Introduction

Recent shifts in the global aid landscape following the withdrawal of U.S. funding under the Trump administration have created significant gaps in support for vulnerable communities worldwide. Although there is broad recognition of shortcomings in the international aid system, the sudden withdrawal of resources exacerbates humanitarian and development challenges. Although waivers allowed lifesaving services to continue, U.S. government payment systems remained mostly offline. Many organizations received simultaneous notices that their programs had been terminated, generating widespread confusion across the sector.

One example: the defunding of projects implemented by Church World Service (CWS) and its local partner Yayasan Cita Wadah Swadaya (YCWS) in Indonesia has placed unaccompanied refugee children and young adults at immediate risk of hunger, health deterioration, and educational disruption. Lacking financial support, they now depend on overstretched services or informal networks, increasing their risk of exploitation.

Other organizations have also faced severe disruption. World Relief halted a nutrition program for malnourished children in South Sudan and could not distribute seeds for food production in Haiti, endangering future harvests. Catholic Relief Services, which receives nearly half its $1.2 billion budget from the U.S. government, anticipates workforce reductions of up to 50%. The Vatican’s Caritas network has warned that millions could die and hundreds of millions more could face dehumanizing poverty because of this “reckless” funding suspension.

In this context, international faith-based organizations (IFBOs) are well-positioned to play a substantive role, given their community ties, diverse funding streams, and service history. IFBOs are vital connectors to local faith actors (LFAs), often overlooked by secular structures. The leadership and deep-rooted engagement of LFAs further strengthen IFBOs’ impact, as LFAs often deliver direct support, advocate for sustainable solutions, and foster resilience. By resourcing these efforts, IFBOs ensure that aid reaches the most vulnerable while enabling communities to shape dignified, long-term solutions.

Local Partnerships, Presence and Trust

Modern IFBOs resemble secular INGOs in professionalism and expertise, but their legitimacy at the local level is often rooted in faith identity. Concerns about proselytization are largely unfounded. When implemented well, faith-based aid merges moral and spiritual motivations—such as compassion and justice—with professional standards that uphold equitable, needs-based assistance.

While secular INGOs emphasize human rights or humanitarian principles, IFBOs also draw on religious texts, traditions and community practices that emphasize care for the vulnerable and the dignity of every individual. These values foster long-term engagement and a deep commitment to service.

IFBOs are uniquely positioned to engage LFAs who understand local cultures and challenges. Their long-standing community presence fosters trust and reduces the skepticism often faced by external actors. As insiders, they can engage in sensitive conversations about development or cultural practices.

For example, a Muslim organization like Islamic Relief Worldwide integrates zakat (charitable giving) and sadaqah (voluntary aid) into its humanitarian response, ensuring that emergency relief aligns with faith-driven justice. This has helped build trust in communities otherwise wary of external aid. Similarly, CWS, founded on Christian values, uses social teaching to guide its work in displacement-affected regions, prioritizing human dignity while delivering both lifesaving and long-term support.

In crises—whether caused by conflict, disaster, or discrimination—people often need both tangible resources (food, shelter) and intangible ones (spiritual support). IFBOs and LFAs often share the faith traditions of those they serve, fostering solidarity and resilience. Research shows that even when faith is not shared, it can still enhance trust. Importantly, spiritual support must always be voluntary and never a condition for receiving aid.

Funding Challenges

Despite their networks of congregations and private donors, many IFBOs rely on government funding. Cuts to USAID grants have forced difficult decisions: scaling back programs, reducing staff, or seeking alternative funding.

Tighter budgets strain global operations. Staff cuts risk losing local expertise and severing relationships built over years, weakening trust and capacity. Abrupt project closures disrupt services and may erode community confidence in future aid efforts.

LFAs, often lacking large infrastructures, are hit hardest. The communities they serve risk losing critical support. While faith communities may donate generously, they cannot always compensate for the loss of major government contributions or replace the infrastructure underpinning national or international systems – whether in health, education, protection, or livelihoods – that are vital to community resilience and well-being.

Short-Term vs. Long-Term Priorities

Another effect of reduced aid is the shift toward short-term humanitarian relief (food, water, emergency care) at the expense of long-term development. Like secular INGOs, IFBOs operate in both spheres—responding to crises while sustaining programs in disaster risk reduction, education, health, and vocational training. Cutting long-term projects risks stalling progress and deepening vulnerability.

Conclusion

In this period of reduced aid, IFBOs and their networks of LFAs—from organized local groups to the village pastor—are more important than ever. Their presence, trust, and donor networks position them as key responders when public services collapse. Though not a substitute for comprehensive development strategies, their provision of hope and spiritual support adds resilience to traditional aid.

Religious actors also play crucial roles in promoting peace and reconciliation, especially in conflict zones. Their moral authority and deep community ties facilitate dialogue and support those most at risk of violence and displacement. Yet IFBOs face the same financial constraints as secular organizations and must make difficult decisions about which programs to continue.

To weather this geopolitical storm, JLI and its partners must stand together in solidarity and mutual support. Collective strength and collaboration will be key to sustaining vital work. The alternative—competing for shrinking funding—risks replicating the very inequalities humanitarianism seeks to address.