The recent dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has cast a cloud over global humanitarian efforts and raised alarms among NGOs reliant on American funding. The Trump administration's abrupt decision to pause foreign development and humanitarian aid for 90 days has reverberated throughout the charity sector, leaving countless programs stranded and vulnerable.
For decades, NGOs have played a pivotal role in executing U.S. foreign policy by delivering humanitarian aid across the globe. Yet the reliance on U.S. funding has become alarmingly evident, particularly in the wake of the recent cuts prompted by the Trump administration.
In 1961, President John F. Kennedy established USAID to streamline foreign assistance programs under one roof, effectively channeling funds to many grassroots organizations worldwide. Since that time, USAID has seen its budget swell to about $44 billion for the year 2023, supporting 52% of its assistance through NGOs. Meanwhile, U.S. humanitarian aid reached a staggering $71.9 billion in the same year, comprising roughly 50% of global humanitarian support.
However, the Trump administration's 90-day suspension of aid, especially in March 2025, prompted immediate outcry as NGOs suddenly lost critical resources for their operations. The ramifications have been particularly severe in regions heavily dependent on U.S. support.
Take Thailand, where NGOs aiding Myanmar refugees have reported suspending programs and laying off staff. Meanwhile, the Danish Refugee Council, one of the major beneficiaries of USAID funding, has been forced to lay off 25% of its 8,000 employees due to the funding freeze. The fallout extends to Africa, where essential initiatives aimed at combating tuberculosis have come to a halt, putting many lives at risk.
The underlying problems precipitating the current crisis can be traced back decades, when bureaucratic bloat within the humanitarian sector led to inefficient management. Compliance and monitoring have often fallen by the wayside as organizations expanded unchecked. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees has seen its operational footprint in China balloon from a modest $50 million program in 1980 to a massive budget requiring five international staff members today.
Amidst the chaos, there are calls for reform within the humanitarian ecosystem. Still, the question lingers: Who will lead the charge for this reform? Given the United States' major budget allocations to humanitarian aid, many believe they hold the key to driving change. However, the current administration's drastic approach, capturing more headlines than constructive solutions, has fostered skepticism.
As the situation escalates, the consequences extend beyond losing financial support for NGOs. A federal judge ruled on March 24, 2025, that the Trump administration's dismantling of USAID was unconstitutional. This ruling comes amidst a shadow hearing led by Representative Gregory W. Meeks in a bid to confront what Democrats characterize as a gross malfeasance by House Republicans.
Meeks' shadow hearing scheduled for March 25 will feature testimonies from employees affected by the disbanding of USAID. It serves as a stark reminder that many of those dismissed or put at risk have stories illustrating the human cost of these budget cuts. The reality is that the U.S. capacity for soft power and humanitarian assistance is at stake.
Meanwhile, concerns are mounting over appointments made by Marco Rubio—currently acting administrator of USAID—who is stretching himself thin across multiple roles within the State Department, USAID, and the National Archives. Questions raised by House Democrats regarding his ability to balance these responsibilities and his involvement in the destruction of documents have put his appointments under scrutiny.
On March 11, a memo was issued directing remaining USAID employees to eliminate classified documents, adding yet another controversy to the tumult surrounding the agency. The situation prompted a lawsuit spearheaded by unions representing USAID employees, asserting violations of constitutional rights.
As disaster looms for the humanitarian community, the ripple effects of USAID's collapse extend beyond the walls of affected organizations. Aid entities that have been less dependent on federal funding are taking strides to fill the enormous gap left by USAID's demise, yet they grapple with their limitations. The Canadian Foodgrains Bank's executive director, Andy Harrington, aptly described the situation stating, "If you rip off an arm and a leg, or in this case, chop the body in half, that has massive impacts for the infrastructure we need to do our projects."
Organizations like Refugees International are stepping up to serve as advocates for those struggling to secure their lost funding but the expectation to fill a $65 billion gap annually is daunting. The Center for Global Development offered a hopeful perspective amid gloom, suggesting that USAID's cuts may not be as catastrophic as anticipated, with estimates indicating only 34% of all awards might have been terminated, contradicting the official narrative of 83% being eliminated.
The looming finger-pointing and attempts to recover lost funding will take time, but as the upcoming discussions unfold, it’s evident that a more resilient and adaptable framework for aid is desperately needed. With a reformative lens, stakeholders may find pathways to restore the tattered fabric of international aid as they navigate through this tumultuous landscape.
