Impact of International Aid Cuts on African Communities

The United States is cutting nearly all foreign aid, with sub-Saharan Africa being the most affected region, losing billions of dollars in funding that previously supported health, humanitarian, and development programs. The Donald Trump administration’s decision to cut 90 percent of US Agency for International Development’s (USAID) foreign aid contracts has halted programs that provided food aid to millions, supported health care systems, and fought diseases like HIV/AIDS and malaria.

An article from The New York Times outlined some of what sub-Saharan Africa will lose, finding that cuts will likely lead to severe consequences, including mass famine in Sudan, the collapse of HIV treatment programs in countries like South Africa and the Ivory Coast, and millions of additional malaria and polio cases.

If USAID stops completely, humanitarian crises will worsen as millions of people lose access to food aid, disaster relief, and essential supplies.

Historically, the United States has been the dominant donor in many African humanitarian crises. But with its withdrawal, other countries such as China and Saudi Arabia, will likely attempt to expand their influence while using the African landscape to vie for greater power.

While some emergency waivers for humanitarian assistance were issued, USAID’s payment systems remain blocked, and thousands of staff have been laid off, leaving critical aid programs in limbo.

A Grim Outlook

In 2024, $12.7 billion of the $41 billion in US foreign aid went to sub-Saharan Africa, more than any other region except for 2022 to 2023, when funding shifted to support Ukraine during the Russian invasion.

If USAID stops completely, humanitarian crises will worsen as millions of people lose access to food aid, disaster relief, and essential supplies, particularly in conflict zones like Sudan, Congo, and the Sahel, where famine and mass deaths are expected.

“These USAID cuts will have an immediate and devastating impact on millions,” said Manenji Mangundu, Oxfam country director for the Democratic Republic of Congo, in a statement. “Without it, agencies will be forced into having to make terrible triage decisions including who gets to live and who might needlessly die.”

Health systems will collapse in many countries, leading to half a million preventable HIV/AIDS deaths in South Africa. That’s not accounting for the up to 18 million additional malaria cases, 200,000 polio-related disabilities, and over one million deaths of children from severe malnutrition each year. And the absence of stabilization programs may fuel terrorism and political instability, particularly in fragile regions where extremist groups tend to exploit worsening economic conditions.

China and other global powers will take advantage of the United States withdrawing from key areas, though China is . This means that, more than ever, the community of global nonprofit and non-governmental organizations will have to fill the gap left by these massive cuts.

Critics of USAID fairly point out that its programs also created unnecessary dependency, inadvertently financed corrupt regimes, and was coupled with intentional financing of covert monies to topple governments or groups. From this perspective, some see the cuts in USAID as an opportunity to refocus.

Without US foreign aid, nonprofits are now exploring alternative funding sources to sustain their operations.

“Africa must change its perception of aid. We should start seeing it as a thing of the past,” said Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, director-general of the World Trade Organization. “Our focus should be on two key areas; attracting investment and mobilizing domestic resources.”

The former president of the African Development Bank, Donald Kaberuka, has echoed the idea that current funding cuts led by the United States under Trump’s presidency could encourage African nations to focus on self-reliance and sustainable development. Kaberuka has consistently emphasized the importance of Africa reducing its reliance on external aid and fostering self-sufficiency.

But these shifts will take time, and the nonprofit/NGO sector will have to fill the void where projects, programs, and direct foreign aid have been cut.

Planning for the Future

Without US foreign aid, nonprofits are now exploring alternative funding sources to sustain their operations. Many organizations are turning to private-sector partnerships and leveraging corporate social responsibility programs to finance community-based projects.

Philanthropic foundations and major donors are also being approached to provide more stable, long-term financial backing. Some nonprofits are incorporating social enterprise models, developing revenue-generating initiatives such as microfinance programs or fair-trade businesses to ensure continuity.

For instance, GiveDirectly, a charity focused on direct cash transfers to alleviate poverty, faced a $20 million funding shortfall due to cuts from USAID. In response, they launched a campaign to raise private donations, which as of this writing had secured over $630,000 toward a goal of $1 million.

Facing substantial funding cuts, Save the Children has had to close 463 health facilities and five nutrition centers, and halt child protection programs in 13 countries. In response, the organization is exploring alternative funding mechanisms and revenue-generating projects to sustain its critical services.

In parallel, efforts to build local capacity are becoming a central focus for communities. Organizations are implementing leadership training programs to equip community-based staff with the skills needed to manage and sustain development projects independently. The African Medical and Research Foundation (also known as Amref Health Africa) has initiated leadership training programs aimed at empowering local healthcare workers to take on managerial roles, ensuring that health projects remain effective and sustainable, despite external funding challenges.

As nonprofits and NGOs adapt to these massive shifts in the funding and policy landscape, the big question is whether these changes will be enough.

Grassroots organizations are playing a larger role in delivering aid and services, as international groups emphasize locally driven solutions over externally managed initiatives. This shift is seen as a way to create long-term resilience in affected communities, reducing reliance on foreign assistance, while fostering local ownership of development efforts.

Operational strategies are also evolving to maximize efficiency and impact. Many nonprofits are prioritizing cost-effective solutions, streamlining administrative expenses, and leveraging technology to enhance service delivery. In response to a 30 percent funding reduction, the International Organization for Migration is reorganizing its structure and reducing staff by over 20 percent. The agency is also exploring technological solutions to maintain essential services for vulnerable migrant communities efficiently.

Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières also followed suit. Facing funding constraints, the organization has prioritized cost-effective solutions by adopting mobile clinics and telemedicine services to reach remote populations, reducing operational costs while maintaining healthcare delivery.

Transparency in financial management and project execution has become a key consideration as organizations work to maintain donor confidence. In the policy space, some groups are advocating for regulatory frameworks that support nonprofit sustainability, recognizing the changing landscape of international development funding. While these adjustments present challenges, they are also seen as opportunities to develop new models for aid and humanitarian work.

As nonprofits and NGOs adapt to these massive shifts in the funding and policy landscape, the big question is whether these changes will be enough. Can private donors and social enterprises fill the gaps left behind? Will local leadership step up in ways that make aid programs more self-sustaining? Or are we heading toward a new era of crisis-driven, patchwork relief? The outcomes remain to be seen—but what is clear is that the world of humanitarian aid is being forced to evolve, whether it’s ready or not.