Winners & Losers: FY2026 Foreign Assistance Budget

We must adapt to a fundamentally different foreign assistance landscape.

US foreign assistance as we know it is ending. The programs we've spent careers building are being zeroed out. The multilateral institutions we've worked with for decades are being defunded.

The current Administration just submitted its detailed FY2026 federal budget for international aid. What do you see in that request? For me, the numbers aren't bad. They are catastrophic.

Taking a Chainsaw to Development

The transition from FY2025 to FY2026 represents what the Center for Global Development calls "one of the most dramatic realignments in U.S. international engagement since the Cold War." Here's the difference between the current fiscal year budget and next year’s requested budget:

Yes, entire budget lines that have funded our sector for decades are being eliminated completely.

• Development Assistance that has supported long-term poverty reduction programs in over 40 countries is gone.

• Democracy Fund that has supported civil society organizations and election monitoring worldwide is also eliminated.

And the drastic cuts to the remaining programs will systematically dismantle the global health and development infrastructure that has defined American foreign policy for 75 years.

Transactional US Foreign Assistance

The merger of USAID into the State Department is a move from humanitarianism to transactional foreign aid.

Reuters reported that the State Department's refugee office is assuming USAID's disaster aid role, but the budget reveals plans to cut 54% of humanitarian staff and 90% of democracy-focused personnel to centralize decision-making under an "America First" agenda.

The budget introduces a new $2.9 billion America First Opportunity Fund that signals a fundamental shift in how the U.S. approaches international engagement. Instead of poverty reduction and humanitarian goals, this fund prioritizes "strategic investments" with return-on-investment metrics.

The Center for Global Development notes this represents a move from grants to profit-driven investments through an expanded Development Finance Corporation. Traditional development assistance is being replaced by what officials call "national security loans" to strategic partners.

The humanitarian imperative that has driven our sector is being replaced by transactional bilateralism focused on advancing narrow U.S. interests.

For example, there is no funding requested in FY2026 for any of these activities.

• African Development Fund

• Assistance for Europe, Eurasia and Central Asia

• Clean Technology Fund

• Complex Crises Fund

• Debt Relief and Debt Restructuring

• Democracy Fund

• Development Assistance

• East West Center

• Economic Support Fund

• Eisenhower Exchange Fellowships

• Enduring Welcome Administrative Expenses

• Global Agriculture and Food Security Program

• Global Environment Facility

• International Bank for Reconstruction and Development

• International Center for Middle Eastern-Western Dialogue

• International Disaster Assistance

• International Fisheries Commissions

• International Fund for Agricultural Development

• International Monetary Fund

• International Organizations and Programs

• Israeli Arab Scholarships

• Migration and Refugee Assistance

• National Endowment for Democracy

• Organization of American States Development Assistance Programs

• The Asia Foundation

• Transition Initiatives

• U.S. Agency for Global Media

• UN Human Rights Council

• UN Relief and Works Agency

• USAID Capital Investment Fund

• USAID Office of Inspector General

• USAID Operating Expenses

Download a handy table of these eliminations to share with your colleagues.

The Multilateral Retreat

Organizations that have relied on USAID grants, State Department contracts, or UN partnerships need to start planning for a fundamentally different funding landscape. The era of predictable, multi-year development grants is ending.

The United States is withdrawing from the multilateral institutions. Funding drops from $1.5 billion in actual outlays in FY2024 to $264 million for assessed dues to entities like the IAEA, ICAO, and NATO and a complete withdrawal from WHO.

Other cuts to multilateral institutions include:

• 100% cut to the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD)

• 100% cut to United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) and the UN Human Rights Council

• 100% cut to Migration/Refugee Assistance, risking collapse of UNHCR and WFP operations in conflict zones.

• 84% cut to UN contributions across the board, accelerating the UN80 retrenchment.

No appropriation is requested for UN peacekeeping operations under the Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities account. Instead, any future funding would be drawn from the discretionary America First Opportunity Fund, reducing predictability and congressional oversight

The Broader Context

This isn't happening in isolation. Congress still must approve these budget proposals, and historical precedent suggests some restoration of funding is possible. But the direction is clear: the era of American leadership in global development is ending.

China and Russia are watching.

As the U.S. withdraws from multilateral institutions and cuts development assistance, other powers will fill the vacuum. For American professionals, this means fewer opportunities to shape global humanitarian responses from positions of influence.

---

Read the Informed Alarmists take on the FY26 budget where they say that the pace and scale of this reversal—rooted in ideological animus, strategic realignment, and executive overreach—may prove to be one of the most consequential ruptures in U.S. international engagement since the Cold War.

---

Planning for a Different Future

We need to be realistic about what this means for our careers. The assumption that American foreign assistance would continue growing, that multilateral institutions would expand, that development expertise would remain in demand is no longer valid.

Organizations are already adjusting. Private foundations, European donors, and domestic resource mobilization programs are becoming more important funding sources.

For early-career professionals, this budget signals that traditional humanitarian career paths through USAID, State Department programs, or UN agencies will be severely constrained.

Mid- and senior-career professionals should consider pivoting to private sector development finance, security-focused programming, or work with non-U.S. donors.

It is Time to Adapt

It would be naive to pretend Congress will restore all these eliminated programs. The political consensus that supported decades of foreign assistance expansion is gone.

It is time to adapt to this new reality. There is no shame in:

• Acknowledging our sector is facing an existential crisis.

• Getting jobs with European agencies, private foundations, or local organizations.

• Transitioning your career to a different field and leaving the sector entirely.

We all have our own paths to follow. Some will fight to preserve what funding remains. Others will pivot to new opportunities. Some will leave the work world entirely.

We need to be clear-eyed about what we're facing. The humanitarian sector that employed us, that gave meaning to our careers, that connected American expertise to global challenges… it died on January 20th.

We now must adapt to a fundamentally different landscape while preserving our humanitarian ethos for whatever comes next.