BY RITA OYIBOKA/AMAYINDI YAKUBU
At the dawn of independence, Nigeria faced the monumental task of nation-building, establishing institutions, shaping governance, and setting the wheels of development in motion. Enter the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which, in the 1960s and 70s, rolled out programmes to bolster local governance and instil democratic values. Training public administrators and structuring transparent governance systems, USAID played a pivotal role in Nigeria’s early years, helping to lay the groundwork for a functional state.
Fast forward a few decades, and USAID’s footprint in Nigeria has expanded exponentially. From health to education, agriculture to trade, and even water security, the agency’s interventions have woven themselves into the very fabric of national development. This partnership underscores not just the depth of Nigeria-U.S. relations but also the sheer scale of progress achieved through sustained international collaboration.
However, the shifting sands of U.S. foreign policy now pose a significant challenge. A staggering $68 billion (£55 billion) was allocated for international aid in 2023, with USAID controlling the lion’s share at $40 billion. Yet, much of this went to humanitarian efforts in Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, and notably Ukraine, reinforcing America’s position as the world’s biggest aid donor. In comparison, the UK, the fourth-largest contributor, spent £15.3 billion, less than a quarter of the U.S. total.
Nigeria received a sizable $1.02 billion in 2023, much of which was funnelled into critical areas such as HIV/AIDS treatment, maternal healthcare, and disease prevention. But recent reports from the White House suggest a 90-day suspension of some USAID foreign aid programmes, a move that could spell trouble. Former U.S. President Donald Trump’s cost-cutting stance on international spending has placed crucial sectors, health, education, and agriculture on shaky ground. With Nigeria’s chronic mismanagement of government funds already under scrutiny, the country’s dependence on foreign assistance now faces an uncomfortable reckoning.
Looming Healthcare Limbo
Sensing the impending shortfall, Nigeria’s Federal Executive Council swiftly approved a $1 billion package to reform the healthcare sector, alongside an additional $3.2 million to procure 150,000 HIV treatment packs. The goal? To fortify primary healthcare, maternal services, and the training of medical personnel. But will this be enough?
USAID’s involvement in Nigeria’s health sector runs deep. In the 1980s, its early interventions revolved around immunisation and disease control, with the Nigeria Health Initiative (NHI) investing $50 million to expand public health outreach. By the 2000s, the Polio Eradication Initiative had become a flagship programme, pouring over $100 million into vaccination campaigns, disease surveillance, and health education. Between 2000 and 2015, USAID spent nearly $500 million on maternal health and HIV/AIDS prevention, significantly strengthening Nigeria’s healthcare framework.
More recently, the agency has shifted focus to emerging threats, such as non-communicable diseases and epidemic preparedness. In 2018, the Health Resilience Initiative allocated $120 million to reinforce Nigeria’s health systems. Between 2020 and 2025, a further $150 million has been invested in digital health innovations, aiming to integrate technology into public health monitoring and service delivery.
In an interview with The Pointer, Executive Secretary of the Delta State Agency for the Control of HIV/AIDS (DELSACA), Dr. Rudolf Hobson, weighed in on the situation:
“This decision does not impact Nigeria alone but several other countries. Regardless of external support, governments worldwide must take proactive steps to sustain critical health interventions, including HIV/AIDS treatment,” he said.
Although a waiver ensures the continuation of essential HIV services, Dr. Hobson sees the funding pause as a wake-up call for governments to strengthen domestic healthcare financing.
“All recipient nations must find ways to sustain these programmes. Relying solely on donors is not a viable long-term strategy,” he stressed. Dr. Hobson urged policymakers to explore alternative funding mechanisms, including increased public-private partnerships to ensure uninterrupted HIV care.
Education, Agriculture, Trade: Pillars at Risk
Education has been another major beneficiary of USAID funding. Recognising the need for a skilled workforce, the Basic Education Reform Programme, launched in the early 2000s with $75 million, modernised curricula, enhanced teacher training, and improved infrastructure. USAID later expanded its reach with the Learning for All Initiative in 2016, injecting $90 million into digital learning and vocational training, followed by the Future Skills Programme in 2021, which provided an additional $70 million for digital literacy and critical thinking.
Agriculture, often hailed as the backbone of Nigeria’s economy, has also relied heavily on USAID’s backing. The Feed the Future Nigeria project has received over $300 million since 2010, driving innovation in farming techniques, seed distribution, and market access for smallholder farmers. In 2017, the AgriBoost Programme secured a further $200 million to promote climate-smart agriculture and sustainable farming.
