What should a funder report prove?
It should prove what the organization agreed to report, how each result was defined and calculated, which period and population it covers, where the evidence comes from, and who reviewed the final submission.
For a federal award, record retention has a federal baseline, while award terms and other requirements may add obligations. Sensitive recovery information also needs an applicability and disclosure analysis before participant-level or small-cell data is shared.[1][2]
Which parts of the award should become structured rules?
Convert narrative requirements into a reporting dictionary with owners, sources, dates, calculations, evidence, approvals, and change control. Do not wait until the due date to decide what a measure means.
| Criterion | How to evaluate it |
|---|---|
| Deliverable | Report name, recipient, format, reporting period, due date, owner, approver, and submission evidence. |
| Measure | Exact label, definition, inclusion, exclusion, numerator, denominator, target, disaggregation, and version. |
| Source | Participant, service, workforce, financial, survey, referral, or external record with data owner and quality check. |
| Privacy | Authority, consent or notice when applicable, minimum necessary detail, small-cell rule, access, secure transfer, and retention. |
| Narrative | Context, participant voice with appropriate permission, implementation facts, barriers, learning, and limitations. |
| Approval | Program, data, finance, privacy, legal or compliance, communications, and executive review as appropriate. |
How should a report reconcile to source data?
Freeze the reporting period, preserve the query or calculation, reconcile counts and spending, sample source records, explain adjustments, and retain the submitted version with approval and receipt evidence.
| Workflow moment | What good looks like | Evidence to request |
|---|---|---|
| Award map | Requirement tied to measure, owner, source, and due date | Approved reporting dictionary |
| Data extract | Versioned population and source fields for the period | Reproducible query or export |
| Quality review | Duplicates, missingness, outliers, late records, and exclusions | Issue log and approved resolution |
| Calculation | Numerator, denominator, target, comparison, and rounding | Independent reproduction |
| Submission | Final file, narrative, attachments, approvers, transmission, receipt, and correction history | Immutable or controlled record package |
What should reporting software demonstrate?
Test a mid-period definition change, a late record, a participant who declines a measure, a multi-site total, a small subgroup, and a corrected submission.
- Can the report preserve the measure definition and calculation used for each historical period?
- Can outputs, participant outcomes, financial activity, and narrative evidence remain distinct but connected?
- Can reviewers trace every total to included records and see why other records were excluded?
- How are small cells, sensitive fields, exports, recipients, approvals, and secure transmission controlled?
- Can the organization export definitions, source data, approvals, and submitted versions when the agreement ends?
What makes a report credible?
Credibility comes from stable definitions, traceable evidence, appropriate privacy, transparent limitations, and accountable review, not from selecting only the most favorable numbers.
Avoid causal claims the evaluation design cannot support, explain missing and changed data, and preserve both successes and barriers. When award language is ambiguous, document the clarification from the authorized funder contact rather than inventing an interpretation inside the software.
Frequently asked questions
Should participant stories be included?
Only through an approved, ethical process with appropriate permission and privacy protection. A participant should not feel that services or benefits depend on providing a public story.
Can a dashboard screenshot serve as the report?
Only if the funder accepts it and the underlying definition, period, population, source, review, and retention requirements are still met. A screenshot alone may not be reproducible.
How should missing follow-up data be reported?
Show the eligible denominator and distinguish declined, not reached, not due, invalid, and unknown when possible. Do not silently remove missing cases or treat them as zero.
How long should grant records be retained?
Follow the exact award, applicable federal or state requirements, litigation or audit holds, and organization policy. Federal awards have a baseline in 2 CFR 200.334, with exceptions and possible additional terms.
Sources and product pages
Government sources establish the legal and program requirements covered here. Official vendor pages document the product capabilities and positioning used in this guide.
- 2 CFR 200.334: Retention Requirements for Records: Electronic Code of Federal Regulations. Federal award record-retention baseline. Award terms and other laws may impose additional rules.
- Understanding Confidentiality of Substance Use Disorder Records: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Official federal overview of 42 CFR Part 2 applicability, consent, use, disclosure, and breach obligations.
- Understand: Dashboards, Outcomes, and Reporting: Peerakeet. Peerakeet dashboards, outcome measures, exports, and funder reporting.