• 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

Umbria

Compare
Comparative values by:
Download Report All data

SYNTHETIC INDEX OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITY

PP - Satisfactory

Rating

54 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

PP+ - Good
Download All data

Rating

67 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

  • Collection capacity
  • Spending capacity
  • Spending rigidity
  • New liabilities generated in the current period on the accumulated current liabilities
  • Capital account expenditure financed by loans and bonds
  • Deficit/surplus on health expenditure per capita

Weaknesses

  • Debt per capita
  • Coverage of current expenditure and loan repayments through current revenues
  • 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 % 87.62 High score for high values 4 Medium
Financial pressure per capita € p.c. 2,449.58 High score for low values 4 Medium
Collection capacity % 88.02 High score for high values 10 High
Spending capacity % 92.18 High score for high values 10 High
Spending rigidity % 2.76 High score for low values 10 High
Debt per capita € p.c. 1,499.33 High score for low values 1 Low
Coverage of current expenditure and loan repayments through current revenues % 101.03 High score for high values 1 Low
New liabilities generated in the current period on the accumulated current liabilities % 49.59 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. 0.42 High score for high values 10 High
EU funds management - effected payments % 37.0 High score for high values 1 Low

2 Governance

PP - Satisfactory
Download All data

Rating

53 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

  • Smart Working
  • Subsidiary companies

Weaknesses

  • Public works incompleted
  • Anti-corruption measures undertaken

Indicators of the macro-indicator Governance

Indicator name Unit of measure Value Scoring criteria Score Trend Evaluation of the indicator
E- Government value 15.0 High score for high values 6 Medium
Degree of digitization value 0.27 High score for high values 6 Medium
Target achievement value 10.0 High score for high values 6 Medium
Smart Working value 11.0 High score for high values 10 High
Public works incompleted numero 2.0 High score for low values 1 Low
Public Real Estate properties - report value 111.0 High score for high values 5 Trend not available Medium
Public Real Estate properties - management € p.c. -0.12 High score for high values 6 Medium
Subsidiary companies ABS 100.0 High score for high values 12 High
Anti-corruption measures undertaken value 10.8 High score for high values 1 Low

3 Personnel management

P+ - Weak
Download All data

Rating

40 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

  • Personnel with a degree on total personnel
  • Average of training days

Weaknesses

  • Personnel with fixed-term contract on total personnel
  • Average age
  • Women managers on total 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. 65.52 High score for low values 5 Medium
Personnel with a permanent contract per 1,000 inhabitants val./1.000 residents 1.26 High score for low values 5 Trend not available Medium
Personnel with fixed-term contract on total personnel % 8.21 High score for low values 1 Low
Average age years 54.41 High score for low values 1 Low
Personnel with a degree on total personnel % 50.18 High score for high values 8 High
Average days of absence (sick leave) average days 19.2 High score for low values 4 Medium
Total managers on total personnel % 3.78 High score for low values 5 Trend not available Medium
Women managers on total managers % 34.15 High score for high values 1 Trend not available Low
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 average days 1.23 High score for high values 10 Trend not available High
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 - Poor
Download All data

Rating

38 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

Weaknesses

  • Efficiency indicator - reporting (general)
  • Efficiency indicator - timing supervision (general)
  • 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 % 21.7 High score for high values 5 Medium
Hospital emigration % 11.3 High score for low values 5 Medium
Beds in residential healthcare facilities per 10k inhabitants v/ 10k inhabitants 65.8 High score for high values 5 Medium
Integrated home care services % 2.5 High score for high values 5 Medium
Accredited private healthcare facilities per 10k inhabitants v/ 10k inhabitants 2.25 High score for low values 5 Medium
Territorial pharmaceutical expenditure per capita € p.c. 13.7 High score for low values 5 Medium
Citizens involvement value 6.5 High score for high values 5 Medium
FOIA register: accepted requests % 77.59 High score for high values 1 Low

5 Public tenders and relations with suppliers

PPP - Very Good
Download All data

Rating

86 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

  • Direct procurements on global public tenders - number
  • Direct procurements on global public tenders - amount
  • Timeliness of payments indicator
  • Per capita debt amount vs suppliers
  • Number of corporate creditors per 10k citizens

Weaknesses

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 % 27.27 High score for low values 7 Medium
Direct procurements on global public tenders - number % 44.68 High score for low values 14 Trend not available High
Direct procurements on global public tenders - amount % 1.95 High score for low values 14 High
Timeliness of payments indicator days -17.54 High score for low values 16 High
Per capita debt amount vs suppliers € p.c. 0.05 High score for low values 14 Trend not available High
Number of corporate creditors per 10k citizens v/ 10k inhabitants 0.01 High score for low values 14 Trend not available High
Settlement of commercial debts incurred during the fiscal year % 78.21 High score for high values 7 Medium

6 Environment

P+ - Weak
Download All data

Rating

44 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

Weaknesses

  • Urban waste disposal into dump

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 % 76.2 High score for low values 6 Medium
Land consumption % 5.27 High score for low values 6 Medium
Contaminated sites thousandths 0.8 High score for low values 6 Medium
Urban waste disposal into dump % 37.0 High score for low values 1 Low
Soil waterproofing due to artificial covering % 5.3 High score for low values 6 Medium
Population exposed to landslide risk % 2.0 High score for low values 6 Medium
Population exposed to flood risk % 7.2 High score for low values 6 Medium
Electricity consumption covered by renewable sources % 37.6 High score for high values 7 Medium