>> Yeah, well, basically Oxfam has three basic areas of activities.
One, is our humanitarian response capability, the other is our long-term
development work, and the third is our advocacy and campaigning work.
And in the humanitarian work, basically our criteria for
that is we need to have a basic set of core competencies and
deployable staff for humanitarian emergencies.
And so, and we figured out what we need to contribute to
the work of our global confederation in that particular area,
and we know what that core is and so we established the budge,
budget based on that, in knowing what that core set of competencies is, is.
Now what happens in humanitarian emergencies when the emergencies occur,
we will get large tranches of money coming in to support the emergency.
We would hire new staff.
We would deploy people to the field.
And hire a local staff in the field to build out a large team.
In responding to a major emergency, so.
>> So you're actually growing your own budget by growing your
revenue because you're responding.
>> Right. >> And you're seen to be responding to
this particular emergency.
>> So, so in Haiti we might have 700 staff, but we might only have 25 or
30 expatriate experts, and the rest are all going to be Haitians.
>> Mm-hm.
>> Who are, you know, who, who are, you know,
some of whom would be specialists in public health.
And other areas and
then we would train other people in some of the subset issues that we to,
that we need to address in managing large refugee camp settlements or in
dealing with water and sanitation issues at very, very local or a micro level.
And we're accustomed to doing that in all sorts of settings all over the world so
in some sense this is an area that expands and contracts based on, on need and
availability of funding.
The area where we have to be careful is in the work that we do at the country level,
where we set, where we're developing new programs, and
we're actually trying to keep a sufficient amount of money of,
that we get from donors on a restricted basis for developing the kinds of programs
we've been talking about, let say, a weather index insurance program.
And let's say, Ethiopia might have, you know, a foundation supporting it.
Might have a major corporation like Swiss Re supporting it and
we would put in some unrestricted money and we would get that program going and
support it on a multi year basis.
And we'd have to make commitments that, that program based on the evaluations that
we've done, actually merits ongoing support going forward.
Some sense, we're social investor in the sense that we've gotta, we've gotta test
new ideas and if they're proving to be successful, continue to support them
modestly as we're doing proof of case and then look for more money for expansion.
But, in many cases, in that long-term development work we're assuming we're not
going to do the scale-up so just to take that weather index insurance program
we've taken that to the point where we've got proof of case in Ethiopia.
We've partnered with the World Food Program now, and
they're taking it to other areas of Ethiopia.
But they're also taking it to Mali and Senegal, and perhaps Zambia and Malawi
in the future in which we'll be providing a little bit of the technical support for
the implementation of it, but they're going to do the scale up.
So, we're not presuming that we're going to be the the big service provider
on the scale-up portion of that initiative.
So, that enables us to be very strategic in the way we're putting our money towards
those issues without necessarily assuming we need large tranches of money for
the scale-up.
In the advocacy area, I think we're presuming that it's a complement to our
field-based work, so we never imagined it being something that would dwarf our
long-term development work and on average it's been, probably a quarter,
in terms of scale of our, you know, our overall development work overseas.