~
~~20%~~
(10.00) 310.00 -31% +24% (10.00) Office of Inspector Office of Inspector ~~General~~Generalf
145.73 145.73
~~91.46~~
~~91.46~~146.36 146.36

95135.46 .46
~~95.46~~
~~+4%~~
~~-35~~(4.00) 139.46 -5% -4% %
(54.90) (54.90)
(4.00) (4.00)
( (~~4.00)~~
~~Special Inspector General for Afghanistan~~

~~54.90~~
~~54.90~~

~~40.00~~
~~40.00~~
~~-27%~~
~~n.a.~~
8.00) Educational & Cultural Exchanges Educational & Cultural Exchanges
740.30 740.30
741.30 741.30
750.00 750.00
748.96 748.96

753.00 753.00
753.00 753.00
+2% 2%
+2% 2%
Representation Expenses Representation Expenses
7.42 7.42
7.42 7.42
7.42 7.42
7.42 7.42

7.42 7.42
7.42 7.42
0% 0%
0% 0%
Protection of Foreign Missions & Officials Protection of Foreign Missions & Officials
30.89 30.89
30.89 30.89
30.89 30.89
30.89 30.89

30.89 30.89
30.89 30.89
0% 0%
0% 0%
Embassy Security, Construction & Embassy Security, Construction &
1,950.45 1,950.45
1,983.15 1,983.15
1,995.45 1,995.45
1,983.15 1,983.15

1,983.15 1,983.15
~~1,983.15~~
0%
2(110.00) 2,093.15 +6% +7% %
Maintenance Maintenance
(824.29) (824.29)
(110.00) CRS-29~~CRS-28~~

link to page link to page 3941 link to page link to page 3941 link to page link to page 3941 link to page link to page 3941 link to page link to page 39
~~FY2022 Omnibus~~
~~% Change % Change~~41 % % Change FY2022 FY2022 Change FY2021
FY2022
FY2022
FY2022
CR 2
Consolid.
FY2022 Enacted
FY2021
~~FY2021~~FY2022
House-
Senate
CR 1
P.L.
P.L. 117-
AUSAA FY2022
Req. to
~~Enacted~~to
Total
~~FY2022~~Req.,
Passed
Intro
P.L. 117-
117-70, 103, Div.
K, P.L. 117- Total
FY2022 to FY2022

Enacteda
~~Req~~.bTotalb
H.R. 4373 S. 3075c 43, Div. C Div. B
K, MdNd 128
Enactede
~~Enacted~~
Enacted Enacted
of which Worldwide Security Upgrades
1,181.39
1,132.43
1,144.73
1,132.43

1,132.43
1,132.43
0% 0%
-4% -4%
(824.29)
Emergency-Diplomatic & Consular Emergency-Diplomatic & Consular
7.89 7.89
8.89 8.89
8.89 8.89
8.89 8.89
276.90 276.90
36.00 36.00
7.89 7.89
320.79 320.79
+3510% 3510%
+3968% 3968%
Services Services
Repatriation Loans Repatriation Loans
2.50 2.50
1.30 1.30
1.30 1.30
1.30 1.30

1.30 1.30
1.30 1.30
0% 0%
-48% -48%
Payment American Institute Taiwan Payment American Institute Taiwan
31.96 31.96
32.58 32.58
32.58 32.58
32.58 32.58

32.58 32.58
32.58 32.58
0% 0%
+2% 2%
International Chancery Center International Chancery Center
2.74 2.74
0.74 0.74
0.74 0.74
0.74 0.74

0.74 0.74
0.74 0.74
0% 0%
-73% -73%
Sudan Claims Sudan Claims
150.00 150.00

n.a. n.a.
n.a. n.a.
(150.00) (150.00)
Foreign Service Retirement (mandatory) Foreign Service Retirement (mandatory)
158.90 158.90
158.90 158.90
158.90 158.90
158.90 158.90

158.9 158.9
158.9 158.9
0% 0%
0% 0%
International Organizations, Subtotal International Organizations, Subtotal
2,962.24 2,962.24
3,591.54 3,591.54
3,591.54 3,591.54
3,491.54 3,491.54

3,161.54 3,161.54
3,161.54 3,161.54
-12% -12%
+7% 7%
(802.23) (802.23)
Contributions to International Contributions to International
1,505.93 1,505.93
1,662.93 1,662.93
1,662.93 1,662.93
1,662.93 1,662.93

1,662.93 1,662.93
1,662.93 1,662.93
0% 0%
+10% 10%
Organizations Organizations
(96.24) (96.24)
Contributions to International Contributions to International
1,456.31 1,456.31
1,928.61 1,928.61
1,928.61 1,928.61
1,828.61 1,828.61

1,498.61 1,498.61
1,498.61 1,498.61
-22% -22%
+3% 3%
Peacekeeping Peacekeeping
(705.99) (705.99)
International Commissions, Subtotal International Commissions, Subtotal
176.62 176.62
176.62 176.62
186.62 186.62
181.37 181.37

180.85 180.85
180.85 180.85
+2% 2%
+2% 2%
(Function 300) (Function 300)
International Boundary/U.S. Mexico International Boundary/U.S. Mexico
98.77 98.77
98.77 98.77
108.77 108.77
103.52 103.52

