• 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)

Compare Public Administrations

Administrative Capacity Index

PP+ - Good
64/100

Macro-indicators list

PP+ - Good
67/100
Indicator Value Score Evaluation
Financial autonomy 94.2 8 High
Financial pressure per capita 2,267.6 8 High
Collection capacity 83.5 1 Low
Spending capacity 86.1 5 Medium
Spending rigidity 0.9 10 High
Coverage of current expenditure and loan repayments through current revenues 96.2 8 High
New liabilities generated in the current period on the current accumulated liabilities 39.6 8 High
Capital account expenditure financed by loans and bonds 0.0 8 High
Debt per capita 1,088.9 5 Medium
Deficit/surplus on health expenditure per capita -2.8 5 Medium
EU funds management - effected payments 34.0 1 Low

PP+ - Good
75/100
Indicator Value Score Evaluation
Open data availability 8,052.2 8 High
E- Government 26.0 10 High
Degree of digitalization 0.7 5 Medium
Performance 112.8 12 High
Working from home (WFH) 10.0 4 Medium
Public works incompleted 5.8 1 Low
Public Real Estate properties - wide report 1,111.0 8 High
Public Real Estate properties - management 0.1 8 High
Subsidiary companies 40.0 1 Low
Anti-corruption measures undertaken 112.8 10 High
Court of Auditors - update 2.0 8 High

PPP+ - Excellent
95/100
Indicator Value Score Evaluation
Per capita personnel expenditure 15.8 10 High
Personnel expenditure on current expenditure 0.7 10 High
Expenditure for external advisory on personnel expenditure 0.0 10 High
Personnel with fixed-term contract on total personnel 0.3 10 High
Average age 53.0 10 High
Personnel with a degree on total personnel 43.7 5 Medium
Average days of absence (sick leave) 6.9 10 High
Managers on population 0.1 10 High
Provided bonus out of allocated ones to managers 84.9 10 High
Degree of differentiation of bonus paid to managers 160.1 10 High

PP+ - Good
71/100
Indicator Value Score Evaluation
Efficiency indicator - reporting (multivariable) 2.0 10 High
Efficiency indicator - timing supervision (multivariable) 0 N.A.
Online services 45.5 10 High
Landline high-speed internet access covering 32.1 10 High
Hospital migration 4.5 8 High
Beds in residential healthcare facilities per 10k inhabitants 85.4 4 Medium
Integrated Home Care services 2.6 4 Medium
Accredited private healthcare facilities per 10k inhabitants 2.5 4 Medium
Per capita territorial pharmaceutical expenditure 140.3 1 Low
Planning of renewal of disused public RE properties 4.5 6 High
Citizens involvement 4.5 6 High
FOIA register: accepted requests 94.7 4 High
FOIA register: average time of reply to requests 18.3 4 High

P - Poor
23/100
Indicator Value Score Evaluation
Recurring contractors in direct procurements 10.0 2 Low
Direct procurements on global public tenders - number 20.1 2 Low
Direct procurements on global public tenders - amount 9.4 2 Low
Timeliness of payments indicator -18.1 16 High
Per capita total amount of debts with suppliers 0 N.A.
Number of corporate creditor per 10k inhabitants 0 N.A.
Settlement of commercial debts incurred during the fiscal year 42.0 1 Low

P - Poor
37/100
Indicator Value Score Evaluation
Air quality - PM 2.5 97.0 1 Low
Land consumption 12.1 1 Low
Contaminated sites 7.8 1 Low
Urban waste disposal at landfill 4.2 14 High
Soil waterproofing due to artificial covering 12.1 1 Low
Population exposed to landslide risk 0.5 12 High
Population exposed to flood risk 4.4 6 Medium
Electricity consumption covered by renewable sources 24.0 1 Low