1.1 Data Source & Extraction

All award data in this report is sourced from USASpending.gov, the official public spending database of the United States government, mandated by the DATA Act of 2014 (P.L. 113-101). Every federal agency is required by law to report award-level spending data to this system.

The start date of FY2010 captures the full post-earthquake period (January 12, 2010 earthquake). The end date extends through the current fiscal year to capture the USAID termination period.

1.2 Classification Methodology

Each of the 1,282 award recipients was classified into one of five categories based on organization name matching. The classification is deterministic and reproducible.

Conservative bias: The classification system errs toward under-counting Haitian organizations. Any ambiguous recipient is classified as Unknown rather than Haitian. The 1.3% Haitian share is therefore an upper bound... the true figure may be lower.

1.3 Phi Calculation

Phi measures the share of total aid dollars captured by non-local intermediaries before reaching the intended beneficiary population. A Phi of 0.987 means 98.7 cents of every aid dollar went to organizations outside Haiti. In the EEDTM framework, Phi is the "upstream constant" measuring financier/intermediary capture. The standard Phi for colonial-era financial intermediaries is 0.40. USAID Haiti's Phi of 0.987 exceeds colonial extraction by a factor of 2.47.

1.4 Replication Instructions

Any researcher can replicate these findings using the USASpending.gov API. No authentication is required.

Paginate through all results (13 pages at limit=100). Sum the "Award Amount" field. Classify recipients by name. Calculate Phi. The numbers in this report will match.

2.1 Awards by Recipient Type

2.2 Top 10 Recipients

2.3 Phi Computation

2.4 Comparative Context

3.1 Recipient Profiles (Top 10)

For each major recipient, the following profile documents: headquarters location, total USAID Haiti awards, award type, and contracted scope.

Geographic Summary of Top 10 Headquarters

3.2 The $214 Million Black Box

The second-largest "recipient" of USAID Haiti funds is listed as "Domestic Awardees (Undisclosed)" in the USASpending.gov database. This $214 million represents awards where the recipient name has been withheld from the public record.

The DATA Act of 2014 (P.L. 113-101, Section 3) requires federal agencies to report "the name of the entity receiving Federal funds" for all awards over $25,000. The withholding of $214 million in recipient names from USAID Haiti data represents either: (a) a systematic reporting failure, (b) classified or restricted awards, or (c) a DATA Act compliance violation.

Regardless of the reason, $214 million in aid designated for Haiti was awarded to organizations whose identity the public cannot verify. At 6.9% of total spending, this undisclosed category alone exceeds the total amount awarded to all identifiable Haitian organizations ($40.1M) by a factor of 5.3.

3.3 Geographic Distribution of Awards

4.1 Timeline of Termination

4.2 Programs Halted

4.3 The Irony Calculation

The following calculation examines who actually lost what when USAID Haiti programs were terminated.

This does not mean the cuts are harmless to Haiti. The indirect effects... health services, food distribution, displacement support... are devastating (Part V). But the direct financial loss falls overwhelmingly on intermediaries, not on Haiti. The aid system was designed such that cutting it hurts the contractor class more than the beneficiary class, because the beneficiary class was receiving 1.3 cents on the dollar.

Even with 98.7% intermediary capture, the 1.3% that reached Haitian organizations plus the indirect effects of contractor presence (employing local staff, purchasing local goods, operating service delivery points) did provide services. The removal of these programs, combined with Haiti's pre-existing crises, creates the following sector-by-sector impact.

5.1 Health

5.2 Food Security

The IPC Phase 3+ classification (Crisis, Emergency, Famine) indicates populations requiring urgent action to protect livelihoods, reduce food consumption gaps, and reduce acute malnutrition. At 5.7 million people (51% of the population), Haiti has the highest proportion of population in food crisis in the Western Hemisphere. This is a record for the country.

WFP cut rations by 50% due to funding shortfalls. Hot meal programs were suspended. For the first time since 2016, Haiti enters hurricane season (June–November) with zero pre-positioned contingency stocks. Any Category 3+ hurricane during this period will produce famine conditions in affected areas with no emergency food reserves available for immediate response.

