Executive Order Suspending Foreign Aid Roils State Department and USAID Grantees and Contractors
The first week of the second Trump Administration brought with it the issuance of dozens of executive orders (EO) that suggest far reaching implications for organizations large and small, for profit and non-profit alike. Although many details are still unclear and await further guidance, one EO, Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid[1] (Foreign Assistance EO), has resulted in uncertainty and acute concern on the part of many business entities that contract with or are grantees of the US Department of State or US Agency for International Development (USAID) to administer the billions of dollars in foreign assistance appropriated annually by Congress.
The United States government has long relied upon the private sector to implement programs, deliver services, and conduct various activities to advance US foreign policy objectives. Citing the Foreign Assistance EO, over the past 96 hours the State Department and USAID have served on government contractors and grantees Notices of Suspension (Notices) directing an immediate stoppage of their work.
Contractors and grantees are scrambling to figure out how to respond to the Notices. Simultaneously, they are assessing the impact of an immediate cessation of certain business operations on the organizations themselves and, in some cases, the impact on the beneficiaries of the programs they administer. Organizations are confronting serious questions related to potential legal exposure from lower tier contractors, staff, and other vendors if they fail to meet obligations they have incurred under the awards.
Without much guidance beyond that contained in the bare bones Notices, contractors and grantees are having to make quick decisions, including whether to proceed with any work at all knowing that they may risk not being reimbursed for direct costs consistent with past practice. Organizations are also assessing the consequences, both moral and legal, of potentially furloughing, or worse, permanently laying off staff with essentially no notice.
Many organizations are halting programmatic activities and carefully combing through contracts and awards to identify allowable expenses for which they might be able to seek reimbursement. But in the absence of clear guidance on expenses and reimbursement, which may or may not be forthcoming, every decision an organization makes over these coming days and weeks will carry financial risk. For some organizations, the risks associated with these decisions could prove to be an existential dilemma.
None of these questions are easy to answer. And all of the decisions, to varying degrees, are tough. But there are some items worth thinking through right now to best position both contractors and grantees to navigate this situation as the dust continues to settle and we await clearer guidance from either the Administration or, what looks to be increasingly likely, from the courts.
Industry participants understand that the government generally has the ability to order temporary work stoppages for government contracts. The waters are murkier for grants, which are governed by a combination of federal and agency specific regulations, as well as each individual grant’s terms and conditions. Setting aside the propriety of the suspension instruction, the Notices state, “[e]ffective immediately upon receipt of this Notice of Suspension the Recipient must stop all work under the award(s) and not incur any new costs after the effective date cited above. The Recipient must cancel as many outstanding obligations as possible.” The reality of the situation is that organizations receiving this Notice must immediately begin to mitigate where possible. While it is always possible that the suspension will be rescinded and work will return to normal, contractors and grant recipients should not plan on that outcome.
As such, organizations are well advised to take stock of their operations. The questions worth asking include:
- What type of contracts/grants does the organization have? Are they fully funded with disbursed funds and can therefore operate over a longer period, or are they more at risk to funding disruptions? Are there any notice obligations on the organization to preserve rights such as through a government contract’s Changes Clause or specific grant terms and conditions?
- What agreements are in place with suppliers and subcontractors/subrecipients, and can they be temporarily suspended?
- What ability does the organization have to reassign staff or mitigate payroll costs during a suspension of work? Capable employment law counsel can assist with that assessment.
- What recordkeeping structure exists to track expense, cost, and performance impacts of the suspension? These records will be important to maximizing opportunities to recover from the government in the future.
In the future, organizations are likely to be required to explain how they attempted to mitigate damages and expenses resulting from the suspension of work. This will include proactively engaging and negotiating with business counterparties (i.e., contractors, subgrantees, lessors, etc.) to suspend operations or, in the event of a termination, to part ways on terms that reduce both financial costs and legal exposure for the organization.
Contractors and grantees that received Notices as described above are facing incredible pressures. Capable counsel can assist with navigating these difficult dynamics while maximizing the potential for recovery in the future.
The United States government has long relied upon the private sector to implement programs, deliver services, and conduct various activities to advance US foreign policy objectives. Citing the Foreign Assistance EO, over the past 96 hours the State Department and USAID have served on government contractors and grantees Notices of Suspension (Notices) directing an immediate stoppage of their work.
