USAID Warned Against Gaza Aid Group Days Before $30 Million State Department Funding Approval

 

An internal U.S. government assessment reveals that officials at USAID raised serious concerns last month about the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) — just days before the State Department approved a $30 million grant to the organization.

The 14-page document, obtained by multiple sources, outlines extensive deficiencies in GHF’s funding proposal. USAID officials flagged both operational and reputational risks, citing missing basic details in its aid plans, inadequate risk management strategies, and questionable safety practices — including a proposal to distribute powdered baby formula in an area with limited access to clean water.

One USAID official gave a clear recommendation: “I do not concur with moving forward with GHF given operational and reputational risks and lack of oversight.”

Despite these warnings, the State Department fast-tracked approval of GHF’s funding. According to sources familiar with the decision, senior political appointees, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and top foreign aid official Jeremy Lewin, pushed for expedited approval, bypassing typical vetting procedures. It's unclear whether they reviewed the USAID assessment before issuing the award.

GHF, a U.S.-backed nonprofit established to provide emergency aid to Gaza amid Israel’s 11-week blockade, has faced mounting international scrutiny. Hundreds of Palestinians have reportedly been killed near aid sites operated by the group. Humanitarian organizations and NGOs have criticized the use of armed U.S. security contractors in coordination with the Israel Defense Forces, claiming it has created deadly conditions for those seeking aid.

“Today, Palestinians in Gaza face an impossible choice: starve or risk being shot while trying desperately to reach food,” a coalition of over 240 NGOs said in a recent joint statement calling for GHF’s operations to be halted.

In response to the criticisms, the State Department defended the funding, stating that GHF was the only viable option to provide aid without benefiting Hamas. A spokesperson described the decision as fulfilling the administration’s humanitarian commitment and blamed resistance from career officials on “bureaucratic turf wars.”

According to internal records, GHF submitted a request for emergency funding in early June that spanned only a page and a half. A subsequent, more detailed proposal was still found to be lacking in essential components — including required safety and accountability measures, clear budget plans, and site-specific distribution logistics.

USAID's feedback form noted:

• A vague mission statement that did not meet safe programming standards

• Risk planning documents missing clear strategies to ensure aid reached intended recipients

• Incomplete budgeting and inconsistent timelines

• No details or maps showing new distribution sites

• A proposal to distribute baby formula without safeguards against contaminated water

Typically, such issues would delay or block funding approval until they were resolved. In this case, however, the grant moved forward rapidly. In an internal memo dated June 24, a top State Department appointee recommended waiving standard criteria due to the “humanitarian and political urgency” of GHF’s work.

The funding announcement came on June 26, with disbursement of funds conditioned on GHF completing several tasks normally required before approval — including government registration, partner vetting, and third-party audits. As of last week, none of the funds had yet been released.

Adding to the controversy, GHF’s leadership has seen turnover, with the organization’s head resigning before operations began, citing concerns about compliance with humanitarian principles.

Despite these internal and external alarms, the administration has continued to promote GHF as a solution to Gaza’s deepening humanitarian crisis. A June 30 memo from U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee praised GHF for "undermining Hamas" and "delivering critical food supplies," although no public evidence was offered to support claims of Hamas interference.

An earlier report found that American contractors guarding aid distribution sites used live ammunition and stun grenades to control crowds of desperate Palestinians. The State Department reportedly replaced an internal memo summarizing both positive and negative press about GHF with one showing only favorable coverage.

A State Department spokesperson hinted that further funding may be provided, contingent on GHF demonstrating safe and effective operations.

Despite the promise of aid, critics say the rush to fund GHF bypassed essential safeguards. “There is precedent for rapid funding — but not like this, and not for untested partners with incomplete proposals,” said a former USAID official.

As of now, whether GHF can deliver humanitarian assistance without worsening the crisis on the ground remains an open — and urgent — question.