FLASH
← Development finance

Procedures

How foreign aid moves

From a first conversation to a disbursed dollar, in the actual document names each institution uses. Each institution runs its own version, under its own gates and paperwork.

Sector map

How the sector works before the lifecycle starts

Procedures only make sense after separating instruments, actors, money movement and accountability. A signed document is not always a disbursed dollar.

Instruments

The same sector uses different financial instruments.

  • Grants No repayment by the recipient. Usually 100% grant element.
  • Concessional sovereign loans Public debt with softer terms: grace period, long maturity and low interest.
  • Market priced loans Repayable finance with little or no grant element.
  • Budget support Money enters the treasury and is tracked through policy and fiduciary conditions.
  • Guarantees, equity and blended finance Risk-sharing instruments, often for private investment or infrastructure.

Actors

Power is split between financiers, country authorities and delivery actors.

  • Country side Finance ministry, planning ministry, line ministry, central bank or public agency.
  • Institution side Donor mission, multilateral task team, IMF mission, DFI investment team.
  • Approval body Board, minister, investment committee or delegated official.
  • Implementers Government unit, NGO, contractor, supplier, multilateral partner or client company.
  • Independent review Auditors, evaluators, complaint mechanisms and parliamentary scrutiny.

Money Movement

Documents approve the operation, but disbursement is a separate event.

  • Commitment The financier reserves funds after approval and signature.
  • Effectiveness Legal or operational conditions must be met before first release.
  • Disbursement Funds move by tranche, reimbursement, direct payment or budget transfer.
  • Procurement payment Money reaches contractors, suppliers or partners only after award and verification.
  • Repayment or closeout Loans create service obligations. Grants close through reporting and audit.

Accountability

Sector understanding requires knowing who can stop, audit or disclose each step.

  • Conditions Policy actions, covenants, safeguards and fiduciary controls gate releases.
  • Safeguards Environmental, social, resettlement and grievance rules protect affected people.
  • Results Outputs are delivered goods; outcomes are behavior or welfare changes.
  • Disclosure Some documents are public; others are delayed, summarized or never released.
  • Evaluation Most evaluations judge contribution and performance, not perfect causality.

Worked example

Worked example: a water project

The same operation can be read as a policy cycle, a document trail, a procurement trail and a money trail.

Document trail Money trail Decision right
1

Need

Document
Country strategy and concept note
Money
No money moves
Decision
Country and financier agree the problem is eligible.
2

Design

Document
Feasibility study, safeguards, procurement plan
Money
Preparation funds or studies only
Decision
Scope, cost, risks and results framework become testable.
3

Approval

Document
Appraisal paper and financing agreement
Money
Commitment is booked
Decision
Board, minister or committee authorizes financing.
4

Effectiveness

Document
Legal opinion, conditions precedent, implementation manual
Money
First release still may be blocked
Decision
The recipient satisfies legal and operational conditions.
5

Procurement

Document
Tender, bid evaluation, signed contract, invoices
Money
Payments follow verified awards
Decision
Contractors or partners are selected under procurement rules.
6

Results

Document
Progress report, audit, completion report, evaluation
Money
Final disbursement, audit or repayment
Decision
Outputs, outcomes and lessons are recorded or challenged.
Need named
Designed
Appraised
Approved
Funded
Tracked
Evaluated

Actor sides

Country side Institution side Approval body Implementer Independent review Legal/procurement

Document families

Strategy Appraisal Agreement Monitoring Evaluation Conditions
Composite map

Generic aid cycle

Composite, not one body's official procedure

The outline every institution-specific cycle below elaborates in its own document names. Useful as a map before reading any single one.

7 stages
1 Identification 2 Preparation & design 3 Appraisal 4 Approval 5 Implementation & disbursement 6 Monitoring 7 Completion & evaluation
1

Identification

A need is named, by the recipient government, the donor's own country strategy, or both together. Not yet a commitment of money.

2

Preparation & design

The proposal is worked into a defined scope, budget and results framework, usually by the recipient with donor technical support.

3

Appraisal

A team independent of the design assesses technical, financial, economic, social and environmental soundness before money is committed.

4

Approval

The decision to commit funds is taken by the body that holds authority for the institution: a board, a minister, or a committee.

5

Implementation & disbursement

Funds move, usually in tranches tied to milestones rather than as one lump sum, while the recipient executes the agreed activities.

6

Monitoring

Ongoing tracking against the results framework, feeding corrective action during implementation rather than only after it.

7

Completion & evaluation

A closing account records what was delivered. Often, a separate independent unit also assesses what difference it made.

Step Documents exchanged or requested Agents
1 Identification
  • Concept note
  • Country strategy
  • Recipient government
  • Donor country office
2 Preparation & design
  • Feasibility study
  • Design document
  • Recipient ministry
  • Donor technical staff
  • Consultants
3 Appraisal
  • Appraisal report
  • Appraisal team
  • Safeguards/environmental specialists
4 Approval
  • Approval decision
  • Financing agreement
  • Governing board or approving authority
5 Implementation & disbursement
  • Disbursement request
  • Progress/status report
  • Implementing agency
  • Donor supervision team
6 Monitoring
  • Monitoring report
  • Mid-term review
  • Implementing agency
  • Donor monitoring staff
7 Completion & evaluation
  • Completion report
  • Evaluation report
  • Implementing agency
  • Independent evaluation unit
Multilateral

World Bank Project Cycle

World Bank

Applies to IPF (Investment Project Financing); the Bank also runs Program-for-Results (PforR) and Development Policy Financing (DPF) instruments with adapted document sets, noted where they diverge.

6 stages
1 Identification 2 Preparation 3 Appraisal 4 Negotiation & Approval 5 Implementation & Support 6 Completion & Evaluation
1

Identification

The Borrower proposes the project, aligned with its own development priorities and the Bank's Country Partnership Framework for that country.

2

Preparation

The Borrower, with Bank support, works out design, cost and implementation arrangements, including required safeguard instruments.

3

Appraisal

The Borrower and the Bank jointly review the work from Identification and Preparation before finalising legal and financial terms.

4

Negotiation & Approval

Loan/credit terms are negotiated, then the finalized document goes to the Bank's Board of Executive Directors for approval.

5

Implementation & Support

The Borrower executes the project; Bank staff provide implementation support rather than run it directly.

6

Completion & Evaluation

A completion report is compiled with Borrower input; the Bank's Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) conducts separate validation on a sample of projects.

Step Documents exchanged or requested Agents
5 Implementation & Support
  • Borrower implementing agency
  • Bank task team
6 Completion & Evaluation
  • Bank task team
  • Borrower government
  • Independent Evaluation Group

Source: worldbank.org/en/projects-operations/products-and-services/brief/projectcycle

Multilateral

IMF Lending & Conditionality Cycle

International Monetary Fund

A balance-of-payments financing cycle, not a project cycle. Money supports a government's macroeconomic program and is tracked against policy conditions rather than physical deliverables. Facility used (SBA, EFF, SCF, ECF under the concessional PRGT, or the rapid RCF/RFI for emergencies) determines the terms but not this basic sequence.

7 stages
1 Request 2 Program negotiation 3 Staff-level agreement 4 Executive Board approval 5 Conditionality & tranche release 6 Program reviews 7 Program completion / Ex-post evaluation
1

Request

The member country requests Fund support, typically after informal staff-level consultation on the likely program shape.

2

Program negotiation

IMF staff and the authorities agree the policy package. It covers fiscal, monetary, exchange-rate and structural measures the country will commit to.

3

Staff-level agreement

IMF staff and the authorities reach agreement, subject to IMF Management and Executive Board approval. This is a public signal before the formal decision.

4

Executive Board approval

The Fund's 24-member Executive Board approves the arrangement and the size/access of the facility.

5

Conditionality & tranche release

Funds are released in installments (purchases/drawings), each gated by policy conditions rather than a single approval.

6

Program reviews

Periodic (often quarterly) reviews check whether conditions were met; passing a review unlocks the next tranche.

7

Program completion / Ex-post evaluation

At the arrangement's end, and independently for larger or exceptional-access programs, the Fund's own evaluators assess outcomes.

Step Documents exchanged or requested Agents
1 Request
  • Member government (Ministry of Finance, central bank)
  • IMF Area Department
7 Program completion / Ex-post evaluation
  • IMF staff
  • Independent Evaluation Office (IEO)

Source: imf.org, "IMF Conditionality" and "IMF Lending" factsheets; published country Letters of Intent

Bilateral

USAID Program Cycle

USAID

Governed by ADS Chapter 201. It is distinct from the World Bank's cycle despite sharing the term "Project Appraisal Document". USAID's version is a design document for a Mission-level Project, not a Board paper.

6 stages
1 Country strategic planning 2 Project design 3 Activity design & procurement 4 Implementation & CLA 5 Portfolio review 6 Evaluation
1

Country strategic planning

A Mission sets its multi-year strategic direction for a country, typically a five-year horizon.

2

Project design

Defines how a group of Activities will jointly achieve a Development Objective from the CDCS, with an evidence base and a learning/evaluation plan built in from the start.

3

Activity design & procurement

Individual Activities implementing the Project are designed and competed for award.

4

Implementation & CLA

Activities are executed by awarded implementing partners under continuous Collaborating, Learning and Adapting (CLA). Adjustment is based on evidence, not just end-of-project review.

5

Portfolio review

Periodic Mission-level review of how the Project portfolio as a whole is tracking against the CDCS.

6

Evaluation

Performance and, for larger or higher-risk activities, impact evaluations assess results against the AMELP.

Step Documents exchanged or requested Agents
1 Country strategic planning
  • USAID Mission
  • US Embassy
  • Host-country government (consulted)

Source: usaid.gov, ADS Chapter 201, "Program Cycle Operational Policy"

Bilateral

FCDO Programme Cycle

UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office

Runs on HM Treasury's Green Book "Five Case Model" for the Business Case, inside FCDO's own Programme Operating Framework (PrOF), which sets the roles, gates and review points.

