• Rating classes

  • PPP+ - Excellent (90, 100)
  • PPP - Very Good (80, 89)
  • PP+ - Good (60, 79)
  • PP - Satisfactory (50, 59)
  • P+ - Weak (40, 49)
  • P - Poor (20, 39)
  • F - Fallible (1, 19)
Public Administration

Abruzzo

Compare
Comparative values by:
Download Report All data

SYNTHETIC INDEX OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITY

P+ - Weak

Rating

42 out of 100

Chronological trend

Benchmark score

Benchmark
Emilia-Romagna
70/100
Average score of the Public Administrations
52/100
Worst score
Molise
32/100

Distribution of Public Administrations with respect to the rating class

Administrative capacity Index: summary of the 6 macro-indicators

Administrative Capacity Index

Details of the indicators by individual macro-indicators

1 Financial situation

P+ - Weak
Download All data

Rating

43 out of 100

Chronological trend

Benchmark score

Benchmark
Emilia-Romagna
79/100
Average score of the Public Administrations
51/100
Worst score
Sicilia
15/100

Distribution of Public Administrations with respect to the rating class

Strengths

  • Financial pressure per capita
  • New liabilities generated in the current period on the current accumulated liabilities
  • Capital account expenditure financed by loans and bonds

Weaknesses

  • Financial autonomy
  • Collection capacity
  • Spending capacity
  • Debt per capita
  • EU funds management - effected payments

Indicators of the macro-indicator Financial situation

Indicator name Unit of measure Value Scoring criteria Score Trend Evaluation of the indicator
Financial autonomy % 84.17 High score for high values 1 Low
Financial pressure per capita € p.c. 2,303.59 High score for low values 8 High
Collection capacity % 77.67 High score for high values 1 Low
Spending capacity % 78.98 High score for high values 1 Low
Spending rigidity % 3.95 High score for low values 5 Medium
Debt per capita € p.c. 1,491.14 High score for low values 1 Low
Coverage of current expenditure and loan repayments through current revenues % 103.93 High score for high values 4 Medium
New liabilities generated in the current period on the current accumulated liabilities % 55.22 High score for low values 8 High
Capital account expenditure financed by loans and bonds % 0.0 High score for low values 8 High
Deficit/surplus on health expenditure per capita € p.c. -10.33 High score for high values 5 Medium
EU funds management - effected payments % 28.0 High score for high values 1 Low

2 Governance

PP - Satisfactory
Download All data

Rating

50 out of 100

Chronological trend

Benchmark score

Benchmark
Emilia-Romagna
78/100
Average score of the Public Administrations
55/100
Worst score
Molise
24/100

Distribution of Public Administrations with respect to the rating class

Strengths

  • E- Government
  • Public works incompleted
  • Public Real Estate properties - report

Weaknesses

  • Degree of digitalization
  • Performance
  • Public Real Estate properties - management

Indicators of the macro-indicator Governance

Indicator name Unit of measure Value Scoring criteria Score Trend Evaluation of the indicator
E- Government value 23.4 High score for high values 12 High
Degree of digitalization value 0.18 High score for high values 1 Low
Performance value 101.0 High score for high values 1 Low
Working from home (WFH) value 10.0 High score for high values 5 Trend not available Medium
Public works incompleted number 0.0 High score for low values 8 High
Public Real Estate properties - report value 111.0 High score for high values 10 Trend not available High
Public Real Estate properties - management € p.c. -1.98 High score for high values 1 Low
Subsidiary companies absolute value 66.67 High score for high values 6 Medium
Anti-corruption measures undertaken value 15.6 High score for high values 6 Medium

3 Personnel management

P - Poor
Download All data

Rating

34 out of 100

Chronological trend

Benchmark score

Benchmark
Emilia-Romagna
74/100
Average score of the Public Administrations
48/100
Worst score
Molise
28/100

Distribution of Public Administrations with respect to the rating class

Strengths

Weaknesses

  • Average age
  • Average of training days

Indicators of the macro-indicator Personnel management

Indicator name Unit of measure Value Scoring criteria Score Trend Evaluation of the indicator
Per capita personnel expenditure € p.c. 51.88 High score for low values 5 Medium
Personnel with a permanent contract per 1,000 inhabitants val./1.000 ab. 1.12 High score for low values 5 Trend not available Medium
Personnel with fixed-term contract on total personnel % 1.11 High score for low values 5 Medium
Average age years 54.98 High score for low values 1 Low
Personnel with a degree on total personnel % 47.93 High score for high values 4 Medium
Average days of absence (sick leave) days per person 17.72 High score for low values 4 Medium
Total managers on total personnel % 3.99 High score for low values 5 Trend not available Medium
Women managers on total managers % 38.6 High score for high values 4 Trend not available Medium
Provided bonus out of allocated ones to managers % n.d. High score for low values 0 Trend not available N.A.
Average of training days days per person 0.03 High score for high values 1 Trend not available Low
Degree of differentiation of bonus paid to managers variance n.d. High score for high values 0 Trend not available N.A.

