The Role of USAID Withdrawal in Shaping Social Work Practice with Queer Individuals: A Case Study of a Mthatha-Based Organisation in South Africa

Abstract

The withdrawal of international donor funding poses significant challenges for organisations serving marginalised populations, particularly where external resources are central to service delivery. This study explored the role of USAID withdrawal in shaping social work practice with queer individuals through a case study of one organisation in Mthatha, Eastern Cape, South Africa. Guided by Resource Dependency Theory, the study examined how the withdrawal of donor funding affected organisational sustainability, service provision, and professional social work practice within a queer-focused organisation. A qualitative case-study design employing reflexive thematic analysis was used. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with twelve participants comprising organisational managers, social workers, and queer service users. The findings show that prior USAID support had enabled psychosocial services, advocacy, outreach and capacity building, yet also shaped organisational priorities and constrained professional autonomy. Following withdrawal, participants described programme reductions, staffing losses, increased workloads, diminished access to support for service users, and organisational uncertainty. In response, they articulated aspirations for funding diversification, stronger government partnerships and greater professional autonomy. The study concludes that while external funding can expand queer-focused social work services, heavy reliance on a single international donor creates vulnerabilities that threaten continuity of care. Sustainable service delivery requires diversified funding, strategic local partnerships and enhanced state support.

1. Introduction

Social work is a profession grounded in the principles of human rights, social justice, dignity, and the promotion of well-being among individuals, families, groups, and communities. Central to this mandate is the profession’s commitment to supporting marginalised populations and addressing structural inequalities that undermine human flourishing [1,2]. In this professional context, queer individuals, used here as an inclusive umbrella term for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual and other sexual and gender minority (LGBTQIA+) people, remain among the populations most vulnerable to discrimination, exclusion, and violence despite significant advancements in legal and policy protections across many countries.

South Africa is internationally recognised for its progressive constitutional protections of sexual orientation and gender identity. Section 9 of the Constitution prohibits discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and provides one of the most comprehensive legal frameworks for LGBTQIA+ rights globally [3,4]. Nevertheless, legal recognition has not eliminated the social challenges experienced by queer individuals. Research consistently demonstrates that queer populations continue to experience stigma, discrimination, violence, social exclusion, and barriers to accessing healthcare and social services [4,5,6]. These experiences contribute to adverse psychosocial outcomes, including depression, anxiety, social isolation, and diminished well-being [7].

The persistence of these challenges has increased the importance of queer-affirmative social work practice. Queer-affirmative practice seeks to create safe, inclusive, and empowering environments for sexual and gender minority populations while actively challenging heteronormative assumptions and discriminatory institutional practices [8]. Contemporary scholarship argues that effective social work with queer individuals requires not only culturally responsive practice but also organisational and structural support that enables practitioners to advocate for social justice and respond effectively to community needs [9,10]. Consequently, the quality and accessibility of services available to queer individuals are often influenced by the capacity and sustainability of the organisations that provide them.

Within South Africa, civil society organisations have historically played a crucial role in advancing the rights and well-being of queer communities. These organisations frequently provide psychosocial support, advocacy services, HIV-related interventions, community mobilisation programmes, leadership development initiatives, and safe spaces for individuals experiencing marginalisation. Research on specialised LGBTQIA+ services, including emergency shelter provision for queer youth, underscores the continuing importance of such community-based organisations in responding to psychosocial vulnerabilities [11]. However, many queer-focused organisations operate within resource-constrained environments and remain heavily dependent on external donor funding to sustain their operations.

Among the most influential international donors supporting health, human rights, and development initiatives globally has been the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Through its LGBTQI+ Inclusive Development Policy [12] and associated funding mechanisms, USAID invested substantially in programmes promoting equality, inclusion, healthcare access, community development, and human rights for sexual and gender minority populations [13]. These investments strengthened the organisational capacity of local partners, facilitated service delivery, supported advocacy efforts, and included professional development and training components for service providers [12,13].

Although USAID has historically supported a wide range of health, HIV/AIDS, democracy, governance and human rights initiatives in South Africa, broader changes in the United States foreign assistance policy during 2025 resulted in the termination or substantial reduction in several USAID-administered funding streams, including programmes supported through the United States President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) [14]. These shifts were part of a broader reorientation of US foreign assistance priorities amid rising political polarisation and rightward policy shifts in several high-income donor countries. The scale and abruptness of the cuts underscored a growing vulnerability in the global aid architecture: when major bilateral donors rapidly reprioritise or reduce overseas assistance, organisations and communities that have come to depend on those resources face immediate threats to service continuity [15]. These funding changes were not directed specifically at organisations serving queer communities; rather, they affected numerous civil society organisations across the health and human rights sectors that relied on USAID support [14].

The organisation examined in this study had received multi-year PEPFAR-linked funding to support psychosocial services, community outreach, advocacy, and capacity-building activities for queer individuals. Following the policy shifts, the organisation experienced a gradual reduction in activities rather than an immediate closure: as available resources diminished over several months, programmes were scaled down and staff were progressively released. The precise funding period and contractual details are withheld to protect organisational confidentiality. The present study, therefore, examines how these broader funding changes shaped social work practice, organisational sustainability and service delivery within one queer-focused organisation in Mthatha, Eastern Cape. This case illustrates dynamics that may be relevant to other donor-dependent organisations, while remaining bounded by its single-site design.

