MR: Well, for starters, we offer two ways to give: we have a standard donor-advised fund program, and we also allow people to simply make a gift to support an approved project. We don't insist on donor-advised fund minimums; if you want to give $10,000, we'll grant out $10,000, minus our fee. It's a value-added service, in our view, because of the due diligence we do, and we're finding that lots of different grantmakers and donors agree.

That's an important point. We're not just serving donors who are donating new assets. We're serving donors at community foundations, we're serving donors with donor-advised funds at Fidelity and Schwab, we're helping family foundations that don't have the capacity to do due diligence on grants to Asia, we're helping corporations with employee-giving programs that send money overseas, we're helping trusts.

Now, in terms of grant services, we offer several ways for people to support their favorite causes across Asia. The first is donor-designated. A donor comes in and recommends a grant to a specific project or institution in Asia. We do the due diligence and vet the grantee, our board approves the grant, we sign a grant agreement with the grantee, wire-transfer the funds, and confirm that the funds have been received. Then, a year later, we require follow-up program and financial reports. In that kind of situation, we're providing basic grantmaking services for people who know exactly what and to whom they want to give. We control the process and exercise our discretion — on occasion, we'll even reject grantees who have not passed our due-diligence checks.

We also have donors that come to us for our second service, which is custom program development. For example, a donor might come to us and say, "I have $100,000 that I want to use to help improve the health of children in Pakistan. What can I do?" They don't know which organizations are doing good work, which ones are well run but in need of funds, or what the latest information on the security situation there is, so they come to us. And, of course, we're able to provide them with a range of options.

PND: Is there a minimum grant amount below which it doesn't make sense for you to provide that kind of assistance?

MR: Our minimum for donor-designated grantmaking is $5,000. And we charge certain fees on top of that. The basic fee for a donor-designated grant is 5 percent. It can be less or more, depending on the size of the grant, the level of due diligence required to make the grant, our familiarity with the grantee, and so on.

As I mentioned, donors can also choose to fund programs that already exist. To facilitate that kind of giving, we've started a project called Greatest Needs. Basically, it's a catalog of projects in countries where the Asia Foundation operates that includes short descriptions of individual projects, their stated goals, and their budgets. What it does is allow us to complement our largely donor-driven services with a set of expert-identified projects that gives donors a range of ideas as to what is possible or needs funding.

PND: And the second part of your philosophy?

MR: The second part has to do with being the best grantmakers we can be. One of the rationales for our existence is that international grantmaking is difficult, especially in places like Afghanistan, the Philippines, India, Pakistan. Obviously, since 9/11, it has become even more difficult. One of things we bring to the table is that we have staff on the ground locally; we have people who speak Hindi, or Pashtun, or Chinese, or Khmer; we have well-established procedures in place, both upfront in terms of due diligence and on the back end in terms of monitoring and reporting.

PND: As you know, it's very difficult for grassroots groups in developing countries to get the attention of U.S.-based grantmakers. Other than the Greatest Needs catalog, is your organization doing anything to improve the flow of information between the philanthropic community in the States and small, grassroots groups in developing countries?

MR: We get asked that a lot, and the answer is yes and no. We're very focused on our strategy and branding at the moment. We're a fairly young organization — we were incorporated in 2000 and launched in September 2001, and we're still working on developing our services and building a community of donors. But we would love to add a clearinghouse aspect to our work, for both grantseekers and funders. Of course, there are already vehicles like that out there. Global Giving, based in Washington, D.C., is one; it's a kind of online marketplace where grassroots groups in developing countries can upload a description of their projects, and potential donors and funders can browse and choose a project that meets their interests and requirements.

The "yes" part is that while we won't actually go out and fundraise for groups, we can provide the fiscal sponsorship and basic back-office services they need to work with U.S. funders. Our experience has been that, as much as donors want to give, grantees want to get, and many of them, including some of the educational institutions we work with, have alumni groups or networks in North America that they'd like to tap into without going through the hassle and expense of setting up a separate nonprofit or "friends of" organization. So they come to us.

