ANALYSIS

The IADB scores 57.1% overall, placing it in the fair category. IADB is one of only two IFIs to publish information on the sub-national location of its projects. It leads IFIs on the publication of information on conditions, actual dates, descriptions and planned dates and receives the maximum possible score on 13 indicators. IADB performs poorly on organisation financial information, posting the lowest scores within the fair category, a result of not publishing forward-looking budget information in its IATI organisation file. Of the 22 indicators that take format into account, over two thirds are published in machine-readable formats. Sub-national location and overall activity costs are not included in its IATI data, even though this information is available on its website.

RECOMMENDATIONS

• The IADB should improve its publication to IATI so it is comprehensive and uses all fields, including activity costs, structured results data and links to activity documents. It should also publish a more complete IATI organisation file, including forward-looking budgets.
• It should update its implementation schedule by early 2014 so it is more ambitious, aiming for full implementation of the IATI standard and monthly publication by the end of 2015.
• The IADB should work with IATI to develop specific guidance and an extension to the IATI standard for IFIs and DFIs.

Close