103.00 103.00
103.00 103.00
+4% 4%
+4% 4%
American Sections American Sections
15.01 15.01
15.01 15.01
15.01 15.01
15.01 15.01

15.01 15.01
15.01 15.01
0% 0%
0% 0%
International Fisheries International Fisheries
62.85 62.85
62.85 62.85
62.85 62.85
62.85 62.85

62.85 62.85
62.85 62.85
0% 0%
0% 0%
Agency for Global Media, Subtotal Agency for Global Media, Subtotal
802.96 802.96
810.40 810.40
818.85 818.85
885.40 885.40

885.00 885.00
885.00 885.00
+9% 9%
+10% 10%
(25.00) (25.00)
(25.00) (25.00)
CRS- CRS-2930

link to page link to page 3941 link to page link to page 3941 link to page link to page 3941 link to page link to page 3941 link to page link to page 39
~~FY2022 Omnibus~~
~~% Change % Change~~41 % % Change FY2022 FY2022 Change FY2021
FY2022
FY2022
FY2022
CR 2
Consolid.
FY2022 Enacted
FY2021
~~FY2021~~FY2022
House-
Senate
CR 1
P.L.
P.L. 117-
AUSAA FY2022
Req. to
~~Enacted~~to
Total
~~FY2022~~Req.,
Passed
Intro
P.L. 117-
117-70, 103, Div.
K, P.L. 117- Total
FY2022 to FY2022

Enacteda
~~Req~~.bTotalb
H.R. 4373 S. 3075c 43, Div. C Div. B
K, MdNd 128
Enactede
~~Enacted~~
Enacted Enacted
Broadcasting Operations Broadcasting Operations
793.26 793.26
800.70 800.70
809.15 809.15
870.70 870.70

875.30 875.30
875.30 875.30
+9% 9%
+10% 10%
(25.00) (25.00)
(25.00) (25.00)
Capital Improvements Capital Improvements
9.70 9.70
9.70 9.70
9.70 9.70
14.70 14.70

9.70 9.70
9.70 9.70
0% 0%
0% 0%
Related Programs, Subtotal Related Programs, Subtotal
385.28 385.28
385.17 385.17
387.17 387.17
400.67 400.67

410.67 410.67
410.67 410.67
+7% 7%
+7% 7%
Asia Foundation Asia Foundation
20.00 20.00
20.00 20.00
20.00 20.00
21.50 21.50

21.50 21.50
21.50 21.50
+8% 8%
+8% 8%
U.S. Institute of Peace U.S. Institute of Peace
45.00 45.00
45.00 45.00
45.00 45.00
54.00 54.00

54.00 54.00
54.00 54.00
+20% 20%
+20% 20%
Center for Middle East-West Dialogue Center for Middle East-West Dialogue
0.25 0.25
0.18 0.18
0.18 0.18
0.18 0.18

0.18 0.18
0.18 0.18
0% 0%
-28% -28%
Eisenhower Exchange Programs Eisenhower Exchange Programs
0.21 0.21
0.17 0.17
0.17 0.17
0.17 0.17

0.17 0.17
0.17 0.17
0% 0%
-19% -19%
Israeli-Arab Scholarship Program Israeli-Arab Scholarship Program
0.12 0.12
0.12 0.12
0.12 0.12
0.12 0.12

0.12 0.12
0.12 0.12
0% 0%
0% 0%
East-West Center East-West Center
19.70 19.70
19.70 19.70
19.70 19.70
19.70 19.70

19.70 19.70
19.70 19.70
0% 0%
0% 0%
Leadership Institute for Transatlantic Leadership Institute for Transatlantic

2.00 2.00

n.a. n.a.
n.a. n.a.
Engagement Engagement
National Endowment for Democracy National Endowment for Democracy
300.00 300.00
300.00 300.00
300.00 300.00
305.00 305.00

315.00 315.00
315.00 315.00
+5% 5%
+5% 5%
Other Commissions, Subtotal Other Commissions, Subtotal
14.30 14.30
14.30 14.30
14.30 14.30
14.30 14.30

14.30 14.30
14.30 14.30
0% 0%
0% 0%
Preservation of America’s Heritage Preservation of America’s Heritage
0.64 0.64
0.64 0.64
0.64 0.64
0.64 0.64

0.64 0.64
0.64 0.64
0% 0%
0% 0%
Abroad Abroad
International Religious Freedom International Religious Freedom
4.50 4.50
4.50 4.50
4.50 4.50
4.50 4.50

4.50 4.50
4.50 4.50
0% 0%
0% 0%
Security & Cooperation in Europe Security & Cooperation in Europe
2.91 2.91
2.91 2.91
2.91 2.91
2.91 2.91

2.91 2.91
2.91 2.91
0% 0%
0% 0%
Cong.-Exec. Commission on People’s Cong.-Exec. Commission on People’s
2.25 2.25
2.25 2.25
2.25 2.25
2.25 2.25

2.25 2.25
2.25 2.25
0% 0%
0% 0%
Republic of China Republic of China
U.S.-China Economic and Security Review U.S.-China Economic and Security Review
4.00 4.00
4.00 4.00
4.00 4.00
4.00 4.00

