Politics
What Remains of U.S.A.I.D. After DOGE’s Budget Cuts?
As the United States Agency for International Development was being dismantled in early February, aid workers and officials in Washington and around the world set out to salvage what they could.
In the months since, there has been a widespread and under-the-radar effort to retain and restore some of the agency’s most critical work — including some projects favored by those who had the administration’s ear, a New York Times investigation shows.
Former President George W. Bush, who created the H.I.V./AIDS prevention program known as PEPFAR, called Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Leadership at the World Food Program called senators and ambassadors, and they said that millions of hungry people would die. Aid workers and foreign officials found programs that could be said to align with Mr. Trump’s America First agenda and flagged them for Republicans to pass on to the White House with a request to reinstate them.
The shell of U.S.A.I.D that is left today is the result of this chorus of pleas and negotiations, and of hasty decisions made by political leaders, many of whom had little experience in foreign aid.
Remaining U.S.A.I.D programs by sector
The overhaul was a far cry from the comprehensive review to evaluate aid programs and realign them with U.S. foreign policy that Mr. Trump promised on his first day in office.
Aid workers said different departments frantically drafted their own lists of awards to keep or restore, but no one seemed to be looking at the big picture. Sometimes Mr. Rubio would sign off on a decision, only for staffers from Mr. Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency or other political appointees to determine the opposite. The piecemeal approach, aid workers said, ignored the reality that some programs relied on others to function.
U.S.A.I.D. employees and officials — including members of Congress who are supposed to provide oversight of the agency’s work — have said they are still struggling to decipher the administration’s goals for foreign aid.
This account is based on 70 interviews and dozens of internal documents and correspondence, and an analysis of both public and internal award databases.
As a share of each country’s funding before cuts
Where U.S.A.I.D. funding remains
The remaining awards are designed to address acute disease, hunger and other emergencies, and not areas like education, governance or jobs that are supposed to help countries avoid crises in the first place. Aid workers and experts said this is a short-sighted way to handle foreign aid that reflects a deep misunderstanding of the agency’s work and will have long-term consequences for Americans.
“You know what is not efficient? Putting out fires,” said Laura Meissner, a former U.S.A.I.D. contractor, whose work to manage humanitarian aid in multiple countries was terminated. “It’s way cheaper to stabilize people so they can weather the storm than to wait until they are destitute and their kids are malnourished.”
No rhyme or reason
In February, Elon Musk appeared in an X Spaces event in part to discuss DOGE’s work at U.S.A.I.D. “You have just got to get rid of the whole thing,” he said.
Vivek Ramaswamy, who helped create DOGE, was also on the call and offered a solution: “Let’s say something is cut that the people of this country just demand needs to exist again. It can always be voted back into existence.”
Mr. Musk agreed. “Well said, Vivek.”
Demands to return funding to certain U.S.A.I.D. programs were already underway.
The day after Mr. Musk’s talk, Senator Jerry Moran, Republican of Kansas, publicly urged Mr. Rubio to move American-grown food aid that was stuck in U.S. ports with no funding for shipment. In the weeks to follow, U.S. shippers and farmers met with members of Congress to explain the value of their lifesaving programs.
Many U.S.A.I.D.-supported organizations, including Catholic Relief Services and Mercy Corps, spoke with members of Congress. Several award recipients, including faith-based groups, had private meetings with Pete Marocco, who was managing the agency for Mr. Rubio. Other aid organizations sued the administration.
These efforts were far more frantic than standard lobbying on Capitol Hill. At the same time, U.S.A.I.D. staff members were pushing Trump-appointed officials inside the agency to restore dozens of terminated awards that provided lifesaving food or medicine or kept employees safe overseas.
Political leaders, who had told employees that they knew little about the agency’s programs, acknowledged in late February that some of these awards might have been cut in error, according to internal emails reviewed by The Times.
Then on March 2, a former U.S.A.I.D. official who oversaw global health programs leaked memos that estimated millions would suffer or die from disease if programs did not resume. Over the next day, more than 300 awards were restored, according to internal documents reviewed by The Times. More than 100 more would be “unterminated” in the days to follow.
