Integrated Security Fund annual report 2025 to 2026 (HTML)
Published 4 November 2026
© Crown copyright 2026
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/integrated-security-fund-annual-report-2025-to-2026/integrated-security-fund-annual-report-2025-to-2026-html
Introduction
Ministerial Foreword
The United Kingdom faces a national security environment of growing complexity. The threat from state-linked actors, terrorists and organised criminals is evolving rapidly, while technological change is creating new vulnerabilities alongside new opportunities. Threats that originate overseas increasingly have direct consequences for our security, prosperity and way of life at home.
In this environment, government must step up its response to ensure it can continue to deal with the threats the country faces. The Integrated Security Fund (ISF) has an important role in enabling that response.
“The ISF brings together the capabilities, expertise and partnerships needed to counter and combat the threats to the UK’s national security.”
This Annual Report demonstrates the breadth and practical impact of the Fund’s work during 2025/26. Through investment across more than 20 government departments and agencies, the ISF supported activity to strengthen security at home, build the resilience of our international partners and develop the sovereign capabilities the UK needs for the future.
The results set out here are significant. ISF programmes strengthened cyber protection across public bodies and critical national infrastructure; disrupted criminal networks and malicious digital infrastructure; supported Ukraine and partners facing Russian aggression; improved maritime, border and economic security; and enhanced our preparedness for biological and other emerging threats. The Fund also invested in the skills, technology and partnerships that will underpin our national resilience in the years ahead.
During the year, we also began to streamline the Fund, strengthen oversight and align investment more closely with the priorities of the National Security Strategy 2025. These reforms will ensure that the ISF is simpler, more focused and better able to direct resources towards the most acute threats facing the UK.
I am grateful to everyone across government and beyond who has contributed to this work. Protecting the country is a shared endeavour, and we will continue to pursue it with determination, vigilance and purpose.
Dan Jarvis MBE MP
Minister of State for Security
Foreword by the Senior Responsible Owner
National security challenges do not respect borders. The threats we face are increasingly interconnected, with events overseas having direct implications for the United Kingdom’s security, prosperity and resilience. Addressing them requires government to work across departmental, disciplinary and geographic boundaries.
The Integrated Security Fund exists to support that mission. By bringing together expertise from across government and working closely with international partners, the Fund enables the UK to respond to evolving threats with agility, innovation and purpose.
I became Senior Responsible Owner for the Fund in December 2025 and have been struck by both the breadth of its activity and the professionalism of those responsible for delivering it. This report demonstrates how the Fund has supported action across a wide range of national security priorities, from strengthening cyber security, to countering organised crime, supporting Ukraine, and investing in capabilities that will be critical to the UK’s future security.
The Fund’s value lies not only in what it funds, but in how it operates. The ISF provides a mechanism for departments and agencies to work together, test new approaches and learn quickly in response to an increasingly complex security environment. It also enables preventative action, helping to address threats upstream before they have a direct impact on the UK.
During 2025/26, we began work to streamline the Fund and align it more closely with the priorities set out in the National Security Strategy. A more focused and coherent Fund will strengthen accountability, improve impact and ensure resources are directed towards the most pressing national security challenges.
I am grateful to colleagues, our international partners and the many organisations who contribute to this work. Their expertise, commitment and collaboration are essential to delivering the outcomes described in this report.
Dame Barbara Woodward GCMG OBE
Deputy National Security Adviser (International)
About the Integrated Security Fund
The Integrated Security Fund (ISF) is the UK Government’s cross‑government fund tackling the highest‑priority threats to UK national security at home and overseas. 2025/26 was the Fund’s second year of operation following its establishment in April 2024 to bring together domestic and overseas national security programming.
