ODA Allocations 2026: AfGH Official Statement
The UK Official Development Assistance programme allocations confirm that cuts to the aid budget will have a devastating impact on the health systems relied upon by the most vulnerable people around the world for their survival – systems already under strain from conflict, climate change and spiraling debt burdens.
Despite a rhetorical commitment from the UK Government to global health, the overall picture from allocations is mixed. We call for more information on how spend by the new Human Development Directorate will be allocated across the wide range of sectors it supports, including the additional £82 million per year to mitigate against potential disproportionate equalities impacts, and how this has been decided.
While the UK Government has reaffirmed support for key multilateral mechanisms such as Gavi and the Global Fund, it is stepping back from others – including the Global Polio Eradication Initiative, which has played a critical role in reducing global polio cases by over 99% and saving millions of children’s lives.
Although some protections have been maintained for centrally managed health programmes for SRHR and MNCH, cuts to or the potential ending of health programmes in Somalia, Malawi and Sierra Leone will have devastating consequences and will impact the most vulnerable. With reduction across the WISH programme and the phased exit from last mile delivery in some settings, we urge the FCDO to engage and consult with civil society and community organisations to ensure that this exit causes minimal disruption to services.
We continue to call for a clear comprehensive and strategic approach to Global Health following the UK’s announcements of aid allocations. There is an urgent need for a cross-government global health strategy to ensure that with reduced allocations, the commitments to global health are articulated and coherent across government.
Action for Global Health official reaction
Tsara Crosfill Morton, Senior Policy and Advocacy Advisor for Global Child Health at UNICEF UK and Member of Action for Global Health’s Steering Committee, said:
“The overall reduction in aid funding detailed in today’s UK ODA budget allocations means children in some of the poorest parts of the world will inevitably lose access to services they need to survive and thrive. This comes at a time when hard-won progress for reducing child mortality is in reverse.
Elements of the UK Government’s commitment to global health also remain unclear. The UK Government has promised strong support to some critical multilaterals while stepping back from others – including the Global Polio Eradication Initiative which has prevented the paralysis and deaths of millions of children. The impact of cuts on other global health programming is obscured through the combination of critical services for children and their communities under the Human Development Directorate.
We urge the UK Government to set out a clear and comprehensive strategic approach to global health and to ending the entirely preventable deaths of children.”
Mike Podmore, CEO, STOPAIDS, and Member of Action for Global Health’s Steering Committee, said:
“Whilst we welcome the Foreign Secretary’s ongoing commitment to global health, these latest ODA announcements spell out in more depressing detail the negative impact on key global health institutions of the reduction of ODA funding to 0.3% of GNI.
The Foreign Secretary has said the UK’s ODA commitments reflect UK values and national interests yet these cuts will significantly impact on the most vulnerable communities around the world and make us all less safe from global health threats.”
Reaction from Action for Global Health members
Kitty Arie, CEO, Results UK, said:
“We all know that governments have to make hard choices, and that today global insecurity is a driver of increased defence spending. But it is neither morally defensible nor practically credible to deplete vital development programmes that had already been cut to dangerous levels, freeing up barely enough money to make a dent in military spending. Not only that, but the loss of credibility the UK will face among development partners, and the reduction in the UK’s soft power, will hinder rather than help us deliver our global security goals.”
Dr Wendy Harrison, CEO, Unlimit Health, said:
“We welcome the government’s continued commitment to global health, but with the UK’s aid budget cut dramatically in recent years, every remaining pound must count. Emergency relief is vital — but it treats the symptoms, not the causes.
Sustainable impact comes from investing in resilient, country-owned health systems that empower communities to thrive without aid dependency. With less to spend, the case for a systems-strengthening approach has never been stronger — and we urge the government to put that thinking at the heart of its reformed development agenda.”
Dr Aneesa Ahmed, Head of Programmes and Strategic Partnerships, Amref Health Africa in the UK, said:
“The past year’s aid cuts have reset the global health architecture, changing the ways in which everyone must work to achieve health for all. The UK Government’s refocus on partnership is welcome, as is safeguarding support for multilateral initiatives such as Gavi and Global Fund, investment in the African Development Fund, and investing in women and girls.
“It sets a new path forward, but it means that we are still making uncertain steps without a real roadmap to bring ODA back to 0.7% of GDP. The fact remains that cutting the UK Aid budget, and reducing the proportion of ODA to Africa, forces the UK to do less in Africa because there is less, at a time of multiple intersecting crises when Africa faces 25% of global disease burden with just 3% of the global health workforce to respond to it.
“For our work in African health these crises are largely conflict, climate shocks, chronic underfunding of systems that need to be resilient in the face of mounting disease burdens and outbreaks. In places like South Sudan, ODA from the UK and other Global North nations held up the health system since independence in 2011. With the security situation deteriorating rapidly and the added strain of refugee and returnee populations from the war in Sudan, South Sudan needs sustainable support through aid and investment to build their system back up—not more cuts which means the UK simply has less to offer.
“We know that African leadership and health sovereignty is key to building solutions in a partnerships approach. Real partnership is based on active listening and placing people in communities at the centre of solutions-building. We are pleased to see the focus on supporting local solutions. This must ensure that African community voices are directing the solutions that will work for them, with the UK lending support and expertise, but also investment where it is most effective for those communities.”
Ben Simms, CEO, Global Health Partnerships, said:
“The UK’s aid commitment and leadership have long been a source of pride and in our own national interest. GHP understands the need to examine ODA investment models and to reform aid – but there is no need to go back to the drawing board. Genuine, equitable health partnerships — co-designed, co-led, and mutually beneficial – offer a way forward. They already exist and GHP have been championing them for decades. In May, the UK will co-host the Global Partnerships Conference alongside South Africa. That will be a key moment for the UK to re-commit to global health and to show real ambition to move beyond grants to genuine expertise-sharing, from external intervention to locally-led solutions, from donor to investor.
It is the only model that can deliver durable improvement in health outcomes at the scale the world now needs. The UK Global Health Summit 2026, held in London this week was the intellectual and moral foundation for that agenda. We hope the UK Government will draw on it and we stand ready to support them in doing so.”