4.00 4.00
4.00 0% 0% CRS-31 link to page 41 link to page 41 link to page 41 link to page 41 link to page 41 % % Change FY2022 FY2022 Change FY2021 FY2022 FY2022 FY2022 CR 2 Consolid. FY2022 Enacted FY2021 FY2022 House- Senate CR 1 P.L. P.L. 117- AUSAA FY2022 Req. to to Total Req., Passed Intro P.L. 117- 117-70, 103, Div. K, P.L. 117- Total FY2022 FY2022 Enacteda Totalb ~~4.00~~
0%
0%
~~Foreign Operations, TOTAL~~
~~54,620.25~~
~~53,556.97~~
~~44,772.92 46,317.43~~
~~1,891.10 1,200.00~~
~~47,595.20~~
~~50,686.30~~
~~-5%~~
~~-7%~~
~~(19,733.58) (9,250.00)~~
~~(6,646.00)~~
~~(9,737.1)~~
~~CRS-30~~

~~link to page 39 link to page 39 link to page 39 link to page 39 link to page 39~~
~~FY2022 Omnibus~~
~~% Change % Change~~
~~FY2022~~
~~FY2022~~
~~FY2022~~
~~CR 2~~

~~FY2022~~
~~FY2021~~
~~FY2021~~
~~House-~~
~~Senate~~
~~CR 1~~
~~P.L.~~
~~P.L. 117-~~
~~FY2022~~
~~Req. to~~
~~Enacted~~
~~Total~~
~~FY2022~~
~~Passed~~
~~Intro~~
~~P.L. 117-~~
~~117-70, 103, Div.~~
~~Total~~
~~FY2022 to FY2022~~

~~Enacteda~~
~~Req~~.b
H.R. 4373 S. 3075c 43, Div. C Div. B
K, MdNd 128
Enactede
~~Enacted~~
~~Enacted~~ Enacted Enacted Foreign Operations, TOTAL 54,620.25 68,316.97 44,772.92 46,317.43 1,891.10 1,200.00 47,595.20 (18,632.00) 69,318.30 +1% +27% (19,733.58) (24,010.00) (6,646.00) (28,369.10)
Title II. Administration of Foreign Title II. Administration of Foreign
1,752.45 1,752.45
1,862.65 1,862.65
1,790.62 1,790.62
1,976.35 1,976.35
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
2,003.15 2,003.15
(18.00) 2,021~~2,003~~.15 .15
8+9% %
14+15% %
Assistance Assistance
(41.00) (41.00)
(29.00) (29.00)
( (2947.00) .00)
USAID Operating Expenses USAID Operating Expenses
1,418.75 1,418.75
1,527.95 1,527.95
1,455.92 1,455.92
1,635.95 1,635.95

1,660.95 1,660.95
(17.00) 1,677~~1,660~~.95 .95
9+10% %
17+18% %
(41.00) (41.00)
(25.00) (25.00)
( (2542.00) .00)
USAID Capital Investment Fund USAID Capital Investment Fund
258.20 258.20
258.20 258.20
258.20 258.20
258.20 258.20

258.20 258.20
258.20 258.20
0% 0%
0% 0%
USAID Inspector General USAID Inspector General
75.50 75.50
76.50 76.50
76.50 76.50
82.20 82.20

84.00 84.00
~~84.00~~
~~10%~~
11(1.00) 85.00 +11% +13% %
(4.00) (4.00)
(5.00) Title III. Bilateral Assistance Title III. Bilateral Assistance
41,083.95 41,083.95
~~34,143.91~~
48,003.91 29,625.91 29,248.31 29,625.91 29,248.31
1,891.10 1,200.00 1,891.10 1,200.00
33,314.44 33,314.44
~~36,405.54~~
~~-5%~~
~~-11~~ (13,464.00) 49,869.54 +4% +21% %
(18,210.46) ( (18,210.46) (~~8,750~~18,360.00) .00)
(5,937.00) (5,937.00) ~~(9,028.00~~ (22,492.10) )
Global Health Programs Global Health Programs
13,195.95 13,195.95
13,550.95 13,550.95
10,641.45 10,353.95 10,641.45 10,353.95

9,830.00 9,830.00
9,830.00 9,830.00
-27% -27%
-26% -26%
(4,000.00) (4,000.00) (3,500.00) (3,500.00)
of which USAID
7,265.95
3,870.95
4,561.45
4,423.95 4,423.95

3,880.00
3,880.00
0% 0%
-47% -47%
(4,000.00)
of which State
5,930.00
6,180.00
6,080.00
5,930.00 5,930.00

5,950.00
5,950.00
-4% -4%
0% 0%
Development Assistance Development Assistance
3,500.00 3,500.00
4,075.10 4,075.10
4,075.10 4,075.10
4,075.10 4,075.10

4,140.49 4,140.49
4,140.49 4,140.49
+2% 2%
+18% 18%
International Disaster Assistance International Disaster Assistance
4,395.36 4,395.36
7, 7,~~182~~782.36 .36
4,682.36 4,682.36
4,682.36 4,682.36
400.00 400.00

