# data[].attributes.body
https://www.cfr.org/interactives/global-conflict-tracker#!/conflict/refugee-crisis-in-the-european-unionhttps://www.cfr.org/interactives/global-conflict-tracker#!/conflict/refugee-crisis-in-the-european-union

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
About 1 out of every 10 public school students in the United States right now is learning to speak English. They're called ELLs, for "English Language Learners."

There are nearly 5 million of them, and educating them - in English and all the other subjects and skills they'll need - is one of the biggest challenges in U.S. public education today.

As part of our reporting project, 5 Million Voices, we set out to gather up all the data and information we could find about who these students are and how they're being taught. Here's our snapshot:

The vast majority - some 3.8 million ELL students - speak Spanish. But there are lots of other languages too, including Chinese (Cantonese and Mandarin), Arabic and Vietnamese.

Most ELLs were born in the United States, and are U.S. citizens.

The state with the most ELL students is California - which has 29 percent of all ELLs nationwide. Texas has 18 percent, followed by Florida with 5 percent and New York with 4 percent.

From 2000 to 2014, the growth of the ELL population was greatest in Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, North Carolina and South Carolina.

Based on the most recent data available, NPR found that no matter where they go to school, most ELLs are struggling because they have little or no access to quality instruction tailored to their needs. Although 90 percent of these kids are enrolled in designated ELL programs, at least one recent study argues that the quality of these programs is suspect.

Funding for ELL programs comes almost entirely from local and state sources. That's because federal education funding on average represents about 11 percent of what local school districts spend overall.

Still, the U.S. Education Department does focus on how ELLs are treated. The department's Office of Civil Rights has singled out 121 school districts in which not a single student is even enrolled in an ELL program. Overall, as many as half a million do not receive any special instruction to learn English.
Identifying ELL students
Identifying and screening ELLs is tricky. In most states, school districts use the simplest and lowest-cost method: a take-home survey. An overview of how the screening differs state-to-state can be found here.

In districts with large ELL populations, schools typically test students to determine how much English they speak, read and write. This allows teachers to pinpoint their needs.

Take, for example, a 12-year-old who still can't read in English. Rather than placing that student into a first- or second-grade class with much younger kids who are learning to read, that 12-year old is placed with her peers in sixth or seventh grade, but is pulled out for intense English instruction.

Another option is transitional bilingual instruction. In this model, a teacher who is fluent in both English and the student's native language builds on that child's language for at least 2-3 years. The goal is having the student become fluent in both English while retaining a native language.

A third option is "dual-language immersion," which requires that a classroom be made up of both ELLs and native English speakers. In this approach, all subjects are taught in two languages during the school day. English speakers learn a second language and ELLs learn English. The demand for dual language immersion has grown significantly in recent years.
Achievement
As a whole, English language learners still lag behind in terms of academic achievement.

Most are not making the transition to English quickly enough. Many ELLs remain stuck in academically segregated programs where they fall behind in basic subjects.

Only 63 percent of ELLs graduate from high school, compared with the overall national rate of 82 percent.

In New York State, for example, the overall high school graduation rate is about 78 percent. But for ELLs, it's 37 percent, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.

Of those who do graduate, only 1.4 percent take college entrance exams like the SAT and ACT.
Teacher shortages
ELLs are often concentrated in low-performing schools with untrained or poorly trained teachers. The shortage of teachers who can work with this population is a big problem in a growing number of states.
Gifted ELLs
Only 2 percent of ELLs are enrolled in gifted programs, compared with 7.3 percent of gifted non-ELL students.

According to the National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC), a gifted ELL student is likely to know much of the curriculum content on the very first day of school. But NAGC researchers have found that most gifted ELLs are not on anybody's radar.

Researchers say that, even when ELL students are identified as gifted, the impulse is often to keep them out of accelerated programs despite evidence that they would benefit from more challenging work while they're learning English.