Despite these contributions, concerns regarding donor dependency and organisational sustainability have become increasingly prominent within development scholarship. While international funding may strengthen service delivery and organisational capacity, excessive dependence on external donors may expose organisations to significant vulnerabilities when funding priorities shift or support is withdrawn [16,17]. Resource Dependency Theory suggests that organisations reliant on external resources often adapt their priorities and activities to align with donor expectations, creating dependencies that may compromise sustainability when critical funding streams are disrupted [18].

The withdrawal of USAID funding has generated considerable concern among organisations serving queer communities, particularly regarding service continuity and the sustainability of programmes supporting vulnerable populations. Existing research indicates that funding withdrawal may result in staffing reductions, programme closures, diminished organisational capacity, and reduced access to essential services [19,20]. However, limited empirical research has examined how donor withdrawal specifically shapes social work practice with queer individuals, particularly within the South African context.

Against this backdrop, this study investigates the role of USAID withdrawal in shaping social work practice with queer individuals in South Africa. Drawing on the experiences of organisational managers, social workers, and queer service users in Mthatha, the study explores how funding withdrawal affects organisational sustainability, service delivery, professional practice, and access to support services. In doing so, the study contributes to emerging scholarship on donor dependency, organisational resilience, and queer social work within the Global South.

2. Theoretical Framework: Resource Dependency Theory

This study is underpinned by Resource Dependency Theory (RDT), originally developed by Pfeffer and Salancik [21] to explain how organisations depend on external actors for access to critical resources necessary for survival and growth. Although the theory originated several decades ago, it continues to provide an important analytical framework for understanding contemporary organisational sustainability, particularly within non-governmental and donor-funded sectors. Recent scholarship has reaffirmed that organisations operate within environments characterised by resource scarcity and uncertainty, requiring them to establish relationships with external stakeholders who control access to financial, material, and institutional resources [17,22].

Resource Dependency Theory posits that organisations are not autonomous entities but are shaped by their dependence on external resource providers. Consequently, organisations must continuously adapt their structures, priorities, and operational practices to secure the resources required for continued functioning. Contemporary studies demonstrate that reliance on a limited number of funders often creates vulnerabilities, as resource providers may influence organisational priorities, programme implementation, reporting requirements, and strategic decision-making [22,23].

Within the non-profit sector, donor funding remains one of the most significant determinants of organisational sustainability. Recent research has shown that organisations heavily dependent on external funding frequently experience uncertainty when donor priorities shift or funding streams are discontinued. Such dependency may limit organisational autonomy and expose organisations to financial instability, programme disruptions, and reduced service delivery capacity [17,24]. Furthermore, studies on non-profit sustainability suggest that reliance on a narrow funding base increases organisational vulnerability and often compels organisations to align their activities with donor expectations rather than community priorities [17,25,26].

The relevance of Resource Dependency Theory to this study lies in its ability to explain the relationship between USAID and queer-focused organisations in South Africa. For many years, USAID funding has supported programmes focused on advocacy, psychosocial services, HIV prevention, capacity building, and community mobilisation. These resources enabled organisations to expand their services and strengthen support systems for queer individuals. However, Resource Dependency Theory suggests that when a dominant funding source withdraws support, organisations may experience operational constraints, reduced programme capacity, and increased uncertainty regarding future sustainability [17,21].

The theory further illuminates the power dynamics embedded within donor–recipient relationships. Resource providers often possess the ability to shape programme priorities and influence organisational behaviour because access to critical resources is contingent upon compliance with donor requirements. Within social work practice, such dynamics may affect professional autonomy, service delivery priorities, and practitioners’ capacity to respond effectively to service users’ needs. The withdrawal of donor funding may therefore have implications that extend beyond organisational finances, affecting the quality, accessibility, and sustainability of social work services provided to queer communities [22,27].

Resource Dependency Theory, therefore, provides a valuable lens for examining how the withdrawal of USAID funding shapes organisational sustainability and social work practice with queer individuals in South Africa. By focusing on the relationship among resource dependence, organisational survival, and professional practice, the theory offers important insights into the challenges and adaptations that arise when external funding is reduced or withdrawn.

3. Literature Review

3.1. Social Work Practice with Queer Individuals

Social work is founded upon principles of human rights, social justice, dignity, and the promotion of wellbeing among vulnerable and marginalised populations. Within this mandate, social workers play a critical role in addressing the psychosocial, economic, and structural inequalities experienced by queer individuals. Despite South Africa possessing one of the most progressive constitutional frameworks globally regarding sexual orientation and gender identity rights, queer individuals continue to experience discrimination, stigma, violence, and exclusion across multiple social institutions [6,28]. These experiences contribute to adverse mental health outcomes, social isolation, and barriers to accessing healthcare and social services [7].

Contemporary social work scholarship increasingly advocates for queer-affirmative practice as an ethical and professional response to these challenges. Queer-affirmative practice recognises and affirms diverse sexual orientations, gender identities, and gender expressions while actively challenging heteronormative assumptions embedded within service systems [8]. Affirmative social work extends beyond individual-level interventions and requires practitioners to address systemic inequalities through advocacy, empowerment, and institutional reform [9]. Similarly, one study found that specialised LGBTQIA+ sensitisation training significantly enhances practitioners’ competence and confidence when working with queer populations [10].

