About 510 Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) of government scored low in the latest Transparency and Integrity Index report for 2022, Daily Trust findings have shown.
Accordingly, the Development Bank of Nigeria (DBN), Bank of Industry (BOI) and National Pension Commission (PENCOM) have emerged as the top three organisations in the 2022 Transparency and Integrity Index ranking for MDAs.
Race to presidency: Atiku unveils agenda, pledges jobs, poverty eradication, others
High BP: Expert warns against high intake of salt
The DBN came top of the ranking with 58.74 points, while BOI and PENCOM scored 48 and 33 respectively to finish second and third. The Nigerian Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI) and the Bureau of Public Service Reforms were ranked among the top five agencies.
In the same vein, the bottom five agencies that have zero points are the Sokoto-Rima River Basin Development Authority, Tafawa Balewa Square Management Board, University of Maiduguri Teaching Hospital, Upper Niger River Basin Authority and Vertinary Council of Nigeria.
The ranking was carried out by the Centre for Fiscal Transparency and Integrity Watch (CeFTIW), supported by the MacArthur Foundation.
The Executive Director of CeFTIW, Mr Umar Yakubu, said the Transparency and Integrity Index providesd the benchmark to rate public sector institutions in Nigeria, and at the same time empower Nigerians to demand accountability at all levels
How the MDAs were assessed
Checks by Daily Trust show that out of the 511 MDAs assessed in the report, only the Development Bank of Nigeria scored above 50 points, which is an average score; the other 510 scored below 50 points, which is below average.
Checks by Daily Trust also show that the variables used to assess the MDAs include website integrity, fiscal transparency (financials), open procurement, anti-corruption, citizens engagement and human resources and inclusion
Commenting on the report, Mr Yakubu said, “511 MDAs were assessed across six broad variables, and the the ranking is aimed at preventing corruption in public office as it centred on procurement, budget, human resources, inclusion and website integrity.
“We used this to check the level of transparency with regards to public finances, especially in procurement; how the MDAs spend their money, generate taxes and recruit people. It also assesses them generally on efficiency.
“It is on this assessment that we brought out the ranking of 511 institutions which you saw; where some did well and some did not do well. We hope they will engage Nigerians more on their websites; it is a way of preventing corruption.”
Yakubu regretted that most MDAs chose to present information on their citizen engagement but declined information on procurement, which turned out to be where the corruption centered more on.
He also frowned at the non-availability of information on federal character from the MDAs to enable Nigerians know states’ representation in the various public offices.
he said, “Those are the things missing, but citizens engagement and social media relationship are very active, but our aim is for the MDAs to give information on procurement and publish their audited reports.
“The centre had already involved the EFCC, ICPC and Code of Conduct Bureau to compel defaulting MDAs to give information on procurement and things concerning their finances.
Major findings of the report
Providing more insight on the ranking, Team Lead of the research, Mukhtar Abdulhameed, said the key variables for assessment were central to the outcome of the report.
On website integrity, he said, “The variable seeks to evaluate the accessibility issues of MDAs’ websites as a standard website has to be well structured, functional and accessible at all times.
“It should have well-organised landmarks, headings, styles, content, images, links, tables, forms, widgets, scripts, audio and video, and it should be navigated easily.”
On assessment based on fiscal transparency (financials), Abdulhameed noted that, “Fiscal transparency is an essential aspect of entrenching transparency in the public sector as It entails the timely disclosure of budgetary and other financial documents that explain the financial position of public institutions.”
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) defines fiscal transparency as “the comprehensive, clarity, reliability, timeliness and relevance of public reporting on the past, present and future states of public finances”.
The requirement for fiscal transparency according to him “Involves having budgets documents that are complete, accurate, reliable and available in the public domain.
On open procurement, the research team lead stated that, “The requirement for open procurement is for MDAs and other government institutions to publicise, among other information, tender adverts, method of application for contracts, bidding process, and other detailed information on the awarded contracts, the status of the contracts and contractors.”
For anti-corruption, he said fighting corruption and bribery in all its ramifications ought to be among the cardinal responsibility of all institutions.
He further said, “The anti-corruption variable seeks to evaluate the publication of policies and guidelines for fighting corruption in MDAs and other government institutions. There are two (2) sub-variables which are as follows: Anti-corruption policy and whistleblowing policy.”
He also noted that citizens engagement serves as another important aspect of good governance in providing an open environment for the participation of citizens in decision-making processes.
“The contributions of citizens usually play an important role towards entrenching transparency and accountability in public institutions. MDAs are expected to provide an open environment for engaging citizens.’’
In the area of human resources and inclusion, he explained that, “Human resources variable seeks to evaluate the publication of diverse classes of information. Section 2(3)(c)(vi) of the Freedom of Information Act, 2011 requires public institutions to publish the names, salaries, titles, and dates of employment of all employees and officers of the institution.”
Methodology of scoring
Providing more insights, he said, “Each sub-variable was given a score from 0-1 and the variable was aggregated to have percentage score of 100, after then it will be rescaled to carry the weight given to each variable.
He added that only the top six institutions scored 45 per cent and above, while 505 institutions scored less than 45 per cent.
He further said, “The sectoral ranking is to show the performance of each institution in its sector, coming first for those institutions with low percentage score doesn’t mean they performed well, it is just to show how the institutions performed within their sector.”
He added that only 20 MDAs published information regarding either anti-corruption policy or whistleblowing policy on their websites, with all the remaining 491 not having such information on their websites, noting that, “That is why they scored 0 in the anti-corruption variable.
How 2022 ranking differs from 2021
The Executive Director of the Centre, Mr Yakubu, noted that there was an overall improvement in 2022 compared to 2021.
He said, “There is an improvement in the overall performance. As of 2021 the highest score was 34.92 per cent, while for 2022 the highest score is 59.74 per cent. As of 2021 all the institutions scored below 45, while for 2022 six institutions scored 45 per cent and above
“Also, all the scores of all the sectors have improved in 2022.”
