Department of State, Foreign Operations, and
Related Programs (SFOPS) Supplemental
Funding for Ukraine: In Brief
Updated November 21, 2022
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
R47275
SFOPS Supplemental Funding for Ukraine: In Brief
Introduction
As of November 15, 2022, the Biden Administration had submitted to Congress four emergency
supplemental funding requests to address the crisis caused by Russia’s renewed invasion of
Ukraine in 2022. Congress, in turn, has enacted three emergency supplemental measures—the
March 2022 Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022 (FY2022 USAA; P.L. 117-103, Div.
N); the May 2022 Additional Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022 (FY2022 AUSAA;
P.L. 117-128); and the September 2022 Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2023 (FY2023
USAA; P.L. 117-180, Div. B).
In total, Congress has appropriated $66 billion for supplemental funding for Ukraine in FY2022
and FY2023. Such funding has supported foreign assistance for Ukraine and other countries
affected by the war, U.S. European Command operations and related support for the U.S. military,
and administration and operations of other U.S. government agencies that have responded to
Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, including funding for legal enforcement, sanctions
implementation, and Ukrainian refugee and entrant assistance.
Of the total amount appropriated for supplemental funding for Ukraine, Congress has
appropriated more than $30 billion (approximately 46%) for the Department of State, Foreign
Operations, and Related Programs (SFOPS) accounts. SFOPS funding has supported a range of
activities, including direct financial support for the Government of Ukraine, humanitarian
assistance, security assistance, and civilian agency operations in support of program
administration and oversight.
This report focuses on requested and appropriated funding for Department of State, Foreign
Operations, and Related Programs (SFOPS) appropriations accounts and replaces CRS Insight
IN11877, Supplemental Funding for Ukraine: Department of State, Foreign Operations, and
Related Programs (SFOPS).1
For more information on security assistance to Ukraine, including the use of presidential
drawdown authority, see CRS In Focus IF12040, U.S. Security Assistance to Ukraine. For CRS
coverage on other issues relating to Russia’s war against Ukraine, see CRS Report R47054,
Russia’s 2022 Invasion of Ukraine: Related CRS Products.
March 2 Emergency Supplemental Request and FY2022 USAA
On March 2, 2022, the Biden Administration submitted to Congress a request for $5 billion in
emergency supplemental funding for SFOPS appropriations accounts to address the crisis caused
by Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.2 Such funds were requested as part of a broader package
that would have provided a total of $10 billion for Ukraine and $22.5 billion for response
activities related to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.
The $5 billion for SFOPS was requested among four appropriations accounts to “bolster U.S.
security and economic assistance to Ukraine as well as regional allies and partners” and to
“support lifesaving humanitarian assistance, including emergency food assistance, and additional
support for vulnerable populations and communities.” The Administration also proposed
1 For CRS coverage of regular SFOPS appropriations for FY2022 and FY2023, see CRS Report R46935, Department
of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2022 Budget and Appropriations, and CRS Report R47070,
Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2023 Budget and Appropriations.
2 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-
Pelosi.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
1
link to page 6 SFOPS Supplemental Funding for Ukraine: In Brief
increased flexibility for SFOPS funding through changes to existing authorities, new transfer
authorities to move funds between SFOPS accounts, and authority to reprogram (i.e., to move
funds within an account) both FY2022 and prior-year funds. The Administration asserted that
these changes would afford it “maximum flexibility in supporting Ukraine, our European allies
and partners, and other emergent global needs.”
Congress enacted the FY2022 USAA on March 15, 2022. The measure included a total of $13.6
billion, $6.8 billion of which was for 12 SFOPS appropriations accounts (
Congressional Research Service
4
link to page 6 link to page 9 link to page 6 SFOPS Supplemental Funding for Ukraine: In Brief
Table 1).3 The legislation also included certain new authorities, primarily related to Presidential
Drawdown Authority and other security assistance (Table 2).4 SFOPS funds were appropriated to
support a range of activities in Ukraine and “in countries impacted by the situation in Ukraine.”
