Republic of Moldova vs Rwanda: CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating
CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating over time
- Republic of Moldova
- Rwanda
How they compare
Republic of Moldova currently reports 4 1=low to 6=high against 4 1=low to 6=high in Rwanda, a difference of 0 1=low to 6=high.
Across all 15 years both countries report, Rwanda has been ahead every year.
Republic of Moldova ranks 6th and Rwanda ranks 6th of 85 countries.
Rwanda has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Republic of Moldova | Rwanda | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.8 1=low to 6=high | 3.9 1=low to 6=high | 0.1 1=low to 6=high | Rwanda |
| 2010s | 4 1=low to 6=high | 4 1=low to 6=high | 0 1=low to 6=high | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating, Republic of Moldova or Rwanda?
- Republic of Moldova, at 4 1=low to 6=high against 4 1=low to 6=high in Rwanda as of 2019.
- What is the difference in cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating between Republic of Moldova and Rwanda?
- 0 1=low to 6=high, with Republic of Moldova ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Republic of Moldova and Rwanda?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Republic of Moldova and Rwanda rank globally for cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating?
- Republic of Moldova ranks 6th and Rwanda ranks 6th of 85 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating (1=low to 6=high). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The CPIA measures the extent to which a country’s policy and institutional framework supports sustainable growth and poverty reduction, and consequently the effective use of development assistance. The outcome of the exercise yields both an overall score and scores for sixteen criteria that compose the CPIA. These criteria include: A. Economic Management (1. Monetary and Exchange Rate Policies; 2. Fiscal Policy; 3. Debt Policy and Management), B. Structural Policies (4. Trade; 5. Financial Sector; 6. Business Regulatory Environment), C. Policies for Social Inclusion/Equity (7. Gender equality; 8. Equity of public resource use; 9. Building human resources; 10. Social protection and labor; 11. Policies and institutions for environmental sustainability), D. Public Sector Management and Institutions (12. Property rights and rule-based governance; 13. Quality of budgetary and financial management; 14. Efficiency of revenue mobilization; 15. Quality of public administration; 16. Transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector). The quality of budgetary and financial management criterion assesses the extent to which there is: (a) a comprehensive and credible budget, linked to policy priorities; (b) effective financial management systems to ensure that the budget is implemented as intended in a controlled and predictable way; and (c) timely and accurate accounting and fiscal reporting, including timely audit of public accounts and effective arrangements for follow up.