• 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

Campania

Compare
Comparative values by:
Download Report All data

SYNTHETIC INDEX OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITY

P+ - Weak

Rating

43 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

45 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
  • Deficit/surplus on health expenditure per capita

Weaknesses

  • Spending capacity
  • Debt per capita
  • Coverage of current expenditure and loan repayments through current revenues
  • Capital account expenditure financed by loans and bonds

Indicators of the macro-indicator Financial situation

Indicator name Unit of measure Value Scoring criteria Score Trend Evaluation of the indicator
Financial autonomy % 87.46 High score for high values 4 Medium
Financial pressure per capita € p.c. 2,317.93 High score for low values 8 High
Collection capacity % 86.22 High score for high values 5 Medium
Spending capacity % 77.06 High score for high values 1 Low
Spending rigidity % 6.79 High score for low values 5 Medium
Debt per capita € p.c. 1,514.56 High score for low values 1 Low
Coverage of current expenditure and loan repayments through current revenues % 100.46 High score for high values 1 Low
New liabilities generated in the current period on the accumulated current liabilities % 68.41 High score for low values 4 Medium
Capital account expenditure financed by loans and bonds % 25.1 High score for low values 1 Low
Deficit/surplus on health expenditure per capita € p.c. 13.03 High score for high values 10 High
EU funds management - effected payments % 39.0 High score for high values 5 Medium

2 Governance

PP+ - Good
Download All data

Rating

61 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
  • Target achievement
  • Smart Working
  • Public works incompleted

Weaknesses

  • Degree of digitization
  • Subsidiary companies

Indicators of the macro-indicator Governance

Indicator name Unit of measure Value Scoring criteria Score Trend Evaluation of the indicator
E- Government value 31.5 High score for high values 12 High
Degree of digitization value 0.06 High score for high values 1 Low
Target achievement value 111.0 High score for high values 12 High
Smart Working value 11.0 High score for high values 10 High
Public works incompleted numero 0.0 High score for low values 8 High
Public Real Estate properties - report value 11.0 High score for high values 5 Trend not available Medium
Public Real Estate properties - management € p.c. -0.87 High score for high values 6 Medium
Subsidiary companies ABS 40.0 High score for high values 1 Low
Anti-corruption measures undertaken value 13.8 High score for high values 6 Medium

3 Personnel management

PP+ - Good
Download All data

Rating

61 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

  • Per capita personnel expenditure
  • Personnel with a permanent contract per 1,000 inhabitants
  • Personnel with fixed-term contract on total personnel
  • Women managers on total managers
  • Average of training days

Weaknesses

  • Average age
  • Average days of absence (sick leave)
  • Provided bonus out of allocated ones to managers
  • Degree of differentiation of bonus paid to managers

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. 39.58 High score for low values 10 High
Personnel with a permanent contract per 1,000 inhabitants val./1.000 residents 0.7 High score for low values 10 Trend not available High
Personnel with fixed-term contract on total personnel % 0.0 High score for low values 10 High
Average age years 55.33 High score for low values 1 Low
Personnel with a degree on total personnel % 46.03 High score for high values 4 Medium
Average days of absence (sick leave) average days 21.41 High score for low values 1 Low
Total managers on total personnel % 4.1 High score for low values 5 Trend not available Medium
Women managers on total managers % 46.3 High score for high values 8 Trend not available High
Provided bonus out of allocated ones to managers % 100.0 High score for low values 1 Low
Average of training days average days 1.74 High score for high values 10 Trend not available High
Degree of differentiation of bonus paid to managers variance 24.39 High score for high values 1 Low

4 Public services and relations with citizens

P - Poor
Download All data

Rating

23 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

  • Landline high-speed internet access covering

Weaknesses

  • Efficiency indicator - reporting (general)
  • Efficiency indicator - timing supervision (general)
  • Beds in residential healthcare facilities per 10k inhabitants
  • Integrated home care services
  • Accredited private healthcare facilities per 10k inhabitants
  • Territorial pharmaceutical expenditure per capita
  • Citizens involvement
  • FOIA register: accepted requests

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 10.0 High score for high values 1 Trend not available Low
Efficiency indicator - timing supervision (general) value 0.0 High score for high values 1 Trend not available Low
Landline high-speed internet access covering % 40.8 High score for high values 10 High
Hospital emigration % 8.7 High score for low values 5 Medium
Beds in residential healthcare facilities per 10k inhabitants v/ 10k inhabitants 18.5 High score for high values 1 Low
Integrated home care services % 2.3 High score for high values 1 Low
Accredited private healthcare facilities per 10k inhabitants v/ 10k inhabitants 2.68 High score for low values 1 Low
Territorial pharmaceutical expenditure per capita € p.c. 16.8 High score for low values 1 Low
Citizens involvement value 1.5 High score for high values 1 Low
FOIA register: accepted requests % 68.35 High score for high values 1 Trend not available Low

5 Public tenders and relations with suppliers

P - Poor
Download All data

Rating

26 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

Weaknesses

  • Recurring contractors in direct procurements
  • Direct procurements on global public tenders - number
  • Direct procurements on global public tenders - amount
  • Per capita debt amount vs suppliers

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 % 11.11 High score for low values 1 Low
Direct procurements on global public tenders - number % 0.78 High score for low values 1 Trend not available Low
Direct procurements on global public tenders - amount % 0.01 High score for low values 1 Low
Timeliness of payments indicator days 14.82 High score for low values 8 Medium
Per capita debt amount vs suppliers € p.c. 27.47 High score for low values 1 Low
Number of corporate creditors per 10k citizens v/ 10k inhabitants 1.73 High score for low values 7 Medium
Settlement of commercial debts incurred during the fiscal year % 79.8 High score for high values 7 Medium

6 Environment

P - Poor
Download All data

Rating

32 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

  • Urban waste disposal into dump

Weaknesses

  • Air quality - PM 2.5
  • Land consumption
  • Contaminated sites
  • Soil waterproofing due to artificial covering
  • 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 % 89.3 High score for low values 1 Low
Land consumption % 10.49 High score for low values 1 Low
Contaminated sites thousandths 5.8 High score for low values 1 Low
Urban waste disposal into dump % 1.6 High score for low values 14 High
Soil waterproofing due to artificial covering % 10.4 High score for low values 1 Low
Population exposed to landslide risk % 5.0 High score for low values 1 Low
Population exposed to flood risk % 5.1 High score for low values 6 Medium
Electricity consumption covered by renewable sources % 31.4 High score for high values 7 Medium