[dc]F[/dc]or decades, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has provided billions of dollars in funding to religious charities that play a critical role in disaster relief, poverty alleviation, and healthcare around the world. Organizations such as Catholic Relief Services (CRS), the Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA), and Lutheran World Relief have long depended on USAID grants to sustain operations that affect millions of lives. Now, with a 90-day suspension of USAID funding under the Trump administration’s Executive Order 14169, these organizations are facing budget crises, staff layoffs, and program cuts that could have severe humanitarian consequences. The executive order was issued with the stated goal of increasing financial oversight and ensuring that taxpayer dollars are spent efficiently. Supporters of the measure argue that past audits have revealed inefficiencies and mismanagement in the distribution of USAID funds, and the temporary suspension is seen as an effort to reassess the allocation of resources to better align with American strategic and fiscal priorities. Additionally, concerns have been raised about USAID funds being used inefficiently by implementing partners, prompting calls for greater scrutiny over expenditures and contractor costs.

International Versus Domestic Needs and the Reason for an Audit

Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, USAID has spent $35 billion in “nonlethal” support for Ukraine. Ukraine, with a population of 38 million, is the agency’s largest recipient worldwide, according to The Bulwark. The funding was spent on humanitarian aid and “digital innovation designed to reduce corruption and keep government services running,” to support businesses, promote exports, and restore infrastructure in Ukraine, among other projects. This does not include the $177 billion earmarked by Congress for the Ukrainian military, and Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelenskyy said in an interview with AP that Ukraine only received $76 billion, and that was in the form of weapons. He said claims that Ukraine received $200 billion are “not true. I don’t know where all that money went. Perhaps it’s true on paper with hundreds of different programs – I won’t argue, and we’re immensely grateful for everything. But in reality, we received about US $76 billion. It’s significant aid but it’s not US $200 billion.”

Americans became frustrated when they perceived that domestic disasters received far less federal attention while their money went overseas. In 2023, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) gave $1.3 billion to survivors of natural disasters and $11.8 billion to rebuild roads, public buildings, and infrastructure damaged by disasters. In October 2024, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas told reporters that FEMA did “not have enough funding to make it thorugh the hurricane season.”

So, while religious charities are affected by the suspension of USAID, they are hardly the primary target of the Trump administration, which won the 2024 election on an “America First” platform.

USAID’s Billions in Funding to Religious Charities

USAID has traditionally partnered with faith-based organizations due to their vast networks and ability to reach underserved populations. Catholic Relief Services, one of the largest faith-based recipients of USAID funding, received approximately $4.6 billion in grants from 2013 to 2022, primarily for disaster assistance (NCR Online). In fiscal year 2023 alone, CRS had a budget of nearly $1.2 billion, with $521 million coming from U.S. government grants and agreements–accounting for about 62% of its total revenue (NCR Online).

The Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA) has been another key recipient, working with USAID for over four decades to deliver life-saving aid. Between 2010 and 2020, ADRA received more than $400 million from USAID for various humanitarian programs, including disaster relief, education, and healthcare initiatives across Africa, Asia, and Latin America (“ADRA Responds to USAID Funding Pause”).

However, ADRA relies heavily on USAID for its operational funding. In 2022, 62% of ADRA’s total revenue came directly from USAID, with an additional 1% from sub-awards funded by USAID (“2022 ADRA Audited Financial Statement“). This marks a significant increase from 2016, when only 39% of ADRA’s revenue was sourced directly from USAID, and 4% from related sub-awards. The remaining portion of ADRA’s funding is derived from private donations, corporate contributions, and partnerships with other organizations and governments, such as New Zealand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (“ADRA New Zealand”).

This heavy reliance on U.S. government funding presents a revenue concentration risk. If USAID were to reduce or redirect its funding significantly, ADRA could face severe financial challenges, forcing it to scale back essential humanitarian programs. The organization’s increasing dependence on USAID funding highlights broader concerns about the stability of religious charities that depend predominantly on government aid.

Historical Context: From Kennedy to Bush and the Rise of Faith-Based Initiatives

USAID, established under President John F. Kennedy in 1961, has historically focused on providing humanitarian assistance and promoting economic development worldwide (“Foreign Assistance: Where Does the Money Go?“). However, the involvement of religious charities in federal aid programs became a more structured initiative during the late 20th century.

President Bill Clinton’s administration laid the groundwork for faith-based initiatives by signing the 1996 Charitable Choice provision, which allowed religious organizations to receive federal funding without renouncing their religious identity (“Faith-Based and Community Initiatives”). This opened the door for faith-based groups to compete for government grants directly.

President George W. Bush expanded on this idea by creating the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives in 2001. The initiative aimed to formalize the government’s partnerships with religious charities, arguing that these organizations often provided more effective and compassionate services than secular NGOs. Critics raised concerns about church-state separation, arguing that taxpayer money should not support religious entities, even if the funding were earmarked for humanitarian purposes.

Public Opinion on USAID and Faith-Based Funding

Public polling has shown mixed opinions on USAID funding and the role of religious organizations in government aid. Surveys conducted by Pew Research and Gallup over the years indicate that while most Americans support foreign aid in theory, many are skeptical about how funds are allocated. A 2023 Pew survey found that 54% of Americans believe the U.S. spends too much on foreign aid, while only 21% think it pays too little (Pew Research Center).

Church-State Separation and the Legal Debate

The legal debate over faith-based funding has been ongoing since the introduction of Charitable Choice. The primary concern has been whether these grants violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits government endorsement of religion (“Church-State Separation and Federal Funding”).

Supporters argue that faith-based groups should not be excluded from federal aid merely because of their religious affiliation as long as they adhere to program guidelines that prohibit proselytization. Critics, however, argue that government grants blur the line between church and state, potentially allowing religious institutions to promote their beliefs with taxpayer dollars indirectly.

Notable court cases, including Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002), have upheld government funding for religious organizations under certain conditions. However, the debate remains highly contentious, particularly as federal aid policies evolve.

The Debate Over the Suspension

While the funding freeze has been criticized for its humanitarian impact, supporters argue that it is necessary to ensure that American taxpayer dollars are being used effectively. Past reviews of USAID’s spending have reportedly revealed cases of inefficient allocation and instances where funds were misused or failed to achieve their intended impact. Some legislators and watchdog groups have pushed for greater oversight to prevent fraud, waste, and the misallocation of aid money.

What Happens Next?

As the 90-day funding suspension continues, religious charities and secular aid organizations are lobbying for clarity on the future of USAID’s role in international assistance. If the suspension extends beyond the initial period, millions of people worldwide could face severe consequences–from famine to untreated diseases–due to the sudden withdrawal of American aid. At the same time, ongoing scrutiny over USAID’s financial management and the role of religious organizations in government-funded aid programs could shape future debates on foreign aid policy and its broader implications for American global strategy.

Works Cited

“2022 ADRA Audited Financial Statement.” ADRA adra.org.
“ADRA Responds to USAID Funding Pause.” ADRA, adra.org.
“Faith-Based and Community Initiatives.” U.S. Government Archives, 1996.
Pew Research Center. “What the Data Says About U.S. Foreign Aid.” 6 Feb. 2025, pewresearch.org.
“USAID Spending Report.” Newsweek, 2025, newsweek.com.
“Zelman v. Simmons-Harris.” Supreme Court Ruling, 2002