In his book, Failing Our Brightest Kids: The Global Challenge of Educating High-Ability Students, Chester E. Finn Jr. argues that school policies for identifying gifted ELLs are inadequate. Finn, a former assistant secretary of education, says schools need to train teachers to be more like talent scouts, so that they can spot gifted ELLs.

Otherwise, says Finn, "We're losing talented kids from immigrant families who don't know their way around the American system."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
English Language Learners: How Your State Is Doing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The number of English language learners in public schools is nearing 5 million. Many are struggling academically, despite well-intentioned efforts to help them learn English.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9934/germany-rape-january

# data[].attributes.body
Services and treatment of refugees after arrival

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What is the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) and which agencies participate in it?

Every year, the United States provides opportunities to thousands of the world's most vulnerable refugees to resettle in the U.S., in a program endorsed by each President annually since 1980 through a Presidential Determination and notification to Congress. The U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) is in keeping with our proud history of being a nation of immigrants and refugees, and is an important, enduring demonstration of our commitment to international humanitarian principles.

The United States is the largest refugee resettlement country in the world, admitting approximately two-thirds of all refugee resettlement referrals worldwide each year.

The Department of State's Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) is committed to the effectiveness of the USRAP, and regularly assesses refugee populations worldwide to maintain the integrity of the program and to ensure that the program is responsive to the resettlement needs of the most vulnerable refugees.

While the Department of State manages the overall USRAP, multiple federal government agencies are involved in the refugee admissions and resettlement process, including the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), specifically U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS); and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), through the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR).

The USRAP has over thirty years of experience screening and admitting refugees. No traveler to the United States is subject to more rigorous security screening than the refugees the U.S. Government considers for admission. Only after the U.S. Government's rigorous and lengthy security screening process has been completed and an applicant is not found to pose a threat does the U.S. Government grant that individual refugee admission to the U.S. Security screening of all refugees involves multiple U.S. agencies, including the Departments of State, Homeland Security (DHS), and Defense, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, The National Counterterrorism Center, the Terrorist Screening Center, and two federal intelligence agencies.

Who exactly is eligible for refugee resettlement in the U.S.?

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is responsible for providing life-saving assistance to refugees around the world. Many of the world's refugees are unable to return home or permanently integrate into the country where they have sought refuge (known as the country of first asylum). For a small number, generally less than one percent, UNHCR identifies those refugees who are most in need of resettlement to a third country -- typically more developed countries, further from conflict regions, such as the United States.

UNHCR uses six criteria to determine if a refugee is an appropriate candidate for third country resettlement. For more information on UNHCR standards and criteria for determining resettlement as the appropriate solution for refugees, please refer to the UNHCR Resettlement Handbook, available online here.

Who are the "most vulnerable" refugees that the United States admits?

There is no standard profile. Vulnerability is assessed on a case by case basis, and is generally understood as individuals who are not able to safely and voluntarily return home, are not thriving in their country of first asylum, and are not expected to be able to locally integrate in that country in the future.

Extremely vulnerable individuals may include female-headed households, victims of torture or violence, religious minorities, LGBT refugees, or people who need medical care that they cannot receive in their country of origin or the country of first asylum.

How does the U.S. Government decide who qualifies for refugee status under this program and who doesn't?

The Department of Homeland Security has the authority to make this decision. Under U.S. law, a refugee must have a well-founded fear of persecution based on one of the five "protected grounds":

* Religion

* Political opinion

* Race

* Nationality

* Membership in a particular social group

Furthermore, a refugee must be deemed admissible to the U.S. and not be firmly resettled in a third country.

For a list of grounds that would disqualify a refugee from being admitted to the United States, please visit the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services website.

How does the USRAP work overseas? Can you provide an overview?

The USRAP is led by the Department of State and includes the major participation of DHS and HHS. Along with these three U.S. government agencies, the USRAP involves international organizations such as UNHCR and the International Organization for Migration (IOM), a number of nongovernmental refugee resettlement agencies, and U.S. states, cities, private citizens, religious organizations, and community groups. But only the U.S. Government - specifically DHS - has the authority to determine which refugees will ultimately be offered admission to the U.S.