Contractors and grantees are scrambling to figure out how to respond to the Notices. Simultaneously, they are assessing the impact of an immediate cessation of certain business operations on the organizations themselves and, in some cases, the impact on the beneficiaries of the programs they administer. Organizations are confronting serious questions related to potential legal exposure from lower tier contractors, staff, and other vendors if they fail to meet obligations they have incurred under the awards.
Without much guidance beyond that contained in the bare bones Notices, contractors and grantees are having to make quick decisions, including whether to proceed with any work at all knowing that they may risk not being reimbursed for direct costs consistent with past practice. Organizations are also assessing the consequences, both moral and legal, of potentially furloughing, or worse, permanently laying off staff with essentially no notice.
Many organizations are halting programmatic activities and carefully combing through contracts and awards to identify allowable expenses for which they might be able to seek reimbursement. But in the absence of clear guidance on expenses and reimbursement, which may or may not be forthcoming, every decision an organization makes over these coming days and weeks will carry financial risk. For some organizations, the risks associated with these decisions could prove to be an existential dilemma.
None of these questions are easy to answer. And all of the decisions, to varying degrees, are tough. But there are some items worth thinking through right now to best position both contractors and grantees to navigate this situation as the dust continues to settle and we await clearer guidance from either the Administration or, what looks to be increasingly likely, from the courts.
Industry participants understand that the government generally has the ability to order temporary work stoppages for government contracts. The waters are murkier for grants, which are governed by a combination of federal and agency specific regulations, as well as each individual grant’s terms and conditions. Setting aside the propriety of the suspension instruction, the Notices state, “[e]ffective immediately upon receipt of this Notice of Suspension the Recipient must stop all work under the award(s) and not incur any new costs after the effective date cited above. The Recipient must cancel as many outstanding obligations as possible.” The reality of the situation is that organizations receiving this Notice must immediately begin to mitigate where possible. While it is always possible that the suspension will be rescinded and work will return to normal, contractors and grant recipients should not plan on that outcome.
As such, organizations are well advised to take stock of their operations. The questions worth asking include:
- What type of contracts/grants does the organization have? Are they fully funded with disbursed funds and can therefore operate over a longer period, or are they more at risk to funding disruptions? Are there any notice obligations on the organization to preserve rights such as through a government contract’s Changes Clause or specific grant terms and conditions?
- What agreements are in place with suppliers and subcontractors/subrecipients, and can they be temporarily suspended?
- What ability does the organization have to reassign staff or mitigate payroll costs during a suspension of work? Capable employment law counsel can assist with that assessment.
- What recordkeeping structure exists to track expense, cost, and performance impacts of the suspension? These records will be important to maximizing opportunities to recover from the government in the future.
In the future, organizations are likely to be required to explain how they attempted to mitigate damages and expenses resulting from the suspension of work. This will include proactively engaging and negotiating with business counterparties (i.e., contractors, subgrantees, lessors, etc.) to suspend operations or, in the event of a termination, to part ways on terms that reduce both financial costs and legal exposure for the organization.
Contractors and grantees that received Notices as described above are facing incredible pressures. Capable counsel can assist with navigating these difficult dynamics while maximizing the potential for recovery in the future.
Related Capabilities
© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.
The first week of the second Trump Administration brought with it the issuance of dozens of executive orders (EO) that suggest far reaching implications for organizations large and small, for profit and non-profit alike. Although many details are still unclear and await further guidance, one EO, Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid[1] (Foreign Assistance EO), has resulted in uncertainty and acute concern on the part of many business entities that contract with or are grantees of the US Department of State or US Agency for International Development (USAID) to administer the billions of dollars in foreign assistance appropriated annually by Congress.
The United States government has long relied upon the private sector to implement programs, deliver services, and conduct various activities to advance US foreign policy objectives. Citing the Foreign Assistance EO, over the past 96 hours the State Department and USAID have served on government contractors and grantees Notices of Suspension (Notices) directing an immediate stoppage of their work.
Contractors and grantees are scrambling to figure out how to respond to the Notices. Simultaneously, they are assessing the impact of an immediate cessation of certain business operations on the organizations themselves and, in some cases, the impact on the beneficiaries of the programs they administer. Organizations are confronting serious questions related to potential legal exposure from lower tier contractors, staff, and other vendors if they fail to meet obligations they have incurred under the awards.
