Donor reporting after USAID: How do FCDO, EU, UN and World Bank formats compare?
Nov 04 2026 · Donor reporting
Compare FCDO, EU, UN and World Bank donor reporting formats after USAID. Learn how to use one indicator tracker and re-lay it out per funder.
After USAID's restructuring, many programmes shifted to FCDO, EU, UN or World Bank funding. Each donor has a distinct reporting format. FCDO uses a logframe with a value-for-money narrative. The EU emphasises intervention logic and OECD-DAC criteria. UN agencies require results frameworks with indicator reference sheets. The World Bank expects results frameworks with detailed indicator definitions and baselines. The efficient approach is to maintain one indicator tracker and re-lay it out per funder. Separate systems cause numbers to drift. Always report from a single source of truth, disaggregate data consistently, and document any target changes with reasons.
What changed for donor reporting after USAID?
USAID's restructuring led many programmes to seek funding from FCDO, the EU, UN agencies or the World Bank. Each donor has its own reporting format, so teams must adapt. The core shift is from a single US-centric format to multiple formats, each with different expectations for structure, indicators and narrative.
How do FCDO, EU, UN and World Bank reporting formats compare?
Keep reading — free.
Create an account to unlock the rest of this guide — the worked example, the tables and the checklists — and get The Bridge weekly. Already a member? Sign in.
You'll also get the free handbook by email. Unsubscribe anytime.
Written for M&E professionals. Not a guarantee of accuracy — always verify every claim against its source, and let a named human sign off. Get the free handbook.