7 stages
1 Concept 2 Business Case 3 Approval 4 Implementation 5 Annual Review 6 Project Completion Review 7 Independent scrutiny
1

Concept

An initial problem definition and options screen is scaled to the size of the intervention. The smallest programmes may skip straight to a single combined Business Case.

2

Business Case

The core appraisal document, built on the Treasury Green Book's Five Case Model: Strategic, Economic, Commercial, Financial and Management cases.

3

Approval

Sign-off authority scales with programme value, from delegated country-office approval up to Ministerial or Treasury approval for the largest programmes.

4

Implementation

Delivery, usually through commercial suppliers or multilateral partners rather than direct FCDO delivery.

5

Annual Review

A yearly formal check on performance against the Business Case, scoring progress and risk.

6

Project Completion Review

A closing assessment once delivery ends, feeding FCDO's corporate results reporting.

7

Independent scrutiny

The Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI) reviews FCDO programmes and the operating framework itself, outside FCDO's own management line.

Step Documents exchanged or requested Agents
2 Business Case
  • FCDO programme team
  • Senior Responsible Owner (SRO)

Source: gov.uk, Green Book business case guidance; FCDO Programme Operating Framework; Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI) reviews

Private sector / DFI

IFC Investment Project Cycle

International Finance Corporation (representative of DFI/private-sector project finance)

Finances companies and projects on commercial or near-commercial terms rather than a government. There is no policy-conditionality track, so the gates are financial, environmental/social and reputational risk.

8 stages
1 Business Development 2 Early Review 3 Appraisal (due diligence) 4 Investment Review 5 Public disclosure 6 Board Review & Approval 7 Commitment & Disbursement 8 Supervision & Evaluation
1

Business Development

IFC investment staff identify a prospective client and opportunity aligned with its strategic priorities.

2

Early Review

A first internal screen of the deal, IFC's proposed role, expected development impact and any foreseeable deal-breakers, before authorizing full appraisal.

3

Appraisal (due diligence)

The investment team assesses business, financial, environmental and social risk in depth, including site visits.

4

Investment Review

Post-due-diligence internal review of the deal and negotiation of financing terms.

5

Public disclosure

The project is disclosed publicly for a fixed period before going to IFC's Board.

6

Board Review & Approval

IFC's Board approves the investment on economic, financial and development-value grounds.

7

Commitment & Disbursement

Legal agreements are signed; funds are typically disbursed in stages tied to conditions in the loan agreement rather than as one payment.

8

Supervision & Evaluation

Ongoing monitoring of financial, social and environmental performance against the loan agreement through the life of the investment, through to closing.

Step Documents exchanged or requested Agents
3 Appraisal (due diligence)
  • Investment team
  • Environmental & social specialists
4 Investment Review
  • Investment Review Committee
7 Commitment & Disbursement
  • IFC legal counsel
  • Client company
8 Supervision & Evaluation
  • IFC portfolio/supervision team
  • Independent Evaluation Group (evaluates a sample)

Source: ifc.org/en/what-we-do/products-and-services/ifc-project-cycle

Shared standard

OECD DAC Evaluation Criteria

OECD Development Assistance Committee

Not a cycle stage. This is a shared vocabulary applied at the evaluation stage of every cycle above. It was revised by the DAC Network on Development Evaluation (EvalNet) in 2019, adding Coherence to the original five.

6 stages
1 Relevance 2 Coherence 3 Effectiveness 4 Efficiency 5 Impact 6 Sustainability
1

Relevance

Is the intervention doing the right thing? Alignment with beneficiary needs, country priorities, and partner/donor policies.

2

Coherence

How well does it fit with other interventions in a country, sector or institution? This criterion was added in the 2019 revision to capture interactions other criteria missed.

3

Effectiveness

Did the intervention achieve, or is it expected to achieve, its objectives, including for different groups?

4

Efficiency

Did it deliver results economically and on time, relative to the resources used.

5

Impact

The higher-level effects the intervention produced or contributed to, intended and unintended.

6

Sustainability

Whether the benefits are likely to continue after the intervention ends.

Step Documents exchanged or requested Agents

Source: OECD, "Better Criteria for Better Evaluation" (DCD/DAC(2019)58/FINAL)

Verification map

Where the sector leaves evidence

A complete sector reading compares flow databases, institution documents, recipient country records, procurement evidence and evaluations. No single source sees the whole chain.

About this page Reference content is transcribed from each institution's own published operational policy. Nothing here is queried from the aid ledger on the other pages.

World Bank: "The Project Cycle", worldbank.org. IMF: "IMF Conditionality" and "IMF Lending" factsheets and published country Letters of Intent, imf.org. OECD: "Better Criteria for Better Evaluation" (DCD/DAC(2019)58/FINAL). USAID: ADS Chapter 201, "Program Cycle Operational Policy". UK FCDO: HM Treasury Green Book Five Case Model and the FCDO Programme Operating Framework, gov.uk; Independent Commission for Aid Impact reviews. IFC: "IFC Project Cycle", ifc.org.