The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and
U.S. Responses
Tiaji Salaam-Blyther
Specialist in Global Health
August 26, 2014
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R43697
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
Summary
Ebola virus disease (Ebola or EVD) is a severe, often fatal disease that was first detected near the
Ebola River in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) in 1976. Originating in animals,
EVD is spread to and among humans through contact with the blood, secretions, organs, or other
bodily fluids of those infected. It is not transmitted through the air. On March 22, 2014, the World
Health Organization (WHO) announced that 49 people had contracted EVD in Guinea, West
Africa, and 29 of them had died. As of mid-August, the virus had quickly spread to Liberia, Sierra
Leone, and Nigeria.
The Ebola virus that is circulating in West Africa is not new, but the current Ebola outbreak has
infected and killed more people than all previous Ebola outbreaks combined. As of August 20,
2014, the WHO reported that 2,615 people had contracted the disease, of whom over 1,427 have
died, slightly less than the combined cases (2,387) and deaths (1,590) from previous outbreaks.
Although there are no drugs proven to prevent or treat EBV, health experts know how to contain
it. The disease is spreading, however, because the health systems in the affected countries are ill-
equipped to undertake requisite containment and disease surveillance measures. Years of neglect
and armed conflict have weakened infrastructures, including health systems, in the affected
countries, most prominently in Sierra Leone and Liberia. WHO estimated that the outbreak had
likely begun in December 2013, but was belatedly reported in March 2014 due to poor disease
detection and surveillance capacity.
In July 2014, two U.S. citizen health workers contracted Ebola in Liberia and were first provided
medication that had shown promise in animal studies but that had not yet been tested in humans.
They were evacuated to the United States to receive additional care. Debate in the United States
has ensued regarding entry and exit rights of people infected with communicable diseases;
whether the international community (including the United States) had responded early and
effectively enough to contain the virus; the appropriate use of experimental drugs that had not yet
been tested for human safety and effectiveness, including how to choose recipients of scarce and
sometimes costly drug supplies and how to arrange dispensing to allow analysis of safety and
effectiveness; and feasible approaches to accelerating drug and vaccine development and the
scale-up of manufacturing capacity for investigational products.
The apportionment of most U.S. global health aid is determined by language in appropriations
legislation and their accompanying conference reports, which direct the majority of health aid at
particular diseases, leaving proportionately fewer resources for broader health system
strengthening activities. While deliberating the appropriate response to ongoing Ebola outbreak,
as well as FY2015 appropriations, Congress is likely to discuss how to balance support for
bolstering weak health systems while directly addressing the health effects of Ebola. The FY2015
budget includes a $45 million request from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) for the newly announced Global Health Security agenda and a $50 million funding
proposal for pandemic preparedness efforts implemented by the U.S. Agency for International
Development (USAID). The USAID FY2015 budget request is roughly 30% lower than the
FY2014 appropriation. This report discusses these funding issues and examines other related
concerns, including the impact Ebola is having on other health problems, such as maternal and
child mortality, and the capacity of U.S. agencies to respond rapidly to unforeseen events, like the
Ebola outbreak, in light of budgetary constraints and spending directives.
Congressional Research Service
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
Contents
Background ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Geographic Spread .................................................................................................................... 2
Border/Travel Issues .................................................................................................................. 3
Urban Spread ............................................................................................................................. 4
Health System Constraints in Affected Countries ........................................................................... 4
Governance ................................................................................................................................ 5
Financing ................................................................................................................................... 6
Human Resources ...................................................................................................................... 8
Commodities.............................................................................................................................. 9
Service Delivery ........................................................................................................................ 9
Information .............................................................................................................................. 10
Affected Country Responses ......................................................................................................... 11
International Responses ................................................................................................................. 12
U.S. Responses to Pandemic Threats and Ebola ..................................................................... 14
USAID ..................................................................................................................................... 14
USAID Ebola Responses .................................................................................................. 15
CDC ......................................................................................................................................... 16
CDC Ebola Responses ...................................................................................................... 16
Other Agencies ........................................................................................................................ 17
Possible Issues for Congress .......................................................................................................... 17
Balancing Funding for Immediate Ebola Responses with Support for Health Systems ......... 17
Evaluating U.S. Responses ...................................................................................................... 19
Addressing the Long-Term and Broader Effects of the Outbreak ........................................... 20
Considering Research and Development Needs ...................................................................... 20
Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 22
Figures
Figure 1. Ebola Outbreaks: 1976-2014, as Reported on August 22, 2014 ....................................... 1
Figure 2. Map of Current and Past Ebola Outbreaks ....................................................................... 3
Figure 3. Health Statistics: Affected Countries, Africa, High-Income Countries, World ................ 5
Figure 4. Health Personnel Ratios and EVD Cases Among Health Workers .................................. 7
Figure 5. 2014 Ebola Cases and Deaths by Country, as Reported on August 22, 2014 ................. 11
Tables
Table 1. Impact of Health System Deficiencies on Ebola Outbreak Containment .......................... 4
Table 2. Selected Health System Financing Statistics, 2011 ............................................................ 6
Table 3. U.S. Personnel Deployed to West Africa for Ebola Response ......................................... 14
Table 4. USAID Pandemic Preparedness Funding ........................................................................ 15
Congressional Research Service
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
Table 5. CDC Global Disease Detection Funding ......................................................................... 16
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 23
Congressional Research Service
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
Background
Ebola virus disease (Ebola or EVD) is a severe, often fatal disease that was first detected near the
Ebola River in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) in 1976.1 Originating in animals,
EVD is spread to humans and among humans through contact with the blood, secretions, organs,
or other bodily fluids of those infected. It is not transmitted through the air. Individuals who are
not symptomatic are not contagious.
On March 22, 2014, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced that 49 people had
contracted EVD in Guinea, West Africa and 29 of them had died. WHO estimated that the
outbreak—the first in West Africa—had likely begun in December 2013, but was belatedly
detected due to weak disease surveillance and detection capacity. As of mid-August, the virus had
spread to Sierra Leone, Liberia, and Nigeria, infecting more than 2,000 people and killing over
half of them (Figure 1). WHO cautions, however, that evidence from the field indicate that “the
numbers of reported cases and deaths vastly underestimate the magnitude of the outbreak.”2
Figure 1. Ebola Outbreaks: 1976-2014, as Reported on August 22, 2014
Source: Created by CRS from WHO, Ebola Virus Disease, fact sheet, number 103, April 2014 and WHO, Ebola
Virus Disease Update—West Africa, August 22, 2014.
1 This section was summarized from WHO, Ebola, fact sheet, number 103, April 2014.
2 WHO, “No early end to the Ebola outbreak,” Situation Assessment, August 14, 2014.
Congressional Research Service
1
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
The rapid spread of this virus is of great concern to Congress. In August 2014, the House Foreign
Affairs Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International
Organizations convened an emergency hearing on the subject. At the hearing, Members and
witnesses discussed:
• the unprecedented scale of this outbreak;
• factors impeding country responses;
• whether the international community (including the United States) had responded
early and effectively enough;
• the appropriate use of experimental drugs that had not yet been tested for human
safety and effectiveness, including how to choose recipients of scarce drug
supplies and how to arrange dispensing them safely and effectively; and
• prospects for developing cures and vaccines against the virus.3
The number of people who have contracted and succumbed to Ebola in this outbreak has
exceeded the combined total of cases and deaths in all previous EVD outbreaks. New cases and
deaths are reported regularly by WHO at http://www.who.int/csr/don/archive/disease/ebola/en/.
The Ebola virus that is circulating in West Africa is not new, and health experts are familiar with
methods to contain it. Several factors make this outbreak unique, however, including (1) it is the
first EVD outbreak to occur outside of East and Central Africa, (2) cases are spreading across
borders simultaneously, (3) people are contracting the virus in urban areas, and (4) it has infected
and killed more people than any other single EVD outbreak. The disease is spreading quickly,
however, because the health systems in the affected countries are ill-equipped to implement
requisite containment and disease surveillance measures.
