2022 Aid Transparency Index: which organisations will we assess?

    Published: August 05, 2021

    Alex Tilley

    We have now completed our selection process and can announce which organisations will be assessed in the 2022 Aid Transparency Index. Before each iteration of the Index we gather data on the major international aid organisations so we can screen them against our criteria for inclusion.  There are actually more organisations that meet the criteria than we are able to assess, given our limited resources, so we also aim for a balanced set geographically, and of types of organisation. The Index assesses the transparency of the major aid organisations internationally (including “South-South” donors) and assesses a number of different types of agency. These include bilateral, multilateral and philanthropic organisations that provide both grants and development finance, and that intervene in humanitarian emergencies and fund development projects.

    We will assess a total of 50 organisations in the 2022 Index, three more than we assessed in 2020. We will be introducing eight new organisations and losing five. The new organisations are:

    • African Development Bank (AfDB) – Non-sovereign Portfolio
    • Asian Development Bank (AsDB) – Non-sovereign Portfolio
    • European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) – Non-sovereign Portfolio
    • European Investment Bank (EIB) – Non-sovereign Portfolio
    • German Federal Foreign Office
    • IDB-Invest
    • UK Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS)
    • World Health Organization (WHO)

    Having only found data for the sovereign guaranteed (public sector) activities of several of the multi-lateral development banks in 2020, we have decided to assess the public and private sector portfolios of these banks separately in 2022. We hope this will incentivise publication of more and better data for the private sector activities of these banks and will also allow us to compare transparency between portfolios.

    We have added three other new organisations: the World Health Organization, UK BEIS and the German Federal Foreign Office. These all met our selection criteria and have been included because of their strategic importance. UK BEIS has been assessed previously using the Index assessment approach in our 2020 UK Aid Transparency Review.

    Of the organisations that we dropped for 2022, UK DFID ceased to exist after the merger with the UK FCO to create the FCDO. Others were below the USD 1 billion annual disbursement threshold or were from countries represented by other agencies (France-MEAE, US Department of Defense and Japan MOFA). We have dropped Germany KfW since it has been an outlier as the only bilateral development bank in the Index, and since we now have two other German agencies in the Index (BMZ-GIZ and the Federal Foreign Office).

    Selection criteria

    The criteria for inclusion of organisations in the 2022 index has not changed from the 2020 Index. Given that overall levels of Official Development Assistance (ODA) have remained relatively static, we have maintained the USD 1 billion threshold. Organisations must fulfil a minimum of 3 out of 4 of the following:

    1. The organisation is in majority public ownership, with one or multiple governments as shareholders;
    2. Its primary purpose is providing aid and/or development finance across borders, or it is responsible for the oversight and administration of significant proportions of aid for development resources;
    3. Its budget for aid and/or development – or the resources that the organisation has at its disposal to spend upon aid and development – is at least USD 1 billion per year;
    4. The organisation plays a leading role in setting aid and/or development policy in its home country, region or specialist sector.

    In cases where an organisation does not pass the USD 1 billion threshold but does meet the other criteria, at a minimum, it must have a budget to spend on aid and/or development of at least USD 250 million per year. Publishing data in the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI) Standard is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for inclusion in the Index.


    Data collection for the 2022 Index will start in the week commencing 15th November 2021 – slightly earlier than our usual start date – and end on 30th March 2022. The Index report will be launched in June/July 2022.

    Methodology consultation

    We carried out an extensive review of the Index assessment approach from October 2020 to April this year, and have made several changes. A summary of the process and changes is available here and the new 2022 Technical Paper can be downloaded here.

    As in previous years we will carry out an online consultation through Github to solicit views and suggestions for any changes to the ruleset tests used by our Aid Transparency Tracker to assess the quality of organisations’ IATI data.  This consultation will run in mid-September.  We will share a link to the consultation prior to the start date.

    Once the consultation has closed we will update and re-issue the technical paper with any adjustments incorporated.

    The aid transparency context

    The 2020 Aid Transparency Index saw significant improvements made by several organisations, particularly those that had scored in the “poor” category in 2018. Some of these made wholesale improvements to their transparency and moved up one or two categories.

    There was also a group of organisations that appear to have been languishing in the “fair” category for several iterations without making noticeable improvements. The high-climbers in the 2020 Index showed what can be achieved by allocating resources and prioritising transparency. One way many of the organisations in the Index can quickly make significant improvements to their scores is by publishing high quality performance-related data, such as results and evaluations.

    It is highly likely that the COVID-19 pandemic will still be a major priority for aid organisations when we carry out the 2022 Index. Transparency is particularly important for the emergency response as resources are reallocated and new programmes started. Publishing results and evaluations of these interventions will also help to demonstrate impacts and learn lessons from what worked and what didn’t.

    Next steps

    We will be in touch with the organisations in the Index in the coming months as we prepare for the start of data collection in mid-November. We score the organisations included in the Index twice, once at the start of the data collection and then four months later as the process concludes. We provide feedback after the first round of data collection so organisations can make improvements to their data before the final assessment and scoring.

    Publish What You Fund has several tools that organisations can take advantage of in preparation for and during the data collection. Our Data Quality Tester allows publishers to independently check the quality of their IATI data before they upload it to the registry. IATI Decipher is a browser plug-in that visualises IATI organisation files to facilitate verification of the data and documents that have been included.  IATI Canary is an early warning system that provides an email alert when datasets are broken or invalid against the IATI schema.

    Full list of organisations

    1. African Development Bank (AfDB) – Non-sovereign Portfolio
    2. African Development Bank (AfDB) – Sovereign Portfolio
    3. Asian Development Bank (AsDB) – Non-sovereign Portfolio
    4. Asian Development Bank (ASDB) – Sovereign Portfolio
    5. Australia, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT)
    6. Belgium, DG Development Cooperation and Humanitarian Aid (DGD)
    7. Canada, Global Affairs (GAC)
    8. China, Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM)
    9. Denmark, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
    10. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) – Non-sovereign Portfolio
    11. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) – Sovereign Portfolio
    12. European Commission, DG Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection (ECHO)
    13. European Commission, DG International Partnerships (INTPA – formerly DEVCO)
    14. European Commission, DG Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations (NEAR)
    15. European Investment Bank (EIB) – Non-sovereign Portfolio
    16. European Investment Bank (EIB) – Sovereign Portfolio
    17. Finland, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
    18. France, French Development Agency (AFD)
    19. Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance
    20. Germany, Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development – GIZ
    21. Germany, Federal Foreign Office
    22. Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)
    23. IDB-Invest
    24. Ireland, Irish Aid
    25. Italy, Agency for Cooperation and Development (AICS)
    26. Japan, International Cooperation Agency (JICA)
    27. Korea, International Cooperation Agency (KOICA)
    28. Netherlands, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
    29. New Zealand, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade
    30. Norway, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
    31. Saudi Arabia, King Salman Humanitarian Aid and Relief Centre
    32. Spain, Agency for International Development Cooperation (AECID)
    33. Sweden, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida)
    34. Switzerland, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC)
    35. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
    36. The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
    37. Turkey, Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency (TIKA)
    38. United Arab Emirates, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
    39. United Kingdom, Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS)
    40. United Kingdom, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO)
    41. United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
    42. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
    43. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)
    44. United States, Agency for International Development (USAID)
    45. United States, Department of State
    46. United States, Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC)
    47. United States, President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR)
    48. World Bank, International Development Association (IDA)
    49. World Bank, International Finance Corporation (IFC)
    50. World Health Organization (WHO)