Recent South African studies further highlight the importance of culturally responsive and inclusive services. A study conducted in Gauteng province found that many queer individuals continue to encounter exclusion within healthcare settings despite legislative protections [29]. Likewise, [30] demonstrates that queer persons with disabilities experience multiple and intersecting forms of marginalisation, necessitating integrated and inclusive intervention approaches. These findings suggest that effective social work practice with queer populations requires not only individual competence but also organisational support, institutional commitment, and access to adequate resources.

3.2. Queer Organisations and Social Justice in South Africa

Historically, civil society organisations have been central to advancing social justice and human rights in South Africa. Within the queer sector, community-based organisations have emerged as important spaces for advocacy, psychosocial support, health promotion, leadership development, and community mobilisation. These organisations frequently operate as intermediaries between marginalised communities and broader social institutions, helping to address barriers to service access while promoting social inclusion [8].

Although constitutional protections exist, social acceptance of queer identities remains uneven. Research indicates that queer individuals continue to experience discrimination within educational institutions, workplaces, families, religious communities, and healthcare systems [6]. Consequently, queer-focused organisations often function as safe spaces where individuals can access support, counselling, advocacy services, and community networks.

The contribution of these organisations extends beyond service delivery. They also play a significant role in advancing social justice by challenging discriminatory practices, advocating for policy reform, and promoting awareness regarding sexual and gender diversity. Community-based queer organisations remain essential mechanisms for addressing psychosocial vulnerabilities among LGBTQIA+ populations in South Africa [11]. However, the ability of these organisations to sustain such interventions often depends on external funding.

3.3. International Donor Funding and Social Service Delivery

International donor funding has become an important source of support for social development initiatives throughout the Global South. Donors frequently provide financial resources for programmes related to health, education, gender equality, human rights, and social inclusion. Within the social service sector, donor funding often enables organisations to provide specialised interventions that may otherwise be unavailable due to limited governmental resources [19].

The literature presents competing perspectives regarding donor funding. Proponents argue that donor support strengthens organisational capacity, facilitates innovation, improves service quality, and expands programme reach [22]. Through financial and technical assistance, donor agencies enable organisations to employ qualified personnel, develop infrastructure, and implement interventions targeting vulnerable populations.

Conversely, critics caution that excessive dependence on donor funding may undermine organisational autonomy and sustainability. Resource Dependency Theory suggests that organisations dependent on external resources frequently adapt their priorities and activities to align with donor expectations [17]. In such contexts, power often resides with funding agencies rather than recipient organisations, creating tensions between donor priorities and community needs. As a result, organisations may become vulnerable to external shocks when donor priorities shift or funding streams are discontinued.

These contrasting perspectives highlight the dual nature of donor funding. While external resources may strengthen organisational capacity and service delivery, dependence on a limited number of donors may expose organisations to financial instability and operational uncertainty.

3.4. USAID and LGBTQIA+ Advocacy Organisations

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has historically been one of the largest international development agencies supporting health, governance, human rights, and community development initiatives globally. Through its LGBTQI+ Inclusive Development Policy [12], the agency has emphasised the importance of promoting equality, inclusion, and human rights for sexual and gender minority populations as part of a coordinated whole-of-government effort. This policy builds on earlier commitments and guides the integration of LGBTQI+ considerations across development programming, prioritising locally led approaches, evidence-based strategies, and the meaningful involvement of LGBTQI+ communities. USAID-funded programmes—frequently implemented in partnership with PEPFAR—have supported advocacy initiatives, HIV prevention and treatment services for key populations, psychosocial interventions, community outreach programmes, and organisational capacity-building activities in numerous countries, including South Africa [13].

Within the queer sector, donor support has contributed significantly to the development of community-based organisations and specialised support services. Such funding has enabled organisations to employ skilled personnel, provide psychosocial services, facilitate community mobilisation, and strengthen advocacy efforts to promote social justice and human rights [8]. Furthermore, donor-funded programmes have supported the development of queer-affirmative practice through practitioner training and professional development initiatives [10].

However, scholars argue that organisations heavily reliant on donor funding often experience sustainability challenges when funding cycles end, or donor priorities change [17]. Consequently, while donor support may strengthen service provision in the short term, questions remain regarding the long-term sustainability of programmes dependent on external funding.

3.5. Donor Withdrawal, Organisational Sustainability and Social Work Practice

The sustainability of donor-funded programmes after funding withdrawal remains a major concern in the development literature. A systematic review [19] found that many African programmes experience significant challenges after donor funding ends, including reduced service delivery, staff attrition, programme discontinuation, and diminished organisational capacity. Such outcomes often affect vulnerable populations who rely on these services for support and assistance.

Recent research demonstrates that donor withdrawal affects organisations at multiple levels. Financially, organisations may struggle to maintain operational costs and retain skilled personnel. Programmatically, they may be forced to reduce outreach activities, discontinue interventions, or limit access to services. Institutionally, the withdrawal of funding may create uncertainty regarding long-term planning and organisational viability [17].

For social workers, these challenges have direct implications for professional practice. Reduced organisational resources may constrain service delivery, increase workloads, and limit opportunities for advocacy and community engagement. Furthermore, practitioners may experience ethical tensions when organisational constraints prevent them from adequately responding to service users’ needs. Such concerns are particularly significant within queer-focused organisations where social workers frequently engage with individuals experiencing discrimination, violence, mental health challenges, and social exclusion [7].

