CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Sub-Saharan Africa
Sub-Saharan Africa: CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating was 2.89 1=low to 6=high in 2025. ▬ Flat
CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Sub-Saharan Africa, 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 Sub-Saharan Africa is 2.89 1=low to 6=high, measured in 2025.
That represents a change of up 0.9% on the previous year and down 6.2% over ten years.
Over the whole period, cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Sub-Saharan Africa peaked at 3.09 1=low to 6=high in 2011 and was at its lowest, 2.86 1=low to 6=high, in 2024.
Sub-Saharan Africa ranks 28th of 42 groups on this measure, in the middle of the range.
CPIA quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Sub-Saharan Africa, year by year
| Year | 1=low to 6=high | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 3.05 1=low to 6=high | — |
| 2006 | 3.03 1=low to 6=high | -0.9% |
| 2007 | 3.04 1=low to 6=high | +0.4% |
| 2008 | 3 1=low to 6=high | -1.3% |
| 2009 | 3.04 1=low to 6=high | +1.3% |
| 2010 | 3.08 1=low to 6=high | +1.3% |
| 2011 | 3.09 1=low to 6=high | +0.4% |
| 2012 | 3.04 1=low to 6=high | -1.7% |
| 2013 | 3.01 1=low to 6=high | -0.8% |
| 2014 | 3.09 1=low to 6=high | +2.6% |
| 2015 | 3.08 1=low to 6=high | -0.4% |
| 2016 | 3.08 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2017 | 3.03 1=low to 6=high | -1.7% |
| 2018 | 3.03 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2019 | 3.01 1=low to 6=high | -0.4% |
| 2020 | 2.99 1=low to 6=high | -0.9% |
| 2021 | 2.97 1=low to 6=high | -0.4% |
| 2022 | 2.95 1=low to 6=high | -0.9% |
| 2023 | 2.95 1=low to 6=high | +0.0% |
| 2024 | 2.86 1=low to 6=high | -2.9% |
| 2025 | 2.89 1=low to 6=high | +0.9% |
Averages by decade
| Decade | Average | Lowest | Highest | Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.03 1=low to 6=high | 3 1=low to 6=high | 3.05 1=low to 6=high | 5 |
| 2010s | 3.05 1=low to 6=high | 3.01 1=low to 6=high | 3.09 1=low to 6=high | 10 |
| 2020s | 2.93 1=low to 6=high | 2.86 1=low to 6=high | 2.99 1=low to 6=high | 6 |
More public sector data for Sub-Saharan Africa
- Arms imports 731.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2023)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per capita 0.5807 SIPRI trend indicator values per person (2023)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per unit of GDP 0.0003 SIPRI trend indicator values per US$ of GDP (2023)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), annual growth rate 25.82 % change on previous year (2023)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), gaps filled 731.00 million SIPRI trend indicator values (2023)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per capita 16.8 current USD per person (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), per unit of GDP 0.0109 current USD per US$ of GDP (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), annual growth rate -6.41 % change on previous year (2024)
- Military expenditure (current USD), gaps filled 21.67 billion current USD (2024)
- Arms imports (SIPRI trend indicator values), per square kilometre 30.58 SIPRI trend indicator values per square kilometre (2023)
Frequently asked questions
- What is cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Sub-Saharan Africa?
- Cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating in Sub-Saharan Africa was 2.89 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 Sub-Saharan Africa?
- The highest recorded value was 3.09 1=low to 6=high in 2011.
- What is the lowest cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating recorded in Sub-Saharan Africa?
- The lowest recorded value was 2.86 1=low to 6=high in 2024.
- How does Sub-Saharan Africa rank for cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating?
- Sub-Saharan Africa ranks 28th out of 42 groups with data for 2025.
- Is cpia quality of budgetary and financial management rating rising or falling in Sub-Saharan Africa?
- Over the last ten years it is down 6.2%. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
- Where does this Sub-Saharan Africa 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.