Along those lines, we've established Give2Asia/Canada to meet the growing demand from Asian émigrés living in Toronto, Vancouver, and other Canadian cities. And, looking at the other side of the equation, we're exploring ways to provide technical assistance and training services to Asia-based charitable organizations that are new to fundraising in the U.S. and Canada.

PND: In terms of due diligence, what, if anything, new have you had to do as a result of the voluntary guidelines for international grantmakers issued by the Treasury Department?

MR: Actually, we found that we didn't have to do too much more than we already were. We had a comprehensive due-diligence process in place before the guidelines were issued and checked every grantee against a fairly long list of things. But we did take extra steps to bolster the process, including implementing automatic database checks against the various so-called terrorist watch lists published by the government. We also modified our grant agreement. But again, we already were extremely thorough and didn't have to significantly revise the process. The credit for that should go to staff on the ground in the countries in which we work; they know the terrain, they speak the local language, and they really know the local organizations.

PND: Have you had to drop any grantees since the guidelines were issued?

MR: No, we haven't. From the outset, we've been very careful about due diligence, so while the new guidelines provided important guidance, we already had a secure process in place and a group of excellent, qualified grantees. Another reason is that in countries like Afghanistan, countries where the risk for grantmakers is highest, donors often ask us for grantee suggestions, rather than suggesting grantees themselves. And, of course, that allows our staff to identify grantees from the groups we completely know and trust.

PND: Well, let's talk about your work in Afghanistan. How long has Give2Asia been in Afghanistan and what kind of projects have you funded there?

MR: Well, as I mentioned, Give2Asia was launched in September of 2001 — on September 20, actually, just a week or so after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. And almost immediately, the philanthropic community in the Bay Area and around the country made it clear to us that it was very interested in Afghanistan. In fact, right after the start of the war in Afghanistan, we received funds from the Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund, in San Francisco, to support two programs there. The first was run by the Agency Coordinating Body for Afghan Relief, or ACBAR, which had been created to play an important coordinating role with respect to humanitarian assistance provided by nonprofits and NGOs. And the second program was run by an Afghan NGO called PARSA, which provided education and vocational training to Afghan girls.

Since 2001, we've found that donors interested in Afghanistan tend to gravitate toward two kinds of projects, health and education. For example, our biggest project in Afghanistan right now is a health clinic. It's about an hour or so north of Kabul and is a great story — and not just because it's an interesting case study in transnational philanthropy.

It begins with a Japanese woman from a town near Osaka who was watching news coverage of the war, saw the suffering of the Afghan people, and asked her financial advisor how she could help. The financial advisor bounced it back to her people in New York, who knew we had an office in Afghanistan. Long story short, we eventually received a sizable amount of money from her and, at her request, got together with a local NGO called the Afghan Institute of Learning, which we were already working with, to build a clinic from scratch in a poor community north of Kabul.

The clinic itself actually started out as a modest affair, but then the Ministry of Public Health got involved and it ended up being a six-room, concrete facility. Our Japanese donor provided additional funds to pay for the upgrade. The clinic took about eight months to build, has an annual budget of roughly $200,000, and is staffed by two doctors, two nurses, a dentist and a health educator, who see about a hundred and twenty-five patients a day. A lot of people I talk to think that's a great value.

One of the things I love about this particular story is how committed our Japanese donor was to not only doing it, but doing it in a way that leveraged the capacity of our people on the ground in Afghanistan. She's not getting a tax deduction for her donations, which she would if she were donating assets held in the States; in fact, she's paying a premium to move her own personal funds from Japan to the U.S., and then on to Afghanistan. But it's precisely our ability to tailor a program, to oversee it and provide the due diligence and stewardship she wants, that has made this a compelling project for her. Needless to say, she's delighted with the clinic, and so are we.

PND: Do small projects like a clinic really have an impact on the quality of life in a country as poor and politically divided as Afghanistan?

