Here’s what integrating USAID into the State Department is likely to look like
Programs focused on human rights may be the earliest to face elimination.
TroibNews 
Prepare for a diminished U.S. Agency for International Development that may primarily concentrate on food aid and AIDS clinics—if the USAID name endures in the coming weeks.
The White House has yet to publicly specify its intentions for the aid agency or how international assistance might be affected by ongoing efforts to curtail the agency's established operational independence, aiming to bring it under the aegis of the State Department. Nevertheless, actions taken by the Trump administration thus far are beginning to reveal how USAID's operations may evolve.
Currently, all programs are in a state of uncertainty as USAID personnel worldwide are placed on paid administrative leave. Yet, hints of what may return can be gleaned from public remarks and waivers that have already been issued to a blanket freeze on foreign aid.
PMG has gathered further insights into USAID's potential future through discussions with eleven current and former agency employees, congressional staffers, and leaders of organizations that collaborate with USAID.
The agency's initiatives span a wide range, from humanitarian relief for disaster-affected and war-affected refugees, to malaria vaccination efforts, literacy initiatives in the Middle East, and providing drought-resistant seeds to subsistence farmers in Africa. USAID also works on improving sanitation systems in India, teaching budgeting skills to entrepreneurs in rural Guatemala, and extending microfinance loans to families for purchasing fuel-efficient cookstoves in Africa.
Republicans contend that USAID should concentrate on delivering food aid and other forms of humanitarian assistance. Moreover, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, appointed by Trump as the acting USAID administrator, seems to be focusing on ongoing AIDS prevention and treatment, particularly through the President’s Emergency Program for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), a major initiative that began under President George W. Bush. PEPFAR has been granted a waiver amid the 90-day freeze on foreign aid, and parts of this program are executed and financed through USAID.
Other areas, however, might not be as fortunate. USAID faces cuts similar to other agencies for programs perceived as aligned with “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” This could potentially include initiatives that promote LGBTQ rights and women's rights. A critical question remains whether this will also apply to efforts aimed at combating discrimination against ethnic and religious minorities. The U.S. has previously backed “inclusion” programs that counter workplace and societal discrimination in nations like Serbia and Guatemala, both of which have experienced genocides and crimes against humanity against indigenous and minority populations. Initiatives in Serbia have already been targeted by the Trump administration.
Programs that support global democracy and civil society organizations at USAID are also likely to face reduced funding. Recent statements from tech entrepreneur Elon Musk's DOGE team criticized “Lincoln scholarships,” which provide college funding for democracy activists in Myanmar.
Other aspects remain uncertain. As of now, there has been no communication regarding USAID’s economic development and education initiatives. However, Musk's attempts to shutter the Education Department and growing efforts against the Department of Labor do not bode well for the agency's programs in those areas.
Oversight in the countries where USAID operates is likely to diminish. The administration is not only placing staff abroad on leave but also instructing others to return to the U.S.
Rubio has assigned daily operations of USAID to Peter Marocco, who is also in charge of the State Department's office of foreign assistance, commonly referred to as the “F bureau.” He has been appointed acting deputy administrator of USAID.
Three congressional staffers familiar with Marocco's management style indicate that he has been personally reviewing individual waiver requests, functioning more as a “grant officer” than as a lead administrator within a large bureau of the State Department. They were granted anonymity to discuss the sensitive and rapidly changing situation.
The State Department did not respond to inquiries about comments or requests for Marocco's availability.
According to the staffers, this level of scrutiny is affecting the distribution of aid already approved under a waiver granted by Rubio on January 27. Leaders of aid and humanitarian organizations working with USAID report receiving minimal guidance on applying for funding under the waivers, while current USAID officials are unsure whether humanitarian resources are reaching the communities that require them most.
Bottlenecks in pending applications have already begun to surface, as indicated by both staffers and executives in the aid sector. Some former USAID employees suggest that even key assistance deemed essential to the agency's humanitarian mission may be at risk.
