Comparison Chart
This comparison chart shows donor progress in the Aid Transparency Index from 2013 – 2022.
Since 2013, the number of organisations included in the ‘very good’ category has significantly increased. These organisations are leading the transparency agenda by providing good quality data on their aid and development activities. Yet, there is still room for improvement as many organisations continue to be concentrated around the ‘fair’ category.
Find the organisation you are interested in and follow its progress over the years. Please note that not all donors have been assessed in every Index, and the methodology was updated for the 2018 and 2020 Indexes.
2013
Very Good
Good
World Bank, IDA 73.8%
Global Fund 70.7%
AfDB 63.7%
Canada, CIDA 62.6%
Sweden, Sida 60.4%
Fair
AsDB 57.6%
IADB 57.1%
EC, ECHO 54.2%
EC, DEVCO 52.1%
EC, FPI 51.1%
Denmark, MFA 50.7%
Netherlands, MFA 49.4%
EC, ELARG 48.1%
New Zealand, MFAT 47.8%
U.S., Treasury 47.4%
Germany, BMZ-GIZ 45.9%
UNICEF 44.3%
U.S., USAID 44.3%
Germany, BMZ-KfW 43.7%
Australia, AusAID 43.1%
UN OCHA 41.7%
Poor
UK, FCO 34.7%
U.S., Defense 33.7%
IMF 31.8%
World Bank, IFC 30.1%
Korea, KOICA 27.9%
Norway, MFA 26.9%
Ireland, Irish Aid 26.7%
EIB 26.6%
EBRD 24.5%
Czech Republic, CzDA 24.4%
Estonia, MFA 23.6%
Japan, JICA 23.5%
Belgium, DGCD 23.4%
Finland, MFA 23.0%
U.S., State 22.1%
Austria, ADA 20.4%
Very Poor
Luxembourg, MFA 19.2%
Gates Foundation 18.1%
Switzerland, SDC 18.1%
Latvia, MFA 17.8%
Portugal, CICL 17.4%
Spain, MAEC-AECID 17.4%
Japan, MOFA 17.2%
France, AFD 16.3%
U.S., PEPFAR 16.1%
Romania, MFA 14.8%
France, MAE 13.3%
France, MINEFI 12.2%
UK, MOD 12.0%
Slovakia, SAIDC 12.0%
Brazil, ABC 11.8%
Poland, MFA 11.4%
Slovenia, MFA 10.8%
Germany, AA 10.0%
Italy, MAE 10.0%
Lithuania, MFA 8.2%
Cyprus, CyprusAid 6.5%
Bulgaria, MFA5.7%
Hungary, MFA 4.7%
Malta, MFA3.8%
Greece, HellenicAid 3.6%
China, MOFCOM2.2%
2014
Very Good
Good
AfDB 74.5%
IADB 73.9%
Global Fund 73.3%
Canada, DFATD 71.7%
EC, FPI 69.1%
EC, DEVCO 68.2%
UNICEF 64.7%
EC, ELARG 61.8%
Fair
EC, ECHO 59.9%
Germany, BMZ-GIZ 53.9%
Switzerland, SDC 53.8%
Netherlands, MFA 53.8%
Germany, BMZ-KFW 50.8%
Spain, MAEC 50.6%
Denmark, MFA 49.6%
Gates Foundation 46.6%
Finland, MFA 46.3%
Australia, DFAT 45.9%
New Zealand, MFAT 45.1%
Ireland, IrishAid 42.5%
France, MAEDI 42.4%
UN OCHA 41.3%
U.S., PEPFAR 40.7%
U.S., USAID 40.3%
Poor
U.S., State 38.8%
Japan, JICA 37.2%
Korea, KOICA 36.9%
UK, FCO 35.8%
U.S., Treasury 34.8%
IMF 31.6%
U.S., Defense 30.8%
