The U.S. Congress is weighing in on the restructuring of the State Department. What does that mean for the expedited process — and for President Donald Trump?
Also in today’s edition: Are mergers the answer for financially strapped charities?
+ Zipline’s drones deliver medical supplies every 60 seconds across eight countries, a multibillion-dollar success story built outside traditional aid. Tune in on June 11 at 12 p.m. ET as Zipline co-founder and CEO Keller Rinaudo Cliffton shares what USAID got wrong, what its successor can get right, and how to build sustainable impact that can withstand political shifts. Register to secure your spot.
The state of Congress
The Republican-controlled U.S. Congress has largely been a bystander in the Trump administration's policy tornado, including its swift dismantling of America’s foreign aid architecture.
But are lawmakers on Capitol Hill about to step up and speak out? As with so many things in this unpredictable political climate, that’s a definite maybe.
There are signs, however, that Congress wants a say in what comes next. First, the White House sent it a package to rescind billions in unspent but already-appropriated foreign aid funds. Then, the president sent over a budget that details how he plans to effectively nuke future aid.
Now, as my colleagues Elissa Miolene and Michael Igoe reveal, the House of Representatives is beginning work on a bill to reauthorize and reorganize the State Department, after the department sent an earlier congressional notification outlining its restructuring plans.
A “draft organizational chart” put together by the Republican-led House Foreign Affairs Committee — and obtained by Devex — includes a number of key differences from the one that U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio proposed last week, and a reshuffling of where foreign aid priorities such as global food security would sit.
But a committee spokesperson tells Devex the draft chart was just an “illustrative tool,” and that it should not be considered “a final version of anything.”
Still, it is illustrative that lawmakers want to be consulted on changes moving forward. But will Congress’ deliberative approach mesh with Trump’s “break first” and “build later” approach? And how does its involvement square with the July 1 restructuring deadline that Trump set?
As Yael Schacher of Refugees International puts it: “[A State Department reauthorization bill] might be introduced in the House in the fall, and then it would have to go to the Senate — so this is glacial speed, compared to what the Trump administration is already doing.”
Exclusive: Congress kick-starts State Department reorganization planning
Reality check
As the initial State Department reorganization made the rounds last week, details emerged on proposals to eliminate thousands of jobs, install a new foreign assistance head, reshape the ethos of foreign assistance to match an “America First” mindset, and significantly reshuffle how the United States delivers aid.
But at an event on Capitol Hill, experts questioned the realities of that plan — with many asking whether the State Department could actually handle what had been pushed onto its plate. For example, the department is supposed to shrink its workforce by nearly 3,500 staffers and take on just 300 new employees to program the remnants of USAID.
“The starting point of 300 is a completely ludicrous number,” said Conor Savoy, who was until recently a former team lead for USAID’s foreign policy engagement. “And I cannot emphasize this enough: The State Department has a lot of talented people who work there … but it is not a programmatic agency. It does not have program officers, it does not have contracting officers.”
The point was raised repeatedly at the event, which was hosted by the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network, an organization dedicated to U.S. aid reform. While MFAN has said Rubio’s reorganization plan is a step-up from earlier iterations, the holes in the proposal continued to surface — with some former senior USAID staffers noting that it took the agency years to develop the thousands of programs that today have been left in the dust.
There’s also the technical aspects of a swap-over to the State Department, explained Hally Mahler, the vice president of global programs at FHI 360. Mahler echoed Savoy’s concerns about the State Department’s ability to actually develop, implement, and monitor programs the way USAID’s 13,000-strong staff once did — especially now that many governments and communities doubt U.S. funding can be trusted.
“[The administration has] promised that certain things will continue, but there’s no process for that,” Mahler said. “We might be through this moment of crisis — but there’s a new moment of crisis looming.”
ICYMI: State Dept overhaul to cut 3,400 jobs, recast focus on US values
Joining forces
With so many charities facing a do-or-die financial crisis, could mergers help some survive the implosion of foreign aid?
“Charity mergers are often associated with failing organizations, a way of avoiding closure,” James Haughton, who heads Pestalozzi International, tells Devex contributing reporter Amy Fallon. “I think the sector should lift its gaze and take a different attitude, because what should really drive how we make decisions is how we can have the most impact, right?”
