Introduction
This note presents a series of charts which provide an overview of the Republic of Congo’s recent public financial management (PFM) performance based on this country’s 2014 Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA) assessment. Comparisons are made between the Republic of Congo’s performance and the performance of the other twenty-three countries that had PEFA assessments published in 2014-2015. All analyses have been prepared using results reported from using the 2011 PEFA methodology.
Overall PFM performance
Individual country PFM performance has been determined by applying the following points scale to reported individual performance indicator (PI) scores as presented in Table 1. No points were allocated to PIs that were not scored because either data was unavailable, a D score was given or the PI was not applicable.
Table 1: PI scoring methodology
|
PEFA PI score |
Points allocated |
|
A |
3 |
|
B+ |
2.5 |
|
B |
2 |
|
C+ |
1.5 |
|
C |
1 |
| D+ |
.5 |
| D |
0 |
The graph in Figure 1 below shows the Republic of Congo’s overall score was ranked twenty-second out of the twenty-four countries.
Figure 1: Aggregate PEFA scores for 24 countries
Download a png version of Figure 1 here (the Republic of Congo’s overall result) to review the overall scores of the Republic of Congo and the twenty-three other countries in more detail.
Details of the distribution of overall country scores across PFM performance categories, as determined by PFMConnect, are presented in Table 2. The Republic of Congo’s overall score was 21 points.
Table 2: Distribution of country PFM performance levels
| PFM performance | Overall Scores | Number of countries |
| Very strong | 66.37-84 | 0 |
| Strong | 49.57-66.36 | 8 |
| Moderate | 32.77-49.56 | 7 |
| Weak | 15.97-32.76 | 8 |
| Very weak | 0-15.96 | 1 |
| Total | 24 |
The Republic of Congo’s overall PFM performance is classified as “weak”.
PI performance
The graph in Figure 2 below shows the scores for the Republic of Congo’s individual PIs compared with the average score recorded for each PI across the twenty-four PEFA assessments we have studied. Please note that no scores were recorded for the top seven indicators in Figure 2 as one indicator (PI-15) was not assessed and six other indicators (PI-4, PI-5, PI-9, PI-16, PI-21 and PI-23) received D scores.
Figure 2: Republic of Congo PI score comparisons
Download a pdf version of Figure 2 here (the Republic of Congo PIs) to review individual PI scores in more detail.
Twenty-seven PIs were assessed. Five PIs had scores above the country average, one PI had a score equal to the country average whilst twenty-one PIs had scores below the country average.
Performance across key PFM activities
The graph in Figure 3 below shows the average scores for the six key PFM activities compared with the average score recorded for these activities across the twenty-four country PEFA assessments we have studied.
Figure 3: Republic of Congo key PFM activity comparisons
All six key PFM activities recorded scores below the country average. Download a png version of Figure 3 here (the Republic of Congo’s key PFM activities) to review these scores in more detail.
PEFA ASSESSMENT
You can download the 2014 PEFA assessment for the Republic of Congo here.