A timeline of restored U.S.A.I.D. programs
Over several weeks, officials reinstated programs in reaction to external pressure, global events and specific interest groups.
The newly restored awards included U.S.-grown emergency food aid, disaster preparedness, programs to combat H.I.V./AIDS and malaria, and several awards in Jordan and Cuba.
A senior State Department official who was not authorized to speak publicly said that agency leaders had conducted a faster review than originally planned, after a federal judge ordered officials to reverse the president’s freeze on foreign aid programs.
The official added that recalibrations should be an expected part of any major overhaul and noted that a vast majority of the termination decisions remained in place. The agency declined to make officials available for an on-the-record interview.
U.S.A.I.D. staff members said they felt there was no rhyme or reason to any of it.
The idea was to destroy everything, said a global health security expert at U.S.A.I.D., who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation, as did most aid workers and other officials interviewed for this article. If someone complained, they would bring it back.
Smaller, local organizations were largely absent from the restorations. Without people in Washington to speak up for them, many were left behind.
“Many were wholly dependent on U.S.A.I.D.,” said Tom Hart, the president of InterAction, an alliance of global nongovernmental organizations. “Suddenly pulling the rug from beneath them hurts the idea of helping countries reach self-reliance, a goal the first Trump administration rightly sought.”
Not about fraud, inefficiency or cost
Despite its claims that “waste and abuse run deep” at U.S.A.I.D., the administration did not prioritize keeping programs that work to reduce fraud.
Instead, officials canceled contracts designed to prevent abuse, including awards for inspectors to watch over aid delivery in high-risk locations in more than a dozen countries.
Cost savings was not a significant factor in the administration’s decision making, either. In March, Mr. Rubio announced that officials had cut about 83 percent of the programs at U.S.A.I.D., but, in dollar terms, they cut programs that were worth less than half of the agency’s obligations.
Officials kept some of U.S.A.I.D.’s largest commitments and cut thousands of less expensive ones, an analysis of multiyear grants and contracts shows. The median kept award was worth $6 million, and 40 percent of these awards were worth $10 million or more.
Some were worth billions. For example, the Washington-based private development firm Chemonics retained two awards for global health supply chains focused on H.I.V. and malaria, worth over $6 billion and $2 billion, respectively.
The median cut award, by contrast, was worth just over $1 million. About a third of the cut awards were worth $100,000 or less.
In March, Mr. Marocco told officials privately that he planned to save $125 billion by cutting programs at both U.S.A.I.D. and the State Department. All together, the canceled awards at U.S.A.I.D. were worth an estimated $76 billion over several years, and $47 billion had already been committed to them.
It remains unclear what will happen to that money. An analysis of spending data shows the canceled awards had about $17 billion left unspent when DOGE took its ax to the agency.
If the overhaul wasn’t focused on fraud, efficiency or costs, there was one north star: a post on X from Mr. Rubio on March 10, which explained the government was keeping “approximately 1,000” U.S.A.I.D. programs. Agency staff members said they were told that they could recommend programs to restore — or even seek new funds for existing awards — but that they could never let the total count surpass 1,000.
Aid workers saw the post as Mr. Rubio retaking some control of the U.S.A.I.D. overhaul after DOGE had taken it too far.
Divisions between the secretary and Mr. Musk’s team became clear in April, when Jeremy Lewin, a DOGE staff member who became a top U.S.A.I.D. official, canceled dozens of the most critical emergency food awards that officials had already promised to keep. Mr. Rubio had just signed off on more funds for at least one of the awards, a rare step and a clear sign of its priority.
Within days of the cuts, Mr. Lewin asked agency employees to restore at least six of the awards, according to an email reviewed by The Times. He apologized for the back and forth, saying it was his fault.
“You have Secretary Rubio getting kind of made a fool of by DOGE because he has repeatedly said that they are going to protect these kinds of lifesaving programs. And then you have DOGE go out and basically countermand him,” said Jeremy Konyndyk, president of Refugees International and a former U.S.A.I.D. adviser to the Biden and Obama administrations. “It’s really unclear who is steering the bus.”