Pestalozzi World Children’s Trust and Pestalozzi International Foundation decided to merge last September to form Pestalozzi International, which offers education services in Zambia, India, and Nepal. Haughton says it’s put them in a better position to deal with the current climate, which he didn’t foresee when they began the discussions.
“I think what's happened with USAID and the withdrawal of British international development spending it’s heaped the pressure on organizations like us, and at the same time, the better funders out there are interested and motivated by joint applications,” he says.
But mergers aren’t a breeze. Success depends not just on structure, but on culture, values, and power-sharing.
Some of the trustees at Pestalozzi likely needed more convincing about their merger “because organizations can be quite territorial and quite precious,” says Eddie West-Burnham, the chief operating officer of Pestalozzi International. But once talks began, they were fully onboard.
“Sometimes there’s this feeling of ‘I can't lose my little fiefdom, my little empire,’ especially if the CEO or chair set up the organization,” West-Burnham says. “But the effectiveness, efficiency, and delivering a quality service has to be the priority, not the ego and the status of the chief executive.”
Read: Why an increasing number of charities are deciding to merge (Pro)
+ Curious about the insights that drive global development? Experience the power of Devex Pro with a 15-day free trial. Explore expert analyses, unlock hidden funding opportunities, connect with key players at exclusive events, and access a wealth of knowledge you won't find anywhere else.
Food fight
A House Appropriations subcommittee voted to advance its fiscal 2026 agriculture spending bill, which includes provisions to move Food for Peace and the Famine Early Warning Systems Network, or FEWS NET, from USAID to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The full House Appropriations Committee is expected to consider the bill on June 11, my colleague Ayenat Mersie tells me.
“As the State Department undergoes reorganization, we have worked with the administration on language in this bill to transfer the administration of Food for Peace from the State Department back to USDA where it belongs,” Rep. Andy Harris, a Republican from Maryland, said at the subcommittee markup.
The move aligns with a Republican bill introduced earlier this year that argued USDA is better positioned to manage commodity-based food aid. But critics cite USDA’s limited emergency response experience, staffing constraints, and the risk of siloing food aid from broader humanitarian programs.
Still, it’s unclear exactly what these provisions would authorize. Transfers of this type typically require sign-off from authorizing committees, not just appropriators, one source familiar with the process says.
The bill — which did not receive any Democratic votes — also proposes cutting Food for Peace to $900 million, nearly $800 million below fiscal 2025 levels. These figures are in line with the Trump administration’s budget request, released last week.
“It would cut Food for Peace to its lowest level since 2002, when there were two billion fewer people on Earth,” says Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Democrat from Florida. “These cuts are as morally indefensible as they are strategically foolish.”
On the other hand, McGovern-Dole, which provides school meals to low-income students using U.S. commodities, saw only a slight funding cut — from $240 million to $220 million — despite recent reports of widespread program cancellations.
The Senate has yet to release its version. The final appropriations package is typically the result of negotiations between the two chambers, often landing somewhere in the middle.
+ For more content like this, sign up to Devex Dish, a weekly newsletter on the transformation of the global food system.
In other news
The U.N. Ocean Conference begins today in Nice, France, where world leaders are expected to come up with plans and funding to address the global marine emergency. [France 24]
At least 12 people died Sunday when Israeli forces fired at two aid distribution points in Gaza. [AP]
The charity boat carrying climate activist Greta Thunberg and other personalities that set sail in hopes of breaking the aid blockade in Gaza has been seized by Israeli forces. [Reuters]
Sign up to Newswire for an inside look at the biggest stories in global development.
About the author
Anna Gawel
Anna Gawel is the Managing Editor of Devex. She previously worked as the managing editor of The Washington Diplomat, the flagship publication of D.C.’s diplomatic community. She’s had hundreds of articles published on world affairs, U.S. foreign policy, politics, security, trade, travel and the arts on topics ranging from the impact of State Department budget cuts to Caribbean efforts to fight climate change. She was also a broadcast producer and digital editor at WTOP News and host of the Global 360 podcast. She holds a journalism degree from the University of Maryland in College Park.
