Africa · edition 2025

Ghana 2025: strong rules, weak institutional capacity

Ghana's strongest dimension is enabling environment; its weakest is capacities and processes. The framework is not yet translating evenly into practice.

93 indicators 30 procuring entities 4 dimensions

Overall ITI score

35.8/100

Global average: 44.2

First edition

The ITI score

Ghana enters the index at 35.8 of 100

8.4 points below the global average. Enabling environment carries the score; capacities and processes holds it back.

The 2025 baseline

35.82025

View as table

Edition	Overall ITI score
2025	35.8

Score by dimension, 2025

Enabling environment60.9

Capacities and processes25.5

Citizen participation26.3

Data publication34.1

Dashed marks show the global average.

Inside the four dimensions

Where the score comes from

Enabling environment

60.9/100

Strongest area:Access-to-public information law · Right to request public information +3 more100

Weakest area:Infrastructure data disclosure standard · Organisation responsible for the infrastructure data disclosure standard +1 more0

Explore 3 sub-areas

1.1Legal framework and digital tools60.9

1.1.1Access to public information regulatory framework90

1.1.2Transparency standards in the public infrastructure sector52

1.1.3National digital information tools42

Capacities and processes

25.5/100

Strongest area:Knowledge about different data categories · Institutional website +1 more38

Weakest area:Plan to mitigate limitations for publishing information3.3

Explore 5 sub-areas

2.1Institutional capacities31.7

2.1.1Basic knowledge28.4

2.1.2Digital capacities34.9

2.2Institutional processes21.3

2.2.1Procedures to disclose information29.7

2.2.2Enablers and barriers to disclose information17.4

2.2.3Control over infrastructure projects disclosure16

Citizen participation

26.3/100

Strongest area:Permanent and inclusive citizen participation · Citizen participation in infrastructure projects33.3

Weakest area:Evidence of joint projects16

Explore 2 sub-areas

3.1Participation practices26.3

3.1.1Participation opportunities29.1

3.1.2Use of information by citizens24.1

Data publication

34.1/100

Strongest area:Project owner91.7

Weakest area:Environmental impact8

Explore 6 sub-areas

4.1Disclosure practices34.1

4.1.1Project identification76

4.1.2Project preparation27.3

4.1.3Execution contract procurement46.9

4.1.4Supervision contract procurement15.4

4.1.5Execution contract implementation22.8

4.1.6Supervision contract implementation19

Procuring entities

How 30 procuring entities compare

Scores run from 66.1 to 6.2, with a median of 17.7.

0Leading80 to 100

2Strong60 to 79

9Developing40 to 59

19Weak0 to 39

#
1	Shama District Assembly	66.1	55.1	74.6	70.4
2	Wassa East District Assembly	65.1	58.7	52.8	78.5
3	New Juaben South Municipal Assembly	59.3	43.3	71.4	65.7
4	Tarkwa Nsuaem Municipal Assembly	58.2	67.3	87.7	31.8
5	Ahanta West Municipal Assembly	56.9	52.3	30.3	77.6
6	Sekondi-Takoradi Metropolitan Assembly	50.6	52.2	74.9	34.1
7	Ministry of Energy and Green Transition	50.5	56	80.4	27
8	Effia-Kwesimintsim Municipal Assembly	50.1	56.8	82.3	24.2
9	Ministry of Roads and Highways	49	50.5	65.2	37.5
10	Nzema East Municipal Assembly	48.2	60.6	37.7	44
11	Mpohor District Assembly	45.4	75	55.5	13.2
12	Ghana Water Limited	30.8	46.4	44	8.9
13	Ministry of Transport	23.8	0	0	59.5
14	Wa Municipal Assembly	20.7	26.8	25.7	12.4
15	Ho Municipal Assembly	19.8	0	0	49.6
16	Ministry of Local Government, Chieftaincy and Religious Affairs	17.7	0	0	44.2
17	Sunyani Municipal Assembly	14.8	0	0	37
18	Ministry of Sports and Recreation	14.8	0	0	37
19	Ministry of Health	14.2	35.4	4.1	2
20	Ministry of Education	14.2	0	0	35.5
21	Ghana Civil Aviation Authority	13.9	0	0	34.8
22	Ghana National Petroleum Corporation	13.5	0	0	33.8
23	Ministry of Food and Agriculture	12.9	0	0	32.2
24	Department of Urban Roads	11.5	0	0	28.7
25	State Housing Company Limited	10.5	27.1	4.1	0
26	Techiman Municipal Assembly	10.5	0	0	26.1
27	Obuasi Municipal Assembly	9.6	0	0	24.1
28	Ghana Ports and Harbours Authority	9.2	0	0	23
29	Ministry of Communications, Digitalization and Innovations	6.5	0	0	16.3
30	Ministry of Works, Housing and Water Resources	6.2	0	0	15.6

Entity dashboard

Inspect one entity in depth

Choose an entity

Shama District Assembly

Ranked #1 of 30 entities

66.1PE ITI score

Capacities and processes29.6 above average55.1

Citizen participation48.3 above average74.6

Information disclosure36.3 above average70.4

Ticks mark the average across all 30 entities.