The ISF plays a unique role in the national security system by providing funding for the delivery of key national security strategies beyond the core budgets of departments to be used for innovative programming that embodies the ISF principles:
- Integration: the ISF supports integration by blending Official Development Assistance (ODA) and non-ODA funding and drawing together government departments, agencies and external experts to co-design and co-deliver UK and overseas programmes
- Agility: the ISF can reprioritise funding to respond quickly to changing situations and shifts in UK national security priorities. The Fund’s agility and drive for innovation allows it to act as a platform to test new responses to emerging challenges
- Catalytic effect: ISF programmes aim to have catalytic effect through interventions designed to establish best practice or trial solutions which can then be picked up at scale by relevant government departments. ISF-funded programmes have frequently succeeded in attracting additional support from international partners or, in areas such as cyber security, from the private sector
- High-risk: the ISF encourages programmes to test new, innovative approaches in response to threats and opportunities, balanced by prudent risk management. High-risk tolerance means that the ISF uses experimental approaches, learns lessons quickly and continues to innovate
The ISF allocates money via cross-government governance structures that bring departments together to design, deliver and oversee programming that delivers on key UK national security priorities, supporting delivery of the National Security Strategy 2025. This includes a combination of activity to both strengthen domestic resilience and security, and to support our partners and protect British interests overseas.
In 2025/26, the ISF invested £802.63 million through integrated programmes across over 20 government departments and agencies. Of this, ODA funding constituted £219.94 million (27.4%) and non-ODA £582.69 million (72.6%).
FY2025/26 marked the start of a process to streamline the ISF and ensure it remains well positioned to support the UK’s evolving national security priorities and the focus of the National Security Strategy. During the year, the Fund began consolidating its portfolios, reducing administrative complexity and improving coherence across programmes. This created opportunities to direct resources more effectively, strengthen oversight and maximise the impact of ISF investment. These changes laid the foundations for the governance reforms to be introduced in 2026/27, providing a simpler and more agile structure to support strategic decision-making and the effective delivery of national security objectives.
From 2026/27, ISF allocations will prioritise five strategic areas: countering Russia, Middle-East and North Africa, threats emanating from the Asia-Pacific region, serious and organised crime including immigration crime, and terrorism. Alongside these, the ISF will continue to invest in cross-cutting sovereign capabilities in four areas - cyber and technology, biosecurity, counter-state threats, and economic security. These priorities align directly with the National Security Strategy and reflect the need to harden the UK against hostile actors while supporting stability overseas.
Chapter 1: Delivering the National Security Strategy
Pillar (i) - Security at Home
ISF programming strengthened the UK’s domestic resilience by reducing upstream risks, dismantling criminal and state enablers, and enhancing the security of institutions whose vulnerabilities can directly affect the UK.
The UK faces an increasingly complex and evolving cyber threat landscape, with risks ranging from ransomware attacks on critical national infrastructure to state-sponsored campaigns targeting democratic institutions. The ISF funded the Government Cyber Coordination Centre (GC3) to improve cross-government cyber security facilitating real-time cyber threat intelligence sharing between over 200 cyber defenders from across 69 public bodies, giving local authorities and service providers earlier visibility of malicious activity and helping them reduce the risk of disruptive attacks. Complementary work with the National Protective Security Authority enhanced protective security across energy, telecoms and transport sectors through targeted audits, red‑team exercises and advanced threat‑modelling tools. This materially improved the UK’s ability to detect, deter and respond to state‑linked sabotage and espionage.
In 2025/26 the ISF bolstered long-term UK resilience to economic pressure through funding improved intelligence capabilities, data analysis and AI tools. This enabled the UK to anticipate and counter threats to critical supply chains, financial systems, and transport networks. This work strengthens UK security by improving the UK’s ability to foresee and counter economic threats through enhanced intelligence, data analysis, and AI-enabled monitoring of critical national systems.
The Fund also strengthened UK cyber and fraud resilience by tackling the international networks that support these crimes. Through upstream disruption efforts, law enforcement partners conducted large‑scale operations that removed malicious UK‑linked IP infrastructure, took down scam domains and helped recover £70 million and led to over 1,200 arrests. Across all activity, the ISF’s integrated and agile model allowed UK teams to combine domestic and international tools to prevent, contain and mitigate threats before they could undermine UK security.
