A report from GHTC and Policy Cures Research examines how US federal funding for global health R&D is delivering impact both abroad and at home.

Search the GHTC website

Medical research, global health programs face steep cuts in Trump budget

Read time:
Photo: White house/Shealah Craighead

On Tuesday, the Trump Administration released its full fiscal year 2018 budget proposal. This budget proposes significant cuts to programs that support global health and medical research at the National Institutes of Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the US Agency for International Development.

May 22, 2017 by Courtney Carson

On Tuesday, the Trump Administration released its full fiscal year 2018 (FY18) budget proposal, “A New Foundation for American Greatness.” As foretold by the “skinny budget” proposal released in March, this budget proposes dramatic increases in defense spending and border security, offset by cuts to discretionary spending—including significant cuts to programs that support global health and medical research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the US Agency for International Development (USAID).

Dramatic cuts to global health programs at the State Department & USAID

At a high-level, President Trump proposed roughly a 25 percent cut to global health programs at the State Department and USAID, when compared to final fiscal year 2017 (FY17) funding levels. Looking just at USAID global health programs, funding levels were reduced over 50 percent from FY17 levels, from US$3.05 billion to $1.5 billion. The Administration also used the budget proposal to advance goals of streamlining USAID and State Department operations to find cost savings and efficiencies.

Despite strong bipartisan support for the United States’ flagship global HIV and AIDS program, the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), HIV and AIDS programs across State and USAID were targeted for cuts and consolidation. Direct funding for PEPFAR through the State Department received a $477 million cut, dropping to $3.85 billion from $4.32 billion, and USAID funding for complementary HIV and AIDS programs was zeroed—reflecting a funding cut of $330 million. The zeroing of HIV and AIDS programs at USAID also means associated research and development (R&D) funding for HIV vaccines and microbicides was eliminated.

Man and woman standing in front of a sign that reads "USAID." (PATH/Felix Masi)Man and woman standing in front of a sign that reads "USAID." (PATH/Felix Masi)Other funding cuts include a $62 million cut to global tuberculosis (TB) programs—including cuts to the TB drug facility and multidrug-resistant TB financing—a $65 million cut to maternal and child health programs, a $47 million cut to nutrition programs, and a $25 million cut to programs for neglected tropical diseases. USAID malaria programs (the President’s Malaria Initiative) received an $81 million cut, after factoring in a proposed $250 million transfer of remaining Ebola funds. USAID family planning programs were eliminated.

Slashed funding for medical research at NIH and public health protection at CDC

Biomedical research also saw significant cuts, with a proposed $7 billion or 21 percent cut to NIH. Of particular importance to global health R&D, the Administration proposed a $1.1 billion cut to the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases—which leads research in infectious diseases like HIV and AIDS, Ebola, and Zika—and elimination of the $70 million Fogarty International Center, which builds partnerships and trains researchers around the world. Instead, the Administration allocated $25 million to the Office of the NIH Director to coordinate global health research.

At the CDC—our lead agency for preventing, detecting, and responding to public health threats at home and abroad—overall budgets were cut by $1.3 billion, over 15 percent. This included a $70 million cut to CDC’s National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases and an $85 million cut to the Center for Global Health.

What happens next for global health R&D?

These broad and wide-ranging cuts proposed for global health and medical research programs are deeply concerning, and threaten to reverse gains achieved through our landmark global health programs, stall progress in promising research, and ultimately jeopardize lives at home and abroad. They also are in stark contrast to stated goals of the Trump Administration to honor our commitments to global health, bolster global health security, and support high-priority biomedical science.

Fortunately, Congress has ultimate control over government spending, and leadership on both sides of the aisle has asserted that dramatic cuts to foreign aid, global health, and medical research will not pass muster. As FY18 negotiations continue in Congress, GHTC will continue to stress the importance of global health R&D programs across the US government and highlight the critical role US-supported research plays in saving lives at home and around the world.

