USAID’s Abrupt Closure Highlights Structural Flaws in the Aid System

On September 1, Jeremiah A Carew argued that the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) collapsed not because of ineffective work but due to a failure of narrative. He described the agency’s shutdown as “abrupt” and emphasized that no public-relations campaign could revive it.

The Guardian

Carew, who has spent decades at the final point of delivery in recipient nations, identified the aid architecture as the primary obstacle. This multilayered chain, he said, encourages measurement of success by easy outputs—such as workshop attendance—rather than by long-term systemic impact. Carew also noted a “quiet truth” that aid workers, including local consultants, often benefit when projects are prolonged, creating incentives to extend processes instead of completing them.

The Guardian

To address these issues, Carew recommends several structural changes. First, he urges a shortening of the supply chain and direct funding of local actors, citing examples already practiced by some Nordic donors. Second, he calls for a shift in performance metrics toward genuine outcomes rather than superficial attendance figures. Finally, he suggests rewarding projects that reach completion, thereby reducing incentives to keep initiatives open indefinitely.

The Guardian

Carew’s analysis implies that the aid community must move beyond polished storytelling—often likened to NASA’s high-visibility successes—and focus on systemic reform. By streamlining funding pathways, prioritizing outcome-based evaluation, and aligning incentives with project completion, the sector could mitigate the inefficiencies that contributed to USAID’s downfall and improve the effectiveness of future development assistance.

The Guardian