International relief and development organizations are faced with an unprecedented set of restrictions on their humanitarian service-related advocacy from the lead US international development agency, accompanied by renewed criticism of their increasingly recognized influence in global policymaking. On May 27, 2003, five non-governmental organizations (NGOs) were awarded a total of $7 million under the Iraq Community Action Program administered by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Agricultural Cooperative Development International & Volunteers in Overseas Cooperative Assistance (ACDI/VOCA), Cooperative Housing Foundation International, International Relief and Development, Inc., Mercy Corps, and Save the Children/US were selected to promote "diverse and representative citizen participation in and among communities throughout Iraq," and to identify, prioritize, and delivery "critical reconstruction and development needs." Left out of the official announcement was a condition that each grantee agree to clear any and all publicity or media-related matters tied to their funded-activities through USAID first, and to repeatedly and consistently publicize the U.S. government's funding of their efforts throughout each phase of their on-the-ground service delivery, reflecting the Administration's belief that recipients of federal grants are agents of the U.S. government and its policies. This philosophy was most clearly articulated the week before the Iraq CAP grantee selection by Andrew Natsios, head of USAID, at the annual member forum for InterAction, a coalition of 160 international development and relief organizations. On May 21, 2003 Natsios, former head of InterAction member World Vision (which, ironically, chose not to apply for Iraq relief funding under the CAP initiative), expressed his "irritation" that those served by US-funded humanitarian assistance do not understand or acknowledge the scope of government activity, and that the blame rests, in large part, with American NGOs that do not actively promote the beneficence of the federal government. He added that if a concerted effort were not made by NGOs to promote themselves and their work as an extension of US foreign policy, he would, "personally tear up their contracts and find new partners... [NGOs] are an arm of the U.S. government." As of this writing, two of the five recipients (ACDI/VOCA and International Relief and Development) agreed to the publicity clause. Mercy Crops and Save the Children are still in the process of negotiating clause language and considering whether or not to receive the funds. Coincidentally, a new effort to monitor the growing power and influence of NGOs engaged in multi-national activities and global governance activities, was formally launched on June 11. NGOWatch.org, sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute and the Federalist Society, aims to track the "unprecedented growth in the power and influence of [NGOs]," and to increase the level of accountability and promote transparency within the sector. According to the organizers of the AEI-sponsored research symposium at which the site was announced, NGOs are mostly front groups for "liberal" ideology and anti-corporate activities. Further, their participation in global decision making forums, including the United Nations and World Trade Organization, puts them in the de facto role of decision makers themselves, raising concerns as to their power over the sovereignty of other nations-- including the U.S. Their power, moreover, is growing in a framework without any system of accountability to any actors other than their funders and backers. NGOWATCH's primary goal is to provide increased scrutiny of groups, particularly those operating under the supposed "guise" of humanitarian assistance. It reflects a belief that NGOs are suddenly proliferating to an alarming degree in developing and developed nations, with a level of influence and visibility that extends far beyond their grassroots origins and organizational missions. Though currently available only in preview form, the site will include background and reference resources on a list of groups, with links to their financial reports, and discussion on sector-related trends in this area. As of this writing, neither AEI nor the Federalist Society-- both influential conservative nonprofits with a proven track record of ties to the Administration, Congress, and the courts-- are included on the proposed list of organizations to watch.