The majority of the $6.8 billion (60%) was enacted for humanitarian assistance, including “the
provision of emergency food and shelter,” both for displaced Ukrainians and “for other vulnerable
populations and communities.”5 The remaining SFOPS funds comprised economic assistance—
including direct financial support for the government of Ukraine—security assistance, and
support to U.S. government agencies responding to the war.
April 28 Emergency Supplemental Funding Request and FY2022
AUSAA
The Administration’s April 28 request to Congress called for $14.76 billion in emergency
supplemental funding for SFOPS accounts, out of a total of $33 billion sought for Ukraine and
the region.6 The SFOPS request included funding for purposes beyond the March 2 request,
including to “help food insecure countries around the world” and to “work through the
international financial institutions to support Ukraine and other countries impacted by the crisis.”
As with the March 2 request, the Administration also proposed amending certain authorities.
Congress enacted the FY2022 AUSAA on May 21, 2022. The $40.1 billion measure included
$18.946 billion for SFOPS appropriations accounts (
3 The FY2022 USAA also included $6.5 billion for Department of Defense (DOD) appropriations accounts, $100
million for Food for Peace international food aid, and about $172 million in funding for administration and operations
of other U.S. government agencies that have responded to Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.
4 For more on Presidential Drawdown Authority and security assistance provided for Ukraine, see CRS In Focus
IF12040, U.S. Security Assistance to Ukraine, by Christina L. Arabia, Andrew S. Bowen, and Cory Welt.
5 For more on the humanitarian and refugee crisis caused by the war, see CRS Insight IN11882, Humanitarian and
Refugee Crisis in Ukraine, by Rhoda Margesson and Derek E. Mix.
6 See letter from OMB Acting Director Shalanda Young to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/FY_2022_Emergency_Supplemental_Assistance-to-
Ukraine_4.28.2022.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
1
link to page 6 link to page 9 link to page 6 SFOPS Supplemental Funding for Ukraine: In Brief
Table 1), as well as certain new authorities, similar to those provided in the FY2022 USAA
(Table 2).7 Nearly half of the appropriated SFOPS funds were for the Economic Support Fund
(ESF), including direct financial support for the government of Ukraine.8 A portion of ESF was
also designated “to prevent and respond to food insecurity,” in addition to emergency food
assistance provided via humanitarian assistance accounts.9 Humanitarian and security assistance
each comprised nearly a quarter of the appropriated SFOPS funds; the remaining funding was
appropriated for U.S. government agencies responding to the war and selected multilateral
efforts.
September 2 Emergency Supplemental Funding Request and
FY2023 USAA
In its September 2 Continuing Resolution (CR) Appropriations Issues transmittal to Congress, the
Administration requested a total of $11.7 billion for “Critical Needs in Ukraine,” including $4.5
billion in SFOPS funding in the form of ESF for direct financial support to Ukraine.10 The
transmittal also included requested anomalies for the potential CR, as well as supplemental
funding for COVID-19, monkeypox, and domestic disaster assistance. In addition to the proposed
funding, the SFOPS request for Ukraine included amending certain authorities, such as a
proposed expansion of countries eligible for Foreign Military Financing funding beyond NATO
countries.
Congress enacted the Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2023 (FY2023 USAA; P.L. 117-
180, Div. B), on September 30, 2022, as part of the FY2023 CR that funds the government
through December 16, 2022. The measure provides the requested $4.5 billion in ESF for direct
financial support for Ukraine (
7 The FY2022 AUSAA also included $20.1 billion for DOD appropriations accounts, $900 million for carrying out
U.S. refugee and entrant assistance activities in support of Ukrainian nationals, and $195 million in funding for
administration and operations of other U.S. government agencies that have responded to Russia’s 2022 invasion of
Ukraine.