World Bank, IFC 30.6%
Czech Republic, CzDA 29.5%
Estonia, MFA 28.2%
Norway, MFA 27.7%
Portugal, CICL26.5%
France, AFD 24.7%
EIB 24.6%
EBRD 24.5%
Very Poor
Austria, ADA 19.1%
Latvia, MFA 19.0%
Belgium, DGCD 18.9%
Luxembourg, MFA 18.8%
Slovakia, SAIDC 18.3%
Slovenia, MFA 17.8%
Japan, MOFA 17.0%
Italy, MAE 15.7%
Poland, MFA 14.4%
Croatia, MFA 11.8%
Romania, MFA 10.6%
France, MINEFI 10.3%
Brazil, ABC 9.7%
UK, MOD 9.6%
Germany, AA 9.1%
Hungary, MFA 8.3%
Bulgaria, MFA 8.2%
Malta, MFA 6.6%
Lithuania, MFA 6.5%
Cyprus, CyprusAid 5.9%
Greece, HellenicAid 4.7%
China, MOFCOM 2.2%
2015*
Very Good
Good
EC, ELARG
Netherlands, MFA
EC, FPI
EC, DEVCO
U.S., USAID
Denmark, MFA
Fair
Poor
Belgium, DGCD
EBRD
U.S., Treasury
U.S., Defense
Very Poor
* Six months ahead of the December 2015 Busan deadline, Publish What You Fund assessed 22 major EU and US donors to see whether they were “on track” or “off track” from meeting their aid transparency commitments. See more at: http://roadto2015.org/progress
2016
Very Good
Good
GAVI 78.0%
Canada76.3%
EC, NEAR 74.1%
EC, ECHO 71.9%
EC, DEVCO 68.7%
Netherlands, MFA 66.6%
Denmark, MFA 64.7%
Germany, BMZ-GIZ 63.2%
Fair
U.S., USAID 59.1%
Germany, BMZ-KfW 59.0%
U.S., Treasury 58.1%
U.S., PEPFAR 57.6%
U.S., State 53.9%
EIB 53.5%
Australia 49.9%
EBRD 49.7%
Belgium, DGCD 47.7%
U.S., Defense 46.7%
Spain, MAEC 46.2%
Gates Foundation 46.0%
Switzerland, SDC 45.4%
France, AFD 45.2%
Japan, JICA 44.2%
Norway, MFA 41.9%
Poor
Finland, MFA 38.5%
France, MAEDI 38.0%
UN OCHA 37.0%
Ireland, IrishAid 37.0%
IMF 31.3%
World Bank, IFC 30.9%
Korea, KOICA 26.1%
Very Poor
2018**
Very Good
AsDB 98.6
UNDP 95.5
UK, DFID 90.9
AfDB 88.4
U.S., MCC 87.0
WB, IDA 86.1
IADB 83.5
Good
Canada, Global Affairs 79.7
UNICEF 78.1
EC, ECHO 77.6
EC, NEAR 76.5
GAVI 75.3
Global Fund 74.5
Sweden, Sida 71.2
NL, MFA 70.1
U.S., USAID 68.8
EC, DEVCO 65.9
DE, DGD 63.4
U.S., PEPFAR 63.4
Germany, BMZ-GIZ 60.9
Fair
U.S., State 58.3
BMZ-KFW 57.7
Australia, DFAT 57.4
EBRD 57.1
EIB 57.1
Finland, MFA 54.1
WB, IFC 52.1
Switzerland, SDC 50.9
Denmark, MFA 49.3
U.S., Defense 48.7
Gates Foundation 47.3
France, AFD 46.5
France, MEAE 45.9
Italy, AICS 45.6
N0rway, MFA 43.3
Irish Aid 42.0
Poor
Japan, JICA 38.8
Korea, KOICA 37.0
Spain, AECID 35.1
UK, FCO 34.3
UN OCHA 32.7
NZ, MFAT 31.1
Very Poor
Japan, MOFA 10.2
UAE, MOFAIC 1.9
China, MOFCOM 1.2
**The 2018 Index scores are based on an updated methodology which differs from earlier years. More details of the changes are outlined here.
