The Impact of USAID Suspension and WHO Withdrawal on Global Humanitarian Aid

Examining the consequences for communicators and the shift toward community-led solutions.

In partnership with

Dear reader,

In Sierra Leone, I saw communities celebrate the end of the Ebola outbreak, which was made possible by coordinated international support. During the first COVID-19 wave in the Philippines, I witnessed how emergency health programmes helped families to protect themselves and their loved ones.

These memories come flooding back when I analyse the current aid crisis. Behind every statistic we discuss in this newsletter - the 700 million people losing access to health care, the 25 million lives saved by PEPFAR - are faces I know.

They're the determined health workers who walk for kilometres to reach remote villages. The mothers who queue for hours to get their children immunised. The local leaders who work tirelessly for the health of their communities.

In this edition, I examine how the suspension of USAID programmes and the potential withdrawal of the US from the WHO will impact humanitarian aid around the world. I focus specifically on our role as risk and emergency communicators in strengthening local responses.

At the end of my analysis, you'll find detailed health impact data - not because numbers tell the whole story, but because each statistic represents people we've met, communities we've helped, and lives at stake.

Our work as risk and emergency communicators has shown us that effective aid can make the difference between life and death. At this critical time in global humanitarian aid, our expertise in connecting communities with resources is more important than ever.

Philippe Borremans

PS: if you organization is impacted then please take the time to complete this short survey. Accountability Lab is collecting impact data and will publish results.

Table of Contents

Introduction

The suspension of USAID programmes1 and the possible withdrawal of the US from the World Health Organization (WHO) signal a major shift in global humanitarian aid.

USAID provides over 40% of global humanitarian funding, while the WHO coordinates international health efforts.

These changes show how fragile the system is - a system on which millions of people depend. This situation calls for a new approach to the delivery of humanitarian aid^2.

Immediate impact: A system in crisis

USAID's funding freeze has severely shaken the global humanitarian sector. PEPFAR, which has saved 25 million lives, including 5.5 million children, now faces an uncertain future.

In sub-Saharan Africa, where HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment programmes have made great strides, this suspension risks undoing decades of progress. The impact goes beyond health programmes and threatens food security, emergency response, and development work worldwide.

"The aid community is grappling with just how existential this aid suspension is," said Abby Maxman, president of Oxfam America. The decision "could have life or death consequences" for children and families worldwide, he said.

Ukraine, which heavily relies on support from USAID, is currently confronting significant challenges. The halt in aid disrupts crucial humanitarian assistance and development programs. The suspension of USAID projects in Ukraine not only hampers emergency relief efforts but also jeopardizes long-term stability initiatives.

Small local organisations are feeling the greatest impact. Many of them are dependent on USAID funding, either directly or through subcontracts, and are now facing severe budget cuts.

In El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala alone, the freeze affects over 80% of USAID programmes and threatens efforts to address the root causes of migration and regional stability3.

Risk and emergency communication: bringing about change in humanitarian aid

As risk, crisis, and emergency communicators, we create important links between global institutions and local communities. Our role enables us to build a better humanitarian system. In the current situation, our work to promote clear communication and cooperation between different groups is more important than ever.

To improve the humanitarian sector, we need to rethink our communication and engagement methods. Our profession should lead change by creating real dialogue between international donors and local communities.

This means opening up spaces for meaningful discussion, maintaining transparency in aid delivery, and strengthening relationships between all humanitarian actors.

A major challenge is to combine global expertise with local knowledge. Our communication plans need to work both ways so that information can flow freely between international and local actors.

By helping different regions to share their experiences, we spread effective practises and ensure that local solutions receive the recognition and support they deserve.

“When we as communicators help local communities tell their own stories and make their own decisions, we build stronger humanitarian responses.”

Philippe Borremans

Our best work is characterised by strong community involvement. We need to develop inclusive strategies that reach all people, especially those who are often overlooked, and support communities to tell their own stories.

This includes working with local leaders to improve their communication skills while ensuring that affected populations help shape the programmes that serve them. By understanding the culture and relationships on the ground, we help develop fair and effective humanitarian responses.

Data and results strengthen our work. We need to document how local leaders are improving outcomes and demonstrating the effectiveness of community-based approaches.

This means evaluating our communication strategies and helping others make decisions based on clear information. By making complex information accessible and actionable, we help direct resources to where they will have the greatest impact.

The real problem: An unstable global system

The current situation reveals fundamental problems in the humanitarian system. When a single large donor gets the most power the system becomes unstable. When our organisations have difficulties, the entire humanitarian structure is weakened, which harms the people who need help the most.

This centralised system limits local organisations, even though they often respond best to crises. The communities facing challenges understand their culture and have the trust of their people, but receive little funding and have little say in decisions.

Better humanitarian aid through local leadership

A better humanitarian system needs to give more power and resources to local leaders and organisations. This means changing the way aid works.

Organisations need direct access to funding without going through multiple levels. They need long-term funding to help them grow stronger. New ways of monitoring results should focus on community feedback and actual impact.

International organisations should help rather than control, working closely with local groups and supporting local emergency response capacities. A new policy should reserve certain amounts of humanitarian funding for local organisations and give affected communities a greater say in decision-making.