8 Unlike in the FY2022 USAA, which noted the use of direct financial support in the ESF appropriation itself, the
FY2022 AUSAA made such funds available in the General Provisions: Section 507(a) stated that ESF funds “may be
made available for direct financial support for the Government of Ukraine, and such funds shall be matched, to the
maximum extent practicable, by sources other than the United States Government.”
9 In a June 2022 Fact Sheet, the State Department noted, “The U.S. Government is investing $760 million to combat the
effects of high food, fuel, and fertilizer prices – now being driven up by Putin’s war – in those countries that need it
most.” U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, “President Biden and G7 Leaders Announce Further Efforts to Counter Putin’s Attack
on Food Security,” press release, June 28, 2022.
10 Office of Management and Budget, FY 2023 Continuing Resolution (CR) Appropriations Issues, September 2, 2022.
Congressional Research Service
1
link to page 6 link to page 9 link to page 7 link to page 9 SFOPS Supplemental Funding for Ukraine: In Brief
Table 1),11 out of a total of $12.3 billion, as well as one of the requested authorities (Table 2).12
November 15 Emergency Supplemental Funding Request
On November 15, the Administration submitted to Congress a request for $37.7 billion in
FY2023 emergency supplemental funding for Ukraine.13 The transmittal also included a proposed
$10 billion for the COVID-19 pandemic and other public and global health activities. Of the
funds requested for the Ukraine response, the Administration requested $14.5 billion for SFOPS
accounts (Table 1). The Administration requested the majority of SFOPS funding—$13.045
billion—for the Economic Support Fund to support a range of activities. These activities include
direct budget support ($9.9 billion), economic stabilization and recovery ($1.5 billion), and
energy security ($1.1 billion), among others. Other SFOPS funds were requested for security
assistance ($905 million), humanitarian assistance ($500 million), and the Transition Initiatives
program ($50 million). As with prior requests, the Administration also proposed amending certain
authorities, including those related to Presidential Drawdown Authority and other security
assistance (Table 2). The Administration argued that such authorities would increase its flexibility
to “match resources with evolving needs.”
11 Notably, Section 1302(a) directs that ESF funds “shall” be made available for direct financial support for the
Government of Ukraine. In the FY2022 USAA and AUSAA, Congress directed that such funds “may” be made
available. According to the House Office of the Legislative Counsel, “The term ‘shall’ means that an action is required;
the term ‘may’ means that it is permitted but not required.” House Office of the Legislative Counsel, Drafting
Legislation, at https://legcounsel.house.gov/holc-guide-legislative-drafting#VIIB.
12 Additional funds were provided in the FY2023 USAA for DOD ($7.8 billion) and Department of Energy ($35
million) appropriations accounts.
13 See letter from OMB Director Shalanda Young to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Attachment 2. Ukraine
Assistance Needs at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/FY-2023-Supplemental-funding-
request-for-COVID-19-and-Ukraine.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
1
Table 1. SFOPS Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Ukraine:
Administration Requests and Enacted Appropriations
(In millions of dollars of budget authority)
FY2022
FY2022
FY2023
March 2
USAA
April 28
AUSAA
Sept. 2
USAA
Nov. 15
Appropriations Account
Request
Enacted
Request
Enacted
Request
Enacted
Request
Dept. of State Diplomatic Programs
—
125
—
190
—
—
—
Dept. of State Capital Investment Fund
—
—
—
10
—
—
—