4 Public services and relations with citizens

P+ - Weak
Download All data

Rating

49 out of 100

Chronological trend

Benchmark score

Benchmark
Toscana
90/100
Average score of the Public Administrations
51/100
Worst score
Calabria
Molise
Campania
23/100

Distribution of Public Administrations with respect to the rating class

Strengths

  • Integrated Home Care services
  • Accredited private healthcare facilities per 10k inhabitants
  • FOIA register: accepted requests

Weaknesses

  • Efficiency indicator - timing supervision (general)
  • Hospital migration
  • Beds in residential healthcare facilities per 10k inhabitants
  • Per capita territorial pharmaceutical expenditure

Indicators of the macro-indicator Public services and relations with citizens

Indicator name Unit of measure Value Scoring criteria Score Trend Evaluation of the indicator
Efficiency indicator - reporting (general) value 11.0 High score for high values 5 Trend not available Medium
Efficiency indicator - timing supervision (general) value 0.0 High score for high values 1 Trend not available Low
Landline high-speed internet access covering % 16.4 High score for high values 5 Medium
Hospital migration % 14.5 High score for low values 1 Low
Beds in residential healthcare facilities per 10k inhabitants val./10.000 ab. 42.0 High score for high values 1 Low
Integrated Home Care services % 4.3 High score for high values 10 High
Accredited private healthcare facilities per 10k inhabitants val./10.000 ab. 1.04 High score for low values 10 High
Per capita territorial pharmaceutical expenditure € p.c. 15.0 High score for low values 1 Low
Citizens involvement value 7.8 High score for high values 5 Medium
FOIA register: accepted requests % 94.59 High score for high values 10 High

5 Public tenders and relations with suppliers

F - Fallible
Download All data

Rating

18 out of 100

Chronological trend

Benchmark score

Benchmark
Liguria
Umbria
86/100
Average score of the Public Administrations
53/100
Worst score
Abruzzo
18/100

Distribution of Public Administrations with respect to the rating class

Strengths

  • Recurring contractors in direct procurements

Weaknesses

  • Direct procurements on global public tenders - number
  • Direct procurements on global public tenders - amount
  • Timeliness of payments indicator

Indicators of the macro-indicator Public tenders and relations with suppliers

Indicator name Unit of measure Value Scoring criteria Score Trend Evaluation of the indicator
Recurring contractors in direct procurements % 13.67 High score for low values 14 High
Direct procurements on global public tenders - number % 83.05 High score for low values 1 Trend not available Low
Direct procurements on global public tenders - amount % 36.69 High score for low values 1 Low
Timeliness of payments indicator days 62.0 High score for low values 2 Low
Per capita total amount of debts with suppliers € p.c. n.d. High score for low values 0 Trend not available N.A.
Number of corporate creditor per 10k inhabitants val./10.000 ab. n.d. High score for low values 0 Trend not available N.A.
Settlement of commercial debts incurred during the fiscal year % n.d. High score for high values 0 Trend not available N.A.

6 Environment

PP - Satisfactory
Download All data

Rating

51 out of 100

Chronological trend

Benchmark score

Benchmark
P.A. Bolzano
77/100
Average score of the Public Administrations
53/100
Worst score
Toscana
Liguria
29/100

Distribution of Public Administrations with respect to the rating class

Strengths

  • Contaminated sites

Weaknesses

  • Population exposed to landslide risk

Indicators of the macro-indicator Environment

Indicator name Unit of measure Value Scoring criteria Score Trend Evaluation of the indicator
Air quality - PM 2.5 % 81.8 High score for low values 6 Medium
Land consumption % 5.02 High score for low values 6 Medium
Contaminated sites ‰ inhabitants 0.6 High score for low values 12 High
Urban waste disposal at landfill % 29.2 High score for low values 7 Medium
Soil waterproofing due to artificial covering % 5.0 High score for low values 6 Medium
Population exposed to landslide risk % 5.6 High score for low values 1 Low
Population exposed to flood risk % 7.2 High score for low values 6 Medium
Electricity consumption covered by renewable sources % 42.4 High score for high values 7 Medium