“Standard measures, like early detection and isolation of cases, contact tracing and monitoring, and rigorous procedures for
infection control, have stopped previous Ebola outbreaks and can do so again.”
WHO Director-General, August 12, 2014
This report will discuss these issues and may be updated. For continuous updates on new EVD
cases, see WHO site referenced above.
Geographic Spread
Prior to the current outbreak in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone, EVD outbreaks were
concentrated in the DRC, Gabon, the Sudans, and Uganda (Figure 2). In the current situation,
Ebola is spreading in Sierra Leone and Liberia, particularly in border areas. In past outbreaks,
people who discovered they had EVD after returning home from Central and East Africa did not
spread the virus to others. In this outbreak, however, EVD cases emerged in Nigeria after a man
infected with Ebola traveled to the country. No reports have emerged of EVD spreading in Saudi
Arabia and Spain where EVD patients were evacuated after contracting the virus in Liberia.
3 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights
and International Organizations, Combating the Ebola Threat, August 7, 2014.
Congressional Research Service
2
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
Border/Travel Issues
Figure 2. Map of Current and Past Ebola
Outbreaks
The shared borders of Guinea, Liberia,
and Sierra Leone are notoriously porous
and are the primary sites of Ebola
transmission. Government officials in
these countries have pledged to institute
measures to prevent infected people
from leaving their respective countries.
WHO maintains that there is minimal
risk of contracting Ebola on a plane,4
though some countries are banning
flights from the affected countries and
are revoking visas of travelers from the
area.5 According to the State
Department, fear about the virus is
impacting peacekeeping and security
efforts outside the affected region. The
African Union, for example, reportedly
cancelled a planned deployment of
Sierra Leonean peacekeeping forces to
Somalia amid fears of the virus.6
Suspension of airline services and poor
road conditions in the affected countries
are also reportedly hindering some non-
governmental organizations (NGOs)
Source: Adapted by CRS from the Centers of Disease Control
from moving staff and equipment within and Prevention (CDC) at http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/
and between affected countries.
resources/distribution-map-guinea-outbreak.html.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has issued a Level 3 Travel Warning for
Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone, advising all Americans to avoid nonessential travel to those
countries. It has issued a Level 2 Travel Warning for Nigeria, urging Americans to take enhanced
precautions when traveling to the area.7 Several foreign aid groups, including U.S.-based
institutions, are evacuating personnel from the region. The U.S. Peace Corps began evacuating
340 volunteers stationed in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone in August 2014.8 Also in August,
the State Department issued a travel warning for Liberia, advising Americans to avoid non-
essential travel to the country and began evacuating family members of U.S. Foreign Service
personnel from the Liberia and Sierra Leone, though U.S. embassies remain open in all of the
4 WHO, “WHO: Air travel is low-risk for Ebola transmission,” Note for the Media, August 14, 2014 and WHO,
“Statement on travel and transport in relation to Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak, August 18, 2014.
5 “Ebola cited in suspension of 7,200 Haj visas for Africa,” Arab News, August 6, 2014 and “WHO urges calm as
Kenya bans contact with Ebola-affected countries,” The Guardian, August 17, 2014.
6 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights
and International Organizations, Combating the Ebola Threat, Testimony by Bisa Williams, Deputy Assistant
Secretary, Bureau of African Affairs, Department of State, August 7, 2014.
7 CDC updates its travel warnings as events warrant at http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/diseases/ebola.
8 Peace Corps, “Peace Corps Removing Volunteers in Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea,” press release, July 30, 2014.
Congressional Research Service
3
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
affected countries.9 Samaritan’s Purse, a U.S. non-governmental organization (NGO), ended its
healthcare efforts in Liberia after two of its staff contracted EVD while treating Ebola patients.
Urban Spread
Previous human EVD outbreaks occurred in rural and forested areas. The current outbreak is
spreading in rural and urban settings alike, including capitals. High density conditions in the
capitals of Liberia and Sierra Leone are facilitating the rapid spread of the virus. Disease
outbreaks in urban areas are also troublesome because of the role cities play in international
travel, with many observers fearing importation of the virus via air travel.
Health System Constraints in Affected Countries
A major factor in the rapid spread of Ebola among the affected countries is weak health system
capacity. Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone are among the poorest countries in the world. The
infrastructure, including the health systems, of these countries has been decimated by years of
conflict and neglect. Each of the countries had recently begun to enjoy modest fiscal growth and
political stability. This section describes how deficits in each component of the affected countries’
health systems enable the virus to continue to spread. Table 1 summarizes these issues.10
Table 1. Impact of Health System Deficiencies on Ebola Outbreak Containment
Human
Service
Governance
Financing
Resources
Commodities
Delivery
Information
Description
Policies, strategies, and
Mechanisms
The people who Goods that are
The
The collection,
plans that inform the
used to fund
provide
used to provide
management and analysis, and
course of action a country health efforts
healthcare and
healthcare.
delivery of
dissemination of
will take to meet the
and allocate
support health
healthcare.
health statistics
health needs of its people. resources.
delivery.
for planning and
al ocating health
resources.
Impact of
Slow initial government
Insufficient
Shortages of not Insufficient supply
Many health
Limited capacity
Health
response to Ebola
financial
only health
of protective
facilities in
to conduct
System
outbreak and insufficient
resources to
personnel, but
equipment
Liberia and
contact tracing
Component
capacity to implement
fund local
also support
threatens the safety Sierra Leone. In
and diagnosis calls
Deficiency in national Ebola plans has
responses and
staff like grave
of healthcare
Monrovia,
into question the
Ebola
further diminished public
pay health
diggers and
workers (including
Liberia, all five
actual EVD cases
Context
confidence in political
personnel
statisticians limit community
major hospitals
and impedes
authorities, limiting efforts contribute to
the ability to
volunteers) and is
are closed and
efforts to detect,
to quell rumors and fears
human resource detect, prevent,
associated with
only three clinics treat, and control
about Ebola and to carry
and commodity
and treat EVD
hospital- and clinic-
were operating
the virus.
out disease control.
shortages.
cases.
based infections.
as of August 15.
Source: Created by CRS from WHO webpage on health systems and research on the 2014 Ebola outbreak.
9 State Department, “Response to the Ebola Virus,” Fact Sheet, August 12, 2014. The State Department issues travel
warnings and alerts as events warrant at http://travel.state.gov/content/passports/english/alertswarnings.html.
10 For more information on health systems, see http://www.who.int/topics/health_systems/en/.
Congressional Research Service
4
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
Governance
Following civil unrest, public confidence in government institutions is typically low. Government
leaders in Sierra Leone, Liberia, and Guinea are all working to restore public trust. Poor
conditions in each of these countries, marked by limited and low-quality public services, frequent
interruptions in water and electricity supply, impassable roads, and limited employment and
investment opportunities, have further eroded faith in government. Considering low public trust
of government institutions, public service messages and health outreach campaigns led by
government officials have met resistance and skepticism, further undermining efforts to control
the spread of Ebola. Reports of attacks on health workers and health facilities (run by aid workers
and government officials alike) persist. Rather than reporting suspected Ebola cases to health
officials, people have hidden the ill and patients have fled health facilities while undergoing
treatment, fearing they would contract Ebola in the poorly-equipped health centers. Avoidance of
health facilities is troubling to health experts not only for its impact on Ebola containment efforts,
but also for the possible negative effects on other health efforts, including maternal and child
health programs. Giving birth is particularly risky in the Ebola outbreak countries. Maternal
mortality rates in these areas are among the highest in the world, with Sierra Leone having the
highest (Figure 3).
Figure 3. Health Statistics: Affected Countries, Africa, High-Income Countries, World
Source: Created by CRS from WHO, World Health Statistics Report, 2014.