6,555.45 6,555.45
~~6,955.45~~
~~-3%~~
58(4,348.00) 11,303.45 +43% +157% %
(1,914.04) (1,914.04) ~~(2,500~~ (3,200.00) .00)
(2,650.00) (2,650.00) ~~(3,050~~ (7,398.00) .00)
Transition Initiatives Transition Initiatives
92.04 92.04
92.04 92.04
92.04 92.04
107.04 107.04

200.00 200.00
200.00 200.00
+117% 117%
+117% 117%
(120.00) (120.00)
(120.00) (120.00)
Complex Crises Fund Complex Crises Fund
30.00 30.00
60.00 60.00
40.00 40.00
60.00 60.00

60.00 60.00
60.00 60.00
0% 0%
+100% CRS-32 link to page 41 link to page 41 link to page 41 link to page 41 link to page 41 % % Change FY2022 FY2022 Change FY2021 FY2022 FY2022 FY2022 CR 2 Consolid. FY2022 Enacted FY2021 FY2022 House- Senate CR 1 P.L. P.L. 117- AUSAA FY2022 Req. to to Total Req., Passed Intro P.L. 117- 117-70, 103, Div. K, P.L. 117- Total FY2022 FY2022 Enacteda Totalb~~100%~~
~~Economic Support Fund~~
~~12,526.96~~
~~6,010.23~~
~~3,635.23~~
~~3,480.13~~

~~4,746.00~~
~~4,746.00~~
~~-21%~~
~~-62%~~
~~(9,375.00) (1,750.00)d~~
~~(647.00)~~
~~(647.00)~~
~~Democracy Fund~~
~~290.70~~
~~290.70~~
~~290.70~~
~~340.70~~

~~340.70~~
~~340.70~~
~~17%~~
~~17%~~
~~CRS-31~~

~~link to page 39 link to page 39 link to page 39 link to page 39 link to page 39~~
~~FY2022 Omnibus~~
~~% Change % Change~~
~~FY2022~~
~~FY2022~~
~~FY2022~~
~~CR 2~~

~~FY2022~~
~~FY2021~~
~~FY2021~~
~~House-~~
~~Senate~~
~~CR 1~~
~~P.L.~~
~~P.L. 117-~~
~~FY2022~~
~~Req. to~~
~~Enacted~~
~~Total~~
~~FY2022~~
~~Passed~~
~~Intro~~
~~P.L. 117-~~
~~117-70, 103, Div.~~
~~Total~~
~~FY2022 to FY2022~~

~~Enacteda~~
~~Req~~.b
H.R. 4373 S. 3075c 43, Div. C Div. B
~~K, Md~~
~~Enactede~~
~~Enacted~~
~~Enacted~~
~~Assistance for Europe, Eurasia, and Central~~
Nd 128 Enactede Enacted Enacted Economic Support Fund 12,526.96 14,770.23 3,635.23 3,480.13 4,746.00 (8,766.00) 13,512.00 -9% +8% (9,375.00) (10,510.00)d (647.00) (9,413.00) Democracy Fund 290.70 290.70 290.70 340.70 340.70 340.70 +17% +17% Assistance for Europe, Eurasia, and 770.33 770.33
788.93 788.93
788.93 788.93
788.93 788.93

1,620.00 1,620.00
1,620.00 1,620.00
+105% 105%
+110% 110%
Central Asia Asia
(1,120.00) (1,120.00) (1,120.00) (1,120.00)
Migration & Refugee Assistance Migration & Refugee Assistance
4,032.00 4,032.00
4, 4,~~845~~995.00 .00
3,845.00 3,845.00
3,845.00 3,845.00
415.00 415.00

4,312.19 4,312.19
~~4,727.19~~
~~-2%~~
17(350.00) 5,077.19 +2% +26% %
(2,301.42) (2,301.42) ~~(1,000~~ (1,150.00) .00)
(1,400.00) (1,400.00) ~~(1,815~~ (2,165.00) .00)
Emergency Refugee & Migration Assistance Emergency Refugee & Migration Assistance
500.10 500.10
0.10 0.10
0.10 0.10
0.10 0.10
1,076.10 1,200.00 1,076.10 1,200.00
0.10 0.10
2,276.20 2,276.20 ~~2276100%~~
+2.3 mil% +355% 355%
(500.00) (500.00)
(2,276.10) (2,276.10)
Independent Agencies, Subtotal Independent Agencies, Subtotal
1,393.50 1,393.50
1,393.50 1,393.50
1,430.00 1,430.00
1,410.00 1,410.00

1,404.50 1,404.50
1,404.50 1,404.50
+1% 1%
+1% 1%
Peace Corps Peace Corps
410.50 410.50
410.50 410.50
430.50 430.50
410.50 410.50

410.50 410.50
410.50 410.50
0% 0%
0% 0%
Mil ennium Challenge Corporation Mil ennium Challenge Corporation
912.00 912.00
912.00 912.00
912.00 912.00
912.00 912.00

912.00 912.00
912.00 912.00
0% 0%
0% 0%
Inter-American Foundation Inter-American Foundation
38.00 38.00
38.00 38.00
44.50 44.50
44.50 44.50