Upstream disruption also helped prevent international threats from materialising on UK soil. ISF‑supported joint investigation teams in Kosovo contributed evidence used in 11 of the 13 designations on the UK Global Migration Sanctions List, disrupting networks used by organised crime groups targeting the UK. In Tunisia, ISF‑funded training for the National Maritime Guard and border authorities contributed to an 88% reduction in irregular arrivals to Italy, closing down a key corridor exploited by smuggling groups whose reach extends into Europe and the UK.
Pillar (ii) - Strength Abroad
ISF programmes also advanced UK national security by strengthening the ability of international partners to resist instability, hostile activity by foreign states, organised crime and terrorism reducing the risk of threats reaching the UK or undermining the wider rules‑based international world order.
The ISF continued to prioritise support to Ukraine and other partners in Eastern Europe and the Western Balkans in response to Russian aggression and state backed interference. This included wide-ranging support through security sector reform, enhancing Ukraine’s cybersecurity, countering Russian misinformation, and supporting the Government of Ukraine to deliver vital assistance and services to vulnerable communities near the frontline. Support to Ukraine also helped embed gender sensitivity standards into defence procurement for tens of thousands of servicewomen, improving operational effectiveness on Europe’s frontline against Russian aggression. ISF‑funded crisis‑preparedness initiatives in Latvia connected policymakers with local communities in the Latgale region, reducing vulnerabilities that could be exploited by hostile actors. In Central Asia, landmine clearance along the Tajikistan–Kyrgyzstan border restored safe access to land, mitigating sources of local tension and preventing malign actors from exploiting instability. This support strengthens UK security by bolstering the resilience of European and Central Asian partners against Russian aggression and hostile activity by foreign states, reducing regional instability that could threaten UK interests.
In the Middle East, the ISF delivered holistic programming tackling both the causes and symptoms of regional instability and provided support to vulnerable communities.
The Yemen Maritime Security Partnership united 36 states behind a coherent approach to coastguard reform, improving coastal security and disrupting illicit flows through the Bab al‑Mandeb, a vital shipping route for UK trade. In the West Bank, multi‑donor stabilisation support strengthened Palestinian Civil Defence across 20 high‑risk communities, improving emergency prepardness and first-response capabilities in areas affected by settler violence, movement restrictions and insecurity. Through ongoing ISF-funded programmes, the UK deepened cooperation with Lebanese security and justice institutions, advancing UK security objectives by strengthening Lebanese state sovereignty, stability and resilience. In response to the aftermath of the 2024 Israel-Hizballah conflict, ISF programmes supported the deployment of the Lebanese Armed Forces in South Lebanon and along the Lebanon-Syria border. UK assistance also enhanced the Lebanese Internal Security Forces’ ability to respond to security threats while promoting women’s leadership across government and security institutions. Together, these efforts strengthened UK security by building trusted, long-term partnerships that improve joint responses to terrorism and regional threats, while reinforcing the UK’s influence as a reliable and effective security partner.
In the Indo‑Pacific, ISF investment delivered meaningful gains for UK cyber and strategic interests. Through Defence Cyber Marvel 2026, the UK enabled Indonesia to deploy a significantly larger and more diverse cyber contingent to one of the world’s most sophisticated exercises. This helped strengthen regional resilience to state cyber threats that also target UK systems, while positioning the UK as Indonesia’s preferred partner on cyber security and opening new pathways for policy, operational and commercial engagement under the UK–Indonesia Strategic Partnership. Complementary economic‑security initiatives across Moldova, Armenia and Georgia disrupted illicit financial networks and strengthened regulatory defences against sanctions evasion, reducing opportunities for hostile actors to exploit gaps in regional markets linked to the UK economy.
Economic security programming across the Eastern Neighbourhood bolstered regulatory defences against illicit finance. In Armenia, ISF support catalysed the country’s first inter‑agency investment screening framework, while work in Georgia strengthened virtual‑asset supervision and raised international compliance standards to reduce exposure to sanctions‑evasion and cyber‑enabled crime. In Moldova, ISF‑supported investigations enabled authorities to open seven high‑value cases and secure approximately $700 million in seizures, closing gaps exploited by organised crime and hostile actors. Together, these efforts reduced the ability of malign actors to route illicit finance through markets connected to the UK.