Congressional Research Service
5
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
Acronym: Tuberculosis (TB)
Notes: Maternal mortality refers to the death of a woman while pregnant or within 42 days of a terminated
pregnancy from any cause related to or aggravated by the pregnancy or its mismanagement, but not from
accidental or incidental causes. Neonatal mortality refers to the probability of dying during the first 28 days of life.
Infant Mortality refers to the probability of dying between birth and one year of life. Under-Five Mortality refers to
the probability of dying between birth and five years of age. All statistics collected in 2012, except maternal
mortality rate, col ected in 2013. In 2012 and 2013, the World Bank classified high-income countries as those
with gross national incomes of $12,746 or more.
In the four countries, more than 46,000 women died from pregnancy-related complications in
2012, accounting for roughly 26% of all maternal deaths in sub-Saharan Africa.11 The statistics
are similarly startling for childhood deaths in the EVD outbreak countries. In 2012, nearly 1
million children died in the affected countries before reaching their fifth birthday, accounting for
roughly 30% of all under-five deaths in sub-Saharan Africa.12 Most of these deaths could have
been prevented with adequate access to vaccines, clean water and sanitation, and nutrition.
Experts are concerned that maternal and child mortality rates in these countries will rise as people
avoid health clinics and health workers, even when facing life-threatening circumstances like
post-labor hemorrhage.
Financing
Per capita health spending in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone has been relatively low (Table 2),
contributing to poor conditions of publicly-funded health facilities. Health workers and other
government personnel often experience delays in compensation and benefits. As the Ebola
outbreak intensified, some health workers abandoned their posts, citing not only safety concerns
(from lack of protective equipment) but also frustration over not receiving salaries. Several local
staff at Ebola treatment centers in Liberia had reportedly not been paid for three months.13
Table 2. Selected Health System Financing Statistics, 2011
% of Population
Health Personnel
Per Capita Gov.
Gov. Health Budget as %
Living on < $1 Daily
per 10,000 Pop.
Health Spending
of Total Gov. Spending
Guinea 43.3% not
available
$15
6.8%
Liberia 83.8%
2.8 $27
19.1%
Sierra Leone
51.7%
1.9
$31
12.3%
Nigeria 68.0%
20.2 $49
6.7%
Africa 51.5% 14.6 $76
9.7%
World 21.5% 43.3 $619
15.2%
Source: Created by CRS from WHO, World Health Statistics Report, 2014.
Notes: Health personnel refers to doctors, nurses, and midwives.
In August 2014, Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf reportedly met with health workers and
apologized for the slow government response to the outbreak and promised more robust actions to
11 UNICEF, Trends in Maternal Mortality: 1990 to 2013, 2014.
12 WHO, World Health Statistics Report, 2014.
13 USAID, West Africa Ebola Outbreak—Update #2, August 11, 2014.
Congressional Research Service
6
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
end it.14 The President discussed recent efforts to control the outbreak and address health worker
concerns, including completely decontaminating health facilities, transporting food and other
social support to people in EVD-quarantine zones, and resolving all outstanding salaries and
incentives (such as hazard pay) for healthcare workers—a key complaint among health workers.
Figure 4. Health Personnel Ratios and EVD Cases Among Health Workers
(health personnel per 10,000 population)
Source: Created by CRS from WHO, World Health Statistics Report, 2014 and USAID, West Africa Ebola Outbreak-
Update #8, August 25, 2014.
Notes: Health personnel ratio data col ected between 2006 and 2013.
All of the outbreak-affected countries lack sufficient financial resources to fund their national
plans. Several groups have pledged to provide support to the affected countries, see “International
Responses.” Sierra Leone estimates it will cost nearly $26 million between July and December
2014 to arrest the spread of EVD in the country.15 The Government of Sierra Leone has pledged
$10 million towards its national response plan and donors have pledged an additional $7.6
million, leaving a funding gap of roughly $8.2 million.16 The Government of Liberia estimates
14 Government of Liberia, “President Sirleaf Meets with Healthcare Workers; Promised to Settle all Outstanding
Incentives Beginning This Week,” Press Release, August 10, 2014.
15 Sierra Leone Ministry of Health, Sierra Leone Accelerated Ebola Virus Disease Outbreak Response Plan, 2014.
16 WHO, “President Koroma visits Ebola epicenters of Kenema and Kailahun and launches revised response plan,”
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
7
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
that it will need more than $21 million to control the spread of EVD, roughly $6 million of which
it has already committed to fund internally.17 Guinean health officials estimate that the
government will need to spend $11 million between July and December 2014 to address the
Ebola outbreak.18 As of July 2014, less than $1 million of those funds had been raised.
Human Resources
In order to contain Ebola, an array of health and supporting personnel are needed, including
healthcare providers who diagnose and treat Ebola cases, epidemiologists and statisticians who
study the spread of the disease and inform strategies for containing it, support personnel who
safely dispose of deceased EVD patients, and communication experts who relay health
information. All of these are in short supply in the affected countries.
Human resource constraints are particularly acute among healthcare providers in the affected
countries. Sierra Leone, for example, has fewer than 2 health workers per 10,000 people, far less
than the 25 health experts recommend be available per 10,000 people to meet basic health needs
(Figure 4).19 Ebola control is labor- and resource-intense, due to requisite containment measures
(isolation facilities, protective equipment, expertise in EVD case handling). WHO estimates, for
example, that a facility treating 70 Ebola patients needs at least 250 healthcare workers.20 The
affected countries do not have sufficient numbers of providers to meet such demand.
At an August 2014 congressional hearing, one witness testified that prior to the Ebola outbreak,
Liberia had fewer than 200 doctors.21 After the outbreak, he estimated that about 50 doctors
remained to provide clinical care, due in part to the evacuation of several expatriate doctors.
Existing care providers work longer hours, face additional stress, placing them at greater risk of
workplace errors that can lead to contracting Ebola. According to the CDC and WHO, since the
Ebola outbreak began, 222 health personnel in the affected countries have contracted Ebola, of
whom more than 80 have died (Figure 4).22 More than half of these EVD cases occurred in
Liberia, where many nurses have stopped going to work amid concerns about working conditions,
including inadequate access to appropriate protective gear, and non-payment of hazard pay.23
(...continued)
Press Materials, July 30, 2014.
17 Liberia Ministry of Health, Liberia Operational Plan for Accelerated Response to Reoccurrence of Ebola Epidemic,
2014.
18 Guinea Ministry of Health, Planned Response to the Ebola Virus Disease Epidemic in Guinea, 2014.
19 The Joint Learning, a consortium of one hundred global health leaders, established the ratio after conducting research
on maternal and child health. The ratio was cited in WHO, The World Health Report, 2006, p. 11.
20 WHO, “WHO Director-General briefs Geneva UN missions on the Ebola outbreak,” Briefing to United Nations
Member States, August 12, 2014.
21 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights
and International Organizations, Combating the Ebola Threat, Testimony by Dr. Frank Glover, August 7, 2014.
22 WHO, “WHO Director-General briefs Geneva UN missions on the Ebola outbreak,” Briefing to United Nations
Member States, August 12, 2014 and USAID, West Africa Ebola Outbreak-Update #8, August 25, 2014.
23 Richard Preston, “Outbreak,” New Yorker, August 11, 2014 and BBC, “Sierra Leone chief Ebola doctor infected,”
July 23, 2014.
Congressional Research Service
8
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
Commodities
The affected countries have limited supplies of protective equipment and not all health and
support personnel who interact with the public have access to such equipment. Due to resource
constraints, the protective equipment is primarily provided to healthcare workers in Ebola
treatment centers, leaving health workers who operate among the general population at risk of
contracting and spreading the disease (and other infectious diseases). Health providers also lack
sufficient supplies of antibiotics and safe blood to treat Ebola. The price of disinfectants and
medicine has reportedly doubled, as people attempt to protect themselves and self-medicate in
light of health system deficiencies.24 Without sufficient tools to prevent and treat Ebola, morale
among health workers is reportedly declining.