Dept. of State Office of Inspector
—
4
—
4
—
—
—
General
Embassy Security, Construction, and
—
—
—
110
—
—
—
Maintenance
U.S. Agency for Global Media
—
25
—
—
—
—
—
USAID Operating Expenses
—
25
—
17
—
—
—
USAID Office of Inspector General
—
4
—
1
—
—
—
International Disaster Assistance
2,000
2,650
700
4,348
—
—
250
Transition Initiatives
—
120
—
—
—
—
50
Economic Support Fund
1,750
647
8,760
8,766
4,500
4,500
13,045
Assistance for Europe, Eurasia and
—
1,120
—
—
—
—
—
Central Asia
Migration and Refugee Assistance
750
1,400
150
350
—
—
250
International Narcotics Control and
—
30
400
400
—
—
300
Law Enforcement (INCLE)
Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism,
—
—
100
100
—
—
105
Demining and Related Programs
(NADR)
Foreign Military Financing (FMF)
500
650
4,000
4,000
—
—
500
European Bank for Reconstruction and
—
—
500
500
—
—
—
Development
CRS-2
FY2022
FY2022
FY2023
March 2
USAA
April 28
AUSAA
Sept. 2
USAA
Nov. 15
Appropriations Account
Request
Enacted
Request
Enacted
Request
Enacted
Request
Global Agriculture and Food Security
—
—
150.00
150.00
—
—
—
Program
Total
5,000
6,800
14,760
18,946
4,500
4,500
14,500
Source: Letter from OMB Acting Director Shalanda Young; P.L. 117-103; Addendum A: Detailed Funding Request, Assistance to Ukraine; P.L. 117-128; FY2023
Continuing Resolution (CR) Appropriations Issues; P.L. 117-180; Letter from OMB Director Shalanda Young, Attachment 2. Ukraine Assistance Needs.
CRS-3
SFOPS Supplemental Funding for Ukraine: In Brief
Table 2. Selected SFOPS Authorities: Administration Requests and Enacted
March 2 Request
FY2022 USAA Enacted
Amend Section 506(a)(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act
Amended Section 506(a)(1) to raise the drawdown
of 1961 (FAA; P.L. 87-195) to raise the maximum value
authority to a total of $3.0 bil ion.
of defense article drawdowns by $1.2 bil ion (the
original cap was $100 mil ion).
Amend Section 614 of the FAA (special authority to
Amended Section 614(a)(4)(A)(i ) of the FAA to
provide assistance in situations of vital national security
increase authority from $250 mil ion to $500 mil ion.
interest) to increase authority by $250 mil ion.
Also amended Section 614(a)(4)(C) to adjust existing
limitations to higher dol ar amounts.
Amend Sections 516(f) and 516(g)(1) of the FAA (on
Allows for the President to transfer EDA to “Ukraine
excess defense articles [EDA]). (The Administration did and to allies and partners in Europe” pursuant to
not cite such sections specifically in its request but
Section 516 without regard to the notification
proposed waiving both the notification requirement and requirements in Sections 516(f)(1) and 516(g).
the $500 mil ion limit on the provision of EDA).
Authority to “reprogram FY2022 and prior-year funds
Provides transfer authorities among accounts, which
for Ukraine regardless of existing appropriations
are “in addition to any other transfer authority
directives.”
provided by law.”
April 28 Request
FY2022 AUSAA Enacted
Amend Section 506(a)(1) of the FAA to raise the
Amends Section 506(a)(1) to raise the drawdown
drawdown maximum by $5.0 bil ion.
maximum to $11.0 bil ion.
Amend Section 614 of the FAA to increase authority by Amends Section 614(a)(4)(A)(i ) of the FAA to increase
$500 mil ion.
authority to $1.0 bil ion. Also amends Section
614(a)(4)(C) to adjust existing limitations to higher
dol ar amounts.
Amend Section 7035(b)(5) of the Department of State,
N/A
Foreign Operations, and Related Programs
Appropriations Act, 2022 (P.L. 117-103, Div. K) to
increase the Special Defense Acquisition Fund
obligations cap by $1.0 bil ion.
September 2 Request
FY2023 USAA Enacted
Amend Section 2606(a) of the FY2022 USAA to
N/A
authorize FMF loans for “countries impacted by the
situation in Ukraine” (an expansion from “North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies”).
Amend Section 506(a)(1) of the FAA to raise the
Amends Section 506(a)(1) of the FAA to raise the
drawdown maximum to $3.7 bil ion for FY2023.
drawdown maximum to $3.7 bil ion for FY2023.
November 15 Request
Amend Section 2606(a) of the FY2022 USAA to
authorize FMF loans for “major Non-North Atlantic
Treaty Organization allies” (an expansion from “North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies”) and
increase the authorization ceiling on loan and
guaranteed loan gross principal obligations to $8 bil ion.
Amend Section 506(a)(1) of the FAA to raise the
drawdown maximum to $10.7 bil ion for FY2023.
Congressional Research Service
4
SFOPS Supplemental Funding for Ukraine: In Brief
Amend Sections 614(a)(4)(A)(i ), 614(a)(4)(C),
552(c)(2), and 506(a)(2) of the FAA to increase
respective funding caps. According to the request, such
actions would increase flexibility for assistance to
Ukraine.
Source: Letter from OMB Acting Director Shalanda Young; P.L. 117-103; Addendum A: Detailed Funding
Request, Assistance to Ukraine; P.L. 117-128; FY2023 Continuing Resolution (CR) Appropriations Issues; P.L.
117-180; Letter from OMB Director Shalanda Young, Attachment 2. Ukraine Assistance Needs.
Note: For more information on the use of Sections 506(a)(1) and 614(a)(4)(A)(i ) of the FAA, see CRS In Focus
IF12040, U.S. Security Assistance to Ukraine, by Christina L. Arabia, Andrew S. Bowen, and Cory Welt.
Outlook
To date, congressional support for emergency supplemental funding for Ukraine generally has
been broad and bipartisan. Debate of each bill has been affected by the legislative vehicle to
which the measure has been attached and by selected domestic considerations. Congressional
priorities for aid to Ukraine may also change in the 118th Congress. Some Members of Congress
and newly elected Members of Congress have signaled varying levels of support for continuing to
provide similar levels of assistance for Ukraine. For example, Representative Kevin McCarthy,
who was nominated to serve as Speaker of the House in the 118th Congress, reportedly said
Americans facing an economic recession are “not going to write a blank check to Ukraine.”14
Congress debated the FY2022 USAA within the context of the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2022 (P.L. 117-103), as well as the Biden Administration’s request for supplemental funding to
combat COVID-19. News organizations reported bipartisan congressional support for emergency
supplemental funding for Ukraine, but there appeared to be disagreement over how such funds
should be allocated.15 Some Members advocated for more funding for defense purposes, while
others recommended a greater emphasis on humanitarian and economic assistance for Ukrainians
in need.16 The requested funds to combat COVID-19 also affected consideration of the broader
appropriations measure; some lawmakers questioned the need and requested further justification
for new COVID-19-related funding.17
Considered as a stand-alone bill, the FY2022 AUSAA sparked debate, particularly in the Senate,
about the measure’s overall funding level and oversight mechanisms. Eleven Senators voted
against the FY2022 AUSAA, with some citing concerns that the bill “neglects priorities at
home”18 or should be “offset with cuts”19 to prioritize domestic concerns. Others raised concerns
that the supplemental funds for Ukraine would not have adequate oversight and proposed
amendments to the measure. One proposal would have expanded the Office of the Special
Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) to become the Office of the Special
14 Farnoush Amiri and Kevin Freking, “McCarthy: No ‘blank check’ for Ukraine if GOP wins majority,” Associated
Press, October 18, 2022.
15 Catie Edmonson and Emily Cochrane, “The Biden administration asks Congress for $10 billion to support Ukraine,”
New York Times, March 3, 2022.
16 Tony Romm, “Democrats, Republicans eye large Ukraine aid package, new punishments against Russia,”
Washington Post, March 1, 2022.
