Q10.
Are there regular assessments of the areas of greatest corruption risk for ministry and armed forces personnel, and are the findings used as inputs to the anti-corruption policy?
10a. Risk assessments
Score
SCORE: 100/100
Rubric
Portugal score: 100/100
Score: 0/100
No defence-specific assessment of corruption risk has been commissioned or taken place in the last 2-3 years.
Score: 25/100
There is some awareness regarding risk areas, but an official risk assessment has not been conducted for the ministry or armed force as a whole, or within individual departments. The government may have commissioned or taken part in ad hoc assessments done by external parties or agencies.
Score: 50/100
There has been a partial assessment of corruption risks, but it does not clearly articulate risks for the ministry or armed forces.
Score: 75/100
Corruption risks are clearly identified, but risk assessments are conducted on the ministry or armed force as a whole, rather than with focus on individual departments.
Score: 100/100
Corruption risks are clearly identified. Individual departments conduct their own risk assessments in a process that reflects "business-as usual," whereby corruption risk assessment is a regular practice.
Assessor Explanation
Assessor Sources
10b. Regularity
Score
SCORE: 50/100
Rubric
Portugal score: 50/100
Score: 0/100
There is no regular schedule for risk assessments.
Score: 50/100
There is a schedule for risk assessments, but they are conducted on a less-than-annual basis.
Score: 100/100
Risk assessments are conducted on an annual basis or more frequently.
Assessor Explanation
Assessor Sources
10c. Inputs to anti-corruption policy
Score
SCORE: 50/100
Rubric
Portugal score: 50/100
Score: 0/100
Risk assessment findings are not used to inform anti-corruption policy or practice.
Score: 50/100
Risk assessment findings may be used to develop an anti-corruption policy or action plan, but they are not used to regularly update either policy or practice.
Score: 100/100
Risk assessment findings are used to develop and regularly update the anti-corruption policy and institutional action plans.
Assessor Explanation
Assessor Sources
Compare scores by country
Please view this page on a larger screen for the full stats.
Country |
10a. Risk assessments |
10b. Regularity |
10c. Inputs to anti-corruption policy |
---|---|---|---|
Albania | 25 / 100 | NA | NA |
Algeria | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Angola | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Argentina | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | NA |
Armenia | 75 / 100 | NEI | NEI |
Australia | 50 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Azerbaijan | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Bahrain | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Bangladesh | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Belgium | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 75 / 100 |
Bosnia and Herzegovina | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
Botswana | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 | NA |
Brazil | 75 / 100 | 0 / 100 | NEI |
Burkina Faso | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Cameroon | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Canada | 75 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Chile | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
China | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Colombia | 75 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Cote d'Ivoire | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Denmark | 75 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Egypt | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Estonia | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 | NA |
Finland | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
France | 75 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Germany | 75 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Ghana | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Greece | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Hungary | 50 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
India | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 25 / 100 |
Indonesia | 25 / 100 | NA | NA |
Iran | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Iraq | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Israel | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Italy | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
Japan | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Jordan | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Kenya | 25 / 100 | NA | NA |
Kosovo | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Kuwait | 25 / 100 | NA | NA |
Latvia | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
Lebanon | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Lithuania | 75 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 75 / 100 |
Malaysia | 75 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Mali | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Mexico | 25 / 100 | NA | 50 / 100 |
Montenegro | 50 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Morocco | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Myanmar | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Netherlands | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | NEI |
New Zealand | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
Niger | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Nigeria | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
North Macedonia | 75 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Norway | 75 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 75 / 100 |
Oman | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Palestine | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Philippines | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 75 / 100 |
Poland | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Portugal | 100 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 |
Qatar | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Russia | 50 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Saudi Arabia | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Serbia | 75 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 75 / 100 |
Singapore | 75 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
South Africa | 50 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 75 / 100 |
South Korea | 75 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 75 / 100 |
South Sudan | NEI | NEI | NEI |
Spain | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Sudan | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Sweden | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Switzerland | 50 / 100 | NEI | NEI |
Taiwan | 75 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
Tanzania | 75 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
Thailand | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Tunisia | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Turkey | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Uganda | 75 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 75 / 100 |
Ukraine | 75 / 100 | 50 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
United Arab Emirates | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
United Kingdom | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 | 100 / 100 |
United States | 25 / 100 | 25 / 100 | 0 / 100 |
Venezuela | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |
Zimbabwe | 0 / 100 | NA | NA |