Funding reviews as a governance tool; guidance for international sports governing bodies

As international sport continues to expand its global reach, so too does the responsibility of international sports governing bodies to ensure that the funding they disburse is used effectively, transparently, and for its intended purpose. Whether supporting grassroots development, high-performance programmes, or institutional capacity-building, funding is a powerful tool — but only if it is well-managed.

While internal monitoring and audits play a role, independent external reviews are increasingly seen as a best-practice approach to assessing the use and impact of international funding. Done well, these reviews can strengthen trust, improve governance, and ensure that funds are truly serving the purpose for which they are intended.

As outlined in our previously published articles — The Power of Funding Reviews: Why International Sports Governing Bodies Should Review Funding Given to Local Federations and Common Issues Identified in Reviews of Funds Given by International Sports Governing Bodies to Local Federations — and How to Address Them — these reviews are not just technical exercises. They are essential governance tools that reveal systemic challenges such as poor financial controls, weak oversight, and lack of alignment between funding and outcomes whilst also improving transparency, driving reform, and strengthening trust across the sport ecosystem.

But what should an independent external review actually involve?

This article offers a strategic overview to international sports governing bodies on how and when to request external independent funding reviews, what these reviews should include, and how they can contribute to a culture of financial integrity and good governance.
 

When to Request a Review of Funds

While some reviews can be scheduled regularly, others may be triggered by specific conditions. Key moments to consider requesting an external review include:

• End of a Project: To assess how funds were used, what was achieved, and what lessons can be applied to future projects.
• During a Long-Term Funding Cycle: Where the funding cycle is more than two years, a review should be requested during the funding cycle to ensure that issues are identified on a timely basis and remedial actions taken accordingly, rather than at the end of the funding cycle.
• Prior to Renewing Funding: As part of due diligence before extending or increasing funding.
• Post-Crisis or Allegation: In response to concerns about financial mismanagement, corruption, or underperformance.
• Capacity-Building Initiatives: To inform technical support or institutional development planning.
• First-Time Funding Relationships: To establish a baseline assessment of governance, financial and operational readiness.

 

How to Commission an External Independent Review: Defining the Agreed-Upon Procedures (AUPs)

The effectiveness of any independent review hinges on the clarity and mutual understanding of what is being assessed. This is why agreed-upon procedures (AUPs) are essential. These procedures establish the review’s framework and clearly communicate the expectations of the international sports governing body to the external reviewers as well as the local federations being reviewed.

Key elements of AUPs should include:

• Defining the Scope and Objectives: It is essential to precisely define what the review will cover. Objectives should specify the key questions the review aims to answer and the criteria against which performance will be measured. Will the review focus on the funding of a specific programme? Or will it focus on the local federation’s overall use of all the funding received from the governing body?
• Defining the Timeframe: The exact funding periods or programme cycles to be reviewed should be specified. This could be a single fiscal year, multiple years, or the duration of a particular programme. Clear time boundaries help reviewers collect relevant data and contextualise findings.
• Establishing Criteria and Standards: To ensure that reviews are consistent, it is essential to establish clear criteria and standards. These standards act as the yardstick for measuring compliance, effectiveness, and impact. E.g. the review should ensure compliance with the international sports governing body’s funding regulations.
• Specifying Methodology and Data Requirements: The methods to be used during the review should be outlined — such as document review, interviews with key stakeholders and performing site visits. The AUPs should also clearly list what information, documents, and access to personnel the local federation must provide, ensuring openness and collaboration throughout the process.
• Defining Roles and Responsibilities: The procedures should specify the roles of all parties involved — the international sports governing body commissioning the review, the local federation being reviewed, and the independent external reviewer conducting the work. This includes defining who oversees the review process, who approves the final report, and how disputes or challenges will be handled.
• Agreeing on Timelines and Deliverables: A clear timetable for the review’s completion, including interim updates and final deliverables, should be agreed upon to manage expectations and keep the process on track

 

What a Good Review Should Deliver

The final outcome of an independent external funding review is the review report — an essential document that conveys the findings and recommendations in a clear, transparent, and actionable manner. The value of the review depends heavily on how well this report is structured and communicated. A well-crafted report serves as both a diagnostic tool and a roadmap for improvement.

Key components of an effective review report include:

a. Overview and Context 

• A brief, high-level summary capturing the purpose, scope, key findings, and a snapshot of the financial impact on the funding to provide decision-makers with a quick understanding of the situation at the local federation being reviewed.
• Background information outlining the agreed-upon procedures, the timeframe under review, and any relevant contextual information about the local federation and funding provided by the international sports governing body.

 

b. Detailed Findings

• For each issue identified, a finding should be raised, in line with the agreed-upon procedures and the governing regulations.
• Each finding should be evidence-based, clearly explaining what was expected, what was observed, and the implications of any gaps.
• Any financial impact on the funding should be included in the finding, detailing the exact amount affected.
• Details of specific transactions including invoice numbers and the local federation’s references should be provided as this underpins the specific findings raised. It also gives the local federation the opportunity to check the specific transactions where issues have been identified and provide any clarifications, if required. These details can be provided in appendices to ensure transparency without overloading the main report.

 

c. Recommendations and Best Practices

Recommendations should be practical, clear, and actionable, directly linked to the findings. Each recommendation should:

• Address specific issues or risks identified.
• Assign responsibility to relevant parties (e.g., local federation management).
• Be tailored to the size and local context of the local federation.
• Ensure that it is in line with best practice.

 

By structuring the report in this comprehensive manner, the review delivers meaningful insights that empower international sports governing bodies and local federations to make informed decisions, foster accountability, and drive sustainable improvements in how funding is managed and utilised.
 

Post-Review: Acting on the Results

Commissioning a review is only the first step. What follows is equally important. The governing body should:

• Engage with the Local Federation: Share the findings and recommendations, invite responses, and encourage the development of a collaborative action plan. 
• Monitor Implementation: Set timelines for follow-up actions, and consider technical support where needed.
• Adjust Funding or Conditions: Use the review as a tool to inform future funding decisions — including recognition for strong governance or additional oversight for high-risk recipients.
• Communicate Transparently: Share key findings (where appropriate) with stakeholders to demonstrate accountability.

 

Embedding External Reviews into Sports Governance Best Practice

Requesting external independent funding reviews should not be viewed as a punitive or reactive step. Rather, they are a strategic governance tool, enabling international sports governing bodies to ensure their funds deliver impact, strengthen local federations, and uphold the integrity of their sport globally.

In a time when sport must meet the highest standards of ethics, transparency, and social impact, external reviews provide a structured, reliable pathway to achieving these goals.

By embedding them into funding strategies and governance frameworks, international sports governing bodies can build a more resilient, responsible, and respected sporting movement.
 

About the Author

Sandrine Woo is a Director in BDO LLP’s International Institutions and Donor Assurance (IIDA) team, BDO’s global centre of excellence for supporting global grant-makers. Each year the IIDA team performs over 5,000 engagements for a range of grant-makers, delivering fieldwork in more than 170 countries/territories. One of the specialisations of the IIDA team is international sports governance and funding accountability. With over [20] years of specialist expertise, BDO is dedicated to promoting transparency, accountability and impact in global sport development.