For a long time, foreign aid steadily flowed to aid-receiving countries in a predictable rhythm, one shaped by donor cycles, bilateral and multilateral partnerships. This aid has been particularly crucial in funding key sectors such as health, agriculture, and enabling civic engagement. In January 2025, that rhythm was abruptly disrupted following an executive order issued under the administration of United States President Donald Trump. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) underwent significant restructuring and its operations were formally absorbed into the United States Department of State. What initially appeared to be a policy shift within the United States quickly evolved into a global reckoning about the sustainability of aid-dependent systems, the fragility of civil society financing, and the future of development cooperation. Aid receiving countries, local organizations and systems as well as multilateral institutions including the World Health Organization and several United Nations agencies were significantly affected by the funding withdrawal, facing financial uncertainty as donor priorities shifted and funding pipelines tightened (Igoe, 2025; Leopold & Marlow, 2025). Official development assistance (ODA) reduced significantly with traditional development partners, including governments in the United Kingdom, Netherlands, France and Japan, scaling back international aid commitments. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), ODA in 2024 reduced by 23.1%. This has created a broader contraction across the global development financing landscape. The impact has been felt around the world particularly in the Global Majority contexts with immediate, and deeply personal and operational implications.
To take stock of these shifts, Busara organized a series of conversations, dubbed The Work Is Not Done (TWIND) alongside a global journal where development practitioners, researchers and organizations reimagined development funding—giving their sentiments on how the disruption affected community programs from health systems, youth programs, agriculture, and governance work. As part of these conversations, we held an X Space on April 30th titled “The Work Is Not Done – Reimagining Development Pathways for the Global Majority” featuring development practitioners and researchers working directly with communities on what the new funding landscape looks like. The conversation aimed at spotlighting how development organizations and civic actors across the region were responding to aid withdrawals and declining funding from major funders.
Kicking off the conversation, Monica Akinyi Kay, a project associate with the Social Cohesion Portfolio within Busara and who was moderating the conversation asked the speakers what signals the suspension of USAID sent to the world. A common thread among the speakers was an observation that development organizations had become accustomed to foreign aid and needed to explore new mechanisms. Rachel Gitundu, a PhD researcher at Wanenigen University in the Netherlands explained that the disruption exposed how dependent aid receiving countries have become to foreign funding which leaves them completely vulnerable to any disruptions happening beyond their borders. This was witnessed by media reports such as people not being able to receive HIV/AIDS medication or care risking their health. Gitundu’s remarks follow similar observations by Professor Ken Opalo of Georgetown University who writing on the changes in the aid sector reckons that “ it is much easier to train anger on the heartlessness of erratic aid cuts by political/ideological opponents than to honestly look at the mirror and interrogate how aid dependency exposed millions of people to these kinds of developments in the first place.”
What is apparent is that we cannot ignore the voices of the millions of lives that were disrupted in the process and the current aid architecture must adapt. Major shifts have begun including the growing recognition of local fundraising capacity which can no longer be treated as secondary. Speaking during the X Space, Gitundu observed that aid should be complimentary to local efforts and internal resources. We have previously argued that various forms of collective action already exist in most African communities and can serve as a model for community development as demonstrated by Mbabazi, Muruaru, and Kombo (2025). Gitundu noted that there seems to be a shift towards open communication on vested interests, where funders and aid recipients have ‘explicit conversations’ on what each party wants and how they each benefit from the relationship. In her view this presents both the funder and the recipient room for negotiating and pushing for their interests. Recently, we have seen this new aid architecture being presented to African countries who in turn have challenged the US government on this new architecture. Zambia for instance recently challenged a $2 billion health deal that was put forward by the US in exchange for critical minerals. Similarly, in December last year, a Kenyan court suspended a similar health aid deal over data privacy concerns.
How do organizations remain relevant in this new space?
Visibility has become more important than ever. Traditional approaches to project reporting and donor communication, where organizations only reported at mid or end of projects, no longer seem sufficient. Going back to the X Space, Gitundu observed that organizations have become more visible beyond the usual project reporting especially on social media to communicate to the world what they are doing as a way of remaining visible and positioning themselves to potential funders. We have also seen younger voices across Africa and elsewhere becoming restless and demanding for changes in how they are governed, signalling that they want to be heard and not just seen. In Gitundu’s view there is also a switch towards scaling efforts instead of starting from scratch, as there is limited funding for new innovations. Organizations have also intensified training their staff on how to look for new funding, and the entry of new funders such as China, and philanthropies, and private sector investments.
