A KFF Health News review found that reductions in funding from the Trump administration for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention affected state and local health agencies differently based on each state’s political orientation. States governed by Democrats and certain areas with progressive tendencies took legal action and managed to regain resources for public health initiatives—whereas regions led by Republicans experienced significant financial setbacks.

In late March, the Department of Health and Human Services revoked almost 700 CDC funding agreements across the country—totaling approximately $11 billion. These were granted throughout the COVID-19 crisis and aimed at boosting vaccination campaigns, addressing health inequalities between different population groups, modernizing outdated systems for identifying infectious disease outbreaks, and employing local health workers.

At first, loan cancellations affected both blue and red states similarly. Four out of the five regions with the highest number of canceled loans had Democratic leaders: California, the District of Columbia, Illinois, and Massachusetts.

However, following lawsuits filed by attorneys general and governors from roughly two dozen Democratic-leaning states in federal court, which resulted in an injunction, the situation changed. Among the five states that had the highest number of revoked grants, four are governed by Republicans: Texas, Georgia, Oklahoma, and Ohio.

In progressive states, almost 80% of the CDC funding reductions have been recovered, whereas less than 5% in conservative states have seen similar recovery, per an analysis by KFF Health News. The financial figures listed in an HHS database called the Tracking Accountability in Government Grants System, or TAGGS, frequently differ from what the states officially verified. Therefore, this study concentrated on the quantity of grants rather than their monetary value.

The split reflects the division that exists within healthcare matters, where availability of safety-net medical programs, reproductive freedoms, and the capacity of public health authorities to address health risks vary greatly based on the ruling political party.

In an email release, HHS representative Andrew Nixon stated that the organization “remains dedicated to safeguarding the well-being of all Americans, irrespective of political affiliation or location. The financial support was offered as a reaction to the COVID-19 crisis, which has now passed. We intend to maintain collaboration with states to enhance public health systems and guarantee that neighborhoods possess the necessary resources to manage future outbreaks and protect individuals.”

Public health specialists state that the funds involved were not exclusively allocated for coronavirus-related initiatives; they also supported strengthening public health systems and managing various viral infections such as influenza, measles, and RSV, which stands for respiratory syncytial virus.

“It significantly strengthened infrastructure overall, especially in terms of how states handle public health crises,” stated Susan Kansagra, chief medical officer at the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials.

The Trump reductions occurred as the U.S. reported its
largest measles outbreak
more than three decades and 266 child fatalities during the latest influenza season — the
highest reported
Since 2004, outside of a pandemic. Public health agencies halted vaccination events, reduced their workforce, and suspended agreements, according to statements from health authorities.

Following the blocking of its funding reductions in court, California kept all the grants that the Trump administration tried to reclaim, whereas Texas continues to have the highest number of revoked grants, totaling at least 30. As the CDC reduced financial support in Texas, a measles epidemic spread throughout the United States and Mexico, affecting over 4,500 individuals and resulting in at least 16 deaths.

Colorado, which became part of the legal action, initially faced 11 funding terminations, though 10 were later kept. In contrast, its nearby states that did not file a lawsuit—Wyoming, Utah, Kansas, Nebraska, and Oklahoma—together saw 55 grants terminated, with none being maintained.

In Jackson, Ohio, six community health workers arrived for work one morning in March only to discover that the Trump administration had terminated their funding five months ahead of schedule, causing the Jackson County Health Department to be $500,000 behind budget—and resulting in these individuals losing their positions.

“I was forced to terminate three staff members within one day, which is something I’ve never done previously. Those individuals are no longer involved in outreach efforts in Jackson County,” said Health Commissioner Kevin Aston.

At a certain time, he mentioned, the financial support benefited 11 counties in Appalachian Ohio. Currently, it aids only one.

Marsha Radabaugh, an employee who was transferred, has reduced her involvement in community health initiatives: Previously, she assisted in serving warm meals to individuals without homes and noticed that numerous clients were illiterate, leading her to bring application documents for programs like Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program to their temporary shelter in a nearby park and assist them with completing these forms.

We would locate rehabilitation facilities. We’d distribute hygiene kits, blankets, tents, sleeping bags rated for zero degrees, and similar items,” she explained. As a counselor, she would also remind individuals “that they are valued, that they deserve to be seen as humans—because often, they aren’t treated that way.

Sasha Johnson, who oversaw the community health worker initiative, described individuals such as Radabaugh as “essentially living directories,” providing assistance to those requiring help.

Radabaugh collaborated with a food pantry to provide meals to individuals who are unable to leave their homes.

Ashton described the sudden loss of funds—leading the county to unexpectedly cover unemployment benefits for more individuals—as potentially damaging the health district’s finances. Cutting off funding during the cycle, he mentioned, “was very frightening.”

Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an established opponent of vaccines and advocate for false information regarding immunizations,
has called the CDC
“a hub for corruption.” At HHS, he has made efforts to weaken immunization programs within the United States and globally.

Federal CDC financial support makes up
more than half
regarding state and local health department funding, as reported by KFF, a non-profit organization focused on health information which also operates KFF Health News. States where President Donald Trump secured victory in the 2024 election received a larger portion of the
$15 billion was allocated by the CDC
. In fiscal year 2023, compared to areas where Democratic candidate Kamala Harris prevailed, as reported by KFF.