42.00 42.00
42.00 42.00
+11% 11%
+11% 11%
U.S. African Development Foundation U.S. African Development Foundation
33.00 33.00
33.00 33.00
43.00 43.00
43.00 43.00

40.00 40.00
40.00 40.00
+21% 21%
+21% 21%
Department of the Treasury, Subtotal Department of the Treasury, Subtotal
357.00 357.00
105.00 105.00
105.00 105.00
105.00 105.00

105.00 105.00
105.00 105.00
0% 0%
-71% -71%
(120.00) (120.00)
International Affairs Technical Assistance International Affairs Technical Assistance
33.00 33.00
38.00 38.00
38.00 38.00
38.00 38.00

38.00 38.00
38.00 38.00
0% 0%
+15% 15%
Debt Restructuring Debt Restructuring
324.00 324.00
67.00 67.00
67.00 67.00
67.00 67.00

67.00 67.00
67.00 67.00
0% 0%
-79% -79%
(120.00) (120.00)
Title IV. International Security Assistance Title IV. International Security Assistance
9,004.03 9,004.03
~~9,683~~14,183.89 .89
9,034.03 9,034.03
9,050.01 9,050.01
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
9,579.35 9,579.35
~~9,579~~(4,500.00) 14,079.35 .35
-1% -1%
6+56% %
(902.12) (902.12)
( (~~500~~5,000.00) (680.00) (5,180.00) CRS-33 link to page 41 link to page 41 link to page 41 link to page 41 link to page 41 % % Change FY2022 FY2022 Change FY2021 FY2022 FY2022 FY2022 CR 2 Consolid. FY2022 Enacted FY2021 FY2022 House- Senate CR 1 P.L. P.L. 117- AUSAA FY2022 Req. to to Total Req., Passed Intro P.L. 117- 117-70, 103, Div. K, P.L. 117- Total FY2022 FY2022 Enacteda Totalb~~.00)~~
~~(680.00)~~
~~(680.00)~~
~~International Narcotics Control & Law~~
~~1,385.57~~
~~1,525.74~~
~~1,395.57~~
~~1,388.85~~

~~1,421.00~~
~~1,421.00~~
~~-7%~~
3%
~~Enforcement~~
~~(30.00)~~
~~(30.00)~~
~~Nonproliferation, Anti-Terrorism,~~
~~889.25~~
~~900.25~~
~~889.25~~
~~907.25~~

~~900.00~~
~~900.00~~
0%
1%
~~Demining~~
~~CRS-32~~

~~link to page 39 link to page 39 link to page 39 link to page 39 link to page 39~~
~~FY2022 Omnibus~~
~~% Change % Change~~
~~FY2022~~
~~FY2022~~
~~FY2022~~
~~CR 2~~

~~FY2022~~
~~FY2021~~
~~FY2021~~
~~House-~~
~~Senate~~
~~CR 1~~
~~P.L.~~
~~P.L. 117-~~
~~FY2022~~
~~Req. to~~
~~Enacted~~
~~Total~~
~~FY2022~~
~~Passed~~
~~Intro~~
~~P.L. 117-~~
~~117-70, 103, Div.~~
~~Total~~
~~FY2022 to FY2022~~

~~Enacteda~~
~~Req~~.b
H.R. 4373 S. 3075c 43, Div. C Div. B
~~K, Md~~
~~Enactede~~
~~Enacted~~
~~Enacted~~Nd 128 Enactede Enacted Enacted International Narcotics Control & Law 1,385.57 1,925.74 1,395.57 1,388.85 1,421.00 (400.00) 1,821.00 -5% +31% Enforcement (400.00) (30.00) (430.00) Nonproliferation, Anti-Terrorism, 889.25 1,000.25 889.25 907.25 900.00 (100.00) 1,000.00 0% +12% Demining (100.00) (100.00)
Peacekeeping Operations Peacekeeping Operations
440.76 440.76
469.46 469.46
460.76 460.76
465.46 465.46

455.00 455.00
455.00 455.00
-3% -3%
+3% 3%
(325.21) (325.21)
International Military Education & Training International Military Education & Training
112.93 112.93
112.93 112.93
112.93 112.93
112.93 112.93

112.93 112.93
112.93 112.93
0% 0%
0% 0%
Foreign Military Financing Foreign Military Financing
6,175.52 6,175.52
610,675.52 ,675.52
6,175.52 6,175.52
6,175.52 6,175.52

6,690.42 6,690.42
6(4,000.00) 10,690.42 ,690.42
0% 0%
8+73% %
(576.91) (576.91)
( (4,500.00) 500.00)
(650.00) (650.00)
( (4,650.00) 650.00)
Title V. Multilateral Assistance Title V. Multilateral Assistance
2,620.82 2,620.82
~~3,630~~4,280.13 .13
4,098.56 4,098.56
4,203.96 4,203.96
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
2,374.46 2,374.46
~~2,374.46~~
~~-35%~~
~~-9%~~
~~(580~~(650.00) 3,024.46 -29% +15% (580.00) (650.00) (650.00) .00)
International Organizations & Programs International Organizations & Programs
967.50 967.50
457.10 457.10
477.10 477.10
472.50 472.50

