DFC (United States)
- Score:
- 34.2
- Position:
- =11 / 22 (Non-sovereign)
Overview
The United States International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) is the development bank of the United States. DFC is an agency of the United States federal government and was established in 2019 following the merging of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) with the Development Credit Authority (DCA) of United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
Analysis
DFC ranked joint 11th overall with a score of 34.2 out of 100, moving down in rankings from its position as 6th in 2023 when it scored 38.2. DFC was the only institution out of all 30 institutions assessed both in 2023 and 2025 to decrease in overall score. We could not find any DFC projects from the sample on the IATI Registry, therefore it did not score for the IATI format of publication. While DFC’s score dropped overall, it continued to perform relatively well in the Financial Intermediary Sub-Investments component.
DFC came 13th for Core Information, scoring 10.96 out of 20 and dropping from 8th position in 2023. It scored for sixteen of the seventeen indicators. An improvement included publishing a disclosure policy. However, inconsistent reporting on objectives and total investment cost meant it failed to meet the two survey criteria it had passed in 2023.
In the Impact Management component, DFC performed poorly and ranked second-last with a score of 2.75 out of 25 and dropping from its position as 12th in 2023. While it passed for some of the same organisation-level indicators in 2023, it lost points this time due to no longer publishing its impact measurement approach, aligned standards and evaluation policy. DFC continued not to score for any project-level indicators, including additionality statements, activity indicators/metrics and results.
DFC came joint 7th in the ESG and Accountability to Communities component, scoring 15 out of 30 and dropping from its position as 4th in 2023. It continued to score 100 per cent for organisation-level indicators in this component. However, it failed all project-level indicators in this component, including summary of E&S risks, E&S documentation and assurance of community disclosure. In 2023, it passed the summary of E&S risks indicator but did not this time because of inconsistent disclosure.
In the Financial Information component, DFC came joint third-last, scoring 1.75 out of 15. It only scored for financial reports and currency of investment, losing the points it gained in 2023 for loan tenor disclosure due to inconsistent reporting. It also did not score for the new climate finance indicators.
Finally, DFC performed relatively well compared with other components in the Financial Intermediary Sub-Investments component, ranking joint 2nd with a score of 3.75. It improved since 2023 by disclosing its policy on sub-investment disclosure. It continued to be one of five non-sovereign DFIs to score for disclosing private equity fund sub-investments. It also scored for the FI (bank) use of funds indicator.
Recommendations
- DFC should review its disclosure policy in line with industry best practices and the DFI Transparency Tool.
- DFC should publish all projects to the IATI Standard or ensure that these projects are published by the federal government of the United States.
- DFC should disclose further Core Information data including sub-sector, disbursement, client contact, disclosure date, approval date and signature date. It should consistently disclose activity objectives, sub-national location, domicile, total investment cost, and client description.
- DFC should re-publish its impact measurement approach and indicate which impact standards/initiatives it is aligned to. It should also publish its approach to determining impact attribution, sector/country strategies and re-publish its policy on the evaluation of investments.
- It should disclose project-level Impact Management indicators, including additionality statement, activity indicators/metrics, and results.
- DFC should consistently disclose project-level ESG and Accountability to Communities indicators, including summaries of E&S risks, E&S project plans/assessments, and assurance of community disclosure. It should also begin disclosing beneficial ownership statements, identify main client shareholders, and indicate the presence of the IAM on project pages.
- For Financial Information, it should disclose whether investments are repeat investments, publish detailed co-financing data, and disclose concessionality, mobilisation, and share of equity. It should consistently disclose loan tenor.
- DFC should publish its climate finance methodology and begin disclosing project-level climate finance data including the amounts split by mitigation and adaptation and climate finance rationales.
- It should define use of funds for FIs (banks) at the organisational level and disclose bank sub-investments in line with Publish What You Fund’s DFI Transparency Tool.