The termination of CDC grants across the country under the Trump administration illustrates this trend. Over half of these actions occurred in states where Trump secured victory in 2024, with at least 370 cancellations reported prior to legal intervention, as per an analysis by KFF Health News.

The Columbus, Ohio, health agency was awarded $6.2 million through CDC grants, yet approximately half—$3 million—was lost due to budget reductions under Trump’s administration. According to Columbus Health Commissioner Mysheika Roberts, the city terminated 11 employees responsible for examining infectious disease outbreaks in locations like schools and care facilities.

She further mentioned that the city intended to purchase a new digital health record system to facilitate quicker access to patient hospital information—potentially enhancing early illness identification and offering improved care for individuals affected—but this plan was postponed.

We’ve never received a grant during the middle of the cycle only to have it taken away without explanation,” Roberts stated. “This feeling of unpredictability is troubling.

Columbus didn’t get the money directly from the CDC. Instead, the state provided the city with resources it had obtained from the federal government. Ohio, under the leadership of Republican Governor Mike DeWine and a Republican attorney general, chose not to take legal action against the reduction in funding.

Columbus
filed a lawsuit against the federal government in April
To retain its funds, alongside other Democratic-run cities in Republican-controlled states: Harris County, Texas, which includes Houston; the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County in Tennessee; and Kansas City, Missouri. In June, a federal judge halted these reductions.

As of mid-August, Columbus was awaiting the funds. Roberts said the city won’t rehire staff because the federal funding was expected to end in December.

Joe Grogan, a leading researcher at the University of Southern California’s Schaeffer Institute and previously head of the White House Domestic Policy Council during Trump’s initial presidency, stated that state and local organizations “do not have a right” to the federal funds, which were provided “for addressing an emergency” that has now concluded.

We wasted money over the past five years,” Grogan stated regarding the federal government. “I can’t comprehend why there would be any debate about returning unused coronavirus funds.

Ken Gordon, a representative from the Ohio Department of Health, stated in an email that the $250 million in grants previously received contributed to various initiatives, including enhancing the disease reporting system and increasing public health laboratory testing capabilities.

Several instances of suspended HHS financial support were not scheduled to expire for many years, such as four awards aimed at enhancing public health within Native American communities, a grant provided to a Minnesota-based non-profit organization working to decrease substance abuse issues, and several others allocated to universities focusing on workplace safety, HIV, tuberculosis, and related areas.

Brent Ewig, who serves as the head of policy and government affairs at the Association of Immunization Managers, stated that these reductions represent “the inevitable outcome of ‘boom, bust, panic, neglect’ financing” for public health initiatives.

The organization includes 64 state, local, and regional vaccination initiatives, according to Ewig, which will be less equipped to handle disease epidemics, such as measles.

“The system is blinking red,” Ewig said.

Methodology

The analysis conducted by KFF Health News regarding grants from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention aimed to address four key questions: 1) How many grants have been ended within the United States during the Trump administration starting from March? 2) Which states experienced the highest number of funding cuts? 3) For what purposes did these grants serve? and 4) Were the impacts of terminating these grants different across blue, red, and purple states? This comes after a comparable investigation carried out by KFF Health News for an earlier piece on
nationwide NIH grant terminations
.

Our main information source came from a website belonging to the Department of Health and Human Services that listed terminated grants. We cross-referenced an early list of grant closures dated April 3 with another compiled on July 11 to see how many grants were reinstated. The USAspending.gov database enabled us to monitor grants according to their respective states.

To categorize countries politically, we applied the same procedures as before.
April coverage
Regarding termination of grants from the National Institutes of Health. A state was labeled “blue” if Democrats held full authority over the state administration or if most voters supported Democratic presidential candidates in the past three elections (2016, 2020, 2024). “Red” states followed an analogous classification based on the Republican Party. “Purple” states featured divided governing bodies and/or were seen as key areas in presidential contests. This led to 25 red states, 17 blue states, and eight purple states. The District of Columbia was also categorized as blue under comparable criteria.

This review fails to consider possible resumption of funding in regional areas where money was provided indirectly instead of directly through the CDC; it only takes into account the grantees’ locations, and leaves out awards that ended due to agreements with freely associated states and other international organizations that obtained support directly from the CDC. At minimum, 40 CDC grants have been canceled which were intended for worldwide health initiatives or supporting public health programs in different countries after the
Trump administration’s order
for the CDC to stop backing the World Health Organization.

Related Articles:

・

The opposition against Trump is intensifying
The resistance to Trump is increasing
The pushback against Trump is becoming stronger
Anti-Trump sentiment is rising sharply
Opposition to Trump is gaining momentum
Discontent with Trump is escalating
Criticism of Trump is mounting significantly
Hostility towards Trump is growing more pronounced
Resistance to Trump is expanding rapidly
Public disapproval of Trump is surging

・

Trump is highly annoyed with a Republican senator whose campaign for re-election might determine who controls the Senate.

・

Chaos”: A social security organization “overwhelmed by a crisis” as job losses under Musk cause retirees to face “confusion

・

“A heartless approach”: Trump administration steps back from a particular Social Security reform plan