423.00 423.00
423.00 423.00
-7% -7%
-56% -56%
(580.00) (580.00)
International Bank for Reconstruction and International Bank for Reconstruction and
206.50 206.50
206.50 206.50
206.50 206.50
206.50 206.50

206.50 206.50
206.50 206.50
0% 0%
0% 0%
Development Development
European Bank for Reconstruction and (500.00) (500.00) (500.00) 0% n.a. Development Global Environment Facility Global Environment Facility
139.58 139.58
149.29 149.29
149.29 149.29
149.29 149.29

149.29 149.29
149.29 149.29
0% 0%
+7% 7%
International Development Association International Development Association
1,001.40 1,001.40
1,427.97 1,427.97
1,001.40 1,001.40
1,001.40 1,001.40

1,001.40 1,001.40
1,001.40 1,001.40
-30% -30%
0% 0%
Asian Development Fund Asian Development Fund
47.40 47.40
53.32 53.32
53.32 53.32
53.32 53.32

53.23 53.23
53.23 53.23
0% 0%
+13% 13%
African Development Bank African Development Bank
54.65 54.65
54.65 54.65
54.65 54.65
54.65 54.65

54.65 54.65
54.65 54.65
0% 0%
0% 0%
African Development Fund African Development Fund
171.30 171.30
211.30 211.30
211.30 211.30
211.30 211.30

211.30 211.30
211.30 211.30
0% 0%
+23% 23%
Green Climate Fund Green Climate Fund

625.00 625.00
1,600.00 1,600.00
1,450.00 1,450.00

0.00 0.00
0.00 -100% n.a. CRS-34 link to page 41 link to page 41 link to page 41 link to page 41 link to page 41 % % Change FY2022 FY2022 Change FY2021 FY2022 FY2022 FY2022 CR 2 Consolid. FY2022 Enacted FY2021 FY2022 House- Senate CR 1 P.L. P.L. 117- AUSAA FY2022 Req. to to Total Req., Passed Intro P.L. 117- 117-70, 103, Div. K, P.L. 117- Total FY2022 FY2022 Enacteda Totalb ~~0.00~~
~~-100%~~
~~n.a.~~
~~Climate Investment Funds/Clean Tech~~

~~300.00~~
~~200.00~~
~~450.00~~

~~125.00~~
~~125.00~~
~~-58%~~
~~n.a.~~
~~Fund~~
~~International Monetary Fund~~

~~102.00~~
~~102.00~~
~~102.00~~

~~102.00~~
~~102.00~~
0%
~~n.a.~~
~~Global Agriculture Food Security Program~~

~~43.00~~

~~5.00~~
~~5.00~~
~~n.a.~~
~~n.a.~~
~~International Fund for Agricultural~~
~~32.50~~
~~43.00~~
~~43.00~~
~~10.00~~

~~43.00~~
~~43.00~~
0%
~~32%~~
~~Development~~
~~CRS-33~~

~~link to page 39 link to page 39 link to page 39 link to page 39 link to page 39~~
~~FY2022 Omnibus~~
~~% Change % Change~~
~~FY2022~~
~~FY2022~~
~~FY2022~~
~~CR 2~~

~~FY2022~~
~~FY2021~~
~~FY2021~~
~~House-~~
~~Senate~~
~~CR 1~~
~~P.L.~~
~~P.L. 117-~~
~~FY2022~~
~~Req. to~~
~~Enacted~~
~~Total~~
~~FY2022~~
~~Passed~~
~~Intro~~
~~P.L. 117-~~
~~117-70, 103, Div.~~
~~Total~~
~~FY2022 to FY2022~~

~~Enacteda~~
~~Req~~.b
H.R. 4373 S. 3075c 43, Div. C Div. B
K, MdNd 128
Enactede
~~Enacted~~
~~Enacted~~ Enacted Enacted Climate Investment Funds/Clean Tech 300.00 200.00 450.00 125.00 125.00 -58% n.a. Fund International Monetary Fund 102.00 102.00 102.00 102.00 102.00 0% n.a. Global Agriculture Food Security Program (150.00) 43.00 5.00 (150.00) 155.00 +3% n.a. (150.00) International Fund for Agricultural 32.50 43.00 43.00 10.00 43.00 43.00 0% +32% Development
Title VI. Export Assistance Title VI. Export Assistance
159.00 159.00
-13.61 -13.61
223.80 223.80
323.80 323.80
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
323.80 323.80
323.80 323.80
-2479% -2479%
+104% 104%
Export-Import Bank (net) Export-Import Bank (net)
-113.50 -113.50
-221.50 -221.50
-74.50 -74.50
-74.50 -74.50

-74.50 -74.50
-74.50 -74.50
-66% -66%
-34% -34%
U.S. Development Finance Corporation U.S. Development Finance Corporation
193.00 193.00
128.39 128.39
218.80 218.80
318.80 318.80

318.80 318.80
318.80 318.80
+148% 148%
+65% 65%
(net) (net)
U.S. Trade & Development Agency U.S. Trade & Development Agency
79.50 79.50
79.50 79.50
79.50 79.50
79.50 79.50

