CPIA quality of public administration rating in South Sudan

South Sudan: CPIA quality of public administration rating was 1 1=low to 6=high in 2025. ▼ Falling

Latest (2025)
1 1=low to 6=high
Change on year
unchanged
World rank
85th
of 85 countries
All-time high
2 1=low to 6=high
in 2012
All-time low
1 1=low to 6=high
in 2017
Years of data
14
2012–2025

CPIA quality of public administration rating in South Sudan, 2012–2025

00.511.522012201820252012: 2 1=low to 6=high2013: 2 1=low to 6=high2014: 2 1=low to 6=high2015: 2 1=low to 6=high2016: 1.5 1=low to 6=high2017: 1 1=low to 6=high2018: 1 1=low to 6=high2019: 1 1=low to 6=high2020: 1 1=low to 6=high2021: 1 1=low to 6=high2022: 1 1=low to 6=high2023: 1 1=low to 6=high2024: 1 1=low to 6=high2025: 1 1=low to 6=high

Source: CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Measured in 1=low to 6=high.

Analysis

South Sudan recorded 1 1=low to 6=high for cpia quality of public administration rating in 2025. That is the lowest value across all 14 years on record.

That represents a change of down 50.0% over ten years.

Over the whole period, cpia quality of public administration rating in South Sudan peaked at 2 1=low to 6=high in 2012 and was at its lowest, 1 1=low to 6=high, in 2017.

That places South Sudan 85th out of 85 countries with data for 2025, putting it in the bottom quarter.

The long-run direction has been consistently falling across the 14 years of available data.

CPIA quality of public administration rating in South Sudan, year by year

Annual values for CPIA quality of public administration rating (1=low to 6=high) in South Sudan, 2012 to 2025.
Year 1=low to 6=high Change
2012 2 1=low to 6=high
2013 2 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2014 2 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2015 2 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2016 1.5 1=low to 6=high -25.0%
2017 1 1=low to 6=high -33.3%
2018 1 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2019 1 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2020 1 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2021 1 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2022 1 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2023 1 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2024 1 1=low to 6=high +0.0%
2025 1 1=low to 6=high +0.0%

Averages by decade

DecadeAverage LowestHighest Years
2010s 1.56 1=low to 6=high 1 1=low to 6=high 2 1=low to 6=high 8
2020s 1 1=low to 6=high 1 1=low to 6=high 1 1=low to 6=high 6

More public sector data for South Sudan

All data for South Sudan →

Frequently asked questions

What is cpia quality of public administration rating in South Sudan?
Cpia quality of public administration rating in South Sudan was 1 1=low to 6=high in 2025, according to CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG).
What is the highest cpia quality of public administration rating recorded in South Sudan?
The highest recorded value was 2 1=low to 6=high in 2012.
What is the lowest cpia quality of public administration rating recorded in South Sudan?
The lowest recorded value was 1 1=low to 6=high in 2017.
How does South Sudan rank for cpia quality of public administration rating?
South Sudan ranks 85th out of 85 countries with data for 2025.
Is cpia quality of public administration rating rising or falling in South Sudan?
Over the last ten years it is down 50.0%. The long-run trend across the full record is falling.
Where does this South Sudan data come from?
The figures come from CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as part of CPIA quality of public administration rating (1=low to 6=high). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.

Download this data

CSV · JSON — 14 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

CPIA quality of public administration rating in South Sudan. Statizoid, drawing on CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG). Retrieved 05 September 2026, from https://public-sector.statizoid.com/stat/cpia-quality-of-public-administration-rating-1-low-to-6-high/south-sudan/

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/south-sudan/">CPIA quality of public administration rating in South Sudan</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
127 places, 2,460 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).