3 ms·
From the NY Times article: > or are awaiting reassignment > These maternal health programs are still funded by the President’s Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief,
by aerostable_slug 2y ago
From the NY Times article:
> or are awaiting reassignment
> These maternal health programs are still funded by the President’s Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief, or PEPFAR.
So the money is still there, so are at least some of the staff, and they're doing a reorg. It doesn't look like they're shutting down the program.
- pmags 2y agoYou seem to have left out the critical next sentence (which is the topic of article): But without personnel to manage the initiatives or to disburse the money, it’s not clear how the work will continue.
- aerostable_slug 2y ago"Not clear" doesn't mean "won't be done", and the headline misstates reality (all of the staff aren't actually being terminated) which makes me doubt the objectivity of the entire piece. A simple consolidation of program offices doesn't seem like the worst idea in the world and it (along with other relatively benign scenarios) fit with what's been observed.
- pmags 2y agoThe administration's record to date with respect to USAID, CDC, NIH, and Dept of Ed, suggests a vanishingly low probability of any "relatively benign scenarios". Based on past actions I think the appropriate Bayesian prior for pretty much all such public health efforts is now "they've intentionally broken it" until proven otherwise. I'm happy to update my prior if evidence to the contrary comes to light.