Over the past decade, significant progress has been made in strengthening data systems to support SDG monitoring. In 2025, a comprehensive review of the global indicator framework ‒ endorsed by the Statistical Commission ‒ introduced key updates to better reflect today’s challenges, including climate change, inequalities and digital transformation. These changes have improved the ability of countries to track progress and to develop evidence-based policies.

When the SDG monitoring framework was first established in 2016, only one third of indicators had good data coverage, and 39 per cent lacked internationally agreed methodologies. Today, almost 70 per cent have good coverage, and all 234 indicators now have well-established methodologies.

SDG data availability shows encouraging overall progress between 2019 and 2025 but with persistent gaps in key areas. Goal 3 (Good health and well-being), Goal 6 (Clean water and sanitation), and Goal 7 (Affordable and clean energy) demonstrate substantial improvements, with Goal 7 achieving the highest coverage at over 80 per cent. However, Goal 5 (Gender equality), Goal 13 (Climate action), Goal 14 (Life below water), and Goal 16 (Peace, justice and strong institutions) continue to lag significantly, at below 40 per cent coverage. These disparities highlight critical blind spots in monitoring, revealing the priority development areas that require targeted investment as 2030 approaches.

According to The PARIS21 Partner Report on Support to Statistics 2024, between 2015 and 2022, international financial support to data increased by about 50 per cent in real terms from $586 million to $875 million. Such support targeted specific projects for data and statistics in low- and middle-income countries. While the funding from members of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has remained stagnant over the years, contributions from private foundations, multilateral organizations and non-DAC countries have grown.

However, this upward trajectory is now under threat. The overall downward trend in total official development assistance (ODA) from 2023 to 2025 raises concern that international support for data and statistics will likely face similar declines, threatening the progress of data-driven development. This trend is compounded by the fragile financing structure for data, which remains heavily dependent on a small group of major funders. In 2022, nine funders provided approximately 70 per cent of all financial support for data and statistics. The World Bank contributed the largest share (26 per cent), followed by the United States of America (14 per cent), and the Inter-American Development Bank (10 per cent).

A robust and sustainable financing system for data and statistics must move away from funder-driven, project-based models towards country-led, system-strengthening approaches. This transition requires Governments to increase domestic investment in their data and statistical systems. However, many countries ‒ particularly the low- and lower-middle-income ones ‒ face significant fiscal constraints, limiting their ability to allocate adequate domestic resources.

According to information collected by the Inter-Secretariat Working Group on Household Surveys, which covers 246 household surveys planned in 65 countries for the 2024–2025 period, over 90 per cent of these surveys in low-income countries rely on external sources, compared to around 20 per cent in middle- and high-income countries. Similarly, an analysis of 39 national strategies for the development of statistics (NSDSs) with detailed budget designations showed that most low- and middle-income countries rely on external funders to support their gender-data activities.

The fragility of data financing is well-illustrated after the abrupt termination of funding from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in February 2025, which led to the suspension of the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS). This has exposed the risks faced by data systems that depend heavily on external funders, and it now threatens the production of critical data needed to monitor progress on multiple SDG indicators.

The significance of this disruption becomes clear when considering that, according to a survey of the SDG custodian agencies, data from the DHS has been utilized to varying degrees for 39 SDG indicators for global reporting since 2015. The suspension of the DHS has had varying impacts for different goals. Goal 3 (Good health and well-being) is the most affected, with 11 indicators using DHS data, followed by Goal 5 (Gender equality) with six indicators and Goal 2 (Zero hunger) with five indicators.

Moreover, the degree of reliance on DHS data differs across these 39 SDG indicators, with some drawing a large share of their data points from the DHS, making them particularly vulnerable to disruptions in data collection. The chart below highlights five SDG indicators that have the greatest dependence on DHS data. Since 2015, 70 per cent of the data points on contraceptive use (SDG indicator 5.6.1) and experiences of sexual violence (SDG 16.2.3) have come from the DHS. It has also provided over 50 per cent of the data points on female genital mutilation (SDG 5.3.2), the urban population living in slums (SDG 11.1.1), and the population living in households with basic services (SDG 1.4.1). The impact is particularly severe for countries in sub-Saharan Africa and least developed countries (LDCs).

The termination of the DHS programme is just one example of the broader vulnerabilities created by fragile funding mechanisms in national data and statistics systems. A May 2025 survey of national statistical offices (NSOs) revealed that countries heavily reliant on external funding reported being significantly affected by funding reductions earlier in the year. In addition to the DHS, numerous household surveys and statistical operations were adversely affected.

These disruptions highlight the risks of building national data systems highly dependent on external funding. Sustainable and resilient national data systems require a strong commitment to national ownership. This means that countries define their own data priorities that are aligned with national development goals; and support through robust institutional capacity.

Strategic planning instruments play a critical role in helping countries establish these priorities. Annual and multi-annual statistical plans, along with NSDSs, provide both operational guidance and long-term strategic direction. As of 2023, 79 per cent of countries reported using an annual or multi-annual statistical plan, and 54 per cent had adopted an NSDS.

Equally important is the coordination capacity of NSOs, which is key to translating these plans into action. Effective coordination enables stakeholders across the national data ecosystem to work together under a shared governance framework for statistics. However, in 2023, fewer than half of the NSOs reported being satisfied with their ability to coordinate with partners within the national statistical system. The situation was even more challenging in low- and lower-middle-income countries, where only 26 per cent of NSOs expressed satisfaction with their coordination capacity.

Coordination capability of NSOs beyond the national statistical system remains limited. While nearly all countries reported working with public institutions, only 50 per cent of NSOs partnered with the private sector, 64 per cent with academia and just 42 per cent with civil society organizations.

Proportion of national statistical offices satisfied with their ability to coordinate with partners within the national statistical systems, by income grouping, 2023 (percentage)

While national ownership is essential in setting and owning the data agenda, many countries ‒ particularly low- and lower-middle-income nations ‒ continue to face significant technical constraints. These are reflected in the priority areas that countries have identified within three key domains: statistical operations, internal organizational functioning and key technical areas. Within statistical operations the use of administrative data and survey programmes emerged as top priorities. When looking at the internal functioning of NSOs, investment in information and communications technology (ICT) infrastructure and staff training were identified as the most pressing needs. On the technical front countries highlighted data quality assurance and coordination across the national statistical system as critical areas where capacity must be strengthened.

As countries work to strengthen their statistical capacity, addressing these priority areas requires strong and sustained support from the international community. This support must be coordinated, predictable and aligned with country-defined priorities; meanwhile, it should be anchored in principles of mutual accountability, and it should aim for long-term, system-wide strengthening.