Across Africa, stabilisation and security programmes tackled drivers of conflict and terrorism that have transnational reach. In Somalia, a UK‑facilitated coordination mechanism enabled rapid rehabilitation of the Sabid‑Anole river crossing - an essential supply route destroyed by al-Shabaab in 2025 - improving mobility and governance in areas contested by al‑Shabaab. In Nigeria, refurbishment of the national Explosive Ordnance Disposal School created a sustainable training hub that has already attracted around £1 million in donor funding. By improving partners’ capacity to counter explosive threats, ISF funding helps prevent terrorist and criminal networks from exploiting regional instability in ways that could threaten the UK. These efforts strengthened regional security architectures that ultimately reinforce UK and global safety.
Pillar (iii) - Increasing Sovereign & Asymmetric Capabilities
ISF investment in 2025/26 strengthened the UK’s sovereign resilience and capacity to counter asymmetric threats in cyber, technology, economic security and biosecurity, areas where state-linked actors are rapidly expanding their capabilities. Through advanced threat‑modelling, red‑team testing and targeted partnerships, ISF support helped harden UK critical national infrastructure against state sabotage. Work to counter foreign interference in UK academia strengthened early‑warning systems and reduced opportunities for hostile actors to influence research, governance or teaching in sensitive sectors.
ISF support for CyberFirst has strengthened the UK’s long-term cyber workforce pipeline, with the programme demonstrating expanding reach across the UK education system this year. The graduating cohort of CyberFirst bursary recipients (~100 students) achieved 100% employment, with 38% securing government cyber security roles and 49% entering industry. Building on this momentum, the newly expanded TechFirst programme saw a significant increase in its inaugural intake, issuing 318 conditional offers, a third of which were made to female candidates. This early investment ensures the UK retains the skills and sovereign capability required to meet future cyber and technological threats. An AI‑enabled Arctic monitoring pilot improved UK situational awareness in a strategically contested region, enhancing early‑warning systems for UK and NATO partners and reinforcing the UK’s ability to track state activity across complex environments.
The Fund also strengthened UK biosecurity preparedness through improved surveillance, early‑warning systems and cross‑government data integration, ensuring the UK can detect and respond to high‑impact biological threats more effectively. Across all activity, ISF investment helped reinforce the UK’s sovereign resilience, protect its technological edge and strengthen its ability to deter and counter emerging asymmetric threats.
In 2025/26 the ISF continued to provide high-impact technical and advisory support to national security efforts via the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) Helpdesk – a cross-government resource that focusses on building and providing capability to improve the integration of WPS and gender into programming and policy. This support enhances UK security by strengthening the government’s ability to integrate Women, Peace and Security considerations into national security policy and programming, improving the effectiveness and compliance of UK efforts at home and overseas.
Chapter 2: How the ISF Operates
ISF governance
Ministerial accountability to Parliament for the ISF lies with the Cabinet Office. The ISF’s Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) is the Deputy National Security Adviser for International Affairs. Oversight and management of the ISF is provided by the Integrated Security Fund Unit (ISFU) within the National Security Secretariat of the Cabinet Office.
The ISFU undertakes the following key functions:
- ensuring that the Fund delivered against national security priorities
- ensuring that programming represented value for money and demonstrated impact
- setting the operating framework that underpinned ISF programme design and delivery
- ensuring that programmes across the Fund followed government best practice and had the appropriate structures in place to manage their allocated funds and risks to a high standard
- providing extensive technical advisory support to the ISF network, including through the sharing of best practice and emphasis on lesson learning
ISF allocations
In 2025/26, the ISFU received bids for funding from UK government departments and existing ISF portfolios. Bids for funding had to demonstrate strategic alignment with UK National Security priorities and ISF principles, deliverability and impact.
After ISFU moderation, indicative allocations were agreed by National Security Council Ministers and Ministers with an ISF funding allocation and then approved by the Prime Minister.