79.50 79.50
79.50 79.50
0% 0%
0% 0%
SFOPS Total, Prerescission
72,114.43 ~~71,906.08~~ 86,666.07 62,975.90 63,890.54
2,168.00 1,280.30 64,962.68 ~~68,410.97~~
~~-5%~~
-5(18,946.00) 87,356.98 +1% +21%
(24,295.12) (~~9,250~~24,010.00)
(6,800.00) ~~(10,248~~ (29,194.3)
Rescissions, net Rescissions, net
-530.12 -530.12
-535.00 -535.00
-575.00 -1,653.64 -575.00 -1,653.64
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
1,903.78 1,903.78
0.00 1,903.78 1,903.78
+256% 256%
+259% 259%
(-425.12) (-425.12)
SFOPS Total, Net of Rescissions
71,584.31 ~~71,371.08~~ 86,131.07 62,400.90 62,236.90
2,168.00 1,280.30 63,058.90 ~~66,507.19~~
~~-7%~~
-7(18,946.00) 85,453.20 -1% +19%
(23,870.00) (~~9,250~~24,010.00)
(6,800.00) ~~(10,248.3~~ (29,194.30)
Source: SFOPS Congressional Budget Justification for FY2022SFOPS Congressional Budget Justification for FY2022.
~~Notes:~~; P.L. 116-260; P.L. 117-2; P.L. 117-31; H.R. 4373; S. 3075; P.L. 117-43; P.L. 117-70; P.L. 117-103; P.L. 117-128. Notes: Consolid. = Consolidated Appropriations Act. AUSAA = Additional Ukraine Security Assistance Act. Figures in parentheses are amount designated as Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) or supplemental emergency funding and are subsumed in the larger Figures in parentheses are amount designated as Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) or supplemental emergency funding and are subsumed in the larger
account number above them. “Non-emergency” funding includes both “base” funding (also referred to as “enduring” or “ongoing” funding in budget documents) and account number above them. “Non-emergency” funding includes both “base” funding (also referred to as “enduring” or “ongoing” funding in budget documents) and
OCO funds. Numbers may not add due to rounding. “n.a.” = not applicable. OCO funds. Numbers may not add due to rounding. “n.a.” = not applicable.
CRS-35 a. Includes emergency funds provided in Title IX of the final FY2021 SFOPS appropriation (P.L. 116-260), the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (P.L. 117-2), and the a. Includes emergency funds provided in Title IX of the final FY2021 SFOPS appropriation (P.L. 116-260), the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (P.L. 117-2), and the
Emergency Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021 (P.L. 117-31). Emergency Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021 (P.L. 117-31).
b. Includes supplemental funds requested by the Administration in March 2022 to address the situation in Ukraine and additional COVID-19-related needs b. Includes supplemental funds requested by the Administration in March 2022 to address the situation in Ukraine and additional COVID-19-related needs, and an additional request made on April 28, 2022. See Letter from OMB Acting Director Shalanda Young; Addendum A: Detailed Funding Request, Assistance to Ukraine. .
c. S. 3075 was introduced but was never considered by the Senate SFOPS subcommittee. It is included here only as a reference of potential interest and does not c. S. 3075 was introduced but was never considered by the Senate SFOPS subcommittee. It is included here only as a reference of potential interest and does not
indicate a Senate agreement on FY2022 funding levels. indicate a Senate agreement on FY2022 funding levels.
d. The supplemental request also asked that this funding be provided with authority to be transferred to the Transition Initiatives, INCLE, NADRA and USAID and d. The supplemental request also asked that this funding be provided with authority to be transferred to the Transition Initiatives, INCLE, NADRA and USAID and
State Department operational accounts. State Department operational accounts.
e. Figures in parenthesis include emergency funding from P.L. 117-43, Div. C; P.L. 117-70, Division B; e. Figures in parenthesis include emergency funding from P.L. 117-43, Div. C; P.L. 117-70, Division B; ~~and~~ P.L. 117-103, Division P.L. 117-103, Division M.

~~CRS-34~~N; and P.L. 117-128. f. This includes funding for the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), which has its own account line in some SFOPS legislation. CRS-36

Appendix B. International Affairs Budget
The International Affairs budget, or Function 150, includes funding that is not in the Department The International Affairs budget, or Function 150, includes funding that is not in the Department
of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs (SFOPS) appropriation; in particular, of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs (SFOPS) appropriation; in particular,
international food assistance programs (Food for Peace Act [FFPA], Title II and McGovern-Dole international food assistance programs (Food for Peace Act [FFPA], Title II and McGovern-Dole
International Food for Education and Child Nutrition programs) are in the Agriculture International Food for Education and Child Nutrition programs) are in the Agriculture
Appropriations, and the Foreign Claim Settlement Commission and the International Trade Appropriations, and the Foreign Claim Settlement Commission and the International Trade
Commission are in the Commerce, Justice, Science appropriations. In addition, the SFOPS Commission are in the Commerce, Justice, Science appropriations. In addition, the SFOPS
appropriation measure includes funding for certain international commissions that are not part of appropriation measure includes funding for certain international commissions that are not part of
the International Affairs Function 150 account. the International Affairs Function 150 account.
CRS- CRS-3537