MR: Absolutely. I haven't visited the clinic personally, so I can't give you a colorful anecdote based on firsthand experience. But I can say that, previously, the community in question was served by a poorly staffed facility that didn't have enough money for basic medicines; clinic staff would have to ask patients to go to the market to purchase their own medicines. Then our donor got involved, and before you know it the community had a clinic that not only could afford to buy medicine, it was immunizing children and dispensing good natal care to pregnant women and even was able to purchase a combination van/ambulance that could be used to bring doctors and supplies to some of the outlying villages in the area. So, the answer to your question is, yes, they make both a qualitative and quantitative difference.

PND: Do you have a success story in the area of education you can share?

MR: One of the projects we've been working on is a day care center at Kabul University. Actually, it's a good story because it involves not just one donor, but almost two hundred donors who pooled their funds at the instigation of an Afghan-American professor at Cal State-San Luis Obispo by the name of Maliha Zulfacar who has connections in the Afghan ministry of higher education and travels to and from Kabul quite frequently. The availability of day care is something most of us in America take for granted, but it's unusual in Afghanistan. This was a grassroots initiative that got its start among faculty members and students, mostly women, at Kabul University. These women wanted a chance to continue to teach or study after they had children, and Maliha and hundreds of other donors from the Cal Poly community came together to make that a reality.

PND: How difficult is it to measure the effectiveness of your work in a country like Afghanistan?

MR: We keep our metrics and evaluation fairly straightforward. It's hard to do anything on scale in a country like Afghanistan, and since all of our projects are donor-driven, our focus is on impact, sustainability, and how funds are being used. One of the big concerns we all have in a post-9/11 world is how funds are being used, and simply getting a financial report that actually means something is often a big issue. But additional project evaluation is possible if requested by the donor.

PND: When you talk about measuring impact, what kinds of things do you look for?

MR: Well, we look for a sound proposal up front, we look for sound management once the project is under way, and we look for demonstrated results. Now, in the case of something like the clinic, it's relatively easy to demonstrate impact. In addition to having Asia Foundation staff on the ground who visit from time to time, we have the Afghan Ministry of Public Health on board, and they're starting to get to know the doctors there. And as we get to know the doctors better, we are learning, through their own records and reports, exactly how many patients are being seen, what they are being treated for, the outcome of that treatment, and so on. So we know the clinic is having a significant impact in that community.

PND: And in terms of sustainability?

MR: For most of our projects, we need to have some sort of sustainability plan before we will commit funds. In the case of the clinic, we knew the Afghan Institute of Learning and its executive director, having worked with them before, and we knew they were proven fundraisers. They also had an established track record with other projects. So we were pretty confident they'd be around to oversee the project for years to come. We're also starting to see a few new projects that have sustainability plans based on fees and earned income. One great example of this is a vocational training and retail sales project proposed by an excellent NGO we've supported in Baghlan.

PND: Is your work in Afghanistan supported by the Afghan people?

MR: Absolutely. The clinic is a perfect example. That project wasn't about a big NGO parachuting in and building a clinic because it wanted to build a clinic; the idea for it was generated by the local community and communicated to the Afghan Institute of Learning. One resident of the town donated the land on which it was built, and other residents along the main thoroughfare leading to the clinic donated pieces of their property so the road could be widened to accommodate the new van/ambulance. It wasn't just donor and grantee; it was very much a community effort.

PND: Tell us about the security situation. Are you able to do projects outside of Kabul?

MR: We do work outside of Kabul, but our ability to do so is very much dependent on the security situation at any given moment, and that changes constantly. As I've said, our grants in Afghanistan are facilitated by the Asia Foundation, which itself has several projects outside of Kabul, and foundation staff are very careful in assessing the level of risk in various areas. The clinic we funded is a bit north of Kabul, and to our knowledge has not had any security problems, although security for the clinic itself is a line item in the budget.

PND: Has the security situation improved or deteriorated over the last year?

MR: That kind of question is difficult for me to answer from my post in San Francisco. But my sense is that the situation is still dangerous. I hope that the relative calm surrounding the presidential election earlier this month will contribute to increased stability. But that's a big, optimistic "if."

PND: Is it difficult to recruit people to work in Afghanistan?

MR: Well, we have the wonderful benefit of working closely with the Asia Foundation, which had an office in Kabul for twenty-five years and which recently reopened that office. They're very familiar with the country and have been able to recruit consultants and advisors to live and work there. It's a hardship post, certainly, and a dangerous one at that, but we do have staff on the ground there, and they do absolutely incredible work.

