Presented by Pivotal
Experts warn most NGO shutdowns are now rushed and harmful as funding dries up — but the process doesn’t have to be a crisis.
Also in today’s edition: Gates Foundation DPI chief Sanjay Jain talks Africa’s future with digital ID, and the U.N. kicks off its search for a new leader.
+ Devex is running a Black Friday discount campaign on our professional memberships. For a limited time, get a 50% discount on our Pro membership — normally $400 for the year — which offers exclusive access to content and events for development leaders.
We’re also offering a 50% discount on our Career Account membership — normally $114 for the year — for development workers looking for their next position.
Planning dignified endings
Since USAID funding cuts hit in January, NGOs everywhere have been scrambling. A Humanitarian Action survey found 81 NGOs had already shut at least one office, and Save the Children said its decision to close five was “an outright failure of responsibility of those in power and a moral failure of us all.”
But does closure translate into failure? Devex contributor Gabriella Jóźwiak looks at how NGOs facing the end can wind down operations in the least harmful way — and why more organizations should think about their endings even at their beginning.
Closure, experts say, doesn’t have to be chaotic. Camille Acey, who runs The Wind Down, admits that the chaos accompanying the dismantling of USAID meant a lot of closures were frantic — and that while organizations may feel pressured to consider mergers, they shouldn’t rush. Instead, she says, leaders should be transparent and ask: “What can we do to make this as dignified an ending as possible?”
One way, she suggests, might be leaving guidance and advice for those who might want to carry on the work in the future.
“If five or 10 years from now someone’s inspired by your work and wants to carry it forward,” she says, “Make sure they can find you.”
Read: Is there a good way for an NGO to go out of business? (Pro)
Wanted: New UN boss
The campaign to appoint a new United Nations secretary-general officially started yesterday, with the publication of a joint letter from the leaders of the U.N. Security Council and the U.N. General Assembly asking member states to nominate candidates.
The letter invites “candidates to be presented who have proven leadership and managerial abilities, extensive experience in international relations and strong diplomatic, communication and multilingual skills.”
The letter also noted “with regret that no woman has ever held the position of Secretary-General” and encouraged member states to “strongly consider nominating women as candidates.”
The U.N. Charter empowers the General Assembly to appoint a new secretary-general upon a recommendation by the Security Council, Senior Global Reporter Colum Lynch tells me. In practice, the U.N.’s five permanent members, who have sole veto power, have historically picked the candidate, leaving it to the 193-member assembly to rubber-stamp their choice. But over the past decade, the broader membership has been expanding their role in questioning candidates, and more recently requiring they disclose the financial backing of their campaigns.
The letter marked something of a rebuff of some of the council’s powerful members, who have resisted efforts to set basic criteria for the next U.N. leader.
Earlier this year, Beijing, Moscow, and Washington formed a united front in seeking to water down a U.N. General Assembly resolution mapping out a process for electing the new U.N. leader. In one instance, they put forward identical amendments proposing the removal, without explanation, of the provision that insisted member states only nominate candidates who “embody the highest standard of efficiency, competence and integrity, and a firm commitment to the purposes and principles of the [U.N.] Charter.”
“Here we cannot accept the selection criteria,” the U.K. delegation noted. The U.S. and Russia, meanwhile, have objected to language urging member states to nominate a woman, arguing the competition should be based largely on merit.
Opinion: ‘We do not lack qualified women’ — why the next UN leader must be a woman
ICYMI: Is the world ready for a woman at the helm of the United Nations?
See also: The UN's changing of the guard
Left beh-AI-nd
A new World Bank report dropped yesterday with a big question at its core: How can low- and middle-income countries tap into the promise of AI when, as Christine Zhenwei Qiang — global director with the World Bank Group’s digital vice presidency — puts it, they’re stuck in an “AI readiness impasse”?
She joined experts from the World Bank, the Gates Foundation, and George Washington University for a lively conversation moderated by Devex’s Catherine Cheney, digging into the Digital Progress and Trends Report 2025: Strengthening AI Foundations.
Right out of the gate, the World Bank’s senior managing director for development policy and partnerships, Axel van Trotsenburg, raised the stakes. AI, he warned, risks “creating a new divide” on top of all the existing ones — unless countries start investing in the connectivity, computing power, and expertise.