The literature further suggests that diversifying funding, pursuing strategic partnerships, mobilising community resources, and increasing government support may enhance organisational resilience following donor withdrawal [22]. Nevertheless, empirical evidence regarding how donor withdrawal specifically shapes social work practice with queer individuals remains limited, particularly within the South African context.

3.6. Knowledge Gap

Although considerable scholarship exists regarding queer wellbeing, affirmative social work practice, donor dependency, and organisational sustainability [8,19,20,25,26], limited empirical attention has been devoted to understanding how donor withdrawal shapes social work practice with queer populations. Existing studies predominantly focus on healthcare outcomes, organisational management, or donor-funded development programmes [19,25,26], with relatively little emphasis on the lived experiences of social workers and queer service users affected by funding disruptions. Furthermore, there remains a scarcity of South African research examining the implications of USAID withdrawal for organisational sustainability, professional practice, and service delivery within queer-focused organisations. This study addresses this gap by exploring, through an in-depth case study, how the withdrawal of USAID funding influences social work practice with queer individuals in one Mthatha-based organisation.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Research Approach and Design

This study adopted a qualitative case study approach to explore how the withdrawal of USAID funding shaped social work practice with queer individuals within one Mthatha-based organisation. Qualitative research is well-suited to investigating complex social phenomena because it enables an in-depth understanding of participants’ experiences, perceptions, and interpretations within their natural contexts [31]. A single-organisation case study design was chosen to generate rich, context-specific insight into the organisational, professional and service-user consequences of donor withdrawal.

Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis [32]. This approach was selected because it prioritises researcher reflexivity, allows for both inductive and theory-informed coding, and is well suited to exploring patterned meanings across a heterogeneous sample of participants (managers, social workers and service users). The design focused on participants’ accounts of the period before, during and after funding reductions rather than on phenomenological reduction in lived experience per se.

4.2. Study Setting

The study was conducted in Mthatha, a town situated within the King Sabata Dalindyebo Local Municipality in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. Mthatha was selected because it hosts one of the few community-based organisations in the region that specifically provides services to queer individuals and had previously benefited from USAID funding. The setting provided a suitable context for exploring the implications of donor withdrawal on organisational sustainability and social work practice.

4.3. Population and Sampling

The study population comprised stakeholders affiliated with a queer-focused organisation operating in Mthatha. Participants were selected for their direct involvement in programmes previously supported by USAID and for their experiences of the organisational changes that followed USAID’s withdrawal of funding.

Purposive sampling was utilised to recruit information-rich participants capable of providing detailed insights relevant to the study objectives [33]. Inclusion criteria required that managers and social workers had been employed by the organisation during the period of USAID-supported programming and had direct experience of the funding changes; service users were required to have accessed organisational services (psychosocial support, support groups or outreach) either before or during the period of funding reduction. Participants who had joined the organisation only after the main funding reductions, or who had no knowledge of the USAID-supported programmes, were excluded. Service users included both current and former beneficiaries.

Recruitment occurred through organisational gatekeepers who circulated study information sheets. Interested individuals contacted the research team directly. The sample comprised 12 participants: 5 organisational managers, 3 social workers, and 4 queer service users. These participant categories were selected to ensure representation of both service providers and beneficiaries, thereby enabling a comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon under investigation. Participants’ engagement with the organisation ranged from approximately two to eight years. To protect anonymity given the small sample and single-site design, a full demographic table is not presented. In broad terms, participants were adults spanning early adulthood to middle age; the service-user group self-identified across a range of LGBTQIA+ identities consistent with the organisation’s client base; and the professional participants included both queer and non-queer practitioners.

Data collection continued until thematic saturation was reached. Saturation occurred when additional interviews yielded no new themes or significant insights relevant to the research question [32].

4.4. Data Collection

Data were collected through semi-structured individual interviews and document analysis between late 2025, after the main funding reductions had taken effect and while the organisation was still adjusting to reduced capacity. An interview guide containing open-ended questions was used to facilitate discussions concerning the role of USAID funding, experiences of funding withdrawal, organisational sustainability, service delivery, and social work practice with queer individuals. Questions included: “How did USAID funding shape the services your organisation was able to provide?” In what ways did donor requirements influence day-to-day social work practice? What changes did you observe after the funding reductions began?” and “What do you think is needed for the organisation to sustain its work in the longer term?”

Interviews were conducted in person at locations agreed upon by the participants and lasted 45–60 min. Interviews were conducted in isiXhosa and/or English according to participant preference; the principal researcher is bilingual and conducted most interviews directly. With participants’ consent, interviews were audio-recorded and subsequently transcribed verbatim. IsiXhosa transcripts were translated into English by the researcher, with selected passages checked through back-translation for accuracy. Where quotations appear first in isiXhosa followed by an English rendering, the interview segment was conducted in isiXhosa; where only English is presented, the interview was conducted primarily in English. Translations aim for fidelity to meaning and tone rather than word-for-word literalism; the terms “loosely translated” or “translated” are used consistently to indicate this approach.

Document analysis complemented interview data by providing contextual information regarding organisational programmes, funding arrangements, and service delivery activities. The use of multiple data sources enhanced the richness and credibility of the findings.