In the vast majority of cases, the first step in refugee resettlement is a determination by UNHCR that a refugee is need of third country resettlement. U.S. embassies and certain NGOs are also qualified to refer cases to the USRAP, but the program receives very few from those two sources. A minority of refugees considered for resettlement in the U.S. enter our program through direct applications, often through family members who are already in the United States or through another U.S. affiliation.

Congressionally authorized direct application programs include a program for U.S.-affiliated Iraqis, which is operated in Baghdad, Jordan and Egypt and a program for Iranian religious minorities operated largely in Vienna. We also have a program for former Soviet Union religious minorities mostly operated in Moscow and a program in Havana for various categories of Cubans. As stated previously these cases represent a minority of all refugee applications, worldwide.

Regardless of the origin of the referral, once a case enters the USRAP, all cases are treated the same: case files are prepared by staff at one of nine Department of State-funded Resettlement Support Centers (RSCs) across the world. At each RSC, caseworkers interview the refugee and his or her family, take photos, check the facts in the file, collect initial information to begin the security clearance process, and collect other biographic information to be presented to a DHS officer.

While most other resettlement countries focus on a handful of populations in certain locations, the United States has a worldwide presence. RSCs are currently located in nine primary locations around the world, many of which have sub-offices in the surrounding region:

* Amman, Jordan with sub-offices in Baghdad, Iraq and Cairo, Egypt;

* Bangkok, Thailand with a sub-office in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia;

* Damak, Nepal;

* Havana, Cuba;

* Istanbul, Turkey with a sub-office in Beirut, Lebanon;

* Moscow, Russia with a sub-office in Kyiv, Ukraine;

* Nairobi, Kenya with a sub-office in Johannesburg, South Africa;

* Vienna, Austria; and

* Quito, Ecuador with small sub-offices in San Salvador, El Salvador and Tegucigalpa, Honduras.

Once case files are prepared at the RSC, the next step is the DHS interview, where officers from USCIS personally conduct extensive, in-depth interviews in the countries in which the refugees are located.

The DHS officer verifies the refugee's biographic information, takes fingerprints, and gathers details on the individual's history, refugee experience, and other information. The DHS officer uses all of that information to determine if the individual qualifies for refugee status under U.S. law and meets the criteria for resettlement in the United States.

Once this qualification has been established, refugees are subject to intensive security screening. All refugees undergo multiple, detailed security checks before being approved for U.S. admission. The Department of State and DHS work together to submit the refugee's information into a U.S.-based security screening process, which compares biometric information, personal data, and the refugee's application information against a wide array of U.S. government databases and terrorism watch lists, including from the FBI, Departments of Homeland Security, State, and Defense, as well as the National Counterterrorism Center as well as additional intelligence agencies.

Refugees are subject to the highest level of security checks of any category of traveler to the United States.

Additional information on refugee security screening is available here.

If approved, the applicant and his or her family undergo medical examinations to identify diseases of public health significance such as tuberculosis; these exams are standard for all immigrants seeking to reside permanently in the United States. Refugees are not allowed to travel to the United States until their medical checks have been performed and cleared. More information regarding the requirements for these examinations may be found at the website for the CDC.

Finally, refugees attend cultural orientation, which in most cases includes a three-day class providing information about customs and procedures in the United States and which helps the refugees understand what type of support they will receive from the resettlement agencies and their communities when they arrive. Cultural orientation also clarifies what the United States expects of the refugees, including their responsibility to find work, support themselves and their families, abide by the law and learn English.

What happens to refugees once they are admitted to the U.S.? Who works with them domestically?

Refugee travel is arranged on behalf of the U.S. Government by IOM. Before departing for the U.S., refugees sign a promissory note agreeing to repay the U.S. government for their travel costs. These loans are typically repaid within five years, and are an important step for refugees seeking to establish a credit history once they arrive in the United States. This repayment program is also one of the first steps that refugees take toward financial self-reliance, a key emphasis of the USRAP.