Observers are also concerned about inadequate diagnostic tools. In each of the three outbreak
countries (Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone), only two laboratories are capable of diagnosing
Ebola, inhibiting efforts to detect and contain the disease. Without access to rapid diagnostic tests
and limited screening procedures (patients self-report symptoms), people who are sick with Ebola
may be intermingling with the general population in health facilities. Waiting and treatment areas
are filled to capacity with the sick who may be carrying Ebola but cannot be confirmed unless
they visit an Ebola treatment center where viral samples are sent for analysis once daily to one of
the two laboratories in the affected countries.25
Service Delivery
The Ebola outbreak has further diminished healthcare options in the affected countries. Many
health facilities in Liberia and Sierra Leone are closed. As of August 15, in Liberia, all five major
hospitals were closed and only three clinics were operating in the capital, Monrovia, and in Sierra
Leone, almost no private hospitals were open. Even before the outbreak, access to health clinics
was limited. The vast majority of health facilities were concentrated in urban areas, and Ebola
outbreak clinics are concentrated in the high prevalence areas (Figure 2), leaving large swaths of
the population with limited access to healthcare and to Ebola prevention and treatment services.
Due to limited transport options, villagers frequently travel great distances (often on foot) in
search of healthcare, prompting most to wait until health complications are severe. Delayed
health-seeking practices are reducing survival prospects among those sickened by Ebola and
encumbering efforts to detect and contain the virus. The poor conditions of the health facilities
also discourage attendance. Power outages and interruptions in potable water delivery are
common.26 In addition, ambulance services are virtually non-existent in rural areas and limited in
urban areas. One district in Sierra Leone with a population of 465,000 people reportedly has only
four ambulances, which are often overcrowded with ill people, irrespective of Ebola infection
status.27
24 Newsweek, “Ebola Frontline: Flooding in Sierra Leone Exacerbates Public Health Fears,” August 12, 2014.
25 The Guardian, “State of emergency declared in Liberia and Sierra Leone after Ebola outbreak,” July 31, 2014.
26 Doctors Without Borders, “Flash Quote: WHO Declares Ebola an International Public Health Emergency,” Field
News, August 8, 2014.
27 The Star, “In Sierra Leone, an exhausting struggle to contain Ebola,” August 18, 2014.
Congressional Research Service
9
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
Due to human resource constraints, most countries in sub-Saharan Africa have come to rely on
community health workers for healthcare delivery, especially in rural areas. Community health
workers are often the first and only providers of healthcare, though they are without formal
medical training and are not prepared to distinguish Ebola from other common ailments,
including malaria and typhoid fever, which share similar early symptoms. They are particularly
vulnerable to contracting and spreading Ebola, due to limited protective equipment. Analysts are
concerned that other health efforts not related to Ebola are imperiled.
Information
Weak government responses coupled with mistrust of government leaders have prompted many to
resist Ebola-containment efforts and to ignore Ebola education efforts. Denial is high in Liberia
and Sierra Leone about whether Ebola is real, and suspicion about health workers are fueling
rumors that they are intentionally infecting people. Other rumors entail cannibalism or the use of
Ebola as a ruse to kidnap people and sell their organs. Suspicion about health personnel has been
met with violence and has prompted some people to avoid treatment or flee health facilities.28 On
August 16, 2014 in the Liberian capital Monrovia, for example, an armed crowd attacked an
Ebola treatment center, emptied it of all care and treatment provisions, and abducted or chased
away the patients.29 Health officials have found the patients who fled, but remain concerned that
the incident may have further spread Ebola in the densely populated city.
“The International Rescue Committee has seen significant, dramatic declines in service delivery at the health facilities in the past
month, because people are rightfully scared to go to the health facility right now. There’s going to be a major decline in the
number of women who decide to deliver at the health facility, the number of new acceptors of family planning, the number of
children who get malaria treatment.”
International Rescue Committee, August 12, 2014.
Due to limited surveillance capacity, there is high uncertainty about the actual number of Ebola
cases. One report from the Liberian Health Ministry indicated that the County Surveillance Office
in one of the districts with high EVD cases lacks computers for data management.30 Without
sufficient ambulance capacity, dead bodies are reportedly lying in homes and on streets in Liberia
with the cause of death undetermined, while backlogs of viral samples are waiting to be tested.31
On August 23, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) began using a mobile
laboratory to conduct rapid onsite testing and ease the backlog.32
28 Amanda Taub, “Why Most of the People Ebola Kills May Never Actually Contract It,” Vox, August 13, 2014.
29 New York Times, “With Aid Doctors Gone, Ebola Fight Grows Harder,” August 16, 2014.
30 Ibid.
31 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights
and International Organizations, Combating the Ebola Threat, Testimony by Dr. Frank Glover, August 7, 2014 and
Doctors Without Borders, “New Strategies, More Resources Needed to Curb Ebola Epidemic,” Press Statement,
August 15, 2014.
32 USAID, West Africa Ebola Outbreak—Update #6, August 20, 2014.
Congressional Research Service
10
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
Affected Country Responses
Responses to Ebola by the
Figure 5. 2014 Ebola Cases and Deaths by Country, as
Governments and people
Reported on August 22, 2014
of the four affected
countries have varied.
Nigeria has, to date,
prevented the virus from
spreading beyond those
who had contact with the
sole imported case. The
other affected countries
have been less successful
at halting the spread. In
Guinea, daily case counts
are much lower than in
Sierra Leone and Liberia
where new cases are
rapidly rising (Figure 5).
Years of turmoil in
Liberia and Sierra Leone
Source: Created by CRS from WHO data as reported on the Global Alert and
have eroded trust in those
Response website, http://www.who.int/csr/don/archive/disease/ebola/en/.
governments, leading many to resist government containment efforts. Violent responses in Liberia
to quarantine zones have increased concerns that the inability to contain the Ebola outbreak could
destabilize the affected countries.
Poor civic-government relations have led the Governments of Sierra Leone and Liberia to declare
states of emergency, which could enable them to “institute extraordinary measures, including, if
need be, the suspensions of certain rights and privileges.”33 Threats of punishment for those
harboring Ebola patients or fleeing health facilities34 and the institution of quarantine zones where
police and military forces are barring people from entering or exiting districts with high EVD
caseloads (as indicated with polka dots in Figure 2) are exacerbating sentiments of mistrust.
The affected countries imposed quarantine zones on districts with high numbers of EVD cases.
These zones stretch across 185 square miles and may contain more than 70% of the EVD cases.35
People in those areas reportedly will be provided with material support and medical attention, and
testing and contact tracing efforts in those health areas will purportedly be strengthened. Burial
services in those areas will reportedly be done in “accordance with national health regulations,”36
though in some instances, burial teams have been confronted by members of the community who
have refused access to the deceased.
33 Government of Liberia, “President Sirleaf Declares 90-Day State of Emergency, As Governments Steps up the Fight
against the Spread of the Ebola Virus Disease,” August 6, 2014.
34 Al Jazeera, “Ebola threatens more West African nations,” June 28, 2014.
35 Joint Declaration of Heads of State and Government of the Mano River Union for the Eradication of Ebola in West
Africa, August 1, 2014, http://www.emansion.gov.lr/doc/MRU_EBOLA_jOINT.pdf and Government of Liberia,
“MRU Leaders Meet in Conakry, Agree on Measures to Fight the Ebola Viral Disease,” August 1, 2014.
36 Joint Declaration of Heads of State and Government of the Mano River Union for the Eradication of Ebola in West
Africa, August 1, 2014.
