I just learned about the Aid Transparency Index and it is a very cool undertaking. The group grades all major aid organizations across 22 indicators. In 2013 they started taking into account not only how accessible the data is, but also how accessible the format is in which it is provided. Click here for more on the indicators, here for their methodology, and here for the 2013 results.
Speaking of accessibility, I wish I could reproduce the graphics they have showing the results. It is one of the flashiest, yet totally clear, illustrations I’ve seen. So what’s the lowdown on the 2013 results. They find that:
“The top ranking agency is U.S. MCC, scoring 88.9%, while China takes the last place scoring only 2.2%. At the top end, MCC (88.9%), GAVI (87.3%), UK DFID (83.5%) and UNDP (83.4%) are all nearly 10 or more percentage points ahead of the next highest donor. The average score for all organisations is comparatively low at 32.6%, with 25 organisations scoring less than 20%. As in previous years, larger organisations generally perform better overall. Multilaterals as a group tend to score higher than bilaterals, although the performance of individual organisations within each group varies significantly.”
The group recognizes though that this is just the beginning of the challenge. They note that “understanding how and why people use this data will continue to be a goal for all development actors – and will mean working closely with diverse partners to make a real difference.”