The State Department works with nine domestic nonprofit organizations to resettle refugees. These organizations have about 315 affiliates in 180 communities throughout the United States. Every year, each of these nine agencies and any new agencies that would like to be considered for participation in the program - it's an open, competitive process - submit proposals describing their capacity to resettle refugees. The proposals detail everything from staff capacity, the size of affiliate offices, foreign language capacity, what sorts of special needs cases (e.g. special educational, medical or other needs) they are able to work with, and a variety of other information.

Once this information is collected and following consultations with state officials, proposals are reviewed and the State Department determines an overall numerical placement plan by location. The placement of specific refugee families in specific communities, however, is determined by the Department of State and the resettlement organizations on a weekly basis. Every week, representatives from each of these nine organizations meet to review information on refugee families who have passed the DHS interview, security screening, and medical screening. A variety of factors are taken into account when deciding where to place specific refugees, but the most important factor for placement is if a refugee has relatives in a specific community (often refugees who have preceded them). If so, the refugee is likely to be resettled near those family members, because being resettled near family contributes greatly to a refugee's long term chance of success in the United States.

Resettlement organizations meet refugees at the airport and begin the process of helping them get resettled and acclimated in their new communities. Resettlement agencies are responsible for providing initial reception and placement services in the first 30 to 90 days after the refugees arrive, which includes finding safe and affordable housing and providing a variety of services to promote early self-sufficiency and cultural adjustment.

It is important to note that, once a refugee arrives in the United States, they are allowed to move freely within the United States. Like all other immigrants, refugees are not bound to remain in the state to which they are initially resettled, although the assistance to which they are entitled might not follow them to a new state.

The Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) also funds programs for which refugees are eligible up to five years after arrival. Thus, although the Department of State's role in the domestic resettlement is limited to the first 90 days, HHS/ORR funding comprises a critical component of support once those initial 90 days have expired.

How much time does the entire refugee resettlement process typically take?

Worldwide, the average processing time is about 18 to 24 months from UNHCR referring a refugee to the U.S. for consideration, through the U.S. Government's screening and processing of the applicant, to the U.S. Government granting admission to the refugee. But every case is different, and processing times vary.

Are there educational or language requirements for the refugees the U.S. Government considers for admission?

The USRAP has no requirements in terms of educational background, English language, or other education in order to consider an applicant for refugee admission to the U.S. The program focuses on providing durable solutions to the most vulnerable refugees. Once admitted to the U.S., the USRAP requires that refugee children attend school and the program strongly encourages refugees to learn English.

Where do the UNHCR and DHS interviews take place?

The UNHCR interviews and all pre-screening and DHS interviewing takes place in the foreign country to which a refugee has fled overseas.

How much does the resettlement program cost?

In FY 2016, the U.S. Department of State spent nearly $545 million on the USRAP, as authorized by the U.S. Congress.

Does the Department of State track refugees once they enter the U.S.?

While the Department of State requires that the resettlement agencies provide employment statistics at 90 days and the Department of Health and Human Services requires that the resettlement agencies provide information on refugees that are enrolled in certain programs, refugees have the same freedom to live or travel throughout the United States as any other lawful immigrant.

Do potential or current refugee resettlement communities have a say in where and whether refugees are resettled in their communities?

All resettlement agencies are required by State Department guidelines to consult quarterly with stakeholders in their communities. These stakeholders can include, but are not limited to: local law enforcement, emergency services and first responders, public schools, private citizens, and other agencies that have a stake in refugee resettlement. The content of these conversations is taken into account when the Department of State makes placement plans.

Can refugees' nuclear and/or extended family join them? Can refugees petition for other family members to join them after they arrive in the U.S.?

Generally a refugee "case" consists of the principal applicant, his or her spouse, and unmarried children under the age of 21. Additional relatives may be considered on a case by case basis.

Once a refugee arrives in the United States, a number of avenues exist to petition for other members of his or her immediate family. Under Priority Three (P-3) processing, a refugee or asylee who is at least 18 and been in the U.S. in refugee or asylee status for no more than five years can file an Affidavit of Relationship (AOR) for a spouse, parents, and unmarried children under the age of 21. This form must be submitted to the Department of State through a resettlement agency affiliate in the refugee's geographic area. This program is only open to designated nationalities, set by the Bureau in consultation with DHS/USCIS at the beginning of each fiscal year. DNA testing of refugees/asylees and certain family members overseas is a requirement of this program.

A refugee who has arrived in the United States, or a person granted asylum in the United States, can also file a Form I-730 (Visa 93) for a spouse and unmarried children under the age of 21. There are no restrictions on nationalities that can file this petition, but it must be filed with DHS/USCIS within two years of arrival in the United States. The Form I-730 may be downloaded from the USCIS website (www.uscis.gov) and can be submitted directly to DHS/USCIS without the aid of a resettlement agency. However, a refugee may consult with a resettlement agency in his/her geographic location for details about this program.

Lastly, a refugee has the option of filing a Form I-130 Petition for Alien Relative upon arrival in the United States. Only U.S. citizens or refugees with Legal Permanent Resident status are eligible to file this petition. Depending on their legal status in the U.S. applicants may apply on behalf of spouses, children, parents, and siblings. Please visit the DHS/USCIS website for eligibility requirements and filing instructions.

Do refugees automatically become U.S. citizens?

No. Refugees are admitted to the U.S. as refugees and remain in that status for 12 months. They are authorized and expected to work during this time. After 12 months, they are required to apply to adjust their status to Legal Permanent Resident (commonly known as a "green card holder").

Refugees can apply for citizenship after having been resident in the United States for five years, but this is not a requirement. Refugees are permitted to remain in the United States as Legal Permanent Residents.

Can you describe the security screening process in more detail?

Nothing is more important to us than the security of the American people. The United States remains deeply committed to safeguarding the American people, just as we are committed to providing refuge to the world's most vulnerable people. These goals are not mutually exclusive.

All refugees undergo the most intensive security screening of any traveler to the United States. This screening includes multiple federal intelligence, security, and law enforcement agencies, including the National Counterterrorism Center, the FBI Terrorist Screening Center, and the Departments of Homeland Security, State, and Defense. Syrian refugees go through yet additional forms of security screening. A refugee applicant cannot be approved for travel until all required security checks have been completed and cleared.

The U.S. Government has a great deal of experience screening and admitting large numbers of refugees from chaotic environments, including where intelligence holdings are limited.

The Department of Homeland Security has full discretion to deny admission before a refugee comes to the United States. When in doubt, DHS denies applications on national security grounds and the individual never travels to the United States. DHS' decisions are guided by the key principle affirmed throughout the U.S. Government that the safety and security of the American people must come first. The U.S. Government has the sole authority to screen and decide which refugees are admitted to the United States.

In performing this security screening, all available biographical and biometric information is vetted against a broad array of law enforcement, intelligence community, and other relevant databases to help confirm a refugee's identity, check for any criminal or other derogatory information, and identify information that could inform lines of questioning during the interview. DHS conducts extensive in-person, overseas interviews of all refugee applicants. Biographic checks against the State Department's Consular Lookout and Support System, known as CLASS, which includes watch list information, are initiated at the time of a prescreening at the RSCs.

In addition, the State Department requests security advisory opinions from the law enforcement and intelligence communities for those cases meeting certain criteria. Biometric checks are coordinated by USCIS using mobile fingerprint equipment and photographs at the time of the interview. These fingerprints are screened against the vast biometric holdings of the FBI, the integrated automatic -Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS), and screened and enrolled in DHS's Automated Biometric Identification System, which is known as IDENT.