Congressional Research Service
11
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
Sporadic attacks on health workers and clinics, as well as refusal by some to allow health
providers access to the sick or deceased is presenting a security challenge for the affected
countries. Community resistance to date has mostly been targeted at specific events or facilities,
though Liberia is facing increasing incidences of violence as the government tries to use armed
forces to impose disease containment measures, which many have defied, and to institute a
curfew. On August 20, 2014, the Liberian military reportedly fired live rounds of ammunition to
disperse crowds protesting the quarantine measures.37
The disruptive effective of quarantine zones have caused some to raise alarm about possible food
shortages in the quarantine-affected areas. The World Food Program (WFP) announced in August
that it would provide food aid to the roughly 1 million people living in the quarantine zones.38
Before Ebola hit, hunger was already a problem in the affected countries, particularly in rural
areas. Consumption of wild animals is common practice in areas with high food insecurity. Health
officials have been expanding efforts to inform the public about the risks associated with eating
wild animals, including fruit bats and other animals that might carry EVD.39 Even if people
understand that wild animals may carry EVD, hunger often compels them to continue hunting and
eating the animals despite the risks.
Some economists are concerned about the possible economic impact of this outbreak on the
affected countries. Government restrictions on the movement of goods and people have
reportedly halted commerce in some areas. Cross-border markets have virtually disintegrated,
stripping vendors in border territories of their sole source of income. Countless farmers have fled
affected zones and delayed sowing crops, raising concerns about food insecurity. Since July,
many daily activities have been banned: the Governments of Sierra Leone and Liberia have
ordered the closure of schools and markets and put nonessential government staff on mandatory
leave.40 At the same time, some foreign companies are reportedly evacuating workers. A number
of mining firms have purportedly withdrawn their foreign staff and shut down non-essential
operations. China Union, which began shipping iron ore out of Liberia this year, is reportedly
scaling back its activities and considering temporarily halting operations until the outbreak is
under control.41
International Responses
On August 8, the World Health Organization Director-General Margaret Chan declared the
ongoing Ebola outbreak a “public health emergency of international concern,” thereby requiring
signatories under the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR)42 to report on Ebola cases and
other requirements of the IHR. The IHR requires countries to develop national preparedness
capacities, including the duty to report internationally significant events, conduct surveillance,
37 USAID, West Africa Ebola Outbreak—Update #6, August 20, 2014.
38 WFP, “WFP Steps Up Assistance to Meet Urgent Food Needs of Families and Communities Affected by Ebola,”
August 18, 2014.
39 “Ebola risk unheeded as Guinea’s villagers keep on eating fruit bats,” The Guardian, August 4, 2014.
40 Justin Moyer, “Liberia closed its borders to contain Ebola. Can that work?” The Washington Post, July 31, 2014 and
Monica Mark, “State of emergency declared in Liberia and Sierra Leone after Ebola outbreak,” The Guardian, July 31,
2014.
41 The Economist, “Panicking only makes it worse,” August 16, 2014.
42 For more information on the IHR see http://www.who.int/ihr/en/.
Congressional Research Service
12
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
and exercise public health powers, while balancing human rights and international trade. The IHR
can also be used to gauge disparities in disease surveillance capacity and assess efforts by the
international community to address them, as signatories of the IHR are required to report annually
“on progress achieved in providing support to Member States on compliance with, and
implementation of the Regulations on IHR requirements.”43
The international community, including the United States, is providing support for Ebola
responses in the affected countries and WHO is coordinating those efforts. Pledges from
multilateral actors include:
• the introduction of a $100 million Ebola response plan by WHO;44
• a $210 million pledge from the African Development Bank (ADP);45
• the deployment of food and nutritional support by the World Food Program
(WFP) to around 1 million people living in the EVD quarantine zones;46
• the United Nations Humanitarian Air Service (UNHAS) pledged to provide air
transport for aid workers and other stakeholders who are finding it increasingly
difficult to travel due to suspended service by commercial airliners.47
• a pledge of €11.9 million by the European Union (EU);48 and
• the provision of $200 million in concessionary loans from the World Bank.49
The WHO response plan is intended to fund national Ebola plans. The ADP announced that it will
allocate $60 million of its pledge to WHO for its Ebola response. UNHAS is seeking $7.3 million
from the international community to fund its transport efforts. The EU funds will be used to
expand Doctors Without Borders (known by its French acronym, MSF) operations, provide
medical equipment for diagnosing the virus, protective equipment, and support WHO response
plan. The World Bank funds will be used to improve disease surveillance and laboratory
networks, purchase medical supplies, pay salaries for medical staff, and offer social support for
those undergoing financial hardship caused by the epidemic.
Most of the international efforts aimed at supporting national responses to the ongoing outbreak
are provided in the form of financial aid, technical assistance, and delivery of commodities, such
as protective equipment. The International Rescue Committee (IRC), MSF, and the International
Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) are among the handful of aid groups
43 WHO, Checklist and Indicators for Monitoring Progress in the Development of IHR Core Capacities in State
Parties, February 2011.
44 Originally, WHO estimated the regional plan would cost roughly $71 million to implement. See WHO, Affected
Countries Ebola Virus Disease Outbreak Response Plan in West Africa, 2014. WHO adjusted its estimate to $100
million. See WHO, “WHO Director-General, West African Presidents to Launch Intensified Ebola Outbreak Response
Plan,” July 31, 2014.
45 USAID, West Africa Ebola Outbreak—Update #4, August 15, 2014.
46 WFP, “WFP Steps Up Assistance to Meet Urgent Food Needs of Families and Communities Affected by Ebola,”
August 18, 2014.
47 USAID, West Africa Ebola Outbreak—Update #4, August 15, 2014.
48 European Commission, West Africa-Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) Outbreak, August 11, 2014.
49 World Bank, “Ebola: World Bank Group Mobilizes Emergency Funding to Fight Epidemic in West Africa,” Press
Release, August 4, 2014.
Congressional Research Service
13
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
providing direct healthcare. Samaritan’s Purse closed its health clinics after two of its workers
became infected. The affected countries continue to face acute human resource constraints, which
the financial aid has not yet sufficiently addressed. Some health experts have criticized the
international response, deeming it a “failure”50 and have implored donors to deploy health
providers. According to one MSF doctor, “[d]eclaring Ebola an international public health
emergency shows how seriously WHO is taking the current outbreak; but statements won’t save
lives. It is clear the epidemic will not be contained without a massive deployment on the
ground.”51
U.S. Responses to Pandemic Threats and Ebola
The United States supports the capacity of foreign nations to prepare and, if necessary, respond to
disease outbreaks—including Ebola—primarily through USAID and CDC. The U.S. Departments
of Agriculture, Defense and State also contribute to such efforts. These efforts began in earnest
after the 2003 SARS outbreak. U.S. responses to the current Ebola outbreak stem from these and
other pandemic preparedness efforts. Related activities include providing support for WHO and
national Ebola response plans, implementing awareness raising campaigns, bolstering disease
surveillance and detection capacity, providing commodities and health supplies, and training
police and military forces on the appropriate use of protective equipment. As of August 18, 2014,
the United States has deployed 95 personnel to Ebola affected countries (Table 3).
Table 3. U.S. Personnel Deployed to West Africa for Ebola Response
(as of August 25, 2014)
Agency or Department Guinea
Liberia
Sierra
Leone Nigeria
CDC 17
21
28
8
DOD 0
2
0
0
USAID 1
15
3
0
Source: Created by CRS from USAID, West Africa Ebola Outbreak-Update #8, August 25, 2014.
USAID
Recognizing that diseases such as Ebola, H5N1 and H7N9 avian influenzas, and MERS and
SARS coronaviruses periodically spill over from animals to cause outbreaks (and sometimes
pandemics) in humans, USAID invested a total of $1 billion on pandemic preparedness efforts
since 2005. This includes $72.5 million in FY2014 for the Emerging and Pandemic Threats (EPT)
program to strengthen the capacity of 18 countries in Africa and Asia to more quickly and
effectively detect and respond to infectious disease outbreaks, including Ebola.52
The program grew out of USAID’s initial response to H5N1 avian influenza in 2005 and is
working to identify interventions to reduce the risk of the animal viruses spilling over and
spreading in human populations. Congress appropriates funds directly to USAID for EPT. These
50 Science, “WHO declares escalating Ebola outbreak an international emergency,” August 8, 2014.
51 New York Times, “U.N. Agency Calls Ebola Outbreak an International Health Emergency,” August 8, 2014.
52 See the USAID webpage on pandemics at http://www.usaid.gov/what-we-do/global-health/pandemic-influenza-and-
other-emerging-threats.
