‎Op-Ed Pausing and Reflecting on Localization in Africa: An After Action Review in Kenya and Senegal

By Gabriel Oche
‎
‎In early July this year, the fears of millions around the world, particularly those working closely with funding from development aid, came to fruition as the US Agency for International Development (USAID) closed its doors.

Despite being the largest single donor of aid in the world (according to the UN) disbursing around $72 billion in assistance during 2023, the USAID also accounted for over 40% of all humanitarian aid accounted for by the UN in 2024.

With USAID absorbed by the Department of State, one trend is clear across the development landscape. It is rapidly changing and slated to affect developing countries (mostly those in Africa) ¢ven more.
‎
‎Since 2025, significant budget cuts to development assistance, which the OECD predicts are within the range of 16% – 28% in 2025 for Africa, are primarily bilateral overseas development assistance.

Also, the world has seen a shift in funding priorites towards short-term humanitarian crises (Le. migration, conflicts, and pandemic responses). In 2023 alone, “ODA to developed countries increased further to $43 billion, while ODA for asylum seekers and refugees in donor countries remained elevated at $31 billion.

However, ODA to. Atrica declined by almost 7% to $4 billion and aid to Lan Amenca and the Canbbean dropped by 15% to $14 billion.”
‎
‎Despite these, donors and international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) operating in Africa are increasingly seeking cost-effective and high-impact channels for development aid utilization amidst global shifts in development aid.

Funding gaps have increasingly paved the way for organizations like Conrad N. Hilton Foundation to support diverse benefactors beyond archetype restrictions synonymous to bi-lateral and INGO funding structures. This thereby increases the attractiveness of local direct implementation (1e. localization).

However, local organizations still navigating this labyrinth of diminishing resources often compounded by high administrative costs, ate forced to re-align operational project/program designs in line with donor specifications which are often viewed to be out of touch with local context thereby leading to ineffective or unsustainable projects/programs.

The concerns of community based organizations, civil society and local non governmental organizations in Africa around this operational landscape of development aid 1s further fueled by increased advocacy for increasing “Southern Agency” or “African Agency.” Thus overall places greater decision making powers in African countries shaping their own development plans.
‎
‎Leading African’s Review of Localization
‎
‎Budgl 1 and CODL, supported by Conard N. Hilton’ Foundation’s commitment to “big solutions and local partnerships” are exploring what localization actually means to local community based organizations and how their work has been impacted by this concept amidst changing dynamics of development aid.

Using an Atter Act on Review – AAR (i.e. Passe and Reflect sessions) to deepen this understanding, both organizations began documenting perspectives, experiences, learnings and crafting what should constitute the next step for localization in Africa based on shared experiences of CBOs in Africa.

The Pause and Reflect sessions in Kenya and Senegal were used to explore how localization goals around funding and local agency matched real experiences of local communities.

Designing the AAR meant focusing on what worked, what didn’t, and why – highlighting power imbalances, funding gaps, trust issues, and accountability closely related to expected
‎