This article was originally published on Crafting Your Home. A human contributor also wrote and edited the post.
Researchers said on July 27, 2026, that the Trump administration’s foreign-aid reductions disrupted essential health services for women, girls and marginalized communities in Kenya, Nepal and Colombia.
Health programs closed abruptly.
The funding changes affected services tied to pregnancy, contraception, nutrition and HIV prevention. Some pregnant women arrived at medical facilities without scans, birth plans or established referral arrangements. Health workers in Kenya and Colombia described patients losing access to supported prenatal services. Clinics that remained open faced additional pressure as other providers reduced operations or closed.
Researchers also identified disruptions affecting adolescents who depended on reproductive-health programs. People living with HIV, LGBTQ+ communities, sex workers and migrants faced further risks when specialized services disappeared. The study found that the funding losses damaged connected health systems rather than isolated projects. When one community program closed, patients could also lose counseling, transportation, referrals and follow-up care.
Researchers focused on three countries.
The research team surveyed 98 global-health practitioners and interviewed 53 people. Participants included clinicians, humanitarian workers, government officials, nonprofit leaders and community health workers. Most of the fieldwork took place in February and March 2025. The researchers focused on Kenya, Nepal and Colombia to document the immediate consequences of the funding decisions.
The study did not attempt to calculate a global death toll. It also did not claim that the experiences in three countries represented every nation affected by the cuts. Instead, the researchers examined how abrupt funding losses changed services during the first weeks of the freeze. Their findings showed rapid staff departures, clinic closures and interruptions to programs serving vulnerable populations.
Nepal organizations lost staff.
In Nepal, funding losses weakened HIV programs and nutrition services for mothers and newborns. Frontline workers left their positions after organizations could no longer pay salaries. Grassroots groups serving LGBTQ+ people and other marginalized communities also reduced or ended services. The closures affected HIV testing, counseling, prevention, and access to pre-exposure prophylaxis, commonly called PrEP.
One network had received 85% of its funding through USAID-supported programs. It operated 20 clinics before the funding changes. The closures left more than 1,200 clients without PrEP services. They also cost 262 of the organization’s 350 staff members their jobs, as reported in coverage of Nepal’s displaced aid workers.
Administration defended the restructuring.
President Donald Trump froze U.S. foreign assistance after returning to office in January 2025. His administration later dismantled much of the U.S. Agency for International Development and transferred certain responsibilities to the State Department. The administration said the restructuring would reduce bureaucracy and align foreign assistance with U.S. interests. It also said remaining programs would face closer reviews for efficiency and effectiveness.
The government outlined its approach through the administration’s foreign assistance policy. The policy called for other countries to contribute more toward humanitarian and health programs. The State Department maintained that the United States continued to provide substantial health and humanitarian support. Officials framed the changes as a reorganization rather than a complete withdrawal from foreign assistance.
Other donor cuts added pressure.
The U.S. reductions followed declining aid commitments from several European governments. Britain also announced plans to reduce its foreign-aid budget from 0.5% to 0.3% of gross national income. Those changes could sharply reduce assistance to several African countries. Kenya’s British aid allocation was expected to fall by 93%.
The planned British aid reductions created additional pressure on organizations already adjusting to the loss of U.S. support. Simultaneous reductions by major donors make it harder for local programs to find replacement funding. Health organizations cannot easily transfer staff, medicine and patients to another provider when several donors withdraw at once.
If you like what you just read, then subscribe to our newsletter and follow us on social media.