Looking to the future

The current changes in global humanitarian aid offer the opportunity to build a better system. Supporting local organisations, strengthening community leadership, and changing the way institutions work can make humanitarian aid more effective.

Implementing these changes requires time, but the cost of inaction is far greater. As the climate crisis, conflicts, and other global challenges amplify the demand for humanitarian aid, it is crucial to establish a system that leverages local leadership while maintaining the advantages of global coordination and expertise.

To move forward, we need bold steps from donors, international organisations and humanitarian leaders. We need new ways of working, different funding approaches, and real change among decision-makers. Most importantly, we need the communities affected by crises to help develop and implement solutions.

The future of humanitarian aid depends on building strong local communities that can manage and prevent crises, not on continuing to rely on external aid.

Only by making these changes can we create a humanitarian system that truly helps those who need it.

FOCUS: the human cost: health effects of the aid freeze

The suspension of USAID programmes and the possible withdrawal of the WHO are leading to an unprecedented health crisis affecting hundreds of millions of people worldwide4. While numbers alone cannot fully capture the human impact, they paint a clear picture of what is at stake.

The scale of the impact

Nearly 700 million people are affected by potential disruption to their access to healthcare through the US Department of Health and Human Services programmes alone. PEPFAR, which has saved 25 million lives, including 5.5 million children, through HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment, now faces uncertainty.

Combined with the State Department's frozen humanitarian programmes and the USDA's nutrition initiatives, the total number of people affected is nearly 800 million - the population of the United States and the European Union combined.*

*It’s important to note that while this estimate provides a sense of scale, the actual impact may vary depending on how long the freeze lasts and which specific programs are ultimately affected. The situation remains fluid, and the full extent of the impact may not be fully understood for some time

Immediate impacts

The effects are already visible in critical areas:

  • HIV/AIDS patients are at risk of having their treatment interrupted

  • Vaccination programmes for children are at risk of being suspended

  • Emergency medical services in conflict areas are losing support

  • Food security programmes that support health are being discontinued

  • Disease surveillance networks are weakened

  • Medical research and clinical trials are frozen

Vulnerable population groups

The consequences hit those who are least able to cope the hardest:

  • Children who are dependent on vaccination programmes

  • People living with HIV/AIDS who need to take regular medication

  • Refugees who are dependent on emergency medical care

  • Communities in conflict zones who need trauma care

  • Populations in areas with weak healthcare infrastructure

  • People in need of continuous treatment for chronic diseases

Long-term risks to public health

Beyond the immediate impact, freezing aid threatens years of progress in global health. Interrupted disease surveillance and reduced pandemic preparedness increase the risk of disease outbreaks. The suspension of research projects and clinical trials delays medical advances that could save lives.

This situation requires urgent attention. Every day that aid is frozen means more people lose access to vital medical care, more treatments are interrupted and more lives are put at risk. These numbers represent real people facing real health consequences.

References and further reading.

1  Gawel, A. (2025, January 27). Devex Newswire: Trump puts a stop to all US foreign assistance programs. Devex. https://www.devex.com/news/devex-newswire-trump-puts-a-stop-to-all-us-foreign-assistance-programs-109145

2  The potential impact of Donald Trump’s presidency on international development: Towards a worst-case scenario? Focus 2030. https://focus2030.org/The-potential-impact-of-Donald-Trump-s-presidency-on-international-development

3  Thomas Byrnes, Humanitarian & Social Protection Consultant | Founder and Director of MarketImpact offers regular updates on the situation. Worth following on LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/thomasbyrnes_humanitarianaid-globaldevelopment-foreignpolicy-activity-7289997712182177792-F45M

4  Guilbert, K. (2025, January 29). US foreign aid freeze a “death sentence” for people in need, NGOs warn. Euronews; Euronews.com. https://www.euronews.com/2025/01/29/us-freeze-on-foreign-aid-funding-is-a-death-sentence-for-people-in-need-ngos-warn?t

There’s a reason 400,000 professionals read this daily.

Join The AI Report, trusted by 400,000+ professionals at Google, Microsoft, and OpenAI. Get daily insights, tools, and strategies to master practical AI skills that drive results.

What I am reading/testing/checking out:

  • Article: Why Do We Default To Government to Solve Our Problems? By Jeff Donaldson, PhD

  • Support the WHO: please consider giving a donation to the WHO Foundation.

Let’s meet!

Here are the events and conferences I'll be speaking at. If you're around, feel free to message me, and we can meet up for a coffee or a Negroni.

  • 🇧🇪 AI in PR Boot Camp II, 20-21 February 2025, Brussels, Belgium

  • 🇦🇪 World Crisis & Emergency Management Summit, April 8 and 9, 2025, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates

How satisfied were you with the content in this edition? 📚

Login or Subscribe to participate in polls.

PS: I hope you've enjoyed this newsletter! Creating it each weekend is a labour of love that I provide for free. If you've found my writing valuable, the best way to support it is by sharing it with others. Thank you for reading!

Parts of this newsletter were created using AI technology to draft content. In addition, all AI-generated images include a caption stating, 'This image was created using AI'. These changes were made in line with the transparency requirements of the EU AI law for AI-generated content. Some links in this newsletter may be affiliate links, meaning I earn a small commission if you click and make a purchase; however, I only promote tools and services that I have tested, use myself, or am convinced will make a positive difference.

Reply

or to participate.