US

Summary

ODA Spending

How much ODA does the US contribute?

The US was the largest donor country in absolute terms in 2024. Relative to economic size, however, the US’ ODA is low, at 0.22% of GNI in 2024, placing the US in 25^th among OECD DAC members. As a result of expected ODA cuts under the Trump administration, the US' ranking in both relative and absolute terms is expected to fall dramatically.

The US aligns with the DAC statistical directives and ODA definition. However, the US' definition of 'foreign assistance' is broader and includes non - ODA eligible items such as military assistance, although there are significant gaps in Department of Defense reporting. The difference between ODA and foreign assistance reporting is highlighted in this table.

How is US ODA changing?

In March 2025, it was announced that 83% of USAID's programs would be cut, with only 869 employees remaining active. Remaining programs are valued at up to US$78 billion, but only US$8.3 billion are unobligated funds intended for future disbursement.

The administration announced high-level plans to reduce US foreign assistance by nearly $60 billion, primarily impacting USAID and State Department grants to a lesser extent. This reduction would be to programs covering multiple-year awards. Although it is still unclear exactly how much of these cuts would be from ODA-eligible programs, based on the fact that the bulk of the cuts are coming from USAID, the cut means that this would drop the US from the largest ODA donor to around the 12^th-largest once the cuts had fully taken place. Some grants for HIV and tuberculosis medications, and food assistance for countries in civil wars and natural disasters will continue.

ODA held nearly steady in 2023. US$6.2 billion of funding went to in-donor refugee costs, equivalent to 9.7% of total ODA, a slight decline from the previous year. Bilateral support to Ukraine accounted for an additional 16% of total ODA in 2022. In April 2024, Congress passed a US$95 billion national security emergency funding bill for Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, and Gaza and other partners, of which US$26.8 billion is for economic and humanitarian assistance.

Many of Trump's previous decisions withdrawing support from the multilateral system and weakening development funding, such as budget cuts to USAID, were previously reversed by the Biden administration. The US once again withdrew from the Paris Agreement and WHO upon Trump's inauguration in January 2025, and has since reduced or terminated funding for 17 other multilateral organizations.

Where is US ODA allocated?

Historically, US Congress favors bilateral assistance as it allows Congress to have greater control in how US foreign assistance is spent. FY2023 enacted levels, however, did provide for a small increase in multilateral funding.

Bilateral Spending

Since Russia’s 2022 full-scale invasion, Ukraine has been the largest recipient of ODA, with governance funding as USAID’s primary focus. Outside Ukraine, USAID’s next-largest sector was humanitarian assistance, supporting crisis-hit nations like Ethiopia, Afghanistan, Yemen, and South Sudan. The withdrawal of US funding threatens essential services in these regions.

Food assistance has been particularly affected, with USAID previously supporting nutrition programs in Nigeria and Bangladesh. Cuts have halted food shipments to famine-prone areas like Sudan and Gaza, while US farmers have also lost revenue from food assistance exports.

The US funded nearly half of global humanitarian assistance in 2023, supporting health, sanitation, and refugee care. Cuts to this sector are expected to have severe consequences globally.

Multilateral Spending and Commitments

As a result of its focus on promoting national interests and strengthening bilateral relationships, the US channels a lower share of its total ODA to multilateral organizations than other OECD DAC donors. Core contributions to multilaterals accounted for 10% of the US’ total ODA in 2023, well below the DAC average of 41%. In absolute terms, the US became the top provider of core contributions to multilaterals in 2021. The FY2024 final appropriations had a 7% increase in contributions to International Organizations, allowing the US to fully meet its obligations. However, voluntary contributions from FY2023 to FY2024 received a cut of 14%.

The US primarily channels its ODA bilaterally, but in 2023, it still contributed US$5.5 billion—about 10% of its total ODA—to multilateral institutions. However, recent policy shifts have seen the Trump Administration withdraw from key multilateral organizations, reduce funding commitments, and spurn high-level G20 meetings.