But with USAID’s funding now in question, Nigerian agribusinesses are bracing for impact. Speaking with our correspondent, A seasoned agriculturalist, Toheeb Azeez, better known as The Lasgidi Farmer, didn’t hold back in his assessment:
“For years, USAID’s Office of Food for Peace has been a lifeline for countless farmers, especially in the northeast. They provided food assistance, nutrition programmes, and market access. Between 2018 and 2020 alone, the FFP contributed over $438 million in aid, supplying more than 91,000 metric tonnes of food. The Feed the Future Initiative catalysed private-sector investments, creating over 26,000 jobs and generating nearly $400 million in domestic sales. Now, all of that is at risk.”
Azeez stressed that while foreign aid should never be a permanent solution, an abrupt cut is like “pulling the plug on a patient still in intensive care.”
“Agriculture is the backbone of Nigeria’s economy, yet it’s underfunded. Many farmers, especially smallholders, still struggle with access to credit, modern technology, and infrastructure. USAID’s investments helped bridge these gaps. Without them, productivity could drop, food prices could rise, and more Nigerians could be pushed into hunger. It’s a domino effect.”
But he insists all hope is not lost if Nigeria takes proactive steps. “This is our wake-up call. First, the Nigerian government must step up funding for agriculture. Instead of relying on foreign grants, we should be giving local farmers and agribusinesses the support they need to thrive. We need better credit schemes, mechanization programs, and storage facilities. The days of post-harvest losses due to poor infrastructure should be behind us.”
He also highlighted the role of the private sector. “There’s untapped potential in venture capital and impact investing. If USAID saw agriculture as a viable investment, why shouldn’t Nigerian banks, corporations, and high-net-worth individuals? We should also be tapping into diaspora investments. Nigerians abroad send billions home every year, why not channel some of that into structured agricultural financing?”
Collaboration, he believes, is the key to survival. “Agricultural cooperatives, public-private partnerships, and regional trade alliances should take center stage. Instead of scrambling for dwindling donor funds, Nigerian agribusinesses should be looking at models that make farming profitable and self-sustaining. We need innovation, blockchain for supply chain transparency, climate-smart farming techniques, and tech-driven access to markets. The world is moving forward, and Nigeria must keep up.”
The Bigger Picture: A Wake-Up Call for Nigeria
Beyond agriculture and healthcare, USAID has played a crucial role in Nigeria’s trade and investment landscape. The Nigeria Trade and Investment Project, launched with $60 million, received an $80 million boost in 2019 to streamline regulations and support small businesses. Clean water, another vital sector, has seen USAID invest nearly $200 million since 2015 through the Safe Water for All Nigeria and Water Access and Sanitation Enhancement Programmes.
But if the days of generous foreign aid are numbered, what next?
A Strategic International Development Leader, Sarah Eshe believes it’s time for a paradigm shift.
“For years, many organisations have built their strategies around foreign aid, particularly from the U.S. However, with the Trump administration’s decision to cut funding, programs tackling poverty, disease, education, and economic empowerment are feeling the impact. If history has taught us anything, relying on foreign donors, especially one dominant source is a dangerous model.
“Every time a Western government shifts its priorities, African organisations scramble. This has to stop. Instead, we must take control of our development agenda. Foreign aid should never be the foundation of sustainability, it should be an enabler, not a crutch,” she said.
Eshe believes that the biggest mistake has been structuring entire sectors around the assumption that Western aid will always be available. She sees the current funding shift as an opportunity to rethink financing models.
According to her, “The goal isn’t to replace Western aid with another dependency. It’s to build self-sufficient, African-led funding mechanisms. Development organisations need to adopt a business mindset. Monetizing aspects of their work such as training programs, consultancy services, or impact investments could provide stable revenue streams. We need to ask ourselves: What assets do we already have that can generate funding? Networks, data, and expertise hold immense value, especially in the private sector.”
She also called for African governments to prioritise funding critical sectors. “Let’s be honest: African governments need to step up. Health, education, and social programs should not depend on foreign donors. We should demand increased domestic funding, stronger policy support for local NGOs, and meaningful public-private partnerships that go beyond press releases.”
Another underutilised resource, she noted, is the African diaspora, which sends over $95 billion home annually more than foreign aid and foreign direct investment combined.
“We’ve barely scratched the surface of structured diaspora engagement. Crowdfunded endowments could support grassroots organizations, while diaspora bonds could finance large-scale infrastructure and health projects. We don’t need to beg U.S. policymakers to maintain their aid we need to mobilise our global network.”
Eshe also emphasised the need for African organisations to take control of their narrative. “One reason global donors hesitate to fund African-led initiatives is trust. They don’t believe we can manage large sums responsibly. It’s an uncomfortable truth, but we must address it. More transparency and better financial management are essential.”
The potential withdrawal of USAID funding is a wake-up call Nigeria can’t afford to ignore. It presents an opportunity to transition from aid dependency to proactive, strategic development. By channelling oil revenues into education, embracing agritech, and fostering innovation in healthcare, Nigeria can take charge of its own progress.