Without much guidance beyond that contained in the bare bones Notices, contractors and grantees are having to make quick decisions, including whether to proceed with any work at all knowing that they may risk not being reimbursed for direct costs consistent with past practice. Organizations are also assessing the consequences, both moral and legal, of potentially furloughing, or worse, permanently laying off staff with essentially no notice.
Many organizations are halting programmatic activities and carefully combing through contracts and awards to identify allowable expenses for which they might be able to seek reimbursement. But in the absence of clear guidance on expenses and reimbursement, which may or may not be forthcoming, every decision an organization makes over these coming days and weeks will carry financial risk. For some organizations, the risks associated with these decisions could prove to be an existential dilemma.
None of these questions are easy to answer. And all of the decisions, to varying degrees, are tough. But there are some items worth thinking through right now to best position both contractors and grantees to navigate this situation as the dust continues to settle and we await clearer guidance from either the Administration or, what looks to be increasingly likely, from the courts.
Industry participants understand that the government generally has the ability to order temporary work stoppages for government contracts. The waters are murkier for grants, which are governed by a combination of federal and agency specific regulations, as well as each individual grant’s terms and conditions. Setting aside the propriety of the suspension instruction, the Notices state, “[e]ffective immediately upon receipt of this Notice of Suspension the Recipient must stop all work under the award(s) and not incur any new costs after the effective date cited above. The Recipient must cancel as many outstanding obligations as possible.” The reality of the situation is that organizations receiving this Notice must immediately begin to mitigate where possible. While it is always possible that the suspension will be rescinded and work will return to normal, contractors and grant recipients should not plan on that outcome.
As such, organizations are well advised to take stock of their operations. The questions worth asking include:
- What type of contracts/grants does the organization have? Are they fully funded with disbursed funds and can therefore operate over a longer period, or are they more at risk to funding disruptions? Are there any notice obligations on the organization to preserve rights such as through a government contract’s Changes Clause or specific grant terms and conditions?
- What agreements are in place with suppliers and subcontractors/subrecipients, and can they be temporarily suspended?
- What ability does the organization have to reassign staff or mitigate payroll costs during a suspension of work? Capable employment law counsel can assist with that assessment.
- What recordkeeping structure exists to track expense, cost, and performance impacts of the suspension? These records will be important to maximizing opportunities to recover from the government in the future.
In the future, organizations are likely to be required to explain how they attempted to mitigate damages and expenses resulting from the suspension of work. This will include proactively engaging and negotiating with business counterparties (i.e., contractors, subgrantees, lessors, etc.) to suspend operations or, in the event of a termination, to part ways on terms that reduce both financial costs and legal exposure for the organization.
Contractors and grantees that received Notices as described above are facing incredible pressures. Capable counsel can assist with navigating these difficult dynamics while maximizing the potential for recovery in the future.
The United States government has long relied upon the private sector to implement programs, deliver services, and conduct various activities to advance US foreign policy objectives. Citing the Foreign Assistance EO, over the past 96 hours the State Department and USAID have served on government contractors and grantees Notices of Suspension (Notices) directing an immediate stoppage of their work.
Contractors and grantees are scrambling to figure out how to respond to the Notices. Simultaneously, they are assessing the impact of an immediate cessation of certain business operations on the organizations themselves and, in some cases, the impact on the beneficiaries of the programs they administer. Organizations are confronting serious questions related to potential legal exposure from lower tier contractors, staff, and other vendors if they fail to meet obligations they have incurred under the awards.
Without much guidance beyond that contained in the bare bones Notices, contractors and grantees are having to make quick decisions, including whether to proceed with any work at all knowing that they may risk not being reimbursed for direct costs consistent with past practice. Organizations are also assessing the consequences, both moral and legal, of potentially furloughing, or worse, permanently laying off staff with essentially no notice.
Many organizations are halting programmatic activities and carefully combing through contracts and awards to identify allowable expenses for which they might be able to seek reimbursement. But in the absence of clear guidance on expenses and reimbursement, which may or may not be forthcoming, every decision an organization makes over these coming days and weeks will carry financial risk. For some organizations, the risks associated with these decisions could prove to be an existential dilemma.