2020
Very Good
AsDB 98.0
– Sovereign Portfolio*
WB, IDA 97.1
UNDP 96.6
AfDB 95.5
– Sovereign Portfolio*
IDB* 95.4
UNICEF 92.9
US, MCC 92.1
Global Fund 86.5
UK, DFID 85.4
Canada, GA 80.9
GAVI 80.8
*For reasons of data availability it was only possible to review the transparency of this development bank’s sovereign (government backed) portfolio and not its private investments. The Inter-American Development Bank only manages the IDB Group’s sovereign-backed lending, its private sector portfolio is managed by IDB Invest, a separate entity within the Group.
Good
EC, NEAR 78.7
NZ, MFAT 77.6
BMZ-KFW 77.3
US, USAID 76.7
EC, DEVCO 76.5
UN OCHA 74.0
BMZ-GIZ 72.3
NL, MFA 71.2
KO, KOICA 70.7
EBRD† 69.1
EC, ECHO 68.2
SIDA 63.7
BE, DGD 63.4
US, State 63.2
Switzerland, SDC 61.1
† For this development bank, data for both its sovereign and non-sovereign portfolios were available and both were reviewed.
Fair
US, PEPFAR 59.8
EIB† 58.9
Finland, MFA 58.6
France, AFD 58.5
WB, IFC 58.1
Gates Foundation 57.9
Spain, AECID 57.8
Australia, DFAT 51.8
Italy, AICS 49.3
Japan, JICA 49.3
France, MEAE 48.9
UK, FCO 48.6
Denmark, MFA 48.6
Norway, MFA 43.5
Irish Aid 42.6
Saudi Arabia, KSRelief 42.0
† For this development bank, data for both its sovereign and non-sovereign portfolios were available and both were reviewed.
Poor
US, Defense 39.8
Very Poor
UAE, MOFAIC 17.7
Japan, MOFA 16.3
Turkey, TIKA 6.3
China, MOFCOM 1.2
2022
Very Good
AfDB – sovereign 98.5
World Bank, IDA 97.1
IADB 96.3
AsDB – sovereign 94.8
US, MCC 92.0
UNICEF 89.1
UNDP 88.1
GAVI 87.1
UN OCHA 85.9
AsDB – Non-Sov. 82.3
Good
Germany, BMZ-GIZ 79.3
AfDB – Non-Sov. 78.6
Korea, KOICA 77.7
EC, ECHO 77.1
EC, INTPA 72.4
UK, FCDO 71.9
Canada, GAC 71.1
UK, BEIS 69.9
WHO 69.3
US, PEPFAR 68.6
Sweden, Sida 68.0
Global Fund 67.9
Netherlands, MFA 67.2
EBRD – sovereign 66.6
US, USAID 65.2
New Zealand, MFAT 64.4
EC, NEAR 64.0
France, AFD 63.5
Belgium, DGD 63.3
Gates Foundation 62.0
EBRD – Non-Sov. 60.6
Fair
US, State 58.0
EIB – sovereign 56.2
Italy, AICS 53.9
World Bank, IFC 53.0
Denmark, MFA 52.9
EIB – Non-Sov. 52.3
Finland-MFA 50.8
Ireland, Irish Aid 48.0
Switzerland, SDC 47.0
Australia, DFAT 41.9
Spain, AECID 41.1
Poor
Japan, JICA 22.9
IDB Invest 34.1
Norway, MFA 36.2
Germany, FFO 37.2
Saudi Arabia, KSRelief 38.7
Very Poor
UAE, MOFAIC 1.1
Turkey, TIKA 1.6
China, MOFCOM 5
The following agencies have changed names since previous Indices:
- EC DEVCO Development Cooperation to EC INTPA International Partnerships
- UK’s Departamnt for International Development (DFID) to UK Foreign Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO)