Problem:

Eliminating USAID reduces America’s ability to project soft power (defined by the Council on Foreign Relations as “a country’s ability to influence others without resorting to coercive pressure”), abandons our partners and allies, and slashes our ability to solve global challenges. The United States is now less prosperous, more vulnerable, and less prepared to address future threats such as infectious diseases, extreme weather, uncontrolled migration, economic coercion, and misinformation. All told, the current administration eliminated 83% of USAID's programs and moved them to the State Department.

Policy Response:

On day one of a future administration, the President must rescind Executive Order 14169, known as "Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid." New, immediate executive action must re-establish USAID as an independent agency under the foreign policy guidance of the Secretary of State and strategically coordinated through the National Security Council (NSC) to ensure development policy remains integrated with defense and diplomacy, with clear statutory-style delegations of authority. 

New executive action must: 

(a) Reaffirm USAID’s independent statutory mission and authority under the Foreign Assistance Act while recommending additional Congressional action to codify USAID’s existence and functions;

(b) Restore programmatic authorities to USAID where appropriate;

(c) Create temporary flexibility in hiring and contracting (as authorized by existing statutes) to re-staff high-priority humanitarian, development, and health programs; 

(d) Restore USAID’s role as a National Security Council (NSC) Principal and (e) establish a 180-day modernization review with public reporting.

Program Area Description

Funding for the US Agency for International Development can be generally summarized in one of four categories: 1) USAID Operations, 2) development and economic assistance, 3) global health programs, and 4) international humanitarian assistance.

The following chart provides insight into the current administration’s rethinking of foreign assistance under the State Department, whereby previous funding accounts have been eliminated, and some funding has been merged into broader accounts.

The chart compares funding across these categories. For FY2024 and FY2025, totals include both USAID and State Department funding. For FY2026 and FY2027, following the dissolution of USAID, the figures represent State Department funding only.

The chart does not include State Department international security assistance, PL480 Title II food aid appropriated to the Department of Agriculture, and other Foreign Operations funding. It also does not include other State Department funding for Administration of Foreign Affairs and Trust Funds or broader Function 150 funding.

Key Findings:

• The current administration eliminated the majority of USAID programs, maintaining some programs in global health and humanitarian assistance (now housed at the State Department). As of FY2026, roughly $19–20 billion of foreign assistance funding previously appropriated to USAID programs has been eliminated.  According to an analysis conducted by Boston University's School of Public Health, within a year of cuts, 781,343 people have died as a result of these cuts, the majority of them being children.  That was 88 people every hour for the entire first year of the current presidential term. 

• Combined U.S. foreign assistance spending dropped sharply. Total funding across USAID and the State Department for aid-related funding categories fell from roughly $31 billion in FY2023 to around $13 billion in the current administration's FY2027 request, a decline of more than 55%.  As of 2025, for the first time ever, the United States was no longer the world's largest foreign assistance donor.

• Congress has consistently rejected the administration's deepest proposed cuts. In FY2026, Congress appropriated more than double what the administration requested, reflecting bipartisan resistance to the scale of the proposed reductions.

• Humanitarian assistance was restructured and reduced. Individual funding streams from USAID and State were eliminated and replaced with one broader account, funded at lower levels than in previous years.

• Global health funding has survived, but only because Congress stepped in. Congress rejected proposed cuts to global health programs and continued funding them at robust levels, reflecting bipartisan support for these programs.

• The administration replaced established budget accounts with new ones that reflect its own priorities. Longstanding accounts like Development Assistance and Economic Support Funds were eliminated and replaced with new accounts, including the "America First Opportunity Fund" and "National Security Investment Programs,” giving the administration more discretion over how funds are directed.

• Congress drew a line between national security programming and an ideological agenda. Rather than fund the administration's America First Opportunity Fund directly, Congress created a new National Security Investment Programs account, signaling a preference for evidence-based development over politically driven spending, while still allowing some America First funding to flow.

Comparison of Historic and Current Budget Appropriations and Requests

(in thousands of dollars)

Sources: 

FY2025 International Affairs Congressional Budget Justification
FY2026 International Affairs Congressional Budget Justification
FY2027 International Affairs Congressional Budget Justification

Explanatory Notes:

• FY2023 reflects funding fully available for implementation under the previous administration, as most funds appropriated in FY2023 would have had to be fully spent by September 30, 2024.

• FY2024 reflects the final appropriation under the previous administration. However, in January 2025, the current administration froze foreign assistance funding such that the majority of funds appropriated by Congress in FY2024 could not be spent before they expired.  

• FY2025 request reflects the current administration’s last request to Congress, while FY2025 reflects Congressional appropriations, including recissions of $5.6 billion in prior year funding. 

• FY2026 Request reflects the current administration’s priorities, while FY2026 Estimate reflects Congressional appropriations. 

• FY2027 again reflects the current administration’s priorities. This data provides an understanding of the previous Administration’s views on this program, the current administration’s views, and Congressional views for all years.