But not everyone agreed on how fast LMICs need to move. Shahid Yusuf, chief economist of The Growth Dialogue at George Washington University, urged governments to take a breath: “Hold your horses,” he said. “Don’t suffer from FOMO as of yet,” referring to the term for “fear of missing out.”
Instead of pouring scarce resources into massive data centers, Yusuf argued most countries would be better off focusing on “small AI” — practical tools that run on everyday devices and can deliver real gains in health, education, and agriculture.
Curious how AI is already reshaping economies — and what it will take for LMICs to benefit? You can watch the full event here.
From aid to agency
When Sanjay Jain, director of digital public infrastructure, or DPI, at the Gates Foundation, took the stage of the Global DPI Summit in Cape Town, South Africa, earlier this month, he pushed a big shift: The world must move “from a time of digital aid to digital empowerment.” He was quoting Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi — a signal of how India’s DPI model is shaping global thinking.
DPI, including digital ID, payments, and data-sharing, is now a top priority for African governments, writes Catherine. But as Jain put it, building it “can seem like a massive and complex undertaking,” especially when donors show up with scattered digital projects. That’s why the foundation wants tools that “put countries in control.”
There’s urgency: the collapse of USAID exposed how risky donor dependence is, and AI raises the stakes even higher. Yet even open-source tools can constrain countries. And as the Digital Impact Alliance’s Kay McGowan noted, digital sovereignty now hinges on far more than data storage: “Whose software are you using? Who’s actually implementing … and where is your talent coming from?”
Momentum is building. Rwanda, South Africa, and Nigeria are showing more coordinated approaches, and Ethiopia’s MOSIP-based ID is now being shared across the continent. And the private sector is stepping in, too. “This is our moment,” said James Mwangi, CEO of Equity Group Holdings. “The best thing of mobilizing domestic capital in developing DPI infrastructure is that Africa doesn’t just become a user but becomes an owner of its own infrastructure.”
Read: As DPI accelerates, African countries pursue digital sovereignty
Cheap shots
The R21 malaria vaccine is about to get cheaper. UNICEF and the Serum Institute of India — the world’s largest vaccine manufacturer — struck a new deal backed by Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, bringing the price down from $3.90 to $2.99 a dose. Gavi says this discount was unlocked through a financing tool that raises money via vaccine bonds, and expects the lower price to kick in by late 2026 or early 2027, according to Dr. Scott Gordon, head of Gavi’s malaria vaccine program.
Gavi anticipates savings of up to $90 million, enough to buy another 30 million doses. R21 is one of two World Health Organization-prequalified malaria vaccines, and most children need four doses — sometimes five in high-transmission areas.
So far, more than 10 million children across 24 countries have received malaria vaccines, though data on how many are fully vaccinated isn’t in yet. That matters in a region where malaria remains deadly, writes Senior Reporter Jenny Lei Ravelo. In 2023, nearly 600,000 people died from the disease in Africa, 76% of them children under 5.
Read: UNICEF, Gavi deal slashes malaria vaccine price to $2.99 per dose
+ Get up-to-date inside information on important global health news when you sign up for Devex CheckUp, our free, Thursday newsletter on the subject matter.
In other news
Reconstruction efforts in Gaza will take at least $70 billion over several decades, according to the U.N. Trade and Development Agency. [The Guardian]
The United Arab Emirates wants to ramp up investment and trade across sub-Saharan Africa as it pursues food security. [Bloomberg]
The U.S. Justice Department is seeking to block the deposition of Elon Musk in a lawsuit alleging he illegally drove efforts to dismantle USAID through the Department of Government Efficiency. [Forbes]
Sign up to Newswire for an inside look at the biggest stories in global development.
About the author
Helen Murphy
Helen is an award-winning journalist and Senior Editor at Devex, where she edits coverage on global development in the Americas. Based in Colombia, she previously covered war, politics, financial markets, and general news for Reuters, where she headed the bureau, and for Bloomberg in Colombia and Argentina, where she witnessed the financial meltdown. She started her career in London as a reporter for Euromoney Publications before moving to Hong Kong to work for a daily newspaper.