The senior State Department official said that all decisions had been made by U.S.A.I.D. and State Department officials in close consultation with Mr. Rubio, and that they made adjustments as priorities evolved.
Picking up after DOGE
Conservatives have long wanted to reform foreign aid and the layers of bureaucracy that stand between Washington and the people who benefit. But the enormous scope of the U.S.A.I.D. reduction, and the rushed and opaque way it was done, has privately concerned many Republicans.
Andrew Natsios, a former U.S.A.I.D. administrator under President George W. Bush, said that DOGE made a mess that has left gaps for China and Russia to fill.
“Our economy, our security and our way of life is dependent on our connection to the developing world and not just the rich world,” he said “And we have just lost our influence in the developing world.”
As Mr. Musk has stepped back from the spotlight, the remaining steps of the overhaul have been relatively calm and more strategic, according to internal correspondence reviewed by The Times and interviews with people familiar with the decision making. Officials are bringing the remaining U.S.A.I.D. awards under the umbrella of the State Department this summer, where plans for these programs could change again.
The bureaus that will absorb the awards are facing significant cuts too, and employees have expressed concern that they simply do not have the staff, resources or expertise to run them. They plan to terminate more awards and to let others expire.
After months of uncertainty, even the chosen projects are struggling to plan for the future.
One is a World Food Program contract in Kenya that helps feed 700,000 refugees from nearby conflicts. The program is nearly out of food, and while it remains on the list of active U.S.A.I.D. awards, it has not received any funding this year.
As a result, the program’s organizers have had to reduce the rations they provide.
“Do I feed more people for a shorter period of time, or do I feed fewer people who are more critical?” said Lauren Landis, the program’s country director in Kenya. “We haven’t made that decision yet.”
Methodology
A complete list of U.S.A.I.D. awards operating after the president’s decision to review the agency’s work has not been made public. To assess which programs were kept or cut, The Times obtained internal data on individual award status from U.S.A.I.D. and the State Department in April and May and compared that data to similar information on award status that was shared with Congress in March and obtained by The Times. A small number of awards were missing from each of these data sets.
Reporters drew on data from ForeignAssistance.gov and USASpending.gov to determine information about the sectors, recipients and spending for each award.
Award status data is as of May 7; a few dozen awards have been cut since then, internal data shows.
Except where noted, the dollar value of awards is based on the amount that had been obligated over the lifetime of the award, as of May 7 for active awards and as of March 25 for terminated awards.
Spending, sector, and recipient data was not available for 45 terminated awards. Spending data was not available for 18 active awards.
new video loaded: Bill Clinton Says He ‘Did Nothing Wrong’ in House Epstein Inquiry
transcript
transcript
Bill Clinton Says He ‘Did Nothing Wrong’ in House Epstein Inquiry
Former President Bill Clinton told members of the House Oversight Committee in a closed-door deposition that he “saw nothing” and had done nothing wrong when he associated with Jeffrey Epstein decades ago.
-
“Cause we don’t know when the video will be out. I don’t know when the transcript will be out. We’ve asked that they be out as quickly as possible.” “I don’t like seeing him deposed, but they certainly went after me a lot more than that.” “Republicans have now set a new precedent, which is to bring in presidents and former presidents to testify. So we’re once again going to make that call that we did yesterday. We are now asking and demanding that President Trump officially come in and testify in front of the Oversight Committee.” “Ranking Member Garcia asked President Clinton, quote, ‘Should President Trump be called to answer questions from this committee?’ And President Clinton said, that’s for you to decide. And the president went on to say that the President Trump has never said anything to me to make me think he was involved. “The way Chairman Comer described it, I don’t think is a complete, accurate description of what actually was said. So let’s release the full transcript.”
By Jackeline Luna
February 27, 2026
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) accused Everett, Washington, Mayor Cassie Franklin of escalating tensions with federal authorities after she issued a directive limiting immigration enforcement in the city.
Franklin issued a mayoral directive this week establishing citywide protocols for staff, including law enforcement, that restrict federal immigration agents from entering non-public areas of city buildings without a judicial warrant.