4.5. Researcher Positionality and Reflexivity

The author served as the research supervisor for an undergraduate project from which the empirical data were drawn and is a social work academic based at Walter Sisulu University, with prior engagement in queer-affirmative practice scholarship. The researcher did not hold a formal role within the case organisation and was not previously known to most participants. Nevertheless, given the sensitivity of funding and organisational sustainability issues, potential social desirability effects were considered. Reflexive notes were kept throughout data collection and analysis to surface assumptions about donor funding, organisational vulnerability and queer community needs. The author acknowledges that their academic position and interest in queer social work may have shaped the framing of questions and interpretation of findings; efforts were made to remain close to participants’ own language and priorities.

4.6. Data Analysis

The study utilised reflexive thematic analysis following the six-phase framework developed by [32]. The process involved familiarisation with the data, generation of initial codes, identification of candidate themes, review of themes, definition and naming of themes, and production of the final report.

Interview transcripts were read repeatedly to facilitate immersion. Coding was conducted across the entire dataset, with particular attention to similarities and differences among the three participant groups (managers, social workers, and service users). Initial codes were generated inductively from participants’ language and later organised into broader patterns that spoke to the effects of funding withdrawal on organisational functioning, professional practice and service access.

Themes were refined through iterative comparison, ensuring that each final theme remained clearly relevant to the central research focus on the experiences and implications of withdrawal. Divergent perspectives (for example, between managerial accounts of organisational strategy and service-user accounts of lost belonging) were retained and reported where they enriched understanding of the phenomenon.

4.7. Trustworthiness

Trustworthiness was ensured through the principles of credibility, dependability, confirmability, and transferability [34]. Credibility was enhanced through prolonged engagement with participants and the use of multiple data sources. Dependability was supported through detailed documentation of the research process and methodological decisions. Confirmability was promoted through reflexive note-taking and the maintenance of an audit trail throughout the study. Transferability was enhanced by providing detailed descriptions of the study context, participants, and research procedures, thereby enabling readers to assess the applicability of the findings to other settings.

4.8. Ethical Considerations

Ethical clearance for the study was obtained from the Walter Sisulu University Human Research Ethics Committee (REC/H27(06/11/2025), which was approved on 19 September 2025. Participation was voluntary, and all participants provided written informed consent. Participants were informed of their right to withdraw at any stage without penalty.

Working with a small community-based organisation required particular ethical sensitivity. Access was negotiated through organisational gatekeepers with care to avoid any implication that participation was linked to continued organisational support or relationships. The researcher emphasised that the study was independent of the organisation’s funding or management decisions. Given the sensitivity of issues relating to sexual orientation, gender identity, organisational finances and job security, identifying information was removed from transcripts and pseudonyms were used. Particular care was taken to ensure that no individual could be identified through role descriptions or quotations, and that the organisation itself could not be readily identified. All data were stored securely and accessible only to the research team. Participants were offered the opportunity to review transcripts of their own interviews.

4.9. Limitations of the Study Design

This study is based on a single organisation in Mthatha. While the case provides rich, context-specific insight into the lived effects of donor withdrawal on queer-focused social work practice, transferability is necessarily limited. The organisation may be unusually dependent on a single international funder compared with better-resourced metropolitan queer organisations, or it may share vulnerabilities with other small community-based organisations in secondary towns and rural provinces. Findings should therefore be read as illuminating dynamics of resource dependence and service disruption rather than as representative of all queer organisations in South Africa. Future multi-site or comparative research would strengthen external validity.

5. Findings

The findings presented in this section are based on semi-structured interviews conducted with five organisational managers, three social workers, and four queer service users affiliated with a queer-focused organisation in Mthatha. To situate the accounts of withdrawal, a brief contextual overview of participants’ experiences of USAID funding prior to the reductions is provided. Three interconnected themes then address the central research focus: (1) service and organisational disruptions following funding withdrawal; (2) consequences for professional practice and workloads; and (3) aspirations for organisational independence and sustainable service delivery in response to withdrawal.

5.1. Contextual Overview: USAID Funding Prior to Withdrawal

Participants consistently described prior USAID support as having played a significant role in enabling services directed towards queer individuals. Donor funding had allowed the organisation to establish and sustain programmes that would otherwise have been difficult to implement due to limited local funding opportunities. This prior dependence forms the necessary backdrop against which experiences of withdrawal must be understood.

Participant H explained:

“Ngaphandle kwemali yase Amerika [USAID], uninzi lweenkonzo esizinikileyo ngebezingekho. Le nkxaso-mali isincede sakwazi ukufikelela kuluntu, ukuqesha abasebenzi kunye nokubonelela ngenkxaso kubantu ababengenandawo yokuya. Loosely translated (Without the money from America [USAID] support, many of the services we provided would not have existed. The funding enabled us to reach communities, employ staff and provide support to people who otherwise had nowhere to go.)”

Similarly, Participant B indicated:

“Yho Bhuti, le nkxaso-mali yasinceda kakhulu ukuba siqhube iinkqubo zokwazisa, amaqela enkxaso kunye neenkonzo zengqondo. Isincedisa kakhulu ukuthenga izixhobo ezifunekayo ukuze siphendule kwimingeni ejongene nabantu abathandana nabobulili obufanayo kuluntu lwethu.” Loosely translated: (The funding helped us run awareness programmes, support groups and psychosocial services. It gave us the resources needed to respond to the challenges facing queer individuals in our communities.)

Social workers also highlighted USAID’s role in strengthening professional practice through training and capacity-building. Participant C noted:

“The donor invested in training programmes that improved our understanding of gender diversity and queer-affirmative practice. This strengthened our confidence when working with clients.”

Participants further indicated that USAID funding contributed towards expanding access to counselling services, advocacy programmes, community outreach initiatives and support networks for queer individuals. Several participants described the funding as a critical resource that enabled organisations to respond effectively to issues such as discrimination, family rejection, mental health challenges and gender-based violence.

The findings suggest that USAID funding was viewed not merely as a financial resource but as a mechanism that enhanced organisational capacity, expanded service delivery, and strengthened professional social work interventions with queer populations.

5.2. Service and Organisational Disruptions Following Funding Withdrawal

While prior funding had expanded capacity, participants also described how donor requirements had shaped organisational priorities and professional time. These pre-existing dependencies became acutely visible once funding was reduced. The most immediate consequences of withdrawal concerned programme scale, staffing and service continuity.

Moreover, participants acknowledged the benefits of USAID funding, they also expressed concerns about the extent to which donor requirements influenced organisational priorities and professional practice.

Participant F observed:

“Ewe yona inalo ifuthe on how we work as the Agencies. Uzibona uchitha ixesha elininzi uzifumana ugxile kwiingxelo, kwiinjongo kunye neemfuno zabaxhasi endaweni yokuchitha ixesha nabathengi. Ngamanye amaxesha kuvakala ngathi amaphepha abaluleke ngakumbi kunabantu. Loosely translated: Yes, it does influence how we work as the Agencies. Most of the time you find yourself focusing on reports, targets and donor requirements rather than spending time with clients. Sometimes it feels as though the paperwork becomes more important than the people.”

This concern was echoed by Participant D, who stated:

“Aba bantu base America banako ukusokolisa ngoba kaloku bayakuxelela ukuba yintoni omawuqale ngayo without being direct about it. Nangona zibalulekile nje izinto esizenzayo, kufuneka xa bekunike imali, isondele kakhulu kwizidingo zabo njengabantu abakunike imali. Kwaye kukho iimeko apho iimfuno zoluntu kunye nolindelo lwabanikeli zingasoloko zihambelana.” Directly translated to mean (These Americans can be difficult because they tell you what to do without being direct about it. Although the things we do are important, when they give you money, it should be as close to their needs as the people who gave you the money. Moreover, there are situations where the needs of the community and the expectations of donors do not always match.)

Several participants described experiencing tension between professional obligations and donor-driven performance indicators. Social workers reported that a significant amount of time was devoted to administrative tasks, monitoring activities, and compliance requirements. Consequently, participants believed that donor priorities occasionally influenced the nature and scope of services delivered.

Participant H remarked:

“SingooNontlalo [Nontlalontle] silindeleke ukuba bahlangabezane neenjongo zabaxhasi baze bavelise ubungqina bempembelelo. Umngeni kukuba eminye imiba yoluntu ayinakuncitshiswa ibe ngamanani kunye neempawu.” Meaning (As Social workers, we are expected to meet donor targets and produce evidence of impact. The challenge is that some community issues cannot be reduced to numbers and indicators.)”

Participants further argued that donor funding relationships created power imbalances between organisations and funding agencies. While organisations depended on financial support to sustain operations, donors possessed considerable influence over programme design and implementation.

One participant summarised this dynamic by stating:

“When someone controls the resources, they also influence the agenda. That is the reality of donor funding.”

The findings reveal a complex relationship in which donor support simultaneously strengthened service delivery, shaped organisational priorities, and influenced professional practice.

5.3. Consequences for Professional Practice and Workloads

The most significant theme emerging from the findings concerned the consequences of USAID’s withdrawal of funding. Participants reported that reductions or terminations of funding had immediate effects on organisational functioning and service provision.

Participant G explained:

“Bhuti! Ukuyekiswa kwala mali, kwanyanzeleka sithatha izigqibo ezinzima kakhulu kwafuneka kwenziwe izigqibo ezinzima. Kwanyanzeleka si-reduce (reduce) ezinye zeprogramme zethu, si-revise (revise) budget. Embi kakhulu kukuba ezinye iinkonzo azisakwazi ukuqhubeka kwinqanaba elifanayo.” Translated: “Brother! The suspension of this funding forced us to make very difficult decisions. We had to reduce some of our programs and revise the budget. The worst thing is that some services can no longer continue at the same level.”

Similarly, Participant A stated:

“Bhut’am, singabantu ekwanyanzeleka ukuba benciphise imisebenzi eminizi, kwaye sikhulule nabanye abantu, kwabe bekungekho zixhobo zaneleyo zokuxhasa yonke into ebesiyenza”. Meaning “My brother, we are people who were forced to reduce many jobs, and let go of other people, and there were not enough resources to support everything we were doing.”

Social workers reported increased workloads due to staffing constraints and reductions in organisational resources. Participant C reflected:

“Bhuti (brother), there were fewer people available abazokwenza umsebenzi (to do the work), kodwa zona izidingo (but the needs) ze (of) clients remained the same. In some cases, the demand for services actually increased.”

Participants also highlighted the effects of funding withdrawal on service users. Queer individuals described reduced access to psychosocial support, community programmes and referral services.

Participant J commented:

“Uninzi lwabantu bethu baxhomekeke kwezi nkonzo. Ke ngoku, xa iinkqubo zincitshiswa, luluntu olubandezelekayo kuba zimbalwa iindawo apho abantu baziva bekhuselekile kwaye bexhaswa khona.” Meaning (Many people depended on these services. When programmes are reduced, it is the community that suffers because there are fewer places where people feel safe and supported.)

Another participant added:

“Le ndawo yethu is more than indawo esinika iinkonzo. Ifana nekahay kuthi apho samkeleka khona, nabanye abantu abafana nathi nesisebenza nabo. Ngokucacileyo, ukulahlekelwa zezinye zezo nkqubo kwachaphazela abantu abaninzi ngokweemvakalelo.” Translated to mean: This [organisation] place of ours is more than a place where we provide services. It is like a home to us where we are welcomed, and to other people like us whom we work with. Obviously, the loss of some of those programs affected many people emotionally.

The organisation was more than just a service provider. It was a space where people could find acceptance. Losing some of those programmes affected many people emotionally.”

Participants consistently linked the withdrawal of funding to organisational uncertainty. Concerns were expressed regarding future sustainability, staff retention and the organisation’s capacity to maintain essential services.

The findings suggest that donor withdrawal extended beyond financial consequences and directly affected service delivery, organisational stability and access to support services for queer communities.

5.4. Aspirations for Organisational Independence and Sustainable Service Delivery in Response to Withdrawal

Despite the challenges associated with the withdrawal of funding, participants demonstrated a strong desire for greater organisational independence and sustainability.

Participant E stated:

“Abelungu bathi ‘experience is the best teacher’, ufundile ke mfo, ndiyayiqaonda ukuba uyayazi loo not ukuba ithetha ukuthini. Kuyo yonke le nto, sifunde ukuba ukuthembela kumnikeli omnye kuyingozi. IAgency ifuna imithombo emininzi yenkxaso ukuba ifuna ukusinda kwixesha elide.” (Translated to mean: “The whites say ‘experience is the best teacher’, so you are educated, man, I bet you know what that means. Through all of this, we have learned that relying on a single donor is dangerous. Organisations need multiple sources of support if they want to survive in the long term.”)

The participant’s reference to “the whites” (abelungu) is noteworthy. It locates the donor relationship within a racialised and historically layered power dynamic, signalling that the experience of external funding is not merely technical or administrative but is also interpreted through post-colonial and racialised frames of dependency and instruction. This underscores the broader power asymmetries that Resource Dependency Theory helps to illuminate.

Several participants emphasised the importance of diversifying funding sources to reduce vulnerability to future funding shocks.

Participant B remarked:

“We need stronger partnerships with government, the private sector and local philanthropists. Sustainability cannot depend on a single donor.”

Social workers similarly expressed a desire for greater professional autonomy. Participant C noted:

“Our goal is to provide services based on community needs and professional values rather than constantly adapting to changing donor priorities.”

Participants further advocated for increased government support for organisations serving queer communities. Many believed that public institutions should assume greater responsibility for ensuring access to social services and protecting the rights of marginalised populations.

Participant H concluded:

“Support for queer communities should not depend entirely on international donors. There needs to be a long-term commitment from local structures and government institutions.”

Overall, participants viewed funding diversification, strategic partnerships, and enhanced state support as critical mechanisms to strengthen organisational sustainability and protect the continuity of services for queer individuals.

6. Discussion

The findings of this case study illuminate how the withdrawal of USAID funding was experienced within one queer-focused organisation in Mthatha. Prior funding had expanded psychosocial services, advocacy, outreach and practitioner capacity, yet it had also shaped organisational priorities and professional time through reporting regimes and performance indicators. Once that funding was reduced, the vulnerabilities associated with concentrated resource dependence became visible in programme cutbacks, staffing losses, increased workloads and diminished access to affirming spaces for service users. These outcomes align with existing scholarship on the operational instability that frequently follows donor exit [17,19] and with Resource Dependency Theory’s emphasis on the risks of reliance on a limited number of external resource providers.

The findings further support contemporary queer social work scholarship that emphasises the importance of organisational support in facilitating affirmative and inclusive practice. Participants reported that donor-funded training opportunities enhanced their capacity to work effectively with queer populations. This observation is consistent with the work of scholars who argue that specialised training strengthens practitioners’ ability to challenge discrimination and provide culturally responsive services [9,10]. Consequently, USAID’s influence extended beyond financial support and directly contributed to the development of professional competencies necessary for queer-affirmative practice.

At the same time, the findings revealed tensions associated with donor dependency. Participants described how reporting requirements, performance indicators, and donor priorities occasionally shaped organisational activities and influenced professional practice. These findings reflect the central propositions of Resource Dependency Theory, which suggests that organisations dependent on external resources often modify their behaviour to maintain access to critical funding streams [17,18]. While donor support strengthened organisational capacity, it simultaneously created power asymmetries that limited organisational autonomy and influenced programme priorities.

