Rwanda vs Samoa: CPIA quality of public administration rating

Rwanda
4 1=low to 6=high
in 2025
Samoa
4 1=low to 6=high
in 2025
Rwanda rank
1st
Samoa rank
1st

CPIA quality of public administration rating over time

  • Rwanda
  • Samoa
01234200520152025

How they compare

Rwanda currently reports 4 1=low to 6=high against 4 1=low to 6=high in Samoa, a difference of 0 1=low to 6=high.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 21 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Samoa ahead.

Rwanda ranks 1st and Samoa ranks 1st of 84 countries.

Samoa has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Rwanda Samoa Difference Ahead
2000s 3.5 1=low to 6=high 4 1=low to 6=high 0.5 1=low to 6=high Samoa
2010s 3.65 1=low to 6=high 3.9 1=low to 6=high 0.25 1=low to 6=high Samoa
2020s 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 public administration rating, Rwanda or Samoa?
Rwanda, at 4 1=low to 6=high against 4 1=low to 6=high in Samoa as of 2025.
What is the difference in cpia quality of public administration rating between Rwanda and Samoa?
0 1=low to 6=high, with Rwanda ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Rwanda and Samoa?
21 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2025.
How do Rwanda and Samoa rank globally for cpia quality of public administration rating?
Rwanda ranks 1st and Samoa ranks 1st of 84 countries.
Where does this data come from?
CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA quality of public administration rating (1=low to 6=high). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Rwanda vs Samoa: CPIA quality of public administration rating. Statizoid, drawing on CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Retrieved 01 September 2026, from https://public-sector.statizoid.com/compare/cpia-quality-of-public-administration-rating-1-low-to-6-high/rwanda/samoa/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://public-sector.statizoid.com/compare/cpia-quality-of-public-administration-rating-1-low-to-6-high/rwanda/samoa/">Rwanda vs Samoa: CPIA quality of public administration rating</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
CPIA quality of public administration rating (1=low to 6=high)
Unit
1=low to 6=high
Source
CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG)
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
126 places, 2,443 data points, 2005–2025
Last refreshed

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 CPIA Quality of Public Administration criterion covers the core administration defined as the civilian central government (and subnational governments, to the extent that their size or policy responsibilities are significant) excluding health and education personnel, and police. The criterion assesses the functioning of the core administration in three areas: (a) managing its own operations; (b) ensuring quality in policy implementation and regulatory management; and (c) coordinating the larger public sector Human Resources Management regime outside the core administration (de-concentrated and arms-length bodies and subsidiary governments).