“We’ve heard directly from residents who are afraid to leave their houses because of the concerning immigration activity happening locally and across our country. It’s heartbreaking to see the impacts on Everett families and businesses,” Franklin said in a statement.
“With this directive, we are setting clear protocols, protecting access to services and reinforcing our commitment to serving the entire community.”
ICE blasted the directive Friday, writing on X it “escalates tension and directs city law enforcement to intervene with ICE operations at their own discretion,” thereby “putting everyone at greater risk.”
Mayor Cassie Franklin said her new citywide immigration enforcement protocols are intended to protect residents and ensure access to services, while ICE accused her of escalating tensions with federal authorities. (Google Maps)
ICE said Franklin was directing city workers to “impede ICE operations and expose the location of ICE officers and agents.”
“Working AGAINST ICE forces federal teams into the community searching for criminal illegal aliens released from local jails — INCREASING THE FEDERAL PRESENCE,” the agency said. “Working with ICE reduces the federal presence.”
“If Mayor Franklin wanted to protect the people she claims to serve, she’d empower the city police with an ICE 287g partnership — instead she serves criminal illegal aliens,” ICE added.
DHS, WHITE HOUSE MOCK CHICAGO’S LAWSUIT OVER ICE: ‘MIRACULOUSLY REDISCOVERED THE 10TH AMENDMENT’
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement blasted Everett’s mayor after she issued a directive restricting federal agents from accessing non-public areas of city facilities without a warrant. (Victor J. Blue/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
During a city council meeting where she announced the policy, Franklin said “federal immigration enforcement is causing real fear for Everett residents.”
“It’s been heartbreaking to see the racial profiling that’s having an impact on Everett families and businesses,” she said. “We know there are kids staying home from school, people not going to work or people not going about their day, dining out or shopping for essentials.”
The mayor’s directive covers four main areas, including restricting federal immigration agents from accessing non-public areas of city buildings without a warrant, requiring immediate reporting of enforcement activity on city property and mandating clear signage to enforce access limits.
BLOCKING ICE COOPERATION FUELED MINNESOTA UNREST, OFFICIALS WARN AS VIRGINIA REVERSES COURSE
Everett, Wash., Mayor Cassie Franklin said her new directive is aimed at protecting residents amid heightened immigration enforcement activity. (iStock)
It also calls for an internal policy review and staff training, including the creation of an Interdepartmental Response Team and updated immigration enforcement protocols to ensure compliance with state law.
Franklin directed city staff to expand partnerships with community leaders, advocacy groups and regional governments to coordinate responses to immigration enforcement, while promoting immigrant-owned businesses and providing workplace protections and “know your rights” resources.
The mayor also reaffirmed a commitment to “constitutional policing and best practices,” stating that the police department will comply with state law barring participation in civil immigration enforcement. The directive outlines protocols for documenting interactions with federal officials, reviewing records requests and strengthening privacy safeguards and technology audits.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Everett, Wash., Mayor Cassie Franklin issued a directive limiting federal immigration enforcement in city facilities. (iStock)
“We want everyone in the city of Everett to feel safe calling 911 when they need help and to know that Everett Police will not ask about your immigration status,” Franklin said during the council meeting. ”I also expect our officers to intervene if it’s safe to do so to protect our residents when they witness federal officers using unnecessary force.”
Fox News Digital has reached out to Mayor Franklin’s office and ICE for comment.
Related Article
The morning after Netflix clinched its deal to buy Warner Bros., Paramount Skydance Chairman David Ellison assembled a war room of trusted advisors, including his billionaire father, Larry Ellison.
Furious at Warner Bros. Discovery Chief David Zaslav for ending the auction, the Ellisons and their team began plotting their comeback on that crisp December day.
To rattle Warner Bros. Discovery and its investors, they launched a three-front campaign: a lawsuit, a hostile takeover bid and direct lobbying of the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress.
“There was a master battle plan — and it was extremely disciplined,” said one auction insider who was not authorized to comment publicly.