Most importantly, Gitundu noted that it would be crucial from the onset, for aid recipients to have an exit strategy when engaging in development aid chains. This makes sure that aid is treated as a complementary to local mechanisms with an expiration date. This would call for a recognition of other forms of development resources such as knowledge, expertise, and collaborations among those with good will and working with policymakers to create an appropriate policy environment. This could contribute to moving the stick on development needs of our countries and guard against effects from disruptions beyond borders where we have little control. Gitundu concluded with a reflection on how the funding cuts were felt and navigated by the farmers she works with, where she notes the ingenuity in lived realities where women are agents of their own lives and not always waiting for development aid to survive as is often painted. She argued that although there is need for aid, the system should recognize the agency of local communities, not just passive recipients.
There is no doubt that health was one of the sectors that was severely affected by the suspension of USAID funding as explained by Dr Dismas Ouma, a public health specialist working with the International Centre for Reproductive Health Kenya. In his view, public health programs such as family planning, sexual and reproductive health and malaria which were previously funded by external donors exposed the limited investments by governments. He however noted that going forward, there seems to be a move towards funding systems and integrating different health streams so that health systems can be more resilient. This is a shift from the previous model where programs were vertically funded.
On her part, Entesh Melaisho who works with Twaweza East Africa, an organization focused on civic engagement noted that while governance programs were not severely affected by the disruption, there was still some form of disruption. During the X Space, Emmanuel Muia Mutua, working with the Africa Youth Leadership Forum (AYLF), an organization that builds leadership potential of young leaders explained that while governance programs were not severely affected, the disruptions occurred at a particularly sensitive time as countries in East Africa prepared for elections. The withdrawal of funding meant that some staff had to be laid off while programs focused on civic engagement and democracy—some of them mid-cycle—had to be restructured.
The conversation concluded with a reflection on the different options that organizations can explore to remain afloat and to also remain competitive. These include seeking joint funding opportunities, community ownership of programs and developing long-term partnerships. Entesh observed that organizations have to think about diversifying funding sources, working with private sector players and adapting organizational strategies to fit a new funding model, such as newer and younger funders who are a bit more hands-on and cost conscious. Organizations thus have to be aware of these changes and, have to build reserves to preempt disruptions and to build more resilience. They also have to build more trust with funders, by building proper accountability systems. Unlike earlier aid frameworks that often framed partnerships in purely humanitarian terms, the new environment appears more explicit about mutual interests. Development actors are increasingly acknowledging that donors, governments, and implementing organizations operate with strategic incentives. This has prompted calls for African governments and organizations to articulate their own priorities more clearly and negotiate partnerships based on shared benefit rather than dependency. Exit strategies, once treated as an afterthought, are now becoming central components of funding agreements from the beginning. Finally, building connections with the diaspora community and leveraging their expertise as both Gitundu and Entesh observed could help civil society organizations both in the short and long term.
Follow this link to listen to the full conversation on X.
Further reading
- Al Jazeera. (2025, November 25). International funding cuts disrupted global response to HIV, UN report says. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/11/25/international-funding-cuts-disrupted-global-response-to-hiv-un-report-says
- Igoe, M. (2025, July 2). State Dept. takeover of USAID is an impending ‘train wreck,’ experts say. Devex. https://www.devex.com/news/state-dept-takeover-of-usaid-is-an-impending-train-wreck-experts-say-110417
- Leopold, J., & Marlow, I. (2025, March 28). USAID set to merge with State Department on July 1, agency says. Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-03-28/usaid-set-to-merge-with-state-department-on-july-1-agency-says
- Mbabazi, C., Muruaru, D., & Kombo, S. (2025, October 21). Unlocking community agency: Behavioral insights from Spark Microgrants’ Facilitated Collective Action Process. Busara Global. https://busara.global/blog/community-agency-behavioral-insights-spark-microgrants-fcap
- Mutsaka, F., & Imray, G. (2026, May 5). Zambia blasts the US over a $2 billion health deal in exchange for critical minerals. Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/us-zambia-diplomacy-trump-health-aid-minerals-8a38c5c3c3a5dcddaa3a7cb012278b63
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2026, April). A historic decline in foreign aid: Preliminary 2025 ODA data. OECD. https://www.oecd.org/en/data/insights/data-explainers/2026/04/a-historic-decline-in-foreign-aid-preliminary-2025-oda-data.html
- Opalo, K. (2025, May 29). How should development practice (and institutions) approach the coming reforms in the aid sector? The past is gone. And there are lots of reasons not to mourn for its reinstatement. Substack
- Opalo, K. (2025, February 5). On American aid cuts/disruptions: When the music stops, those who’ve outsourced their ambitions get exposed. Substack.
- Rukanga, B. (2025, December 12). Kenyan court suspends “landmark” US health aid deal over data privacy concerns. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce91degnelko
- Sulgodu Ramachandra, S., & Webster, P. (2025). USA’s exit from the WHO and freeze on USAID funds globally: Its perils and possible opportunities. Journal of Public Health, 47(Supplement_1), i16–i20. [https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdaf122]