Congressional Research Service
14
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
funds have fluctuated between FY2005-FY2014 (Table 4). Related activities in 18 countries in
East and Central Africa and South and Southeast Asia focus on:
• viral detection—identification of viruses in wildlife, livestock, and human
populations that may be public health threats;
• risk determination—characterization of the potential risk and method of
transmission for specific viruses of animal origin;
• institutionalization of a “one health” approach—integration of a multisector
approach to public health (including animal health and environment);
• outbreak response capacity—support for sustainable, country-level response to
include preparedness and coordination; and
• risk reduction—promotion of actions that minimize or eliminate the potential
for the emergence and spread of new viral threats.
Table 4. USAID Pandemic Preparedness Funding
(current U.S. $ millions and percent)
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY14-
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Estimate
Request
FY15
Avian Flu/
16 162 161 115 190 106 93 58 55
73
50 -31.0%
Pandemic
Preparedness
Source: Created by CRS correspondence with USAID officials, August 6, 2014.
Note: Includes supplemental appropriations.
USAID Ebola Responses53
The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has deployed a Disaster Assistance
Response Team (DART) to West Africa to coordinate the U.S. Government’s response to the
Ebola outbreak. The team is overseeing critical areas of the response, such as planning,
operations, logistics in coordination with other federal agencies, including the Department of
Defense (DOD) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), including CDC.
Between March and August 2014, USAID has provided $14.55 million for combating Ebola in
West Africa.54 Of those funds, $8.95 million from the USAID Global Health Bureau was provided
to support the WHO Ebola response plan. This included the provision of 105,000 sets of
protective equipment for healthcare staff and outbreak investigators, as well as hygiene kits, soap,
bleach, gloves, masks, and other supplies to help prevent the spread of disease. 55 The remaining
$5.60 million will be funded through the USAID Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance
53 Summarized from USAID, “USAID and CDC Announce Additional Assistance for West Africa Ebola Response,”
press release, August 5, 2014.
54 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights
and International Organizations, Combating the Ebola Threat, Testimony by Ariel Pablos-Méndez, Assistant
Administrator for Global Health, USAID, August 7, 2014.
55 USAID, USAID Commits More Than $12 Million in Assistance for West African Ebola Response, press release,
August 8, 2014.
Congressional Research Service
15
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
(OFDA) to support CDC disease control and detection efforts and to train health ministry staff in
the affected countries. OFDA is also supporting the International Federation of Red Cross and
Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) to raise public awareness of Ebola’s mode of transmission, teach
disease prevention practices to communities, train volunteers to detect Ebola symptoms and
identify contacts of confirmed or suspected cases for further monitoring, and support safe burial
and body management activities. USAID has reprogrammed funds from the Global Heath and
International Disaster Assistance accounts to fund these efforts.
CDC
CDC funds its global pandemic preparedness efforts through a variety of accounts, including the
Global Disease Detection (GDD) program, Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Global
Health, Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, and Public Health Preparedness and Response.
The Centers leverage resources from these and other program accounts to respond to global
disease outbreaks—including Ebola. Appropriations for GDD have grown since 2003 (Table 5).
Table 5. CDC Global Disease Detection Funding
(current U.S. $ millions)
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual Estimate Request
GDD
12 21 32 32 31 34 44 42 42 45 45 45
Source: Created by CRS from correspondence with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), appropriations
legislation, and budget justification documents.
CDC has requested additional support ($45 million) in FY2015 to fund activities in support of the
Global Health Security Agenda, which will accelerate activities to detect, prevent, and respond to
global infectious disease threats like Ebola.56 CDC directly or indirectly supports pandemic
influenza preparedness efforts in more than 50 countries. In some cases, CDC sends experts to
work with WHO country offices or foreign health ministries, and at other times, CDC forms
cooperative agreements with partners to support country efforts. CDC has also produced public
education and prevention messaging posters and factsheets, many of which are picture-based and
designed to be accessible to illiterate populations, in the affected countries.
CDC Ebola Responses57
At the end of March 2014, CDC teams traveled to Guinea and Liberia to assist their Health
Ministries in characterizing and controlling the outbreak through collection of case reports,
interviewing patients and family members, coordinating contact tracing, and consolidating data
into centralized databases. Following an initial response which seemed to slow the outbreak for a
time, new cases flared up. CDC has since deployed several teams to the West Africa region to
help coordinate the response at the national level, assist with database management, and provide
health education. CDC is also working with partners to display Ebola-specific travel messages for
56 For more on the Global Health Security Agenda, see http://www.cdc.gov/globalhealth/security/.
57 This section was summarized from correspondence with CDC. Also see, Meredith Dixon and Ilana Schafer, “Ebola
Viral Disease Outbreak – West Africa, 2014,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (June 27, 2014), volume 63,
issue 25, pp. 548-551; and http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/guinea/.
Congressional Research Service
16
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
electronic monitors and posters at ports of entry to reach travelers from Guinea, Liberia, and
Sierra Leone. CDC is not providing direct care of Ebola patients. As of August 5, 2014, CDC has
spent approximately $500,000 on staff, supplies and travel for the Ebola response.58
Other Agencies
The State Department is coordinating U.S. responses with affected country host governments and
helping to provide public EVD prevention and awareness messaging. It has also monitored
regional responses, such as an Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) summit
and a WHO-led international meeting on Ebola, both held in July.59 The Department of Defense
(DOD), which had health researchers in the region when the outbreak began, is reportedly
considering deploying personnel to help address the outbreak and is training armed forces on the
appropriate use of protective equipment that it has donated. The goal and makeup of such a
deployment has not been determined or publicly announced.60 DOD also plays a role in
supporting drug research and development efforts related to Ebola virus (see Research and
Development in the section below).
Possible Issues for Congress
The current Ebola outbreak has overwhelmed the governments of Guinea, Sierra Leone, and
Liberia. Insufficient capacity to detect, treat, and prevent the spread of disease has enabled the
virus to spread and has further weakened health systems that were already inundated and in
dilapidated conditions. Containing this outbreak may require additional human and material
support, as well as technical advice to the affected countries. At an August 2014 congressional
hearing, expert witnesses described the dire situation and outlined the scope of required
assistance. This section describes issues the 113th Congress might face as it considers these
proposals.
Balancing Funding for Immediate Ebola Responses with Support
for Health Systems
The speed at which EVD is spreading across West Africa is attributable, in large part, to weak
health systems in those countries. Not only do they face a shortage of trained health workers, but
they also lack expertise in disease prevention and containment, including epidemiology, social
mobilization, logistics, and case and data management. Expertise in these fields is needed to
detect, trace, and contain cases; treat EVD patients; ensure proper use of protective gear; and
conduct EVD awareness campaigns. Low salaries in government-funded health facilities
contribute to high staff turnover, thereby limiting the availability of health workers and the
capacity to ensure consistent and appropriate adherence to disease control protocols.61
58 CRS correspondence with CDC, August 5, 2014.
59 Inter-agency conference call, July 24, 2014.
60 Military Times, “DoD May Send Personnel to Africa to Help Fight Ebola Epidemic,” August 1, 2014.
61 “Ebola cannot be cured but west Africa’s epidemic may have been preventable,” The Guardian, July 8, 2014.
Congressional Research Service
17
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
Donors have long grappled with how to address health emergencies in light of dysfunctional
health systems. In the early 2000s, donors turned to disease-based funding and channeled health
aid through non-governmental groups. Opponents of this approach argued that disease-specific
programs exacerbate human resource shortages in the public sector and further weaken health
systems when parallel bureaucracies are established and government authorities are bypassed.