Netflix stunned the industry late Thursday by pulling out of the bidding, clearing the way for Paramount to claim the company that owns HBO, HBO Max, CNN, TBS, Food Network and the Warner Bros. film and television studios in Burbank. The deal was valued at more than $111 billion.
The streaming giant’s reversal came just hours after co-Chief Executive Ted Sarandos met with Atty Gen. Pam Bondi and a deputy at the White House. It was a cordial session, but the Trump officials told Sarandos that his deal was facing significant hurdles in Washington, according to a person close to the administration who was not authorized to comment publicly.
Even before that meeting, the tide had turned for Paramount in a swell of power, politics and brinkmanship.
“Netflix played their cards well; however, Paramount played their cards perfectly,” said Jonathan Miller, chief executive of Integrated Media Co. “They did exactly what they had to do and when they had to do it — which was at the very last moment.”
Key to victory was Larry Ellison, his $200-billion fortune and his connections to President Trump and congressional Republicans.
Paramount also hired Trump’s former antitrust chief, attorney Makan Delrahim, to quarterback the firm’s legal and regulatory action.
Republicans during a Senate hearing this month piled onto Sarandos with complaints about potential monopolistic practices and “woke” programming.
David Ellison skipped that hearing. This week, however, he attended Trump’s State of the Union address in the Capitol chambers, a guest of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). The two men posed, grinning and giving a thumbs-up, for a photo that was posted to Graham’s X account.
David Ellison, the chairman and chief executive of Paramount Skydance Corp., walks through Statuary Hall to the State of the Union address at the U.S. Capitol on Feb. 24, 2026.
(Anna Moneymaker / Getty Images)
On Friday, Netflix said it had received a $2.8-billion payment — a termination fee Paramount agreed to pay to send Netflix on its way.
Long before David Ellison and his family acquired Paramount and CBS last summer, the 43-year-old tech scion and aircraft pilot already had his sights set on Warner Bros. Discovery.
Paramount’s assets, including MTV, Nickelodeon and the Melrose Avenue movie studio, have been fading. Ellison recognized he needed the more robust company — Warner Bros. Discovery — to achieve his ambitions.
“From the very beginning, our pursuit of Warner Bros. Discovery has been guided by a clear purpose: to honor the legacy of two iconic companies while accelerating our vision of building a next-generation media and entertainment company,” David Ellison said in a Friday statement. “We couldn’t be more excited for what’s ahead.”
Warner’s chief, Zaslav, who had initially opposed the Paramount bid, added: “We look forward to working with Paramount to complete this historic transaction.”
Netflix, in a separate statement, said it was unwilling to go beyond its $82.7-billion proposal that Warner board members accepted Dec. 4.
“We believe we would have been strong stewards of Warner Bros.’ iconic brands, and that our deal would have strengthened the entertainment industry and preserved and created more production jobs,” Sarandos and co-Chief Executive Greg Peters said in a statement.
“But this transaction was always a ‘nice to have’ at the right price, not a ‘must have’ at any price,” the Netflix chiefs said.
Netflix may have miscalculated the Ellison family’s determination when it agreed Feb. 16 to allow Paramount back into the bidding.
The Los Gatos, Calif.-based company already had prevailed in the auction, and had an agreement in hand. Its next step was a shareholder vote.
“They didn’t need to let Paramount back in, but there was a lot of pressure on them to make sure the process wouldn’t be challenged,” Miller said.
In addition, Netflix’s stock had also been pummeled — the company had lost a quarter of its value — since investors learned the company was making a Warner run.
Upon news that Netflix had withdrawn, its shares soared Friday nearly 14% to $96.24.
Netflix Chief Executive Ted Sarandos arrives at the White House on Feb. 26, 2026.
(Andrew Leyden / Getty Images)
Invited back into the auction room, Paramount unveiled a much stronger proposal than the one it submitted in December.
The elder Ellison had pledged to personally guarantee the deal, including $45.7 billion in equity required to close the transaction. And if bankers became worried that Paramount was too leveraged, the tech mogul agreed to put in more money in order to secure the bank financing.
That promise assuaged Warner Bros. Discovery board members who had fretted for weeks that they weren’t sure Ellison would sign on the dotted line, according to two people close to the auction who were not authorized to comment.
Paramount’s pressure campaign had been relentless, first winning over theater owners, who expressed alarm over Netflix’s business model that encourages consumers to watch movies in their homes.
During the last two weeks, Sarandos got dragged into two ugly controversies.
First, famed filmmaker James Cameron endorsed Paramount, saying a Netflix takeover would lead to massive job losses in the entertainment industry, which is already reeling from a production slowdown in Southern California that has disrupted the lives of thousands of film industry workers.
Then, a week ago, Trump took aim at Netflix board member Susan Rice, a former high-level Obama and Biden administration official. In a social media post, Trump called Rice a “no talent … political hack,” and said that Netflix must fire her or “pay the consequences.”
The threat underscored the dicey environment for Netflix.
Additionally, Paramount had sowed doubts about Netflix among lawmakers, regulators, Warner investors and ultimately the Warner board.
Paramount assured Warner board members that it had a clear path to win regulatory approval so the deal would quickly be finalized. In a show of confidence, Delrahim filed to win the Justice Department’s blessing in December — even though Paramount didn’t have a deal.
This month, a deadline for the Justice Department to raise issues with Paramount’s proposed Warner takeover passed without comment from the Trump regulators.
“Analysts believe the deal is likely to close,” TD Cowen analysts said in a Friday report. “While Paramount-WBD does present material antitrust risks (higher pay TV prices, lower pay for TV/movie workers), analysts also see a key pro-competitive effect: improved competition in streaming, with Paramount+ and HBO Max representing a materially stronger counterweight to #1 Netflix.”
Throughout the battle, David Ellison relied on support from his father, attorney Delrahim, and three key board members: Oracle Executive Vice Chair Safra A. Catz; RedBird Capital Partners founder Gerry Cardinale; and Justin Hamill, managing director of tech investment firm Silver Lake.
In the final days, David Ellison led an effort to flip Warner board members who had firmly supported Netflix. With Paramount’s improved offer, several began leaning toward the Paramount deal.
On Tuesday, Warner announced that Paramount’s deal was promising.
On Thursday, Warner’s board determined Paramount’s deal had topped Netflix. That’s when Netflix surrendered.
“Paramount had a fulsome, 360-degree approach,” Miller said. “They approached it financially. … They understood the regulatory environment here and abroad in the EU. And they had a game plan for every aspect.”
On Friday, Paramount shares rose 21% to $13.51.
It was a reversal of fortunes for David Ellison, who appeared on CNBC just three days after that war room meeting in December.
“We put the company in play,” David Ellison told the CNBC anchor that day. “We’re really here to finish what we started.”
Times staff writer Ana Cabellos and Business Editor Richard Verrier contributed to this report.
Letters to the Editor – Three Cheers for a Plano fire station, Dallas Parks & Rec, voting
Miami heat: Phones are ringing off the hook as California billionaires look to drop 9 figures on homes in the 305
‘We’re honoring Black excellence’: Mass. celebrates leaders of color
Tempers flare during another tightly contested matchup between Denver Nuggets, Oklahoma City Thunder
Seattle Torrent put Olympic captain Hilary Knight on long-term IR – Seattle Sports
Florida High School Football Rankings: Top 25 teams – Oct. 21
Cleary's 21 help Le Moyne down Central Connecticut State 69-64 in OT
How old is Bo Nix? What to know about Oregon quarterback ahead of 2024 NFL Draft
99th annual Pony Swim held in Virginia
Indiana Members Credit Union announced as new anchor tenant at Bottleworks District
ICE blasts Washington mayor over directive restricting immigration enforcement
Did the EU bypass Hungary’s veto on Ukraine’s €90 billion loan?
How the federal government is painting immigrants as criminals on social media
Where Iran’s ballistic missiles can reach — and how close they are to the US
Has India’s influence in Afghanistan grown under the Taliban?
-
World2 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts3 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Louisiana5 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Denver, CO3 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Technology7 days agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Technology7 days agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
Politics7 days agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT