In our recent CharityVillage Connects podcast episode, The Dismantling of USAID: Impacts on Global Aid and Canadian Nonprofits, we explored how recent cuts to USAID funding are creating ripple effects for Canadian charities working internationally.

For this episode, we were very pleased to speak with Lindsay Glassco, President and CEO of Plan International Canada. In her interview, Lindsay helped us to better understand the impacts of the USAID cuts, what’s happening on the ground in countries where programs have been affected, and what this might mean for the future of international development work.

To begin, Lindsay gave us some context around the USAID cuts.

Lindsay Glassco: I think we’ve all read about the dismantling of USAID, and I think it actually took us all by surprise just how large that amount was. USAID accounts for nearly half of global aid, which is about $70 billion a year. When it was dismantled, it literally was not just a budget trim but a true unraveling of the global safety net. Most Canadian NGOs are not directly funded by USAID, so we weren’t directly impacted, but none of us work in isolation. We co-deliver our programs with major multilateral partners like the World Food Program, large organizations like the Global Fund, and, of course, a huge number of small local partners in the countries where we operate.

And for a global NGO like Plan, we’re part of a federated model. So, our US national office was directly impacted. And then the country offices that are actually responsible for our operations that were funded by the US were also impacted. At the end of the day, when all of our partners and our country offices are impacted, we’re all affected. When they lose the funding, the gaps quickly, quickly appear. We see it in infrastructure. We’re seeing entire delivery chains collapsing, from medical supplies being disrupted to food rations being stopped to research and data for early warning systems that are used to predict food insecurity. None of these things are available.

So, it’s actually devastating, and I want to point out that this is also coming at a time when we’re seeing an increase in crises. We’re seeing conflict, displacement, hunger, climate change, all converging at a time when these cuts are taking place. And we’re also seeing other donor countries reducing their aid as they’re reprioritizing defense spending as part of the geopolitical environment right now. So the contradiction is just heartbreaking. Just when communities need us the most, it feels a little bit like the world is turning away.

And there’s one other thing I want to speak to, which is really significant, because as the US has shown signs of being more isolationist and as other countries are also declining their assistance and aid, we’re seeing public sentiment starting to shift. And that trust is eroding. We’re seeing economic pressures affecting us domestically. So, Canadian donors as individuals are also pulling back. So this tectonic shift in global trade, security, public attitudes is just incredibly disruptive to the sector, and it’s pushing all of us as NGOs in the sector to have to adapt just very quickly to rethink how we’re doing our business and to actually rebuild. We’re having to rebuild fast and in a more sustainable way.

Lindsay also gave us some examples of the types of programs being impacted by these cuts.

We’re seeing the programs that are most at risk are some of the most essential programs for women and girls, quite frankly: maternal care, HIV programs, contraception. I don’t know if you heard, but I was horrified to hear that millions of condoms and contraceptives that were intended for low-income countries were actually left purposefully in warehouses and then later incinerated, also at a ridiculous cost. This is the proof that when politics get in the way, women and girls are paying the price.

I mentioned education, but I do want to mention it again, because when girls’ education is at risk, we’re actually losing huge potential. An adolescent girl, when she goes to school, let’s say for one extra year of schooling, child marriage is cut in half. And an extra year of schooling also raises the lifetime earning of a girl by 20%. So, it’s not just a program, it’s the return on investment that we’re losing. I mean, this is sort of like the impact on the economy that I don’t think we think about very often. I think we always think about, how are the programs affecting the people versus how are they affecting generations to come?

I mentioned school meals, clean water, latrines, provision of school supplies. These are all game changers in enrollment. They’re all being cut. And if they’re not there, girls won’t go to school. So, those are the ones for me that are the hardest to take. I mean, that’s the space that I work in.

Finally, we asked Lindsay to look ahead and explain what these cuts might mean for the future.

Lindsay Glassco: You know, the cuts in some ways are pushing us to do what we should have been doing all along. I want to be honest about that. In a way, it’s almost like a global reckoning for the sector. And it’s pushing us as organizations to talk about, how can we share services? Should we be merging? How can we operate in a leaner way to have the same level of impact?

There are a ton of discussions, ongoing discussions around localization. I think it’s a priority for pretty much every CEO I’ve spoken to, and we recognize that now’s the time. If we don’t use this time to capitalize on sorting that out, then it’s a wasted opportunity. How do we ensure that those decisions and the dollars are moving directly to the people who can actually drive the change at the community level? So, as I said, we’ve been talking about this stuff, but I think these cuts are giving urgency to a lot of this. And it has us talking about the whole global aid infrastructure.

The model has been in existence since the 1940s. It was a post-World War, model and it’s not necessarily set up for the realities of today. And I think we’ve known for a long time in the development sector that we need to change, and we’re starting to ask ourselves, so what should it look like? I do want to say we haven’t yet come together as a sector to sort of redesign it or to agree on, well, what should the new global aid system look like, but I think we need to do that because we’ve reached the peak of ODA. We’re not going back to where we were.

There’s been a lot of discussions amongst ourselves in the sector and a recognition that we need to diversify our revenue streams and become way more comfortable with innovative finance mechanisms. Private philanthropy will take on greater importance, public-private partnerships, the corporate sector, the development banks, these are all players, I think, who will grow, whose role will grow in this space. We’re also, I think, going to be doing more work as NGOs and consortiums. And as I said, engaging in innovative finance, I think that’s going to become the mainstream.

How are we collaborating? I think just a lot of planning, discussions, brainstorming on what this means for us moving forward. And it means change. I think I personally am very open and welcoming that change.

Want to hear more from Lindsay Glassco? Listen to her full interview in the video below.

Listen to Lindsay Glassco and other sector experts discuss the devastating impacts of USAID cuts in our new podcast episode. Click here to listen.