How much USAID assistance funding went to local partners in 2022?
The U.S. Agency for International Development obligated around $22 billion through grants and cooperative agreements in the fiscal year 2022. Of this amount, just $1.2 billion went to local partners.
By Miguel Antonio Tamonan // 08 May 2023Last month, U.S. Agency for International Development’s Samantha Power admitted before the U.S. Congress that it will be hard to reach the goal of giving 25% of the agency’s money to local organizations. According to its recent progress report published in March, USAID obligated a record $36.4 billion in the fiscal year that ended in September 2022 through its Acquisition and Assistance, or A&A, mechanisms. This is up $9.5 billion from the previous fiscal year, with the increase driven mainly by funding to Ukraine, other humanitarian efforts, and continued COVID-19 response. Of the total, $30.2 billion was distributed via assistance mechanisms, which includes grants and cooperative agreements — 73% more than the previous year. Another $6 billion was obligated through acquisition — which includes contracts — while interagency agreements account for the remaining $225.6 million. Continuing our analysis of the assistance mechanism, Devex now looks into how much the agency spent on local partners. We defined local organizations as those implementing projects in their own countries. Based on USASpending data, USAID obligated around $22 billion through grants and cooperative agreements in FY 2021-22, with $1.2 billion — or between 5 to 6 cents from each dollar — going to local partners in lower-, middle-, and upper-middle-income countries. Why is our figure different from USAID’s? The figure falls behind USAID’s current estimate of 10.5% of its total money going to local partners. However, it is similar to the headline figure in an analysis undertaken by Publish What You Fund, a U.K.-based transparency campaigner, which looked at a sample of USAID funding in 10 countries. Publish What You Fund said the difference was because USAID used a looser definition of what constituted a local partner. Our figures and Power’s are also not comparable for two other reasons. First, our current figure only looks at assistance funding, and second, the USAID pledge only covers part of the agency’s budget. The proportion of assistance funding to these recipients increased by just over half a percentage point — or from 5% in the previous year to 5.6% in FY 2021-22. In cash terms, however, USAID made more progress than the percentages suggest. Overall, the cash allocation to local organizations grew by 46.5% compared to FY 2020-21. Where did the rest of the money go? A further $101.8 million went to LMIC-based implementers for projects in another country — a slight increase from the $95.9 million awarded to this group in FY 2020-21. A significant portion of this, worth $44.7 million, or 43.9%, went to the United Nations Development Programme in Pakistan. And $6 billion went to non-U.S. organizations based in other high-income countries — $400 million less than the previous year. This group is composed mostly of multilateral agencies, with the Global Fund receiving the most, worth $4.1 billion in core contribution, or 68.1% of the total. However, the bulk of assistance money, worth $14.8 billion, went to U.S.-based organizations for the implementation of projects in LMICs. This represents a significant rise from FY 2020-21, worth $5.3 billion — or a 56.2% increase. Focusing on localization Most of the assistance funding to local grantees went to sub-Saharan Africa, with $970.2 million, or 78.8% of the total. Local implementers in Latin America also received a significant allocation, worth $111.7 million, or 9.1% of the total. Meanwhile, local awardees in South Asia and East Asia and Pacific received $103.4 million, or 8.4% of the total. The remainder went to local organizations in Europe and Central Asia, worth $34.8 million, or 2.8% of the total, and the Middle East and North Africa, worth $10.7 million, or less than 1% of the total. Kenya emerged as the top country with the most locally implemented projects, with $206.2 million for 119 local activities — 16.8% of the total. This is 136.3% more than the previous year and accounts for nearly a third of the total cash-term increase in local assistance funding in FY 2021-22. South Africa ranked next, with $200.6 million, or 16.3% of the total. Although the country slipped by a rank from the previous year, the total assistance funding to local organizations increased by 40.9%. Nigeria also received a significant sum, worth $90.8 million, or 7.4% of the total. This is 149.2% more than the previous year. Overall, 48 countries saw an increase in assistance funding to local implementers — or a total of $500.4 million increase. On the other hand, 27 countries saw a reduction in assistance money to local grantees — or a total of $97 million decrease. India saw the biggest dip among countries — from $50.4 million to $24.1 million. Other countries in this group include Tanzania, Colombia, Lebanon, Bolivia, and Namibia. Who were the top local implementers? Four of the top 10 implementers are based in South Africa: Anova Health Institute, BroadReach Healthcare, Right to Care, and Wits Health Consortium. Anova Health Institute overtook Right to Care — which now ranked third — as the top local partner. BroadReach Healthcare rose from seventh to second place, while WHC went from 15th to fourth place. Overall, these four organizations received $128.5 million — 10.4% of the total and 64% of the amount obligated to South Africa. Meanwhile, two of the top local grantees are located in Zimbabwe: Zimbabwe Health Interventions and the Organization for Public Health Interventions & Development. ZHI came from 18th to 7th place, while OPHID climbed from 22nd to 10th place. N’weti, from Mozambique, maintained its spot at 8th place. The rest of the top 10 local organizations were new to the list: • TradeMark Africa, formerly TradeMark East Africa, ranked fifth. TMA did not receive assistance funding in FY 2020-21. • Heartland Alliance Nigeria, which went from 49th to 6th place. • Partners in Hope, which went from 13th to 9th place. Together, the top 10 local grantees received $258.7 million, or 21% of the total. The top local awardees also implement some of USAID’s biggest local activities. This includes: • $45 million to Anova Health Institute for the implementation of the Accelerating Program Achievements to Control Epidemic, or APACE, in South Africa — USAID’s five-year HIV control program in the country’s Gauteng Province. • $29.6 million to BroadReach Healthcare for the implementation of the Southern Africa Bilateral Health Care and Treatment Activities. • $21.4 million to Right to Care for the implementation of HIV/AIDS care and treatment activities in South Africa. • $20.9 million to N’weti for the implementation of community-based HIV activity in Mozambique. • $19.8 million to Partners in Hope to increase access to HIV treatment and care in Malawi. The total amount obligated to Partners in Hope is $600,000 less due to a deobligation to one of its previous awards. Try out Devex Pro Funding today with a free five-day trial, and explore funding opportunities from over 850 sources in addition to our analysis and news content.
Last month, U.S. Agency for International Development’s Samantha Power admitted before the U.S. Congress that it will be hard to reach the goal of giving 25% of the agency’s money to local organizations.
According to its recent progress report published in March, USAID obligated a record $36.4 billion in the fiscal year that ended in September 2022 through its Acquisition and Assistance, or A&A, mechanisms.
This is up $9.5 billion from the previous fiscal year, with the increase driven mainly by funding to Ukraine, other humanitarian efforts, and continued COVID-19 response.
This story is forDevex Promembers
Unlock this story now with a 15-day free trial of Devex Pro.
With a Devex Pro subscription you'll get access to deeper analysis and exclusive insights from our reporters and analysts.
Start my free trialRequest a group subscription Printing articles to share with others is a breach of our terms and conditions and copyright policy. Please use the sharing options on the left side of the article. Devex Pro members may share up to 10 articles per month using the Pro share tool ( ).
Miguel Tamonan is a Senior Development Analyst at Devex, where he analyzes data from public and private donors to produce content and special reports for Pro and Pro Funding readers. He has a bachelor’s degree in Political Science with a Major in International Relations from the Polytechnic University of the Philippines.