CPIA quality of public administration rating (1=low to 6=high) by country

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...

Countries reporting
84
Highest
4 1=low to 6=high
Bhutan
Lowest
1 1=low to 6=high
South Sudan
Median
3 1=low to 6=high
Years covered
21
2005–2025
Data points
2,443

What the numbers show

CPIA quality of public administration rating (1=low to 6=high) is currently reported for 84 countries. The highest value is 4 1=low to 6=high in Bhutan; the lowest is 1 1=low to 6=high in South Sudan.

The median across all reporting countries is 3 1=low to 6=high, and the mean is 2.86 1=low to 6=high.

The gap between the highest and lowest reporting country is a factor of about 4.

Over the past decade 15 countries rose and 23 fell. The largest increase was in Djibouti (up 40.0%), and the largest decrease in South Sudan (down 50.0%).

CPIA quality of public administration rating: full country ranking

#Country LatestYear 10-year changeTrend
1 Bhutan 4 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
1 Cape Verde 4 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
1 Georgia 4 1=low to 6=high 2013 up 14.3% rising
1 Rwanda 4 1=low to 6=high 2025 up 14.3% rising
1 Samoa 4 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
6 Armenia 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2013 down 12.5% falling
6 Benin 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 up 16.7% rising
6 Burkina Faso 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged falling
6 Cote d'Ivoire 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 up 16.7% rising
6 Djibouti 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 up 40.0% rising
6 Dominica 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
6 Ethiopia 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged rising
6 Fiji 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
6 Ghana 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
6 Guinea 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 up 16.7% flat
6 Grenada 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
6 India 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2013 unchanged flat
6 Kenya 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
6 Saint Lucia 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
6 Sri Lanka 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 up 16.7% rising
6 Mongolia 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2019 unchanged falling
6 Senegal 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
6 Tonga 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged rising
6 Uganda 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 up 16.7% rising
6 Uzbekistan 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 up 16.7% rising
6 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
6 Vietnam 3.5 1=low to 6=high 2015 unchanged falling
28 Azerbaijan 3 1=low to 6=high 2010 unchanged flat
28 Bosnia and Herzegovina 3 1=low to 6=high 2013 unchanged flat
28 Bolivia 3 1=low to 6=high 2015 down 14.3% falling
28 Cameroon 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
28 Democratic Republic of Congo 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 up 20.0% rising
28 Gambia 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
28 Guyana 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 up 20.0% rising
28 Honduras 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
28 Kyrgyzstan 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged rising
28 Cambodia 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 up 20.0% rising
28 Moldova 3 1=low to 6=high 2019 unchanged rising
28 Maldives 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged falling
28 Mozambique 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
28 Mauritania 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
28 Niger 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
28 Pakistan 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 14.3% falling
28 Sierra Leone 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
28 Togo 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 up 20.0% rising
28 Tajikistan 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged rising
28 Tanzania 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged falling
28 Kosovo 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged rising
28 Zambia 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
28 Zimbabwe 3 1=low to 6=high 2025 up 20.0% rising
51 Burundi 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
51 Bangladesh 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 16.7% falling
51 Central African Republic 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 up 25.0% rising
51 Congo 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
51 Micronesia (country) 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
51 Kiribati 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 16.7% falling
51 Laos 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 16.7% falling
51 Liberia 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged rising
51 Lesotho 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 16.7% falling
51 Madagascar 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged falling
51 Malawi 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged falling
51 Nigeria 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged falling
51 Nepal 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 16.7% falling
51 Papua New Guinea 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 16.7% falling
51 Sao Tome and Principe 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 16.7% flat
51 Chad 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
51 Tuvalu 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
51 Vanuatu 2.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 16.7% falling
69 Angola 2 1=low to 6=high 2013 down 20.0% falling
69 Comoros 2 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 20.0% falling
69 Eritrea 2 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 20.0% falling
69 Guinea-Bissau 2 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 20.0% falling
69 Marshall Islands 2 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged falling
69 Mali 2 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 20.0% falling
69 Myanmar 2 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 20.0% falling
69 Nicaragua 2 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 33.3% falling
69 Solomon Islands 2 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
69 Somalia 2 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged flat
69 East Timor 2 1=low to 6=high 2025 unchanged falling
80 Afghanistan 1.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 40.0% falling
80 Haiti 1.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 40.0% falling
80 Sudan 1.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 25.0% falling
80 Yemen 1.5 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 40.0% falling
84 South Sudan 1 1=low to 6=high 2025 down 50.0% falling

Regions and income groups

Aggregates are excluded from the country ranking above so that a region can never outrank a country.

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

CPIA quality of public administration rating by country. Statizoid, drawing on CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Retrieved 28 August 2026, from https://public-sector.statizoid.com/stat/cpia-quality-of-public-administration-rating-1-low-to-6-high/

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/stat/cpia-quality-of-public-administration-rating-1-low-to-6-high/">CPIA quality of public administration rating by country</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).