Ghana Says No To $109M U.S. Health Deal, Citing Sovereignty And Data Privacy Fears

The proposal allowed up to 10 U.S. entities unrestricted access to Ghana's health data models, dashboards, and metadata.

Ghana has officially rejected a proposed $109 million health funding agreement with the United States, citing significant concerns over data privacy and national sovereignty.

The May 1 announcement makes Ghana the latest African nation to walk away from a bilateral health deal under the Trump administration’s “America First Global Health Strategy.” According to Arnold Kavaarpuo, executive director of Ghana’s Data Protection Commission, the proposed deal included provisions that would have granted U.S. entities unprecedented access to sensitive national health data.

At the heart of the collapse is a disagreement over the scope of data sharing. Ghanaian officials claim the U.S. requested access that “went far beyond what would typically be required” for public health monitoring.

Kavaarpuo detailed allegations that the proposal allowed up to 10 U.S. entities unrestricted access to Ghana’s health data models, dashboards, and metadata. This access would reportedly have been granted without the requirement of prior approval from the Ghanaian government for specific data use cases, The Associated Press reported.

Furthermore, officials pointed to a significant lack of governance oversight within the agreement’s framework. Kavaarpuo noted that the arrangement was structured such that the U.S. would merely notify the country after undertaking data exercises rather than seeking permission. He warned that the language, as written, effectively amounted to “outsourcing the health data architecture of the country to a foreign body.”

Ghana’s withdrawal follows a growing pattern of pushback against the new U.S. health aid framework, which replaces previous programs under the dismantled United States Agency for International Development (USAID).

Zimbabwe and Zambia rejected similar deals earlier in 2026, citing issues surrounding fairness and data sovereignty. Meanwhile, a Kenyan court recently suspended a similar U.S. aid deal over privacy concerns raised by local activists. In Nigeria, although an agreement was signed, critics have pointed to restrictive clauses, such as the U.S. commitment to primarily supporting Christian faith-based healthcare providers.

Jean Kaseya, director general of the Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has previously expressed “huge concerns” regarding the transparency and data-sharing requirements embedded in these new bilateral agreements.

Despite rejecting the $109 million package, the Ghanaian government emphasized its desire to maintain a strong relationship with the United States. Following a cabinet-level decision informed by the Attorney General, Ghana is now exploring “ways of collaborating in other areas of mutual interest… without the questions of surrendering sovereignty.”

The U.S. State Department declined to provide specifics on the negotiations but stated, “We continue to look for ways to strengthen the bilateral partnership between our two countries.”