These findings also resonate with broader critiques of international development funding. Donor–recipient relationships frequently involve unequal power relations in which funding agencies possess substantial influence over programme agendas and resource allocation [16]. In social work practice, such dynamics may create ethical tensions when donor priorities conflict with community needs or professional values. Participants’ concerns regarding administrative burdens and donor-driven targets, therefore, reflect wider debates concerning the balance between accountability requirements and responsive service delivery.

The most significant finding of the study concerns the consequences of USAID withdrawal. Participants consistently reported programme reductions, staffing challenges, organisational uncertainty, and diminished access to services following the withdrawal of funding. These findings support previous research demonstrating that donor-funded organisations frequently experience operational instability when funding cycles end, or external support is reduced [19,35]. From a Resource Dependency Theory perspective, these outcomes illustrate the vulnerabilities that emerge when organisational sustainability is concentrated within a limited number of external funding relationships.

Importantly, the effects of funding withdrawal extended beyond organisational functioning and directly affected queer service users. Participants described reduced access to psychosocial support, community programmes, and safe spaces that previously provided essential sources of support and belonging. This finding is particularly concerning given existing evidence regarding the disproportionate mental health burdens and social exclusion experienced by queer populations [4,7]. The reduction in services, therefore, has implications not only for organisational sustainability but also for broader social justice outcomes and the well-being of marginalised communities.

The findings further demonstrate that organisations and practitioners are not passive recipients of donor decisions. Participants articulated a strong desire for organisational independence, funding diversification, and greater institutional support from government and local stakeholders. These aspirations align with recent scholarship emphasising the importance of organisational resilience and diversified funding portfolios in mitigating the effects of resource shocks [20,36]. Diversification strategies may strengthen organisational stability while reducing vulnerability to abrupt donor withdrawal.

Evidently, the findings suggest that donor withdrawal should not be understood solely as a financial or organisational challenge. Rather, it constitutes a social justice concern with direct implications for service accessibility, professional practice, and the protection of human rights. At the same time, the binary of “donor funding as beneficial/withdrawal as harmful” underplays the more complex power dynamics revealed by participants. Donor reporting regimes, performance indicators and agenda-setting practices shaped professional time and organisational priorities in ways consistent with broader critiques of NGOisation and the externalisation of queer advocacy frameworks [16]. Resource concentration amplified vulnerability precisely because the organisation’s growth and service model had become tightly coupled to a single external funder. Participants’ calls for diversification can therefore be read as deliberate attempts to reduce that dependence and reclaim greater professional and organisational autonomy. What is distinctive about this South African, queer-focused case is the intersection of progressive constitutional protections with persistent everyday stigma and thin local state funding for specialised psychosocial services; the same dynamics of resource dependence would likely appear in other donor-reliant NGOs, yet the consequences for queer service users carry particular weight given the scarcity of affirming alternative spaces in secondary towns such as Mthatha. The study contributes to existing scholarship by demonstrating how donor dependency simultaneously influences social work practice at organisational, professional, and service-user levels. While USAID funding facilitated significant advances in queer-focused social work services, the findings highlight the need for more sustainable funding arrangements to support long-term service provision and organisational resilience.

The study affirms the explanatory value of Resource Dependency Theory in understanding the relationship between donor funding and social work practice. However, it also extends the theory by illustrating how resource dependence affects not only organisational survival but also social workers’ ability to uphold principles of social justice, inclusion, and human rights in contexts of funding uncertainty.

7. Conclusions

This study explored the role of USAID withdrawal in shaping social work practice with queer individuals through a case study of one organisation in Mthatha, South Africa. The findings show that prior USAID support had enabled the organisation’s programme development, capacity building, advocacy initiatives, and psychosocial service provision. At the same time, that support had shaped priorities and constrained professional autonomy. Following withdrawal, participants described concrete disruptions to services, staffing and workloads, reduced access to affirming spaces for queer service users, and organisational uncertainty, alongside clear aspirations for more diversified and locally grounded funding arrangements.

However, the findings also revealed the vulnerabilities associated with donor dependency. Participants described how donor requirements influenced organisational priorities and professional practice, and how the withdrawal of funding led to service disruptions, organisational uncertainty, and reduced access to support services for queer individuals. These findings highlight the complex relationship between external funding, organisational sustainability, and social work practice.

Guided by Resource Dependency Theory, the study demonstrated that reliance on external resources may strengthen organisational capacity while simultaneously creating vulnerabilities when funding relationships are disrupted. The withdrawal of USAID funding, therefore, affected not only organisational operations but also social workers’ ability to provide consistent and responsive services to queer communities.

Ultimately, the study concludes that sustainable and inclusive social work services for queer individuals require funding models that extend beyond dependence on single-source international donors. Strengthening funding diversification, fostering strategic partnerships, and enhancing government support are essential for ensuring the long-term sustainability of queer-focused organisations and the continued advancement of social justice for sexual and gender minority populations in South Africa.

At the policy level, provincial Departments of Social Development could play a more active role by incorporating queer-affirmative psychosocial services into funded social work programmes, issuing targeted calls for proposals from community-based organisations, and developing hybrid funding mechanisms that combine state grants with local philanthropy and private-sector partnerships. Clearer multi-year funding windows and reduced administrative burdens would further support organisational stability. Without such shifts, the vulnerabilities illustrated in this case risk recurring whenever external donor priorities change.