Supporters assert that disease-based funding strengthens oversight capacity and facilitates the
monitoring and evaluation of the investments.
This debate intensified following the introduction of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS
Relief (PEPFAR).62 In an effort to curb the massive number of deaths that followed the
introduction of HIV/AIDS, U.S. agencies provided funding to large non-governmental
organizations and local partners who established care and treatment facilities outside of
government networks. While the effort helped save millions of lives and averted millions more
HIV infections, the United States has become the sole supporter for millions of people worldwide
whose lives are at risk should U.S. funding be discontinued. In the second phase of PEPFAR
(FY2009-FY2013), increasing portions of PEPFAR resources were used to support health
systems in hopes of bolstering country capacity to assume ownership over HIV/AIDS programs.
Now in its third phase, debate on the use of PEPFAR funds for building health systems has
resumed. A 2013 GAO report noted that roughly 21% of PEPFAR funds were spent on capacity
building projects under the “other” budgetary category. At her confirmation hearing, PEPFAR
Country Coordinator Deborah Birx asserted that under her leadership, 50% of all PEPFAR
resources, including those funded through other accounts, would be spent on care and treatment
activities, as mandated. Health system advocates fear that budgetary reforms aimed at adhering to
the law may imperil efforts to bolster health systems.
The U.S. Congress faces a similar dilemma with the current Ebola outbreak. The affected
countries need focused support to overcome this outbreak. Once this outbreak is arrested,
however, the countries will not be in any better position to detect, prevent, or respond to any other
disease outbreak unless donors begin the arduous task of supporting the development of strong
health systems. Ken Isaacs, Vice President of International Programs and Government Relations
at Samaritan’s Purse, described this dilemma at an August 2014 congressional hearing on Ebola,
“While it should be the goal of the developed world to build capacity, the building of this capacity
should not be the focus during times of an emergency crisis of a deadly disease that threatens the
international community.”63
Though PEPFAR and other U.S.-funded health programs have attempted to respond to calls for
greater investment in health systems, no appropriations specifically targeting such efforts are
provided. Language in appropriations and accompanying conference reports direct the majority of
health aid to particular diseases, leaving minimal resources for broader activities to strengthen
health systems. As Congress considers responses to the current Ebola outbreak, as well as
FY2015 appropriations, it may debate the appropriate mix of disease-specific and health system
strengthening support. The inability of the affected countries to contain the Ebola outbreak may
be a factor in congressional consideration of the $45 million sought by the CDC to fund the
62 For more on PEPFAR, see CRS Report IF00042, The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR):
Summary of Recent Developments (In Focus) and CRS Report R42776, The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS
Relief (PEPFAR): Funding Issues After a Decade of Implementation, FY2004-FY2013, by Tiaji Salaam-Blyther
63 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights
and International Organizations, Combating the Ebola Threat, Testimony by Ken Isaacs, Vice President of
International Programs and Government Relations, Samaritan’s Purse, August 7, 2014
Congressional Research Service
18
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
newly announced Global Health Security agenda. Congress may also consider calls from some
health experts who call for the establishment of a “Health Systems Fund,” to be administered by
WHO.64
Evaluating U.S. Responses
A variety of U.S. agencies are responding to the ongoing Ebola outbreak. The Department of
State is leading diplomatic engagements; USAID is coordinating U.S. responses, including the
provision of financial and material support; CDC is heading public health and medical response
activities; and DOD is handling support for foreign armed forces. With the exception of USAID,
the budgetary structure of each of these agencies enables them to respond to this unanticipated
event by drawing from other internal accounts. The Department of State’s efforts to coordinate
bilateral diplomatic engagements are likely conducted through existing channels (e.g., embassy
contacts) and, as such, would not require additional, dedicated funding. Outbreak responses by
the CDC can be financed through USAID disaster assistance accounts, as well as several CDC
accounts that are used for domestic and international health efforts and for which there is not
explicit congressional direction on their use. Since DOD responses typically focus on force
protection, engagement with foreign countries can be funded through an array of activities that
support that mandate.
The appropriate use and level of support to provide for foreign assistance is often strongly
debated in Congress and as a result, Congress has established numerous directives over the years
on how foreign aid funds are to be used. As the lead U.S. development agency, USAID often
receives specific direction from Congress on how the bulk of its funds will be used through
annual appropriations, leaving the agency with limited ability to address unanticipated events,
like the current Ebola outbreak, without drawing from ongoing health efforts. According to
USAID, it is currently reprogramming funds planned for preventing future outbreaks, as well as
addressing ongoing outbreaks (including responses to H7N9 avian influenza in China and MERS-
CoV in the Middle East), to address the current Ebola outbreak.65
Supporters of the current appropriation structure see it as a tool for overseeing health programs
and ensuring that congressional priorities are met. Opponents argue that congressional directives
encumber the agility that is needed in the field and create artificial segmentation of health and
development issues, thereby limiting the impact and sustainability of such efforts.
By their nature, disease outbreaks are often unpredictable, though with appropriate disease
surveillance, detection, and response mechanisms, their impact can be minimized. At present,
USAID pandemic preparedness efforts are focused on East and Central Africa as well as South
and Southeast Asia, where previous Ebola and influenza outbreaks have occurred. Now that
Ebola has emerged in West Africa, it is highly probable that another Ebola outbreak may occur in
the region, a scenario countries in the region are ill-prepared to handle. The FY2015 budget
request ($50 million) for pandemic preparedness is roughly 30% less than the FY2014 funding
level ($73 million). Even if Congress funds USAID pandemic preparedness programs at the
64 Lawrence Gostin, “West Africa’s Ebola Epidemic is Out of Control, But Never Had to Happen,” Briefing Paper
Number 9, August 20, 2014. For more on the possible structure and functions of the Global Health Fund, see Lawrence
Gostin and Eric Friedman, “Towards a Framework Convention on Global Health: A Transformative Agenda for Global
Health Justice,” Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law, and Ethics, (2013), volume 13, issue 1.
65 CRS correspondence with USAID, August 5, 2014.
Congressional Research Service
19
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
FY2014 funding level, one USAID official contends that it will not be enough to meet current
demands.66
Addressing the Long-Term and Broader Effects of the Outbreak
The Ebola outbreak may cause several long-term and broader effects in the region. Under the best
of circumstances, experts predict that it will take at least six months to get the outbreak under
control. MSF has reported that some affected villages in Sierra Leone have lost the majority of
adult community members, leaving vulnerable populations—such as children and the elderly—
without resources to cultivate agricultural land and procure food.67 Observers are also concerned
about a growing number of children who are being orphaned from Ebola. This group is
particularly vulnerable to marginalization due to overwhelming fear of the virus. Countries in
West and Central Africa already had large orphan populations due to a variety of causes including
armed conflict and HIV/AIDS. In 2012, some 28 million children were orphaned in the region, of
whom more than 4 million lost one or more parent to AIDS.68
Ebola is also hindering the capacity of these governments to address other health issues, such as
obstetrical complications. Experts are concerned that child and maternal mortality rates, already
high in the region, may further rise due to diminishing numbers of health personnel (caused both
by Ebola deaths and abandonment of posts), diversion of limited resources to Ebola treatment
centers, and public avoidance of health centers.
The full health effects of the Ebola outbreak may not be known until it is contained. An
accounting of broader health and development needs will likely ensue and may rekindle debate
over how U.S. global health assistance funds are apportioned. Since PEPFAR was launched,
global health advocates have debated the appropriate share of global health resources HIV/AIDS
programs should consume. Though U.S. global health programs are aimed at a range of global
health problems, appropriations for combating global HIV/AIDS comprise the bulk of U.S. global
health funding.69 Congress is likely to face arguments from advocates from a variety of actors
attempting to garner support for a bevy of health and development issues that will have likely
worsened in the wake of Ebola, including maternal and child mortality, child vulnerability and
orphanhood, poverty, food scarcity, and water-borne infections.