link to page link to page 4143
Table B-1. International Affairs Budget, FY2021-FY2022
(In millions of U.S. dollars; numbers in parentheses are the portion of the account totals designated as OCO or emergency funds) (In millions of U.S. dollars; numbers in parentheses are the portion of the account totals designated as OCO or emergency funds)
FY2022
FY2022 % FY2022 FY2022
CR 2
~~Omnibus~~
% Consolid. Change,
~~FY2022~~House
CR 1
(P.L. ~~117-~~
(P.L. 117-
AUSAA FY2022
FY2021-
FY2021
~~House~~FY2022 (H.R.
(P.L. 117-
117-70, ~~70, Div.~~
103, Div. K,
(P.L. 117- Enacted
FY2022

Total
~~FY2022~~ Req.
~~(H.R.~~ 4373)
43, Div. C)
Div. B)
K, M)
128) Total
Enacted
State-Foreign Operations,
71,407.69 71,407.69
~~71,194.46~~86,131.08
62,214.68 62,214.68
2,168.00 2,168.00
1,280.30 1,280.30
62,878.05 62,878.05
~~66,326.35~~
-718,946.00 85,272.35 +19% %
excluding Commissionsa
(23,870) (23,870)
( (~~9,250~~24,010.00) .00)
(6,800.00) (6,800.00)
( (~~6,800~~29,194.00) .00)
Commerce-Justice-Science
105.37 105.37
105.43 105.43
120.93 120.93
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
112.43 112.43
0.00 112.43 112.43
+7% 7%
Foreign Claims Settlement Foreign Claims Settlement
2.37 2.37
2.43 2.43
2.43 2.43

2.43 2.43
2.43 2.43
+3% 3%
Commission Commission
Int’l Trade Commission Int’l Trade Commission
103.00 103.00
103.00 103.00
118.5 118.5

110.00 110.00
110.00 110.00
+7% 7%
Agriculture
2,770.00 2,770.00
1,800.11 1,800.11
1,985.0 1,985.0
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
2,077 2,077.00 0.00 .00
2,077.00 2,077.00
-25% -25%
(800.00) (800.00)
(100.00) (100.00)
(100.00) (100.00)
FFPA Title II FFPA Title II
2,540.00 2,540.00
1,570.00 1,570.00
1,740.0 1,740.0

1,840.00 1,840.00
1,840.00 1,840.00
-28% -28%
(800.00) (800.00)
(100.00) (100.00)
(100.00) (100.00)
McGovern-Dole McGovern-Dole
230.00 230.00
230.11 230.11
245.0 245.0

237.00 237.00
237.00 237.00
+3% +3%
Total International Affairs ~~(150)~~
74,283.06
~~73,100~~87,860.00
64,320.21
2,168.00
1,280.30
65,067.48
~~68,515.78~~
~~-8%~~
(18,946.00 87,461.78 +18% (150) (24,520.00)
(~~9,250~~24,010.00)
(6,900.00)
(~~10,348.30~~29,394.00)
Source: SFOPS Congressional Budget Justification for FY2022; SFOPS Congressional Budget Justification for FY2022; ~~H.R. 4373~~March 2 and April 28, 2022, supplemental request letters to Congress from OMB; H.R. 4373; P.L. 117-43; P.L. 117-70; P.L. 117-103, P.L. 117-128. .
Notes: Figures in parentheses are amount designated as Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) or supplemental emergency funding and are subsumed in the larger Figures in parentheses are amount designated as Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) or supplemental emergency funding and are subsumed in the larger
account number above them. Non-Emergency funding includes both base funding (also referred to as “enduring” or “ongoing” funding in budget documents) and OCO-account number above them. Non-Emergency funding includes both base funding (also referred to as “enduring” or “ongoing” funding in budget documents) and OCO-
designated funds. Numbers may not add due to rounding. “n.a.” = not applicable. designated funds. Numbers may not add due to rounding. “n.a.” = not applicable.
a. Includes mandatory spending from the Foreign Service retirement account and does not align with budget justification figures that count only discretionary spending. a. Includes mandatory spending from the Foreign Service retirement account and does not align with budget justification figures that count only discretionary spending.
Excludes funding for international commissions that is appropriated in the SFOPS bil but part of function 300 of the budget (Natural Resources and Environment), Excludes funding for international commissions that is appropriated in the SFOPS bil but part of function 300 of the budget (Natural Resources and Environment),
not function 150 (International Affairs). not function 150 (International Affairs).

CRS- CRS-3638

Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

Appendix C. International Affairs Components Chart
Figure C-1. International Affairs Budget Components

Source: Created by CRS. Created by CRS.

Author Information

Cory R. Gill Cory R. Gill
Emily M. Morgenstern Emily M. Morgenstern
Analyst in Foreign Affairs Analyst in Foreign Affairs
Analyst in Foreign Assistance and Foreign Policy Analyst in Foreign Assistance and Foreign Policy

Marian L. Lawson Marian L. Lawson

Section Research Manager Section Research Manager

Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

3739

Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
R46935 R46935 · VERSION 810 · UPDATED
3840