IBRD only vs Tanzania, United Republic of: CPIA social protection rating
CPIA social protection rating over time
- IBRD only
- Tanzania, United Republic of
How they compare
Tanzania, United Republic of currently reports 4 1=low to 6=high against 3.5 1=low to 6=high in IBRD only, a difference of 0.5 1=low to 6=high.
That makes Tanzania, United Republic of's figure about 1.1 times IBRD only's.
The two have swapped places 4 times across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Tanzania, United Republic of ahead.
IBRD only ranks 1st and Tanzania, United Republic of ranks 1st of 42 groups.
Across the 2 decades both report, IBRD only averaged higher in 1 and Tanzania, United Republic of in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | IBRD only | Tanzania, United Republic of | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.59 1=low to 6=high | 3.3 1=low to 6=high | 0.2922 1=low to 6=high | IBRD only |
| 2010s | 3.53 1=low to 6=high | 3.95 1=low to 6=high | 0.4183 1=low to 6=high | Tanzania, United Republic of |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia social protection rating, IBRD only or Tanzania, United Republic of?
- Tanzania, United Republic of, at 4 1=low to 6=high against 3.5 1=low to 6=high in IBRD only as of 2025.
- What is the difference in cpia social protection rating between IBRD only and Tanzania, United Republic of?
- 0.5 1=low to 6=high, with Tanzania, United Republic of ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for IBRD only and Tanzania, United Republic of?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do IBRD only and Tanzania, United Republic of rank globally for cpia social protection rating?
- IBRD only ranks 1st and Tanzania, United Republic of ranks 1st of 42 groups.
- Where does this data come from?
- CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA social protection 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 Country Policy and Institutional Assessment (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 Social Protection criterion assesses government policies in social protection and labor market regulations that reduce the risk of becoming poor, assist those who are poor to better manage further risks, and ensure a minimal level of welfare to all people. Specifically it evaluates social protection (SP) and labor policies, namely those engaged in risk prevention by supporting savings and risk pooling through social insurance, protection against destitution through redistributive safety net programs and promotion of human capital development and income generation, including labor market programs. It also assesses the functioning of an SP system, including its effectiveness in a crisis and in providing arrangements and incentives to help beneficiaries to move from protection to promotion and prevention, including through interactions with private, informal means of SP. The criterion covers: (a) the overall SP system; (b) social safety net programs; (c) labor markets programs and policies, namely those aiming to promote employment creation and productivity growth while protecting core labor standards and ensuring adequate working conditions; (d) local service delivery and civil society participation in community development programs; and (e) pension and old age savings programs.