Trump-Era Foreign Aid Cuts Disrupted Health Services for Women and Girls, New Study Finds

A new study examining the impact of U.S. foreign-aid reductions under the Trump administration has raised concerns about how sudden funding changes affected health programs serving women, girls, and vulnerable communities in Kenya, Nepal, and Colombia. Researchers found that the cuts disrupted maternal care, HIV services, reproductive health programs, and community-based support networks that millions of people rely on in some of the world’s most vulnerable regions.

The research, published after an assessment of the early months following the 2025 freeze and termination of several U.S.-funded programs, highlights how quickly health systems can be affected when major international donors withdraw support. Researchers emphasized that the findings represent an early assessment rather than a complete picture of the global consequences. However, they said the evidence from the three countries showed a clear pattern: programs that depended heavily on American funding struggled to maintain operations after their financial support was suddenly cut off.

Health Programs Faced Sudden Closures After Funding Changes

The study found that reductions in U.S. assistance affected programs focused on some of the most critical areas of public health, including pregnancy care, contraception access, nutrition support, and HIV prevention. In Kenya and Colombia, health workers reported that some pregnant women arrived at medical facilities without important preparation services, including prenatal scans, birth plans, and established referral systems. When community organizations shut down or reduced operations, patients often lost more than a single service. Researchers found that many programs provided connected support, including counseling, transportation assistance, medical referrals, and follow-up care.

The loss of these networks created additional challenges for people who already faced barriers accessing healthcare. Women, adolescents, people living with HIV, LGBTQ+ communities, migrants, and other marginalized groups were among those most affected, according to the researchers. The study found that smaller organizations were particularly vulnerable because many relied heavily on one major donor. Without emergency funding or financial reserves, some organizations had limited ability to continue paying workers or maintaining services.

Researchers Examined Kenya, Nepal, and Colombia

The research team focused on three countries to understand the immediate effects of the funding changes. Researchers surveyed 98 global health professionals and interviewed 53 individuals, including healthcare workers, nonprofit leaders, government officials, humanitarian workers, and community health providers. Most of the fieldwork occurred during February and March 2025, shortly after the funding changes began affecting programs.

The researchers did not attempt to estimate a worldwide death toll or suggest that every country experienced identical consequences. Instead, they examined how sudden financial disruptions affected healthcare systems during the first months after the aid freeze.

The findings showed several common challenges:

• Health workers leaving positions because salaries could no longer be paid.
• Clinics reducing operations or closing entirely.
• Patients losing access to specialized services.
• Community organizations struggling to replace lost funding. Researchers said the speed of the funding changes created additional difficulties because many organizations had little time to develop alternative plans.

Nepal’s HIV and Maternal Health Services Experienced Major Pressure

Nepal became one of the countries where researchers documented significant disruption. The study found that HIV programs, maternal nutrition services, and community health organizations experienced major challenges after funding losses affected staffing and operations. Some organizations serving LGBTQ+ communities and other vulnerable groups reduced services or stopped operating completely. The impact was especially significant for programs providing HIV testing, counseling, prevention services, and access to pre-exposure prophylaxis, commonly known as PrEP.

Researchers highlighted one organization that had received approximately 85% of its funding through USAID-supported programs. Before the funding changes, the organization operated 20 clinics. After the cuts, more than 1,200 clients lost access to PrEP services, while hundreds of employees lost their jobs. The loss of experienced healthcare workers created another challenge. Many community programs depended on staff members who had built long-term relationships with patients who faced discrimination or difficulty accessing traditional healthcare facilities. Replacing those workers would require new funding, recruitment, and training, leaving communities without immediate alternatives.

Trump Administration Defended Foreign Aid Restructuring

The Trump administration defended the foreign-aid changes, arguing that the restructuring was designed to make assistance programs more efficient and better aligned with U.S. priorities. President Donald Trump froze foreign assistance after returning to office in January 2025. The administration later moved to reduce the role of the U.S. Agency for International Development and shift certain responsibilities to the State Department. Officials said the changes were intended to reduce bureaucracy, increase oversight, and encourage other nations to contribute more toward international health and humanitarian efforts.

The administration maintained that the United States continued to provide significant support for global health programs. Supporters of the restructuring argued that foreign assistance should be carefully reviewed to ensure taxpayer money is used effectively. However, researchers said the rapid changes in funding created serious challenges for organizations that had depended on long-term U.S. support. Many programs were unable to secure replacement funding before services were interrupted.

Global Health Groups Warn About Dependence on Major Donors

The study also examined how broader changes in international aid affected healthcare programs. The U.S. reductions came as some European countries also considered lowering foreign assistance commitments. Researchers warned that simultaneous reductions by multiple major donors could place additional pressure on health systems worldwide. When several funding sources decline simultaneously, local organizations have fewer options to replace lost resources.

Healthcare providers cannot easily move patients, staff, and medical services from one organization to another when multiple programs face financial challenges. Researchers said the situation highlighted the importance of creating stronger and more reliable healthcare financing systems. They recommended that governments strengthen domestic health programs while reducing dependence on a single international donor.

Women and Girls Remain Among Those Most Vulnerable to Funding Disruptions

The study emphasized that women and girls often experience the greatest consequences when health programs lose funding. Maternal care, reproductive health services, and adolescent health programs frequently depend on community-based organizations that provide support beyond traditional medical treatment.

When those programs disappear, patients may lose access to education, transportation assistance, counseling, and preventive care. Researchers warned that vulnerable groups often face the greatest barriers during periods of uncertainty because they may already experience discrimination, poverty, or limited access to healthcare. The study’s authors called for stronger protections to ensure that future funding changes do not leave vulnerable communities without essential services.

The Long-Term Impact Remains Unclear

While the study documented early disruptions, researchers noted that the full global impact of the funding changes remains uncertain. Some organizations may find new donors or rebuild services over time, while others may continue facing financial challenges. The findings from Kenya, Nepal, and Colombia provide an early look at how quickly health systems can be affected when major sources of funding disappear.

The debate over foreign assistance continues as governments weigh spending priorities, national interests, and humanitarian responsibilities. For the communities affected, the issue is more immediate. Health workers, patients, and local organizations are dealing with the consequences of funding decisions made thousands of miles away. The study highlights a central challenge in global healthcare: maintaining essential services requires stable, predictable support. When that support changes suddenly, the effects can reach the people who depend most on those programs.