Through IDENT, applicant fingerprints are screened not only against watch list information, but also for previous immigration encounters in the United States and overseas, including cases in which the applicant previously applied for a visa at a U.S. embassy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) and which agencies participate in it? Every year, the United States provides opportunities to thousands of the world's most vulnerable refugees to resettle in the U.S., in a program endorsed by each President annually since 1980 through a Presidential Determination and notification to Congress.

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.unhcr.org/4a1d5ba36.pdfhttp://www.unhcr.org/4a1d5ba36.pdf

# data[].attributes.headline
A Road Map for Integrating Europe's Refugees

# data[].attributes.subject
A Road Map for Integrating Europe's Refugees

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/employment-and-growth/a-road-map-for-integrating-europes-refugees

# data[].attributes.body
http://dailysignal.com/2017/03/08/assimilation-not-integration-prevents-young-immigrants-from-turning-to-terrorism/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tax Benefits of Giving : Charity Navigator

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Charity Navigator works to guide intelligent giving. We help charitable givers make intelligent giving decisions by providing information on more than 1,100 charities and by evaluating the financial health of each of these charities.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/future-development/2016/07/25/how-to-defeat-terrorism-intelligence-integration-and-development/

# data[].attributes.headline
UN  Members States advances to  the Work Capital Fund

# data[].attributes.subject
UN  Members States advances to  the Work Capital Fund

# data[].attributes.body
http://teachnorthkoreanrefugees.org/

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.texasobserver.org/the-strangers-next-door-amarillo-refugees/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
State Department staffers have been instructed to seek cuts in excess of 50 percent in U.S. funding for U.N. programs, signaling an unprecedented retreat by President Donald Trump's administration from international operations that keep the peace, provide vaccines for children, monitor rogue nuclear weapons programs, and promote peace talks from Syria to Yemen, according to three sources.

The push for such draconian measures comes as the White House is scheduled on Thursday to release its 2018 budget proposal, which is expected to include cuts of up to 37 percent for spending on the State Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and other foreign assistance programs, including the U.N., in next year's budget. The United States spends about $10 billion a year on the United Nations.

It remains unclear whether the full extent of the steeper U.N. cuts will be reflected in the 2018 budget, which will be prepared by the White House Office of Management and Budget, or whether, as Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has proposed, the cuts would be phased in over the coming three years. One official close to the Trump administration said Tillerson has been given flexibility to decide how the cuts would be distributed.

On March 9 in New York, U.S. diplomats in a closed-door meeting warned key U.N. members, including wealthy donors from Europe, Japan, and South Korea, to "expect a big financial constraint" on U.S. spending at the United Nations, said one European diplomat. "There are rumors of big cuts to the State Department budget, but again, on our side, no figures," the diplomat said.

The cuts would fall heaviest on U.N. programs, like peacekeeping, UNICEF, and the U.N. Development Programme, that are funded out of the budget of the State Department's Bureau of International Organization Affairs. It remains to be seen whether other U.N. agencies popular with Congress, like the World Food Programme and U.N. refugee operations - which are funded out of separate accounts in the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the State Department, respectively - will get hit as hard. But one source tracking the budget proposal said the Trump administration is considering cuts of up to 36 percent on humanitarian aid programs.

Richard Gowan, a U.N. expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said cuts of this magnitude would create "chaos."

The U.N. refugee agency (UNHCR) received $1.5 billion of its $4 billion budget from the United States last year, he said. Cutting the U.S. contribution would "leave a gaping hole that other big donors would struggle to fill."

"Multiply that across other humanitarian agencies, like the World Food Programme, and you are basically talking about the breakdown of the international humanitarian system as we know it," he added.

The budget proposal reinforces a shift by the Trump administration from U.S. support for diplomacy and foreign assistance to increased financial support for the U.S. military. Late last month, the Trump administration argued that the proposed cuts in the budgets for the State Department, USAID, and other foreign assistance programs, including contributions to the U.N., would help offset a projected $54 billion increase in defense spending.

Those cuts, it now appears, are likely to fall disproportionately on the United Nations, which has less of a constituency in Washington than does the State Department.