ISF procurement
ISF programmes adhere to UK government procurement regulations and guidance and follow any additional processes set by the department from which they operate. The commercial case of the ISF Programme Document (Business Case) appraises and captures the mechanisms that will be employed to deliver the programme for example commercial contract, accountable grant agreement, MOU or direct delivery (in-house). For commercial contracts, the most appropriate route to market to deliver Value for Money is assessed in a sourcing strategy, but primarily a bespoke Commercial Framework (CSSF (ISF) Framework 2023) is used to source goods or services. Commercial decisions are all assured through proportionate departmental commercial governance, and as required, Ministerial approval.
Monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL)
A systematic and comprehensive approach to MEL is embedded throughout ISF programming to ensure that the ISF could improve delivery, strengthen value for money, demonstrate what it was achieving and show how the Fund contributed to UK national security priorities.
Gender
The ISF worked to ensure that gender analysis was incorporated into all project-level activities. All ISF programmes were required to score themselves against Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI) Markers, as a way of ensuring that gender issues are considered from the design stage. These used data points to measure gender equality and inclusion and allow the collection of evidence on the extent to which ISF programming is addressing the needs of women and girls.
Non-discretionary funding
In 2025/26 the ISF managed funding commitments linked to the UK’s international obligations, including mandatory assessed contributions for peacekeeping (to the UN, Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), and NATO) and Criminal Tribunals (the International Criminal Court (ICC), and the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (IRMCT)). This also included the net additional costs for UK troop deployments to UN Peacekeeping Missions, and the UK’s bilateral contribution to support the African Transition Mission in Somalia (ATMIS) and the UN Support Office in Somalia (UNSOS).
From 2026/27, the UK’s contributions to UN peacekeeping missions and other multilateral obligations will no longer be funded by the ISF. Instead, responsibility for these commitments transfers to the FCDO and MOD to enable the ISF to focus more sharply on its core purpose of tackling the most acute threats to UK national security and to align spending with the Fund’s more streamlined, strategically focused remit.
Annex A: ISF financial spend 2025/26
1. Spend by region or theme
Figure 1: Total spend
| Category | Spend (£m) | Spend (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Peacekeeping (Non-Discretionary) | 232.29 | 28.94 |
| Cyber and Technology | 112.05 | 13.96 |
| Eastern Europe & Central Asia (EECAD) | 96.12 | 11.98 |
| Middle East & North Africa (MENA) | 80.71 | 10.06 |
| Africa | 56.71 | 7.07 |
| Counter Terrorism | 33.72 | 4.20 |
| AUSSOM | 25.19 | 3.14 |
| Information Threats & Influence | 24.93 | 3.11 |
| Serious & Organised Crime | 24.52 | 3.06 |
| Western Balkans | 23.19 | 2.89 |
| Economic Deterrence Initiative | 17.86 | 2.22 |
| MoD Operations | 13.96 | 1.74 |
| Biological Security | 13.46 | 1.68 |
| Asia Pacific | 12.45 | 1.55 |
| Small-scale Standalone Programmes | 11.78 | 1.47 |
| ISF Unit | 9.92 | 1.24 |
| Migration | 8.92 | 1.11 |
| Gender & National Security | 4.32 | 0.54 |
| Peacekeeping (Discretionary) | 0.47 | 0.06 |
| Transition* | 0.04 | 0.00 |
| National Security Communications Team | 0.04 | 0.00 |
| Grand Total | 802.63 | 100 |
| *Closed FY2024/25; final payments pending |
Figure 2: Non-ODA spend
| Category | Spend (£m) | Spend (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Peacekeeping (Non-Discretionary) | 194.12 | 33.31 |
| Cyber and Technology | 106.75 | 18.32 |
| Middle East & North Africa | 49.27 | 8.46 |
| Eastern Europe & Central Asia | 40.97 | 7.03 |
| AUSSOM | 25.19 | 4.32 |