While a message sent to employees on Tuesday asserted that essential personnel would remain, this did not extend to many staffers within the Bureau of Humanitarian Assistance, which oversees the agency's emergency response to disasters and conflicts.
A former USAID contractor cautioned that, at this moment, the agency lacks the capacity to respond to a major humanitarian crisis due to the specialized expertise of Bureau of Humanitarian Assistance staff.
“If there is a disaster that occurs anywhere in the world, there is no capacity to respond,” the contractor remarked. “The State Department can’t address this. People will die.”
Specific regions are likely to experience reductions in funding. Special envoy for special missions Richard Grenell criticized USAID for spending over $1 billion in the Balkans, and extensive economic aid for Ukraine may also wane as Republicans persist in their critiques of non-military assistance to Kyiv. Eastern and southern Africa, where USAID primarily provides food and health aid, may be less impacted than other regions.
Democrats are opposing the Trump administration's initiatives, arguing that it is unconstitutional for the White House to pursue the dismantling of an agency that is enshrined in significant portions of federal law. They also contend that such actions will permit China and Russia to expand their influence in Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East.
“Dismantling this vital agency not only jeopardizes our humanitarian commitments but also diminishes our influence and ability to counter adversaries like China, Russia, and Iran,” remarked Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
Conversely, congressional Republicans, even those traditionally supportive of foreign aid, back the administration’s careful examination of USAID. Sen. Lindsey Graham stated on Tuesday, “USAID is going to have to justify its existence.”
“When you look at some of the money they're spending … it's not gonna pass the smell test,” Graham added, while reiterating his belief in the importance of soft power.
Concerns in some humanitarian circles are that U.S. foreign assistance may no longer be seen as a gesture of goodwill but instead as a tool of hard power serving American interests.
“Humanitarians will not be safe if they’re framed by Washington as simply a hard power tool to advance American foreign policy,” cautioned Scott Paul from Oxfam, a humanitarian organization that does not receive support from USAID.
Robbie Gramer, Nahal Toosi, Carmen Paun, Jordain Carney, and Amy Mackinnon contributed to this report.
Anna Muller contributed to this report for TROIB News
The White House has yet to publicly specify its intentions for the aid agency or how international assistance might be affected by ongoing efforts to curtail the agency's established operational independence, aiming to bring it under the aegis of the State Department. Nevertheless, actions taken by the Trump administration thus far are beginning to reveal how USAID's operations may evolve.
Currently, all programs are in a state of uncertainty as USAID personnel worldwide are placed on paid administrative leave. Yet, hints of what may return can be gleaned from public remarks and waivers that have already been issued to a blanket freeze on foreign aid.
PMG has gathered further insights into USAID's potential future through discussions with eleven current and former agency employees, congressional staffers, and leaders of organizations that collaborate with USAID.
The agency's initiatives span a wide range, from humanitarian relief for disaster-affected and war-affected refugees, to malaria vaccination efforts, literacy initiatives in the Middle East, and providing drought-resistant seeds to subsistence farmers in Africa. USAID also works on improving sanitation systems in India, teaching budgeting skills to entrepreneurs in rural Guatemala, and extending microfinance loans to families for purchasing fuel-efficient cookstoves in Africa.
Republicans contend that USAID should concentrate on delivering food aid and other forms of humanitarian assistance. Moreover, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, appointed by Trump as the acting USAID administrator, seems to be focusing on ongoing AIDS prevention and treatment, particularly through the President’s Emergency Program for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), a major initiative that began under President George W. Bush. PEPFAR has been granted a waiver amid the 90-day freeze on foreign aid, and parts of this program are executed and financed through USAID.
Other areas, however, might not be as fortunate. USAID faces cuts similar to other agencies for programs perceived as aligned with “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” This could potentially include initiatives that promote LGBTQ rights and women's rights. A critical question remains whether this will also apply to efforts aimed at combating discrimination against ethnic and religious minorities. The U.S. has previously backed “inclusion” programs that counter workplace and societal discrimination in nations like Serbia and Guatemala, both of which have experienced genocides and crimes against humanity against indigenous and minority populations. Initiatives in Serbia have already been targeted by the Trump administration.