Categories: Congress, DoD, FDA, NIH, PEPFAR, State Department, USAID, US budget

About the author

Courtney CarsonGHTC

Courtney Carson is a policy and advocacy officer at GHTC, who leads GHTC's US advocacy portfolio.

Other Breakthroughs Blog posts you may like:
PATH/Patrick McKern
May 29, 2017

Research Roundup: Underestimating Zika & Chagas and hopes for the Ebola vaccine in the DRC

Written by Taylor Capizola / GHTC
Read time:
In this regular feature on Breakthroughs, we highlight some of the most interesting reads in global health research from the past week. A recent Congressional hearing on Zika has revealed that there is a lack of consensus regarding the diagnosis and treatment of the virus. Furthermore, only approximately 25 percent of babies born from women who have been exposed to Zika receive the necessary follow-up to evaluate their children for developmental defects. Such follow-up is critical—Zika can cause defects in the infant months after birth. As a result, the impact of Zika may be underestimated, leaving public health professionals uneasy about proposed budget cuts by the Trump Administration, which could exacerbate the treatment and reporting challenges that characterize the current outbreak. Chagas disease, colloquially known as "kissing bug disease," is more deadly than previously thought due to underreporting of the disease. Going undiagnosed while carrying Chagas can elevate the risk of death, primarily due to associated heart problems that will develop over time. Chagas disease initially mimics symptoms of the flu, often causing a misdiagnosis and lack of proper treatment, and it can lie symptomatically dormant for years, silently causing irreparable damage to the heart. There is currently no effective vaccine against the disease. The Democratic Republic of Congo’s (DRC) Ministry of Health has approved the use of an experimental Ebola vaccine to combat the outbreak. The vaccine, though experimental, proved to be highly effective in clinical trials. Details of how the vaccine will be deployed have not been announced yet, but if further cases are confirmed, it will likely be given to contacts and contacts of contacts of those with a confirmed case. So far, there have only been two confirmed cases, but over fifty suspected cases.
CDC/Dr. Scott Smith
May 21, 2017

G20 health ministers pledge support for R&D to combat antimicrobial resistance, pandemic threats