| Information Threats & Influence | 24.93 | 4.28 |
| Counter Terrorism | 23.78 | 4.08 |
| Africa | 20.34 | 3.49 |
| Economic Deterrence | 17.86 | 3.06 |
| MoD Operations | 13.96 | 2.40 |
| Biological Security | 13.46 | 2.31 |
| Small-scale Standalone Programmes | 10.17 | 1.75 |
| Serious & Organised Crime | 9.12 | 1.56 |
| ISF Unit | 7.69 | 1.32 |
| Asia Pacific | 7.43 | 1.27 |
| Migration | 6.25 | 1.07 |
| Western Balkans | 6.20 | 1.06 |
| Gender & National Security | 4.03 | 0.69 |
| Peacekeeping (Discretionary) | 0.47 | 0.08 |
| Transition* | 0.68 | 0.12 |
| National Security Communications Team | 0.04 | 0.01 |
| Grand Total | 582.69 | 100 |
| *Closed at end FY2024/25; final payments pending |
Figure 3: ODA spend
| Category | Spend (£m) | Spend (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Eastern Europe & Central Asia | 55.16 | 25.08 |
| Peacekeeping (Non-Discretionary) | 38.17 | 17.35 |
| Africa | 36.37 | 16.53 |
| Middle East & North Africa | 31.43 | 14.29 |
| Western Balkans | 16.99 | 7.73 |
| Serious & Organised Crime | 15.41 | 7.00 |
| Counter Terrorism | 9.94 | 4.52 |
| Cyber and Technology | 5.30 | 2.41 |
| Asia Pacific | 5.03 | 2.29 |
| Migration | 2.67 | 1.21 |
| ISF Unit | 2.24 | 1.02 |
| Small-scale Standalone Programmes | 1.61 | 0.73 |
| Gender & National Security | 0.28 | 0.13 |
| Transition* | -0.64 | -0.29 |
| Grand Total | 219.94 | 100 |
| *Closed FY2024/25; final payments pending |
2. Spend by department
Figure 4: Total spend by department or agency
| Department | Spend (£m) | Spend (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) | 648.04 | 80.74 |
| Ministry of Defence (MoD) | 46.08 | 5.74 |
| Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) | 32.01 | 3.99 |
| Home Office (HO) | 27.24 | 3.39 |
| Cabinet Office (CO) | 23.26 | 2.90 |
| National Crime Agency (NCA) | 6.54 | 0.82 |
| Department for Business and Trade (DBT) | 5.35 | 0.67 |
| UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) | 2.84 | 0.35 |
| Met Office | 2.29 | 0.29 |
| HM Treasury (HMT) | 1.68 | 0.21 |
| Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) | 1.43 | 0.18 |
| Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA) | 1.25 | 0.16 |
| Food Standards Agency (FSA) | 1.16 | 0.14 |
| Department for Transport (DfT) | 0.77 | 0.10 |
| Centre for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science (CEFAS) | 0.49 | 0.06 |
| Department for Education (DfE) | 0.42 | 0.05 |
| Defence Science & Technology Laboratory (DSTL) | 0.39 | 0.05 |
| Animal & Plant Health Agency (APHA) | 0.37 | 0.05 |
| Department of Health & Social Care (DHSC) | 0.34 | 0.04 |
| Department for Energy Security & Net Zero (DESNZ) | 0.31 | 0.04 |
| Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government (MHCLG) | 0.12 | 0.01 |
| Department of Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS) | 0.10 | 0.01 |
| UK Space Agency (UKSA) | 0.09 | 0.01 |
| HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) | 0.06 | 0.01 |
| Grand Total | 802.63 | 100 |
Figure 5: Non-ODA spend by department or agency
| Department | Non-ODA (£m) | Non-ODA (%) |
|---|---|---|
| FCDO | 442.89 | 76.01 |
| MoD | 43.74 | 7.51 |
| DSIT | 32.01 | 5.49 |
| Cabinet Office | 23.26 | 3.99 |
| Home Office | 15.64 | 2.68 |
| NCA | 6.12 | 1.05 |
| DBT | 5.35 | 0.92 |
| UKHSA | 2.84 | 0.49 |
| Met Office | 2.29 | 0.39 |
| HMT | 1.68 | 0.29 |
| VMD | 1.43 | 0.25 |
| DEFRA | 1.25 | 0.21 |
| FSA | 1.16 | 0.20 |
| CEFAS | 0.49 | 0.08 |
| DfE | 0.42 | 0.07 |
| DfT | 0.40 | 0.07 |
| DSTL | 0.39 | 0.07 |
| APHA | 0.37 | 0.06 |
| DHSC | 0.34 | 0.06 |
| DESNZ | 0.31 | 0.05 |
| MHCLG | 0.12 | 0.02 |
| DCMS | 0.10 | 0.02 |
| UK Space Agency | 0.09 | 0.02 |
| Grand Total | 582.69 | 100 |
Figure 6: ODA spend by department or agency
| Department | ODA (£m) | ODA (%) |
|---|---|---|
| FCDO | 205.15 | 93.28 |
| Home Office | 11.60 | 5.27 |
| MoD | 2.34 | 1.07 |
| NCA | 0.42 | 0.19 |
| DfT | 0.37 | 0.17 |
| HMRC | 0.06 | 0.03 |
| Grand Total | 219.94 | 100.00 |
ODA and Non-ODA
The 2025/26 total spend was split by £219.94 million (27.4%) of ODA and £582.69 million (72.6%) of non-ODA.
