Gutting U.S.A.I.D. Was a Disaster. Here Is How to Move Forward.

Opinion|Foreign Aid Wasn’t Perfect. Here’s How to Fix It.

The dismantling of U.S.A.I.D. was contemptible for so many reasons, not least of which that it was based on false claims and puts millions of the world’s most vulnerable at risk. If you think the Biden administration’s withdrawal from Afghanistan was bad, consider the chaos and death since this administration’s abrupt withdrawal from the entire world. Instead of winding down projects responsibly, the U.S. government left like a thief in the night, owing money, breaking promises and abandoning American aid workers in conflict zones.

Although a federal judge on Tuesday cast U.S.A.I.D. a temporary lifeline, foreign aid as we knew it is gone. While some contracts might be brought back under the State Department, it’s unlikely that the U.S. government — the largest donor in the world, according to recent data — will soon restore its foreign aid to the level it was. That doesn’t mean the rest of us should give up trying to help other nations. Those who care about the world and America’s role in it need to create a new vision for what foreign aid could be.

It’s early days in the effort to reimagine aid, but this much is clear: It should be leaner and less bureaucratic. It should be based on partnerships that respond to local needs, not pronouncements from Washington. And it will sometimes be fueled by private donations rather than taxpayer dollars. A public discussion has already begun. For instance, Unlock Aid, a group that has been trying to reform foreign aid for years, is unveiling a series of new ideas this month.

The first step is acknowledging that the old system had flaws. To be sure, millions of lives were saved during famines and epidemics. But let’s be honest. U.S.A.I.D. could be inefficient and wasteful. It’s hard to talk about that because such acknowledgments get misused as weapons against foreign aid, but building a better blueprint requires it.

Part of the blame lies with Congress, which loaded up U.S.A.I.D. with burdensome regulations. That’s why, year after year, grants and contracts flowed to the same American behemoths that perfected the art of federal fund-raising. Last fiscal year, only about $2 billion — out of some tens of billions of dollars — went directly to local partners on the ground. Much of the rest of the money was funneled through international organizations like the World Bank, or big American nonprofits and companies that can spend as much as half of their budget on overhead costs like rent and salaries in the United States.

Top recipients of U.S.A.I.D. funds include the Baltimore-based Catholic Relief Services, which gets high marks for its work, and the Washington-based for-profit company Chemonics, which often doesn’t. (Chemonics just agreed to pay $3.1 million to settle claims of fraudulent billing, providing fodder for Elon Musk’s assault on aid.) Organizations like these pay local partners around the world to work on U.S.A.I.D.’s behalf. But it doesn’t always end well. According to one survey, many local partners who worked on subcontracts from U.S.A.I.D. said that they were barely consulted on budgets and work plans, and were paid less than what they were promised.