Written by Matthew Robinson / GHTC & Marissa Chmiola / GHTC
Read time:
Photo: CDC/ Dr. Scott SmithHealth ministers from G20 nations, meeting for the first time last Thursday and Friday, pledged to work together to combat antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and improve pandemic preparedness, emphasizing the critical role research and development (R&D) plays in confronting these global challenges. “By putting global health on the agenda of the G20, we affirm our role in strengthening the political support for existing initiatives and working to address the economic aspects of global health issues,” stated the declaration released Saturday. “Global health risks, such as infectious disease outbreaks and antimicrobial resistance (AMR), have a severe impact on the lives and well-being of millions of people as well as on the global economy. Since these global challenges cannot be addressed by one country, region or sector alone, they call for a coordinated global response.” In the declaration, G20 health ministers noted the role of new and improved medicines, vaccines, diagnostics, and other health tools in containing infectious disease outbreaks and pledged support for new models for R&D preparedness: “Research and Development (R&D) are necessary for the timely availability and development of new and improved quality medicines, vaccines, diagnostics and medical equipment for containing emergencies. This requires mobilization of national and international research efforts and facilities, and norms and commitments to share data and samples, in accordance with national legislation, and public health benefits in an inclusive, timely and transparent manner. In addition, sustainable funding and effective international R&D coordination is needed.  We welcome and support new models for R&D preparedness including the “WHO R&D Blueprint”, the Global Research Collaboration for Infectious Disease Preparedness (GLOPID-R) and the “Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI)”, which is developing new vaccines for epidemics. We underscore the importance that products emerging from such R&D efforts become accessible to all people in need. In regard to sample and data sharing, we recognize the importance of the WHO global influenza surveillance and response system and Pandemic Influenza Preparedness (PIP) framework, as well as the global initiative on sharing all influenza data.” The declaration also noted concern about the insufficient R&D pipeline of antimicrobial therapies and highlighted the importance of fostering R&D for new antimicrobials and other vital health tools, citing support for incentive mechanisms and global partnerships to spur technology development: “We note with concern that the research and development (R&D) pipeline for developing new antimicrobial therapies against life-threatening and highly resistant organisms has been drying up and does not correspond to the global needs in light of growing antimicrobial resistance during past decades. We highlight the importance of fostering R&D for new antimicrobials, alternative therapies, vaccines and rapid-point-of care diagnostics, in particular for priority pathogens as identified by WHO and for tuberculosis. We recognize the importance of reactivating the R&D pipeline through incentive mechanisms that avoid the reliance on high price/volume combinations. We also recognize the need to promote prudent and responsible use of antimicrobials. In the Hangzhou G20 Leaders’ Communiqué, G20 leaders called on the WHO, FAO, OIE and OECD to collectively report back in 2017. Their report ‘Tackling Antimicrobial Resistance, Ensuring Sustainable R&D’ will be considered by leaders when they meet on 7-8 July. In this context we support ongoing initiatives, examining push and pull mechanisms that take into account needs of all countries and stress the need for a better coordination of existing initiatives. Furthermore, we note the importance of affordable access to new and existing antimicrobial drugs, diagnostic tools, alternative therapies and vaccines of quality to all patients in need. We will preserve the widest possible therapeutic treatment options through avoiding removal of old antibiotics from the market and work for a sustainable solution to address this issue. To reinvigorate research and development in science and industry for antimicrobials, we welcome and build on the work of existing global and regional product development partnerships and funding initiatives such as the Global Antibiotic Research and Development Partnership (GARDP), launched in May 2016 by the WHO and the Drugs for Neglected Diseases initiative (DNDi), UNITAID, the Joint Programming Initiative on AMR (JPIAMR), Combating Antibiotic Resistance Bacteria Biopharmaceutical Accelerator (CARB-X), Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI), the TB Alliance for new anti-tuberculosis medicines. We commit to broaden the voluntary financial support for these initiatives. We call on other countries, philanthropic organizations, academia and the private sector to support these initiatives. We recognize the necessity of tools such as Target Product Profiles to describe high need products and the importance of prioritization of pathogens, to steer R&D efforts to the most pressing public health needs. Therefore, we welcome the WHO priority pathogen list, which, in addition to existing recommendations for HIV, TB, Malaria and NTDs, should guide R&D for antimicrobials. We recognise drug-resistant tuberculosis as an important threat and therefore commit to address tuberculosis within interventions for AMR. We acknowledge the need to develop and promote access to new drugs, diagnostics and vaccines to tackle drug-resistant tuberculosis consistent with the WHO End TB Strategy. We recognize the importance of other relevant initiatives and plans, such as the STOP TB Partnership. We welcome the decision by Member States to hold a United Nations High-Level Meeting on Tuberculosis in 2018 and the WHO Ministerial Conference on Ending TB in the Sustainable Development Era to be held in Moscow in November 2017.” The inclusion of supportive language for R&D in the health ministers’ declaration follows calls by GHTC and partners for G20 leaders to commit investment in research, innovation, and development of innovative health technologies to counter threats posed by AMR, poverty-related and neglected diseases, and pandemics. The health ministers’ declaration will feed into and inform outcomes of the G20 leaders’ summit in Hamburg, Germany, in July, where G20 leaders will release a final joint communique. While GHTC is very pleased with the health ministers’ clear acknowledgment of the importance of R&D, we also caution that this is not the end of our advocacy efforts for the G20. While the health ministers are clearly on board, the advocacy community must keep pushing to ensure that global health R&D does not get lost in the much larger debate that happens for the full, formal G20 communique. We look forward to working with all of our partners to do so.