The Global Fund has historically received the largest share of US multilateral assistance, but its funding has been reduced from US$2 billion to US$1.2 billion due to a decline in contributions from other donors. Similarly, the Biden Administration pledged US$4 billion to the IDA in December 2024, but it remains uncertain if the Trump Administration will honor this commitment. While a full US withdrawal from MDBs is unlikely, an exit or significant decrease in funding would significantly impact operations. The Trump Administration terminated US$436.8 million in funding to the IBRD, a relatively small amount in comparison to US$28.4 billion obligated and remaining to the bank.

The US withdrew from the WHO on January 20, 2025, despite previously being its largest donor, contributing US$1.3 billion in the 2022–2023 budget cycle. The administration has also canceled US$4 billion in pledged funding to the GCF, marking the first time a country has withdrawn previously committed funds. In March 2025, it was reported that the US will end various levels of financial support for 17 different multilateral organizations, including 14 UN agencies. The sum of all terminated unobligated amounts comes to nearly US$4.1 billion, likely to represent multi-year funding beyond 2025. While some lost their remaining funding for all existing awards, others, such as IBRD, retained several. Uncertainty remains about revenue streams from other US government agencies to the World Bank and other multilaterals.

Politics & Priorities

What is the current state of US politics?

The US is a constitutional federal republic, where powers reserved for national government are shared between independent branches of government: the executive branch, which is headed by the president; the US congress, and the judiciary. The president, currently Donald Trump (Republican) since January 2025, sets overarching policy orientations for US foreign assistance, including for development. Development policies and priorities are also defined by the US congress, including the two chambers, the House of Representatives and the Senate, which have a final say on federal spending, including foreign assistance.

Within the executive branch, the US Department of State is responsible for foreign policy and diplomacy. On March 28, 2025, the US administration announced plans to merge USAID into the State Department, dissolving it as an independent agency and reducing staffing to a statutory minimum of 15 positions.

Congress must pass new legislation to officially eliminate the agency. If it does so, the State Department will create an Office of Global Food Security to manage food security and humanitarian programs previously handled by USAID. The remaining global health programs will be supervised by the Bureau of Global Health Security and Diplomacy. Other programs will be managed by regional bureaus within the State Department. By July 1, 2025, the State Department will fully take over USAID’s remaining programming. By September 2, 2025, USAID’s operations will transfer to State or shut down completely.

Former US President Donald Trump (Republican) won reelection in November 2024 and took office in January 2025. The House and the Senate were also won by the Republican Party in November 2024, giving the president significant congressional support at least until the midterm elections in fall 2026.

Main Actors

What are the US' development priorities?

The Trump administration paused foreign assistance for 90 days upon his inauguration in January 2025, announcing in an executive order that "foreign aid industry and bureaucracy are not aligned with American interests and in many cases antithetical to American values." Trump Administration executive orders have been challenged frequently in court, with a District Judge ruling on March 10 that any terminations, suspensions, and stop-work orders issued between January 20 and February 13, 2025, are invalid, and payments or letter of credit drawdowns for work completed before February 13 cannot be withheld. The ruling against withholding funds means that around US$2 billion owed to USAID partners for already-done work is now required to be paid out by the government. The ruling does not affect the termination of programs that have not yet been carried out.

With many USAID staffers receiving official termination notices and all but 15 statutory positions being eliminated, even those working for projects that had initially received a life-saving waiver, the administration has essentially signaled the premature end of the ostensible 90-day review period and quashed hopes of any meaningful resumption of USAID activities. USAID headquarters have since closed.

By issue

Global health: The US is historically the largest donor to global health. However, overall budget constraints, small cuts to global health security, and lower donor contributions to the Global Fund have resulted in overall decreases in global health in FY2024. US funding to the Global Fund is capped at no more than a third of all total funding, which can constrain contributions.

The US, previously its largest contributor, withdrew from the WHO in January 2025. Funding for Gavi was terminated in March 2025. While the administration generally has the authority to select the implementing organizations it collaborates with, in global health, Congress provides agencies with specific funding instructions. These instructions include amounts for different program areas and for certain international institutions (incl. Gavi). Consequently, Congress may review the list of terminations in light of these directives and request that the administration report on its spending plans.

