TODAY’S PAPER | September 09, 2026 | EPAPER

WHO faces staff shortage

Says funding challenges hamper Congo Ebola response


Reuters September 09, 2026 1 min read

GENEVA:

Shortages of trained staff, operational partners and funding are causing a bottleneck in efforts to expand the Ebola response in the Democratic Republic of Congo as the outbreak spreads geographically, a World Health Organization official said on Tuesday.

The outbreak has spread beyond its initial epicentre in Bunia, affecting six provinces and prompting authorities to adopt a more decentralised strategy by building treatment centers closer to newly affected communities, the WHO said.

Congo's outbreak of the Bundibugyo species of Ebola has killed 3,175 people and infected more than 6,000, according to the WHO - making it the country's worst epidemic - and it is continuing to spread across its northeast.

WHO technical officer Luca Fontana said nearly 1,400 treatment beds had already been established across 59 treatment centres, one of the fastest scale-ups he said he had witnessed, including during the 2014 to 2016 West Africa Ebola epidemic.

"Yet, despite this extraordinary effort, we estimate that another 1,600 beds will be required," he said.

WHO estimates around three health workers are needed for each Ebola patient bed, meaning around 9,000 staff would be required for the planned capacity of 3,000 beds.

That would require the recruitment and training of roughly 5,000 additional health workers.

"Every time a healthcare worker walks inside the patient's area, wearing the full gear, the personal protective equipment, it's approximately $25. We have hundreds of staff walking inside the patient's area every single day," Fontana said.

Compounding the challenge, the pool of international organisations capable of running Ebola treatment centres is limited, partly due to the impact of broader global donor funding cuts, Fontana said.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