NEW YORK — Recent developments in U.S. foreign aid and policy changes are generating significant concern among nonprofits, particularly those operating internationally. The Trump’s administration has enacted various measures, including freezing foreign assistance, withdrawing from the Paris climate accord, and enforcing restrictions on nonprofits that accept American funds related to abortion services. Earlier this week, there was also an announcement regarding a freeze on federal loans and grants; however, this pause has since been lifted.
Many organizations are now assessing how these changes will affect their missions. In some cases, smaller nonprofits are attempting to fill gaps left by withheld U.S. funding. In 2024, the U.S. is expected to be the world’s largest humanitarian contributor, having allocated $13.9 billion for foreign aid. This enormous commitment underscores the extensive impact any alterations to these funds can have globally, affecting various humanitarian and development issues. Primarily, the oversight for foreign assistance falls under the U.S. State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which recently paused funding for 90 days to audit whether each grant aligns with the administration’s policies.
Yuriy Boyechko, who leads the New Jersey organization Hope for Ukraine, expressed his concerns over the implications of a potential funding halt from USAID for humanitarian efforts in Ukraine. He has been in touch with local groups and highlighted the critical nature of programs that deliver firewood to rural, underserved areas. Many residents, especially the elderly and impoverished, depend on this wood during winter for heating and cooking. “I genuinely don’t know how they will manage to survive the winter,” he stated, reflecting the depth of concern among those directly impacted.
Boyechko pointed out that these grassroots organizations, mainly volunteer-operated, rely heavily on consistent funding from USAID’s Kyiv office for their operations, including purchasing necessary resources like wood. He encouraged anyone worried about the situation to advocate for continued support from their representatives and the White House. “Generosity defines America, and cutting aid is not a positive step for the nation or for human welfare overall,” he asserted, underscoring Ukraine’s significant reliance on U.S. support.
While USAID confirmed that all programs without exemptions approved by the Secretary of State are on hold, it did not clarify whether humanitarian aid in Ukraine would be suspended. Fiscal year 2023 data showed that the United States committed $68 billion in foreign aid, addressing a broad spectrum from disaster relief to healthcare and democratic initiatives across 204 countries.
Billionaire philanthropist Mike Bloomberg has previously stepped up to fill funding gaps, notably after the U.S. withdrew from the Paris climate agreement. In late January, he announced that he would finance the U.S.’s contributions toward the U.N. Climate Change offices, covering an amount of $10.25 million for the years 2016 to 2019. Antha Williams, head of the environment program at Bloomberg Philanthropies, emphasized the importance of being able to adapt quickly to maintain progress when government support falters.
The U.N. climate framework was established through the 2015 Paris agreement, which set ambitious goals to limit global warming to below 1.5 degrees Celsius. The U.N. organizes vital climate negotiations and holds countries accountable for their emissions targets. Williams noted that Bloomberg Philanthropies also supports a coalition called America is All In, which gathers local governments, businesses, and academic institutions to track advancement towards their climate objectives, especially now that the federal government has stepped back from this role.
Experts are reporting a lack of communication from USAID and the State Department with their partners regarding these changes. A webinar convened by Devex, a platform focused on international development, recently addressed queries surrounding compliance with the new orders, financial management, and the potential for waivers. Retired USAID officer Susan Reichle highlighted the need for organizations to persuasively demonstrate the significance of their work not only to the agency but also to the American public and lawmakers. She warned that a continuous absence of U.S. leadership in fulfilling its commitments ultimately undermines national security.
Various organizations are affected by both the funding freeze and the Global Gag Rule which forbids U.S. aid recipients from providing or discussing abortion services. MSI Reproductive Choices, an international nonprofit dedicated to reproductive health, has avoided signing the rule during the previous Trump administration, resulting in decreased U.S. funding. However, its mobile health clinic in Zimbabwe relies on financial support from the U.S. embassy and could cease operations without alternative funding sources. Senior director Beth Schlachter noted that no amount of charitable funding could substitute for the financial shortfall caused by the U.S. funding limitations, thereby presenting challenging scenarios for large donors.
“In light of the extensive changes occurring, other funders are now evaluating their development priorities beyond just reproductive health services,” she remarked, illustrating the far-reaching effects of current policy shifts on various humanitarian efforts.