PND: Earlier this year, an op-ed in the New York Times suggested that one of the obstacles to success the international community faces in Afghanistan is a lack of local capacity. Are there enough native-born teachers, doctors, and engineers in Afghanistan to run all the projects that international development agencies are trying to get off the ground there?

MR: That's a question that John Summers, the head of the Asia Foundation office in Kabul, is in a better position to answer than I am. I would only say that many of our grantees are very focused on capacity building. For example, the Afghan Institute of Learning is conducting teacher trainings as a way of ensuring there'll be enough qualified teachers to staff the schools they plan to build over the next few years. They're also working to train healthcare workers. And ACBAR has initiated training programs for NGO professionals. So local capacity is being developed, and we're involved in the process.

PND: Is the Afghan expatriate community in the States optimistic or pessimistic about the future of Afghanistan?

MR: Well, our prime contact is Professor Zulfacar at Cal Poly, and she's extremely hopeful and committed. She's involved in a lot of different projects, and I think she feels things are moving in the right direction. What, if anything, the elections change, and how the country and its prospects are viewed by those abroad, is something all of us in the international development community will be paying attention to.

PND: What is at stake for the international community in Afghanistan?

MR: I think Afghanistan, along with Iraq, poses great challenges for the international community. And the key issues, from my perspective, have to do with long-term commitment and resources. There is a real possibility for a very positive outcome in Afghanistan. But it depends on many factors. Certainly, local leadership and political dynamics are chief among them. But there's also a vital role for the international community in terms of supporting positive change, whether it be providing technical assistance to the Afghan government, humanitarian aid to communities in need, or economic assistance to help revitalize Afghanistan's devastated economy. There is great need everywhere you go in Afghanistan, and without steadfast, long-term political and financial support from the international community, any progress we have made there to date is at risk. We at Give2Asia are privileged to be able to help international donors contribute to the reconstruction of Afghanistan, and we hope that they'll stay committed to the cause.

PND: If you could give three things to the Afghan people, what would they be?

MR: Well, first, a sense of security and stability. It's incredibly difficult to rebuild and work toward a better future if you're constantly worried about violence. So stability would be first.

The second, as I just noted, would be a continued commitment from the international community. This surely will be challenging, especially in light of large federal deficits as far as the eye can see, an uncertain economic recovery, donor fatigue, and there being no shortage of worthy new causes to support. But I hope that America and its citizens will be there for Afghanistan for years to come. We have the means, and a small amount of our wealth can go a very long way there.

And I guess the third thing is related to the other two: I wish the Afghan people could have all the clinics and all the schools they need. I don't know if anyone has put a number or price tag on that, but seeing the impact a single clinic or vocational training program can have underscores just how fundamental education and basic healthcare are to everything Afghanistan and Afghans hope to accomplish.

PND: And what one or two things would you want our readers to understand about Give2Asia in general, and your work in Afghanistan specifically?

MR: That we can help people who are interested in helping Afghans and Afghanistan; that we have established a secure, effective grantmaking model in a difficult place and are having great results; and that a dollar goes a long way, not just in Afghanistan, but in developing countries throughout Asia. To build, provision, and staff a modern clinic for $200,000 is not only amazing, it's a great investment.

I would say the same for Give2Asia, which has arrived at a very exciting juncture. We're four years old, and we've learned a great deal since our launch. We've doubled our results every year and facilitated $6.4 million in giving for donors in our last fiscal year, on an operating budget of about one-tenth that amount. We think we're filling a critical niche by reducing barriers to giving overseas and making it easier for donors to support the causes they care most about. And we look forward to continuing to connect donors and grantees who are committed to making a difference in Asia's future.

PND: Well, thanks for your time, Mike.

MR: Thank you.

Mitch Nauffts, PND's editorial director, spoke with Mike Rea earlier this year and again after the recent presidential election in Afghanistan. For more information on the Newsmakers series, contact Mitch at mfn@fdncenter.org.