CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Low income
Low income: CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating was 2.5 1=low to 6=high in 2025. ▼ Falling
CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Low income, 2005–2025
Source: CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Measured in 1=low to 6=high.
Analysis
The most recent figure for cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Low income is 2.5 1=low to 6=high, measured in 2025. That is the lowest value across all 21 years on record.
That represents a change of down 18.5% over ten years.
Over the whole period, cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Low income peaked at 3.14 1=low to 6=high in 2009 and was at its lowest, 2.5 1=low to 6=high, in 2024.
That places Low income 38th out of 42 groups with data for 2025, putting it in the bottom quarter.
The long-run direction has been consistently falling across the 21 years of available data.
CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Low income, year by year
| Year | 1=low to 6=high | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 3.08 1=low to 6=high | — |
| 2006 | 3.08 1=low to 6=high | -0.1% |
| 2007 | 3.1 1=low to 6=high | +0.8% |
| 2008 | 3.12 1=low to 6=high | +0.8% |
| 2009 | 3.14 1=low to 6=high | +0.6% |
| 2010 | 3.14 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2011 | 3.14 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2012 | 3.02 1=low to 6=high | -3.8% |
| 2013 | 3.07 1=low to 6=high | +1.5% |
| 2014 | 3.14 1=low to 6=high | +2.2% |
| 2015 | 3.07 1=low to 6=high | -2.2% |
| 2016 | 2.98 1=low to 6=high | -3.0% |
| 2017 | 2.85 1=low to 6=high | -4.3% |
| 2018 | 2.89 1=low to 6=high | +1.4% |
| 2019 | 2.83 1=low to 6=high | -2.1% |
| 2020 | 2.83 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2021 | 2.77 1=low to 6=high | -1.9% |
| 2022 | 2.7 1=low to 6=high | -2.8% |
| 2023 | 2.59 1=low to 6=high | -4.0% |
| 2024 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | -3.4% |
| 2025 | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.1 1=low to 6=high | 3.08 1=low to 6=high | 3.14 1=low to 6=high | 5 |
| 2010s | 3.01 1=low to 6=high | 2.83 1=low to 6=high | 3.14 1=low to 6=high | 10 |
| 2020s | 2.65 1=low to 6=high | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | 2.83 1=low to 6=high | 6 |
Countries ranked near Low income
- 36 Bangladesh 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Bolivia, Plurinational State of 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Chad 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Congo 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Djibouti 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Fiji 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Grenada 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Kyrgyzstan 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Lao People's Democratic Republic 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Maldives 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Mali 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Nepal 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Papua New Guinea 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Sao Tome and Principe 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Senegal 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Sierra Leone 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Solomon Islands 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Saint Lucia 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Timor-Leste 3 1=low to 6=high compare
- 36 Zambia 3 1=low to 6=high compare
More public sector data for Low income
- Arms imports 141.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per capita 0.1887 SIPRI trend indicator values per person (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per unit of GDP 0.0002 SIPRI trend indicator values per US$ of GDP (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), annual growth rate -50.7 % change on previous year (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), gaps filled 141.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per capita 12.46 current USD per person (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per unit of GDP 0.0154 current USD per US$ of GDP (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), annual growth rate 17.86 % change on previous year (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), gaps filled 9.31 billion current USD (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per square kilometre 19.47 SIPRI trend indicator values per square kilometre (2023)
Frequently asked questions
- What is cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Low income?
- Cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Low income was 2.5 1=low to 6=high in 2025, according to CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG).
- What is the highest cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating recorded in Low income?
- The highest recorded value was 3.14 1=low to 6=high in 2009.
- What is the lowest cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating recorded in Low income?
- The lowest recorded value was 2.5 1=low to 6=high in 2024.
- How does Low income rank for cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating?
- Low income ranks 38th out of 42 groups with data for 2025.
- Is cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating rising or falling in Low income?
- Over the last ten years it is down 18.5%. The long-run trend across the full record is falling.
- Where does this Low income data come from?
- The figures come from CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as part of CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating (1=low to 6=high). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 21 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).
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.