Programs that support global democracy and civil society organizations at USAID are also likely to face reduced funding. Recent statements from tech entrepreneur Elon Musk's DOGE team criticized “Lincoln scholarships,” which provide college funding for democracy activists in Myanmar.
Other aspects remain uncertain. As of now, there has been no communication regarding USAID’s economic development and education initiatives. However, Musk's attempts to shutter the Education Department and growing efforts against the Department of Labor do not bode well for the agency's programs in those areas.
Oversight in the countries where USAID operates is likely to diminish. The administration is not only placing staff abroad on leave but also instructing others to return to the U.S.
Rubio has assigned daily operations of USAID to Peter Marocco, who is also in charge of the State Department's office of foreign assistance, commonly referred to as the “F bureau.” He has been appointed acting deputy administrator of USAID.
Three congressional staffers familiar with Marocco's management style indicate that he has been personally reviewing individual waiver requests, functioning more as a “grant officer” than as a lead administrator within a large bureau of the State Department. They were granted anonymity to discuss the sensitive and rapidly changing situation.
The State Department did not respond to inquiries about comments or requests for Marocco's availability.
According to the staffers, this level of scrutiny is affecting the distribution of aid already approved under a waiver granted by Rubio on January 27. Leaders of aid and humanitarian organizations working with USAID report receiving minimal guidance on applying for funding under the waivers, while current USAID officials are unsure whether humanitarian resources are reaching the communities that require them most.
Bottlenecks in pending applications have already begun to surface, as indicated by both staffers and executives in the aid sector. Some former USAID employees suggest that even key assistance deemed essential to the agency's humanitarian mission may be at risk.
While a message sent to employees on Tuesday asserted that essential personnel would remain, this did not extend to many staffers within the Bureau of Humanitarian Assistance, which oversees the agency's emergency response to disasters and conflicts.
A former USAID contractor cautioned that, at this moment, the agency lacks the capacity to respond to a major humanitarian crisis due to the specialized expertise of Bureau of Humanitarian Assistance staff.
“If there is a disaster that occurs anywhere in the world, there is no capacity to respond,” the contractor remarked. “The State Department can’t address this. People will die.”
Specific regions are likely to experience reductions in funding. Special envoy for special missions Richard Grenell criticized USAID for spending over $1 billion in the Balkans, and extensive economic aid for Ukraine may also wane as Republicans persist in their critiques of non-military assistance to Kyiv. Eastern and southern Africa, where USAID primarily provides food and health aid, may be less impacted than other regions.
Democrats are opposing the Trump administration's initiatives, arguing that it is unconstitutional for the White House to pursue the dismantling of an agency that is enshrined in significant portions of federal law. They also contend that such actions will permit China and Russia to expand their influence in Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East.
“Dismantling this vital agency not only jeopardizes our humanitarian commitments but also diminishes our influence and ability to counter adversaries like China, Russia, and Iran,” remarked Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
Conversely, congressional Republicans, even those traditionally supportive of foreign aid, back the administration’s careful examination of USAID. Sen. Lindsey Graham stated on Tuesday, “USAID is going to have to justify its existence.”
“When you look at some of the money they're spending … it's not gonna pass the smell test,” Graham added, while reiterating his belief in the importance of soft power.
Concerns in some humanitarian circles are that U.S. foreign assistance may no longer be seen as a gesture of goodwill but instead as a tool of hard power serving American interests.
“Humanitarians will not be safe if they’re framed by Washington as simply a hard power tool to advance American foreign policy,” cautioned Scott Paul from Oxfam, a humanitarian organization that does not receive support from USAID.
Robbie Gramer, Nahal Toosi, Carmen Paun, Jordain Carney, and Amy Mackinnon contributed to this report.
Anna Muller contributed to this report for TROIB News