Discretionary and non-discretionary
Of the total 2025/26 spend of £802.63 million, £531.19 million (66.2%) was discretionary.
Non-discretionary spend consists of the continued funding of peacekeeping activities as part of UK membership to the various multilateral organisations, the UK’s troop deployments to UN Peacekeeping in Cyprus, and the UK commitment to AUSSOM and UNSOS (Somalia).
Of the total 2025/26 spend of £802.63 million, £271.44 million (33.8%) was non-discretionary. This included:
- assessed peacekeeping contributions (£232.29 million)
- Operational funds for the MOD (£13.96 million)
- AUSSOM and UNSOS (£25.19 million)
A breakdown of these figures is included in Annex B.
Annex B: ISF non-discretionary spend breakdown
| UN Peacekeeping / Multilateral Contributions | Total Spend | ODA Spend | Non-ODA Spend |
|---|---|---|---|
| MONUSCO — DR Congo | 29.81 | 4.47 | 25.34 |
| UNMISS — South Sudan | 44.42 | 6.66 | 37.75 |
| MINUSMA — Mali | 1.97 | 0.30 | 1.68 |
| MINUSCA — Central African Republic | 44.71 | 6.70 | 38.01 |
| UNSOS — Somalia | 18.77 | 0.00 | 18.77 |
| UNIFIL — Lebanon | 18.90 | 2.84 | 16.07 |
| UNISFA — Abyei | 11.36 | 1.70 | 9.65 |
| UNDOF | 2.47 | 0.00 | 2.47 |
| MINURSO — Western Sahara | 2.55 | 0.38 | 2.17 |
| UNMIK — Kosovo | 1.55 | 0.23 | 1.32 |
| UNFICYP — Cyprus | 1.16 | 0.00 | 1.16 |
| UNSOH — Haiti | 6.30 | 0.00 | 6.30 |
| UN Peacekeeping Credits | -3.14 | 0.00 | -3.14 |
| Sub-total | 180.83 | 23.28 | 157.54 |
| UN Special Political Missions | 18.26 | 9.50 | 8.77 |
| UN Tribunals | 1.23 | 0.00 | 1.23 |
| International Criminal Court | 13.61 | 0.00 | 13.61 |
| OSCE Field Missions | 7.28 | 5.39 | 1.89 |
| NATO KFOR — Kosovo | 1.99 | 0.00 | 1.99 |
| Total | 42.37 | 14.88 | 27.49 |
| Foreign Exchange Adjustment (gains and losses on advance purchases of foreign currency) | 9.09 | 0.00 | 9.09 |
| Total Peacekeeping Budget | 232.29 | 38.17 | 194.12 |
| MOD operational spend | Non-ODA (£ million) |
|---|---|
| Operation TOSCA – Cyprus | £13.96 |
AU Mission Somalia spend
| AU Mission Somalia | Non-ODA (£ million) |
|---|---|
| AU Mission Somalia | £25.19 |