The average American thinks the US is an (almost) unlimited ATM for foreign countries--as if Nepal or South Sudan could just show up to their local US ATM, punch in their pin, get a fresh billion, burn through that billion on hospitals, schools, a few slices of pizza and then get another fresh billion.

But it’s not that easy--the money available is not that profuse and comes with strings attached. Plus, what is available is tightly disbursed in ways that don’t always make sense.

The annual US budget is about $4 trillion. According to a poll conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation, the average American thinks 26 percent, or more than a trillion, goes to foreign aid.

And 56 percent of respondents think that whatever the US is actually spending on foreign aid, it’s too much. (The myth that foreign aid is ineffective tends to fuel this perception.)

In reality, less than 1 percent of the US budget goes to foreign aid, and of that, only 30 percent goes to the least developed countries in the world.

Think about that for a moment. The fight against extreme poverty can’t succeed if it becomes a secondary priority among the global powers: which is essentially what 30 percent of less than 1 percent communicates. 

Why the US should reprioritize

The world’s Least Developed countries, or LDCs, need the most help developing.

LDCs rarely have the societal structures in place--stable government, functioning judicial system, solid infrastructure, etc.--that attract foreign investment.

Middle income countries, the primary beneficiaries of US aid, often do have systems in place to attract investors.

When private investment arrives, dependence on aid from foreign governments eases and a country is more likely to enter a virtuous cycle of growth: as the country stabilizes, more money arrives, the country stabilizes further, more money arrives and so on.

LDCs depend on outside government assistance to establish the foundation necessary to enter into positive cycles of growth in the first place. The aid helps create the conditions that enable a break from poverty.  

Foreign aid also allows LDCs to raise their own revenue. When a stronger, more accountable government develops, more taxes can be collected and a country can take steps toward economic independence. 

In cliched terms, you have to spend money to make money.

Looked at from this light, LDCs should be receiving more funds--at least 50 percent of US government aid--because they need to be lifted to an economic level that will attract business.

The imbalance of spending more on middle income countries rather than LDCs isn’t unique to the US. Global outside development assistance (a fancy term for what most call “foreign aid”) to LDCs dropped by 6.7 billion USD in 2014, or $128 million every week.

The percentage of overall ODA that went to LDCs has also tapered from 2013 levels.

So if not LDCs, where does the US spend its foreign aid?

Some spending categories such as emergency aid and military assistance aren’t factored into standard foreign aid, but these sums grow quite large.

So the Ebola epidemic in western Africa and aid to Iraq following ISIS’s invasion (and, <cough> the US military's presence) aren’t strictly included in the budget.

1) Keeping that in mind, health is the largest area for US foreign aid, with relevant programs receiving $5.3 billion USD in 2013.

These funds focus mostly on HIV/AIDS, maternal and child healthcare and malaria.

2) Next, economic development--building roads, improving internet access, expanding electricity--commands $2.7 billion USD.

3) Humanitarian assistance for helping refugees and those affected by disasters is the third biggest component.

I know what you’re thinking--aren’t all of these issues central to extreme poverty? And you’re right. They are.

But this aid isn’t always allocated to the countries mostly keenly facing extreme poverty.

Afghanistan, Israel, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Vietnam, Ethiopia, Pakistan, India, Turkey, Kenya and Palestine receive the most aid from the US.

Only Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Ethiopia are considered LDCs.

The US (and the world) can do better than this. The fight against extreme poverty calls for sustained, increasing action, not gradually declining action.

2015 is a historic year for the fight against poverty--the Global Goals will be unveiled in September, guiding the next 15 years of international development. World leaders need to stand together and increase their commitments to address the root conditions that hold countries back. Starting with those who most need the aid is an obvious step.

Tell the US to prioritize countries that need the aid most by calling the US State Department through the TAKE ACTION NOW (and if you’re not reading this on your phone CLICK HERE to see the details of how to make this call).