Climate: Funding for climate programs in the International Affairs Budget, which are largely cross-cutting, is not detailed. However, funding levels between FY2023 and FY2024 remained essentially flat, including for the Clean Technology Fund and the Global Environmental Fund. There was no specific allocation for the Green Climate Fund, but the State Department is permitted to make a US contribution. The Trump Administration has canceled US$4 billion in pledged funding to the GCF, marking the first time a country has withdrawn previously committed funds.

The Trump administration withdrew from the Paris Agreement in January 2025 and has taken a hostile stance towards climate-related endeavors.

Gender equality: The first-ever US National Strategy for Gender Equity and Equality, which applies to both US domestic and international policy, was released in 2021. FY2024 funding to gender remained essentially at FY2023 levels, including US$250 million for GBV, US$150 million for Women, Peace, and Security Strategy, and US$200 million for the Gender Equity and Equality Action Fund. The FY2025 budget requested a 15% increase in gender accounts.

The Trump administration has taken a hostile stance towards gender equality, mandating that all federal programs, including foreign aid programs, eliminate their DEI practices upon his inauguration in January 2025. Development programs involving a gender element were the subject of severe political criticism in the early days of the administration.

While agriculture and education are key sectors for the US, they are typically not considered top-level priorities. Food security has consistent bipartisan congressional support. However, FY2024 enacted levels cut international food programs by 6% compared to the previous year.

Key programs providing food assistance have typically enjoyed bipartisan support in DC, with many Republicans eschewing a conservative view on development in general to support US intervention in crisis conditions. This is due in no small part to the fact that US farmers in predominantly conservative states produce a significant amount (more than US$510 million in 2024) of food commodities, including corn, rice, and soybeans, that are sent abroad as food assistance. US Republicans and their constituents have expressed dismay at the loss of revenue for American farmers. Food assistance is one of the sectors that will continue under the State Department.

By region

See charts under the Bilateral Spending section for greater recipient and regional distribution detail.

The US concentrates its bilateral ODA on sub-Saharan Africa, which typically receives between a quarter and a third of US bilateral ODA.

The US - Africa Summit in December 2022 brought together a number of African leaders and US officials to create and expand partnerships across the African continent to cover a range of issues including food security, climate change, health care and pandemic preparations, inclusive economies, good governance, human rights, and peace and security. The summit resulted in a total of US$55 billion in commitments to the continent from the US over 2022-2025.

Since the beginning of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, the US has provided over US$13 billion in direct budget support, including for healthcare, education, and emergency response. In addition, US$1.4 billion has been provided in humanitarian assistance and over US$800 million in development assistance, which will bolster Ukraine’s energy grid, governance institutions, agricultural production, small businesses, and civil society.

Budget

What are the details of the US' ODA budget?

The FY2025 budget should have been enacted by September 30, 2024, however, the US instead ran a continuing resolution keeping funding at FY2024 levels until December 20, 2024. Another continuing resolution extended funding through March 2025. The US House of Representatives and Senate passed a continuing resolution to fund the government through September 2025, which would keep federal agencies’ spending at 2024 levels.

The US does not have a dedicated ODA budget. Rather, the federal budget is divided into budget ‘functions’ that include all spending on an issue, sourced from various appropriations bills. Almost all development-related spending is within Budget Function 150, commonly referred to as the IAB, which includes ODA-accountable funding and non - ODA money, such as operating embassies, military assistance, and promotion of US exports.

ODA spending does not necessarily reflect the most current obligations and expenditures for US foreign assistance. A good source of detailed funding is ForeignAssistance.gov, which allows analysis of funding by agency, sector, type of funding, region, and other breakdowns.

The vast majority of funding included under international affairs comes from the SFOPS appropriations bill, with the remainder sourced primarily from the agricultural appropriations bill for food security and food-assistance funding.

The SFOPS bill is divided into ‘titles,’ each covering a different budget envelope. The money in these envelopes is mainly, but not exclusively, managed by the State Department and USAID. Relevant titles related to global development include:

• Title I: Department of State and Related Agency largely funds the management and running of the State Department. It also contributes to the US’ assessed contributions to 44 international organizations, including the UN regular budget and its specialized agencies.
• Title II: Administration of Foreign Assistance provides operational funds for USAID.
• Title III: Bilateral Economic Assistance covers much of the US’ foreign assistance and development activities, accounting for just under half of the entire SFOPS. The largest share goes to global health. Programs funded under Title III are jointly managed by the State Department and USAID. Most funding is channeled through the ‘Development Assistance’ envelope, which is broadly intended to foster economic progress and social stability in partner countries, and the ESF, which provides assistance to allies and countries in transition to democracy, support the Middle East peace process, and finance economic stabilization programs.
• Title V: Multilateral Assistance includes money for US voluntary contributions to various multilateral organizations, including to the World Bank and global environmental funds.

This table excludes emergency funding.

How does the US determine its ODA budget?

The US fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30. The budget process begins 12 to 14 months, or more, prior to the start of the fiscal year. Most federal spending consists of ‘mandatory spending’ and ‘discretionary spending;' foreign assistance falls under discretionary spending. The budget process for discretionary spending can be categorized into three separate phases: 1) development of the president’s budget request, 2) congressional budgeting, and 3) congressional appropriations.

This timeline has become increasingly variable in recent years due to political deadlocks, often resulting in continuing resolutions that extend the fiscal year and that keep the government funding running while an agreement is reached.

Phase 1: Development of the president’s budget request (May - February) Government departments and agencies begin developing budgets in May and submit funding requests in September/October: From May to September, departments and agencies develop their budgets and set broad parameters for spending on specific programs. The USAID and the State Department, for example, negotiate major funding levels and policy decisions for each budget line and then share the proposal with the White House’s OMB. From September to November, OMB negotiates funding levels with the heads of government departments and agencies. Engagement with OMB from August to September is important. At this time, it can receive external input to inform its engagement and negotiation with departments and agencies.

Under normal circumstances, negotiations can take between two and four weeks before the OMB officially passes back the budget request for agency review. In recent years, this stage has taken months rather than weeks, delaying the release of the budget request.

OMB works to finalize budget request in late fall and president submits it in February: In November/December, the OMB finalizes the budget request before the president signs off in late December/early January. Traditionally, the president submits his budget request to Congress the first Monday in February. This date is often delayed, particularly when a new administration takes office.

Phase 2: Congressional budgeting (February - April) Congress sets spending limits for main budget areas: Once the president’s budget request is submitted to Congress, the CBO evaluates the request. The House and Senate then each develop, debate, and (in theory) pass a joint congressional budget resolution before April 15. The resolution sets the overall level of discretionary funding for the next fiscal year. This ceiling or “budget cap” is sent to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. Unlike the president’s budget request, which is a detailed proposal – the budget resolution is a short, high-level document. It is not a bill that is signed into law, but instead provides the binding budget cap that appropriators use to allocate discretionary spending. The president’s budget request is a key opportunity for advocates to engage in discussion on the foreign affairs budget with key stakeholders including with Congress, government agencies and departments, and the White House, through meetings, letters, and media outreach.

Phase 3: Congressional appropriations (April - September) Congress considers appropriations bills that allocate funding to government functions, including foreign assistance, from April 15 to September: After the final budget resolution is agreed upon, or after April 15 (whichever comes first), Congress must draft, debate, and pass 12 different appropriations bills, which correspond to different government functions. This includes the appropriations bill for SFOPS, which funds most development programs (see ‘Budget’). During the spring, each of the relevant committees and subcommittees hold several hearings on the president’s budget request to debate, amend, and rewrite or “mark-up” the appropriations bills. Prior to this phase, there are several advocacy opportunities, including meetings on Capitol Hill, letters to Appropriations Committee chairs, events, and participation in hearings.

House and Senate negotiate final budget; president signs: Once an appropriations bill has passed the House and Senate, a conference committee is formed with representatives from the Appropriations Committees to negotiate the differences between the House‐ and Senate-passed bills. If the House and Senate cannot find an agreement by the end of September, Congress needs to enact an emergency short-term measure – usually a ‘continuing resolution’ – to provide temporary funding to ensure the government continues to operate while the appropriations bills are finalized. Any spending bills are then sent to the president for approval or for veto; vetoes are rare and require an override from two-thirds of both chambers of Congress.