Considering Research and Development Needs
Since 1976, several Ebola outbreaks have erupted in sub-Saharan Africa, yet therapeutic options
remain undeveloped. There is no cure, specific treatment regimen, or vaccine to prevent Ebola,
nor or is there any post-exposure prophylaxis for health workers who face regular exposure.
Treatment of EVD symptoms increases the probability of survival. The appropriate use of
experimental drugs that have not been tested for human safety and effectiveness has become a
matter of debate, particularly around the issue of equity.
66 Ibid.
67 USAID, West Africa Ebola Outbreak—Update # 5, August 18, 2014.
68 UNICEF, Towards an AIDS-Free Generation Children and AIDS: Sixth Stocktaking Report, 2013.
69 For more on U.S. global health funding, see CRS Report R43115, U.S. Global Health Assistance: FY2001-FY2015
Funding and Issues for Congress.
Congressional Research Service
20
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
In early August 2014, two Americans healthcare workers who became infected with Ebola while
working in Liberia were given an experimental antibody treatment, called ZMapp™, that was not
approved in the United Sates or any other country, and had not been tested in humans.70 A global
health lawyer described the ensuing debate. “Should [U.S.] workers receive a drug in extremely
scarce supply when Africans are affected in far greater numbers? Balanced against this sense of
injustice is the ethical concern of administering an experimental drug to African patients that has
not undergone any safety testing in humans.”71 In addition, if the experimental drugs are
ineffectual or cause serious side effects, then their use may further exacerbate mistrust in
healthcare workers and modern medical treatments. WHO held a special meeting in August on
the topic and announced that under “the particular circumstances of th[e] outbreak, and provided
certain conditions are met ... it is ethical to offer unproven interventions with as yet unknown
efficacy and adverse effects, as potential treatment or prevention.”72
Since the announcement, the United States has provided three courses of the ZMapp™ to Liberia
and the three Liberian health workers who received the drug are reportedly recovering.73 The
DOD Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) is providing additional funding to the
manufacturer to extend research on the drug.74 In addition to ZMapp™, other drugs and vaccines
are under development and several countries have reported having unapproved medicines and
vaccines that they believe may be effective in treating and preventing Ebola.75 The National
Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), for
example, is funding the development of an Ebola vaccine.76 Trials are expected to start in
September 2014.
While some observers are optimistic about the potentially life-saving effects of ZMapp™, others
including the manufacturer, caution that the efficacy of the drug has not yet been determined and
that all available supply on the drug has been exhausted.77 Very few courses of the drug were
developed because it is still in the experimental stage and the manufacturer does not have the
capacity to develop large quantities of the treatment.78 One health expert estimates that it might
take at least two years before a safe and approved drug or vaccine is available for clinicians.79
70 Andrew Pollack, “Ebola Therapy from an Obscure Biotech Firm Is Hurried Along,” The New York Times, August 6,
2014. See also CDC, “Questions and Answers on Experimental Treatments and Vaccines for Ebola,” August 8, 2014,
http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/guinea/qa-experimental-treatments.html.
71 Lawrence Gostin et al., “The Ebola Epidemic: A Global Health Emergency,” JAMA, (August 11, 2014).
72 WHO, “Ethical considerations for use of unregistered interventions for Ebola viral disease (EVD),” WHO statement,
August 12, 2014.
73 Wall Street Journal, “Second American Ebola Virus Patient Gaining Strength,” August 19, 2014.
74 Global Biodefense, “MAPP Biopharmaceutical Awarded Funding for Ebola Drug,” July 30, 2014,
http://globalbiodefense.com/2014/07/30/mapp-biopharmaceutical-awarded-funding-ebola-drug/ and FedBizOpps.Gov,
“MB-2003: An Ebola Virus Countermeasure,” Solicitation Number HDTRA1—13-C-0018-P00003, July 22, 2014.
75 “Japan prepared to supply unapproved medicine to Ebola-hit W. Africa,” Mainichi, August 25, 2014; “Canada to
donate experimental Ebola vaccine,” CTV News, August 12, 2014.
76 NIAID webpage on Ebola/Marbug Research at http://www.niaid.nih.gov/topics/ebolaMarburg/research/Pages/
default.aspx.
77 Mapp Biopharmaceutical, “ZMapp™ Frequently Asked Questions,” and information on Mapp Biopharmaceutical
homepage, August 12, 2014, accessed on August 20, 2014.
78 CDC, “Questions and Answers on Experimental Treatments and Vaccines for Ebola,” webpage on the 2014 West
Africa Outbreak, accessed on August 20, 2014.
79 Doctors Without Borders, “Ebola Specialist: Experimental Drugs Inspire Hope, but Crisis Continues in West Africa,”
Voices from the Field, August 8, 2014.
Congressional Research Service
21
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
CDC underscores that the most effective way to stop the ongoing Ebola outbreak is to follow the
same protocols that halted past Ebola outbreaks: “meticulous work in finding Ebola cases,
isolating and caring for those patients, and tracing contacts to stop the chains of transmission.”80
Conclusion
The rapid spread and high death toll of the current Ebola outbreak is causing panic within the
affected countries, as well as many other countries worldwide. In the affected countries, leaders
are instituting quarantine measures, prohibiting free movement of people in entire districts. CDC
asserts that the implementation of quarantines is an ineffective approach to limiting the spread of
EVD and that the action could limit access health care and case tracing, further inhibiting EVD
response efforts.81 Several people in the quarantine zones have met these actions with violence
and have deepened their resentment and mistrust of government leaders. Violent outbreaks within
the countries, particularly in Liberia, are troubling to some observers who fear the inability of the
governments to contain the virus and their efforts to control population flows may lead to broader
unrest and deepen hunger and poverty, particularly in quarantine zones.
Although WHO maintains that there is little risk of contracting Ebola on an airplane, a growing
number of countries are barring people from Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone from entering
their territories, and an increasing cadre of commercial airlines is cancelling flights originating
from the affected countries. Several international actors have expressed concern about Senegal’s
decision to close its borders, airports, and seaports to arrivals from the EVD-affected countries, as
the country serves as a key operational hub for humanitarian shipments. At the same time,
suspended air travel is hampering the ability to move health workers and material assistance
within and among the affected countries, further inhibiting Ebola response efforts.
Some economists and health experts are concerned about the broader impact that the outbreak and
global responses to it are having on the countries. The World Bank has already reduced projected
economic growth estimates for Guinea. People in the affected countries, already faced with
limited healthcare options before the Ebola outbreak, have almost no access to health services
that are not related to Ebola, as many hospitals in the affected countries have closed since health
workers began contracting Ebola. At the same time, many of the expatriate health workers who
supplemented the paltry health workforce in those countries have evacuated.
Concerns about protecting health workers from Ebola, as well as attacks by fearful citizenry, have
possibly discouraged countries from sending health experts to care for Ebola patients. The United
States and other donor countries have sent teams of experts and other forms of assistance to the
affected countries, though the aid has been provided primarily in the form of material aid and
technical assistance.
The inability of the affected countries to contain the ongoing Ebola outbreak is a testament of the
poor health infrastructures in those areas. As Congress considers responses to this outbreak,
debate may center not only on the levels and types of assistance to fund, but also on how to
balance funding for immediate Ebola responses against the need for broader health system
80 CDC, “Questions and Answers on Experimental Treatments and Vaccines for Ebola,” webpage on the 2014 West
Africa Outbreak, accessed on August 20, 2014.
81 USAID, West Africa Outbreak –Outbreak #8, August 25, 2014.
Congressional Research Service
22
The 2014 Ebola Outbreak: International and U.S. Responses
strengthening efforts. Congress may also consider the long-term assistance these countries may
need as their economies and infrastructures are further decimated by the ongoing outbreak.
Author Contact Information
Tiaji Salaam-Blyther
Specialist in Global Health
tsalaam@crs.loc.gov, 7-7677
Congressional Research Service
23