What specific USAID programs were targeted by recent budget cuts under DOGE proposals?
Executive summary
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) proposals and the White House rescission request targeted a wide swath of USAID-managed programs, with explicit cuts proposed to global health (including HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis programs), migration and refugee assistance, climate and gender-equity initiatives, and large foreign assistance accounts such as the Economic Support Fund — alongside moves that would eliminate or sharply reduce hundreds of USAID awards and voluntary contributions to multilateral organizations [1] [2] [3]. Supporters framed the package as a purge of “waste,” while critics warn it would gut life‑saving public‑health and humanitarian work and shutter the agency’s operational capacity [4] [5].
1. DOGE’s headline targets: global health, HIV/AIDS (PEPFAR), and tuberculosis
The rescission package and DOGE activity singled out global health accounts administered or implemented by USAID — notably funding “activities related to controlling HIV/AIDS” and other infectious‑disease programs — with specific line items such as an estimated $400 million in global health funds flagged for rescission in the White House notice to Congress [1] [2]. Independent watchdogs and analysts likewise report that DOGE and the administration have already cut “hundreds of millions of dollars” appropriated to fight tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS, amplifying warnings about immediate public‑health harm [2].
2. Migration, refugee, humanitarian and peacekeeping assistance
The rescission request would claw back roughly $800 million from the Migration and Refugee Assistance account, which funds the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program and overseas humanitarian responses, and would rescind large sums from other humanitarian lines and peacekeeping support that the administration has already moved to cancel [1] [6]. Analysts say those moves translate into cancelled humanitarian relief and reduced U.S. peacekeeping contributions, with ripple effects on refugee admissions and field operations [6] [1].
3. Major budget buckets: Economic Support Fund and voluntary multilateral contributions
DOGE’s package proposes rescinding more than $1.6 billion from the Economic Support Fund (ESF), a flexible instrument for diplomacy and development, while the broader budget strategy recommends eliminating many voluntary U.S. contributions to international organizations including U.N. agencies and WHO, actions that would effectively strip funding from linked USAID efforts [1] [7].
4. Mass termination of USAID awards and steep agency downsizing
Documents and reporting indicate the administration moved to continue only a fraction of awards while terminating thousands: one internal account suggested continuing 898 USAID awards and terminating 5,341, a swing described as a reduction of up to $78 billion with remaining budget for future use around $8.3 billion, an order‑of‑magnitude contraction compared with recent annual spending [3]. Other reporting and legal filings describe the administration’s dismantling of USAID structures and the placement of staff on leave amid contested legal challenges [8] [3].
5. Programmatic and thematic cuts: climate, gender equity, LGBTQ and democracy promotion
The Office of Management and Budget and administration communications identified funds tied to global climate and green‑energy initiatives, global LGBTQ and gender‑equity programs, and democracy‑promotion bodies among targets for rescission, and the White House sought to zero out or sharply reduce related accounts while also proposing elimination or severe cuts to institutions such as the National Endowment for Democracy and steep reductions to the Millennium Challenge Corporation in earlier proposals [1] [9].
6. Competing narratives and documented consequences
DOGE and allied Republicans framed the cuts as removing “waste, fraud and abuse,” with DOGE claiming large savings on its public “wall,” while Democrats, humanitarian groups, and watchdogs say the cuts shuttered critical life‑saving programs and cost jobs — with some estimates of thousands of deaths tied to disruptions in HIV/AIDS and other programs — and courts and senators have publicly contested the legality and human impact of the dismantling [4] [5] [6] [2]. Independent trackers and courts have also documented emergency legal rulings and at least one federal judge finding aspects of the dismantling likely unconstitutional [3] [8].
7. Scale, uncertainty, and what’s not confirmed
Reporting converges on the same headline targets — HIV/AIDS/PEPFAR, TB, ESF, MRA, climate and gender programs, multilateral voluntary contributions, and mass award terminations — but precise, line‑by‑line program lists vary across sources and some DOGE “wall” entries and contract details were removed or remain opaque, leaving some program‑level specifics and final congressional actions unresolved in the record provided [10] [1] [3].