U.S. officials in Washington and New York learned during the past week that they will be asked to find ways to cut spending on obligatory and voluntary U.N. programs by 50 to 60 percent from the International Organization Affairs Bureau's account. State Department officials, for instance, were told that they should try to identify up to $1 billion in cuts in the U.N. peacekeeping budget, according to one source. The United States provides about $2.5 billion per year to fund peacekeepers.

The reductions in diplomacy and foreign assistance represent a blow to Tillerson and Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, who repeatedly cautioned against " slash-and-burn cuts " during her Senate confirmation hearing.

Haley has already been undertaking a review of the U.N.'s 16 peacekeeping missions to see if she can find room for cuts. She has previously expressed concern about the value of the U.N. Mission in South Sudan, which lacks government support. The United States could end missions by not extending their mandate when they come up for renewal or could negotiate savings in budget talks scheduled for May and June.

Trump's budget plans are encountering strong head wind in Congress, where Democratic and Republican leaders have voiced concerns about imposing steep cuts in the State Department budget. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the president's budget is "probably not" going to be passed.

Peter Yeo, the president of the Better World Campaign, a U.N. advocacy group in Washington, said the budget is only an early salvo in what is likely to turn out to be a long, drawn-out battle.

"[Congress] is unlikely to go along with these strong and disproportionate cuts," he said. "This is only chapter two in a very long book."

The United States has to pay just over 22 percent of the U.N.'s $2.5 billion administrative budget. Additionally, Washington pays billions of dollars for peacekeepers and helps underwrite a swath of other programs that fight hunger, settle refugees, and battle climate change.

Brett Schaefer, a U.N. expert at the Heritage Foundation, said it would be a "hard stretch" to achieve cuts of more than 50 percent in peacekeeping costs. But he said several U.N. missions, including long-standing operations in Liberia, Ivory Coast, and Haiti, are already winding down, raising the prospect of significant cost savings.

And other troubled missions in the Democratic Republic of the Congo; South Sudan; and Darfur, Sudan, might be downsized. Two members of a U.N. panel investigating sanctions violations in Congo - Michael Sharp of the United States and Zaida Catalan of Sweden - were abducted near the village of Ngombe in Kasai-Central province, the Congolese government said Monday. Four Congolese nationals accompanying them on the trip were also kidnapped.

"Is Darfur still necessary in the way it is currently configured, or is it an opportunity to negotiate with Sudan to have a smaller mission?" Schaefer asked.

U.N. diplomats and foreign dignitaries say they expect the United States to seek to eliminate funding for some agencies unpopular with conservatives - including the U.N. Population Fund, which receives about $35 million a year from the United States for family planning programs, and the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change.

The U.N. Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which provides aid to Palestinian refugees, has long been the target of Israeli and congressional criticism on the grounds that it has a pro-Palestinian bias. But one diplomat said UNRWA might be spared because it relieves Israel of the obligation to care for some Palestinians and because Israel sees the program as ultimately promoting stability.

The United States has broad discretion to cut voluntary funds to humanitarian agencies, including the World Food Programme and UNICEF. But those programs are popular among Democrats and Republicans, and any move to slash funding could undermine Washington's case for leading those agencies.

If Washington fails to honor its funding commitments to the U.N.'s regular budget, which is obligatory, it could lose its voting rights in the General Assembly. U.N.-based diplomats say it is unlikely that other foreign donors would fill the entire gap in the event of massive U.S. cuts. For instance, European powers, including Germany, may step up funding to address the Syrian crisis, which has sent massive waves of refugees across European borders, but they are not likely to muster the funds to match American funding on a range of other programs, including international development and peacekeeping.

Anticipating cuts to family planning programs, Dutch Development Minister Lilianne Ploumen recently established a fund to solicit contributions to institutions that have faced a cutoff of U.S. assistance because they perform abortions.

But sub-Saharan Africa has plenty of crises that could only get worse if the United States throttles back its financial support. Bathsheba Crocker, who served as assistant secretary of state for international organization affairs during former President Barack Obama's administration, said steep cuts in the U.S. voluntary funding account could imperil programs responding to major humanitarian calamities, dealing with political crises, and combating terrorists.