17 See, for example, Letter from Senator Mitt Romney et al. to President Joseph R. Biden, March 2, 2022.
18 Senator Josh Hawley, “Hawley Blasts $40 billion in Ukraine Aid: ‘Not in America’s Interests,’” press release, May
16, 2022.
19 Senator Mike Braun, “Senator Braun Statement on $40 Billion Ukraine Spending Package,” press release, May 18,
2022.
Congressional Research Service
5
SFOPS Supplemental Funding for Ukraine: In Brief
Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction and Ukrainian Military, Economic, and
Humanitarian Aid;20 another proposal would have established a new Office of the Special
Inspector General for Ukrainian Military, Economic, and Humanitarian Aid.21 Neither amendment
was adopted in the final law.
The FY2023 USAA was not a primary subject of debate as Congress considered the CR package.
Members instead focused debate on the broader supplemental request, which included proposed
funds for COVID-19, monkeypox, and domestic disaster relief, as well as general government
funding issues and the utility of CRs.22
As the war in Ukraine continues and Congress works to finalize FY2023 appropriations
legislation while also looking ahead to the 118th Congress, Members may debate additional
funding to address the crisis. The Administration has requested that Congress include
supplemental funding in an omnibus appropriations measure that funds the government for the
rest of FY2023 and is enacted before December 16, when the current CR expires.23 However,
Members may consider additional funding or authorization language in stand-alone supplemental
measures or as part of another CR.
In addition to considering the legislative vehicle for potential funding, Members may debate the
amount of funding in a potential supplemental package, as well as the distribution of such funds
across appropriations accounts. While some have expressed support for Ukraine at the
Administration’s proposed levels, others have expressed concern that the Administration is
prioritizing aid to Ukraine over domestic issues and have advocated for reduced funding for the
country.24 Others have raised questions about the rate of U.S. spending on Ukraine and—if the
United States continues to fund the response at the current rate—whether the Administration may
request additional funds in FY2023.25
According to reports, some Members appear poised to revive debate on oversight and
accountability mechanisms that surfaced during consideration of the FY2022 AUSAA. When
questioned on House Republicans’ priorities for aid to the country, House Foreign Affairs
Committee Ranking Member Representative Michael McCaul stated, “We’re not going to write a
20 S.Amdt. 5040.
21 S.Amdt. 5041.
22 See, for example, Kevin Freking and Lisa Mascaro, “GOP gives thumbs down to Biden’s $47B emergency request,”
Associated Press, September 7, 2022; Mychael Schnell, “House GOP calls for ‘no’ vote on CR,” The Hill, September
28, 2022.
23 Letter from OMB Director Shalanda Young.
24 Erik Wasson and Daniel Flatley, “McCarthy Warns GOP May Cut Back Ukraine Aid If Party Wins House,”
Bloomberg, October 19, 2022.
25 John M. Donnelly, “Complicated path ahead for Ukraine aid request,” CQ, November 15, 2022.
Congressional Research Service
6
SFOPS Supplemental Funding for Ukraine: In Brief
blank check without oversight and accountability, which my committee will be providing.”26 The
statement was consistent with a July 2022 letter from both McCaul and Senate Foreign Relations
Committee Ranking Member Senator James Risch that expressed concern about potential gaps in
oversight of the Ukraine assistance and noncompliance with congressional directives, and asked
for “rigorous adherence to statutory oversight standards and requirements.”27
Author Information
Emily M. McCabe
Analyst in Foreign Assistance and Foreign Policy
Disclaimer
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
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
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
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
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
26 Wasson and Flatley, “McCarthy Warns GOP May Cut Back Ukraine Aid If Party Wins House.” McCaul made the
statement after being asked to clarify Minority Leader McCarthy’s statement on the topic.
27 Letter from James E. Risch, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Ranking Member, and Michael T. McCaul, House
Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member, to Antony Blinken, Secretary of State, July 28, 2022.
Congressional Research Service
R47275 · VERSION 2 · UPDATED
7