In early July, a long-feared reality materialized for millions in the development aid ecosystem when the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) ceased operations. As the world’s largest single aid donor, disbursing around $72 billion in 2023 and accounting for over 40 percent of UN-tracked humanitarian aid in 2024, USAID’s absorption into the U.S. Department of State marks a significant shift in global development priorities. This transition has already had disproportionate consequences for developing regions, particularly in Africa.
Since 2025, development assistance to Africa has declined sharply. The OECD estimates cuts ranging from 16 to 28 percent, primarily affecting bilateral overseas development assistance. Donor priorities have increasingly focused on short-term humanitarian responses, including migration management, conflict response, and pandemic preparedness. In 2023, official development assistance (ODA) to developed countries rose to $43 billion, with $31 billion allocated to asylum seekers and refugees within donor countries. By contrast, aid to Africa fell nearly seven percent to $40 billion, while Latin America and the Caribbean experienced a 15 percent decrease.
Amid this shrinking aid space, donors and international NGOs operating in Africa face mounting pressure to deliver more cost-effective and impactful interventions. Funding gaps have opened opportunities for foundations, such as the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation, to support a wider range of beneficiaries beyond traditional funding structures. This renewed interest in local direct implementation—known as localization—offers potential benefits but also exposes challenges. Community-based organizations, civil society organizations, and local NGOs often struggle with diminishing resources, high administrative costs, and rigid donor requirements, which can force programs to conform to externally imposed frameworks disconnected from local realities.
The push for greater African agency emphasizes the need for local decision-making power in shaping development pathways. To explore localization in practice, BudgIT and CODL, supported by the Hilton Foundation, conducted After-Action Review sessions in Kenya and Senegal. These “Pause and Reflect” sessions captured the lived experiences of local organizations, highlighting successes, failures, and underlying structural issues such as power imbalances, limited funding access, trust deficits, and accountability challenges.
Insights from Kenya and Senegal revealed persistent gaps between localization rhetoric and reality. In Kenya, community-based organizations working on social accountability reported that donor and NGO project selection often favored specific regions, concentrating resources in areas like Turkana, Marsabit, Kibera, and Kisumu. While these regions face acute needs, clustering interventions strained local capacity and disrupted long-term development planning. Similarly, in Senegal, projects were concentrated in Dakar, Thiès, and Ziguinchor, with donors retaining significant control over priorities and implementation methods. Funding frequently passed through multiple intermediaries, reducing efficiency, and thematic priorities often misaligned with local needs.
The COVID-19 pandemic further complicated localization efforts. During the crisis, emergency health funding required many local organizations to pivot their work. However, post-pandemic, core localization principles such as equitable partnerships, capacity strengthening, and shared decision-making have weakened, undermining the sustainability of earlier gains.
The Pause and Reflect process underscores that true localization requires structural redesign rather than rhetoric. Building on lessons from Kenya and Senegal, the next phase will extend to Nigeria to identify shared patterns and context-specific solutions. As the global aid landscape evolves, funders must invest in the financial resilience, strategic capacity, and long-term sustainability of local actors. Strengthening trust funds, rewarding consistent local leadership, and supporting principled advocacy are essential steps.
Ultimately, genuine localization is not merely about transferring projects—it is about transferring power. Achieving this begins with trusting, equipping, and enabling local institutions to lead their own development journeys and shape their futures.