5.3 Governance & Security

Haiti has not held elections since 2016. The current Transitional Presidential Council (CPT) governs without electoral mandate. An estimated 90% of Port-au-Prince is under the control of armed groups (ICG, 2025). The Kenya-led Multinational Security Support (MSS) mission, authorized by UNSC Resolution 2699 (October 2023), remains underfunded and understaffed relative to its mandate.

USAID governance programs... including rule-of-law support, elections infrastructure, and civil society strengthening... were terminated in March 2025. No replacement programs have been announced.

5.4 Education

USAID education programs in Haiti included school feeding (via WFP partnership), teacher training, and curriculum development. These programs were terminated. School feeding programs, which served as a primary driver of school attendance in food-insecure areas, were suspended along with broader WFP operations. UNESCO reports approximately 50% of schools in the Port-au-Prince metropolitan area are closed or operating at reduced capacity due to the combined effects of gang violence and program termination.

5.5 Economic

5.6 Displacement

IOM's Displacement Tracking Matrix (DTM) recorded 1.4 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Haiti as of September 2025, representing approximately 11% of the total population. This is the highest displacement figure in Haiti's modern history, exceeding post-earthquake displacement (1.5 million in January 2010, but from a larger initial population base). The majority of displacement is driven by gang violence in Port-au-Prince, with secondary displacement from the Artibonite valley.

IOM was the sixth-largest USAID Haiti recipient ($134M). Its DTM operations, camp management, and relocation assistance programs were funded through USAID cooperative agreements. Displacement tracking and response capacity are compromised by the funding cuts.

The Elite Extraction with Differential Targeting Model (EEDTM) provides a mathematical framework for quantifying extraction patterns across institutional contexts. This section applies EEDTM concepts to the aid industry.

6.1 Phi in Context

In the EEDTM framework, Φ (Phi) measures the upstream constant: the share of extracted value captured by financial intermediaries before it reaches the operational extraction layer. The standard Φ = 0.40, validated across 500 years of colonial finance from the Rothschild syndicate's 1825 Haiti indemnity commission (Φ = 0.451, per Oosterlinck archival data) to modern banking fees.

USAID Haiti produces Φ = 0.987. This exceeds the EEDTM standard by a factor of 2.47.

6.2 The PGSL Pattern

PGSL (Privatize Gains, Socialize Losses) is the structural pattern where profits are captured by private actors while costs are borne by the public.

6.3 The Resistance Ratchet

The EEDTM Resistance Ratchet describes the mechanism by which, when one extraction pathway is blocked, actors shift to alternative pathways while preserving total extraction. Applied to aid:

When USAID is "cut," the extraction mechanism (M4) is blocked. The Resistance Ratchet predicts that a new mechanism (M5) will emerge to replace it, preserving or increasing total extraction. The contractors most damaged by the cuts ($46.6M/year in lost revenue) will seek alternative funding streams... other donor agencies, private philanthropy, new government contracts... while Haiti remains the site of extraction but not the beneficiary.

6.4 Double Extraction

Double Extraction occurs when the victim is first extracted from, then charged for the remedy. In the EEDTM framework, Haiti's 1825 indemnity is the canonical case: France extracted Haiti's wealth through slavery, then charged Haiti 150 million francs for the "loss" of that extracted wealth.

The aid cycle replicates this pattern:

7.1 The SAKALA Model

If 98.7% intermediary capture is the problem, then the solution is a development model with Φ = 0.00. The SAKALA cooperative franchise model is designed to achieve this.

7.2 Cost-per-Job Comparison

8.1 Award Summary by Category (1,282 Awards)

The complete dataset of 1,282 awards is summarized below by classification category. The full award-level dataset is available via the USASpending.gov API using the parameters specified in Section 1.4.

8.2 API Replication Parameters

8.3 Classification Keywords

8.4 Source URLs & Citations