Ghana has declined a proposed health funding agreement with the United States after raising serious concerns about the extent of data access requested by American entities, and is now pushing for a renegotiated framework with stronger protections. The decision reflects growing unease among African nations over how sensitive national data is handled under such partnerships.
According to Arnold Kavaarpuo, the executive director of Ghana’s Data Protection Commission, the proposed terms would have granted US-linked organisations unusually broad access to highly sensitive health data, extending well beyond what is typically required in international health cooperation agreements. He indicated that the provisions lacked adequate safeguards and raised concerns about how such data might be used or controlled once accessed.
The US State Department has not publicly disclosed specifics of the negotiations but stated that it remains interested in maintaining and strengthening bilateral cooperation. The proposed deal was part of a wider shift under the “America First” global health funding approach, which has replaced earlier aid mechanisms associated with the now-dismantled United States Agency for International Development. Under this new model, Washington has pursued similar agreements with more than 30 countries, many of them in Africa, offering substantial funding to support healthcare systems and disease response efforts.
However, these agreements have triggered broader concerns across the continent regarding privacy, sovereignty and oversight. Countries such as Zimbabwe have already rejected similar proposals, while Zambia has expressed reservations without making a final decision. Critics and activists argue that the agreements often fail to provide sufficient guarantees on data protection and may impose restrictive conditions on how aid is distributed.
Regional health leadership has also voiced caution. Jean Kaseya, head of the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, has highlighted significant concerns around data-sharing provisions, underscoring the potential risks of external access to national health systems.
Under the rejected proposal, Ghana was expected to receive roughly $109 million over five years from a total package of about $300 million, supplemented by domestic contributions. However, officials pointed out that the agreement would have allowed multiple US entities to access not only health datasets but also underlying infrastructure elements such as metadata, analytics tools and system architecture, often without prior approval from Ghanaian authorities. This lack of direct oversight raised fears that control over the country’s health data ecosystem could effectively shift to external actors.
Ghana has formally communicated its decision to reject the current terms and has signalled willingness to continue discussions, provided that future proposals address concerns related to governance, transparency and national control over sensitive data.
