A recent memo from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has urged the immediate resumption of key health services that were disrupted following a freeze on international aid ordered by President Donald Trump. The directive, which was issued hours after Trump took office last month, halted foreign assistance while the administration conducted a 90-day review of all aid programs.
Although Secretary of State Marco Rubio later issued a waiver allowing “lifesaving” aid efforts to continue, confusion persisted among organizations operating on the ground. Many aid groups were uncertain about which programs qualified for exemptions, leading to delays in resuming critical services. The newly released memo seeks to clarify these ambiguities, stating that essential health interventions must restart within 30 days to prevent unnecessary loss of life.
The memo specifically highlights the urgency of restarting activities aimed at tackling tuberculosis (TB), malaria, maternal and newborn health, and severe acute malnutrition. These programs, which are funded by USAID, are considered vital in regions where access to healthcare is limited, and preventable diseases continue to claim thousands of lives.
Additionally, the directive includes efforts to combat disease outbreaks such as mpox, avian flu, and Ebola. It also emphasizes the importance of maintaining global health supply chains to ensure essential medicines, medical equipment, and vaccines reach affected populations without further delay.
Despite the memo’s clear directive, some humanitarian organizations remain uncertain about how to proceed. Two sources familiar with the situation told Reuters that the lack of clarity on available funding has made it difficult to determine which programs can be restarted immediately.
The suspension of USAID operations has also created logistical challenges, with many offices experiencing significant staffing cuts both in Washington and abroad. This has left key decision-makers struggling to navigate the evolving situation.
Martin Edlund, CEO of the global health nonprofit Malaria No More, described the memo as a crucial step toward restoring health programs. However, he cautioned that additional measures are needed to ensure aid reaches those in need.
“Even short-term interruptions of malaria prevention and treatment lead to outbreaks and deaths,” Edlund said. He stressed that “start-work” orders must be issued promptly to allow malaria prevention activities such as indoor spraying, mosquito net distribution, and treatment services to resume without further setbacks.
The freeze on international aid has drawn criticism from various quarters, including former U.S. President Barack Obama, who called it a “foreign policy mistake” with potentially dire consequences for global health. Critics argue that suspending funding for crucial health programs not only endangers vulnerable populations but also weakens the United States’ leadership in global health initiatives.
The impact of the aid suspension has been particularly evident in developing countries, where USAID-funded programs play a critical role in addressing health crises. In Kenya, for example, agricultural initiatives that rely on U.S. funding have faced significant disruptions, threatening food security and economic stability. Meanwhile, in South Africa, the Trump administration’s decision to halt aid over concerns related to land reforms and foreign policy has sparked diplomatic tensions.
While the USAID memo provides temporary relief for essential health services, it does not address broader concerns about the long-term future of U.S. foreign aid. Aid organizations remain wary of further policy shifts that could disrupt their work, especially given the administration’s broader stance on reducing international assistance.
A separate memo issued on February 6 attempted to clarify the status of the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), another critical global health program. The memo emphasized that care, treatment, and efforts to prevent mother-to-child transmission of HIV should resume immediately. However, the extent of funding available for these programs remains unclear.
As aid organizations scramble to restart suspended programs, many are calling for greater transparency and communication from the U.S. government. The lack of clear guidelines on funding and program eligibility has made it challenging to deliver lifesaving interventions efficiently.
For now, USAID’s directive offers a glimmer of hope for communities dependent on American-funded health programs. However, the ongoing uncertainty underscores the need for a more stable and predictable approach to international aid—one that prioritizes the well-being of vulnerable populations over political shifts.
With the Trump administration’s 90-day review still underway, aid groups and health advocates are closely watching for further policy announcements that could shape the future of U.S. global health initiatives.