"We have U.N. warnings of famine in four countries," she said, referring to food crises in Nigeria, Somalia, South Sudan, and Yemen. "It is only the U.N. agencies that have the scale and ability to get in and address these challenges."

Meanwhile, a major U.N. peacekeeping mission in Mali is "helping with the counterterrorism threats in the region. This is deeply in the national security interest of the United States," Crocker said.

Photo credit: ANDREW BURTON/Getty Images

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
White House Seeks to Cut Billions in Funding for United Nations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
State Department staffers have been instructed to seek cuts in excess of 50 percent in U.S. funding for U.N. programs, signaling an unprecedented retreat by President Donald Trump's administration from international operations that keep the peace, provide vaccines for children, monitor rogue nuclear weapons programs, and promote peace talks from Syria to Yemen, according to three sources.

# data[].attributes.headline
"U.S. funding for the United Nations may not be as costly as you think"

# data[].attributes.subject
"U.S. funding for the United Nations may not be as costly as you think"

# data[].attributes.body
A look at federal spending in regards to the UN (both obligatory and voluntary spending)

# data[].attributes.body
Summary of their key findings - problems and troubleshooting cities have faced since refugee crisis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The role of cities as first points of arrival, transit hubs and ultimate destinations is well established and widely acknowledged by institutions and stakeholders at national and European level. The EUROCITIES May 2015 statement on asylum (bit.ly/20X1h9u) details the role played by cities, the challenges they face, the solutions they can deliver, and their recommendations to national and EU institutions. This report showcases the practical implications of the work that cities do in receiving and integrating refugees.

Key findings

Cities have shown strong leadership and the ability to coordinate different city services and external stakeholders, sometimes in the absence of a national response.

The public response in cities has been mostly positive, with civil society mobilising to support local administrations' efforts. Nevertheless, there are some concerns about rising tensions among the local population towards refugees, and issues of public order caused mainly by far right-wing protests.

Providing affordable housing for refugees is extremely challenging for local authorities, and cities are working hard to ensure fair living conditions. Organisations working with refugees have criticised housing conditions and lengthy application procedures for asylum seekers.

The capacity of city authorities to deal with refugees is heavily dependent of the fact that asylum policy is a responsibility of national governments, with local authorities often given little room for manoeuvre. Many cities have nevertheless effectively taken over from national authorities to set up reception measures.

Many cities are opting for open and transparent communication with their populations on the reality of the situation.

Promoting fast-track inclusion of newly arrived children into the education system is a priority for many city authorities, who recognise the importance of education for medium to long term integration.

Many cities are forced to operate in the context of budget cuts and recruitment freezes. In addition, current EU state aid rules make public support for affordable housing more difficult. This has a negative impact on policies intended to promote a social mix and increases the risk of ghettoisation.

Cities with a tradition of strong and well-funded public services are better placed to cope with this exceptional situation.

Some cities are increasing their own spending to address the refugee situation by recruiting additional staff and enhancing the provision of services such as language courses. They consider this to be an investment in the future with the potential boost to the local economy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
EUROCITIES Report - Refugee reception and integration in cities - FUTURIUM - European Commission

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The role of cities as first points of arrival, transit hubs and ultimate destinations is well established and widely acknowledged by institutions and stakeholders at national and European level. The EUROCITIES May 2015 statement on asylum (bit.ly/20X1h9u) details the role played by cities, the challenges they face, the solutions they can deliver, and their recommendations to national and EU institutions.

# data[].attributes.body
Case studies of 8 cities. Looks at "good practices among the selected cities as well as gaps in intervention"

# data[].attributes.body
With examples by country

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
10 ways countries can help refugees integrate

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Europe would do well to ensure refugees are best able to integrate - not only out of compassion, but also to enable them to contribute to their new host countries - as workers, as tax-payers and as consumers.