None of these questions are easy to answer. And all of the decisions, to varying degrees, are tough. But there are some items worth thinking through right now to best position both contractors and grantees to navigate this situation as the dust continues to settle and we await clearer guidance from either the Administration or, what looks to be increasingly likely, from the courts.
Industry participants understand that the government generally has the ability to order temporary work stoppages for government contracts. The waters are murkier for grants, which are governed by a combination of federal and agency specific regulations, as well as each individual grant’s terms and conditions. Setting aside the propriety of the suspension instruction, the Notices state, “[e]ffective immediately upon receipt of this Notice of Suspension the Recipient must stop all work under the award(s) and not incur any new costs after the effective date cited above. The Recipient must cancel as many outstanding obligations as possible.” The reality of the situation is that organizations receiving this Notice must immediately begin to mitigate where possible. While it is always possible that the suspension will be rescinded and work will return to normal, contractors and grant recipients should not plan on that outcome.
As such, organizations are well advised to take stock of their operations. The questions worth asking include:
- What type of contracts/grants does the organization have? Are they fully funded with disbursed funds and can therefore operate over a longer period, or are they more at risk to funding disruptions? Are there any notice obligations on the organization to preserve rights such as through a government contract’s Changes Clause or specific grant terms and conditions?
- What agreements are in place with suppliers and subcontractors/subrecipients, and can they be temporarily suspended?
- What ability does the organization have to reassign staff or mitigate payroll costs during a suspension of work? Capable employment law counsel can assist with that assessment.
- What recordkeeping structure exists to track expense, cost, and performance impacts of the suspension? These records will be important to maximizing opportunities to recover from the government in the future.
In the future, organizations are likely to be required to explain how they attempted to mitigate damages and expenses resulting from the suspension of work. This will include proactively engaging and negotiating with business counterparties (i.e., contractors, subgrantees, lessors, etc.) to suspend operations or, in the event of a termination, to part ways on terms that reduce both financial costs and legal exposure for the organization.
Contractors and grantees that received Notices as described above are facing incredible pressures. Capable counsel can assist with navigating these difficult dynamics while maximizing the potential for recovery in the future.
Related Capabilities
© 2026 Jenner & Block LLP. Attorney Advertising. Jenner & Block LLP is an Illinois Limited Liability Partnership including professional corporations. This publication, presentation, or event is not intended to provide legal advice but to provide information on legal matters and/or firm news of interest to our clients and colleagues. Readers or attendees should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to matters mentioned in this publication or at this event. The attorney responsible for this communication is Brent E. Kidwell, Jenner & Block LLP, 353 N. Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60654-3456. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Jenner & Block London LLP, an affiliate of Jenner & Block LLP, is a limited liability partnership established under the laws of the State of Delaware, USA and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with SRA number 615729. Information regarding the data we collect and the rights you have over your data can be found in our Privacy Notice. For further inquiries, please contact dataprotection@jenner.com.
News and Insights
Event
Associate Steven Arango to Speak at the Veterans' Legal Career Fair
On September 18, Associate Steven Arango will speak on a panel at the Veterans' Legal Career Fair (VLCF), the only legal career fair in the United States dedicated to veterans, active-duty service members, and military spouses.
September 18, 2026
Publications
In American Banker, Partner Laurel Loomis Rimon Weighs in on OCC's Handling of Fintech Bank Charter Applications
Partner Laurel Loomis Rimon spoke with American Banker about how the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is approaching bank charter applications from fintechs, amid a growing wave of companies seeking charters from federal regulators.
August 18, 2026
Event
Partner David Greenwald to Speak at PLI Program on Privilege and AI
On August 17, David Greenwald will speak at "Fitting New “Tech” Into the Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Protection," a virtual program hosted by the Practising Law Institute (PLI).
August 17, 2026
Publications
Special Counsel Kimberly Cook Featured in FCBA Member Spotlight
The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) featured Kimberly Cook in its Member Spotlight series.
August 13, 2026
Recognition
Three Jenner & Block Partners Named to Crain's New York Business' 2026 Notable Leaders in Accounting, Consulting & Law List
Crain's New York Business recognized Jenner & Block Partners Anthony Barkow, Alison Stein, and Damian Williams among its 2026 Notable Leaders in Accounting, Consulting & Law.
August 10, 2026