Full detail The complete 93-indicator breakdown

National ITI ScoreScore35.8

1Enabling environmentDimension60.9

1.1Legal framework and digital toolsVariable60.9

1.1.1Access to public information regulatory frameworkSub-variable90

1.1.1.1Access-to-public information lawIndicator100

1.1.1.2Right to request public informationIndicator100

1.1.1.3Sanctions over non-compliance with access to public information mandatesIndicator100

1.1.1.4Organisation guaranteeing the sanctionsIndicator60

1.1.2Transparency standards in the public infrastructure sectorSub-variable52

1.1.2.1Proactive publication of information on public procurement processesIndicator100

1.1.2.2Proactive publication of information on public infrastructure projectsIndicator100

1.1.2.3Infrastructure data disclosure standardIndicator0

1.1.2.4Infrastructure data disclosure standard proactively published as open dataIndicator60

1.1.2.5Organisation responsible for the infrastructure data disclosure standardIndicator0

1.1.3National digital information toolsSub-variable42

1.1.3.1Centralised digital information platformsIndicator60

1.1.3.2Easy access to information in digital information platformsIndicator60

1.1.3.3Infrastructure projects geographic information system (GIS) platformIndicator0

2Capacities and processesDimension25.5

2.1Institutional capacitiesVariable31.7

2.1.1Basic knowledgeSub-variable28.4

2.1.1.1Knowledge about the access-to-information lawIndicator32.7

2.1.1.2Knowledge about transparency initiatives in the infrastructure sectorIndicator27.3

2.1.1.3Knowledge about the transparency data standard in the infrastructure sectorIndicator15.3

2.1.1.4Knowledge about sanctions due to non-compliance on the access-to-public-information lawIndicator28.7

2.1.1.5Knowledge about different data categoriesIndicator38

2.1.2Digital capacitiesSub-variable34.9

2.1.2.1Computer equipmentIndicator36

2.1.2.2Connectivity to the internetIndicator33.3

2.1.2.3Institutional websiteIndicator38

2.1.2.4Information systems for infrastructure projectsIndicator31.3

2.1.2.5Use of digital information systemsIndicator38

2.1.2.6Infrastructure open data publicationIndicator31.3

2.1.2.7Visualisations based on infrastructure projects dataIndicator34

2.2Institutional processesVariable21.3

2.2.1Procedures to disclose informationSub-variable29.7

2.2.1.1Procedures for the publication of informationIndicator24

2.2.1.2Responsibilities for disclosureIndicator16

2.2.1.3Information officer profileIndicator35.3

2.2.1.4Information officerIndicator36

2.2.1.5Follow-up mechanisms on information requestsIndicator37.3

2.2.2Enablers and barriers to disclose informationSub-variable17.4

2.2.2.1Internal policy for information publicationIndicator22

2.2.2.2Disclosure training programmeIndicator26.7

2.2.2.3Identification of limitations for publishing informationIndicator18.7

2.2.2.4Plan to mitigate limitations for publishing informationIndicator3.3

2.2.2.5Bureaucratic barriers to publish informationIndicator20.7

2.2.2.6Documentation of non-compliance and sanctionsIndicator8.7

2.2.3Control over infrastructure projects disclosureSub-variable16

2.2.3.1Level of disclosed infrastructure projectsIndicator18

2.2.3.2Level of investment represented by disclosed infrastructure projectsIndicator14

3Citizen participationDimension26.3

3.1Participation practicesVariable26.3

3.1.1Participation opportunitiesSub-variable29.1

3.1.1.1Institutionalised citizen participationIndicator28

3.1.1.2Permanent and inclusive citizen participationIndicator33.3

3.1.1.3Citizen participation in infrastructure projectsIndicator33.3

3.1.1.4Citizen attention officeIndicator24

3.1.1.5Online form for consultation or requestsIndicator18.7

3.1.1.6Awareness of participation opportunitiesIndicator32

3.1.2Use of information by citizensSub-variable24.1

3.1.2.1Centralised citizen complaintsIndicator29.3

3.3.2.2Requests and responses of access to informationIndicator22

3.3.2.3Institutional response capacityIndicator21.3

3.3.2.4Institutional use evidenceIndicator28.7

3.3.2.5Citizens use evidenceIndicator20

3.3.2.6Evidence of joint projectsIndicator16

3.3.2.7Improvements as a response to citizen participationIndicator24.7

4Information disclosureDimension34.1

4.1Disclosure practicesVariable34.1

4.1.1Project identificationSub-variable76

4.1.1.1Project reference numberIndicator58.7

4.1.1.2Project ownerIndicator91.7

4.1.1.3Sector and sub-sectorIndicator89.7

4.1.1.4Project nameIndicator83.3

4.1.1.5Project locationIndicator88.3

4.1.1.6Project descriptionIndicator70.3

4.1.1.7PurposeIndicator65.7

4.1.2Project preparationSub-variable27.3

4.1.2.1Environmental impactIndicator8

4.1.2.2Land and settlement impactIndicator10

4.1.2.3Contact detailsIndicator22.3

4.1.2.4Project budget and date of approvalIndicator61

4.1.2.5Funding sourcesIndicator75

4.1.3Execution contract procurementSub-variable46.9

4.1.3.1Procuring entity and contact detailsIndicator74.3

4.1.3.2Procurement processIndicator60

4.1.3.3Number of firms biddingIndicator30

4.1.3.4Contract typeIndicator61.7

4.1.3.5Contract titleIndicator35

4.1.3.6Contract priceIndicator53.3

4.1.3.7Contract start dateIndicator41.7

4.1.3.8Contract durationIndicator36.7

4.1.3.9Contractor(s)Indicator28.3

4.1.3.10Contract scope of workIndicator47.7

4.1.4Supervision contract procurementSub-variable15.4

4.1.4.1Procuring entity and contact detailsIndicator28.7

4.1.4.2Procurement processIndicator14

4.1.4.3Number of firms/individuals biddingIndicator11.7

4.1.4.4Contract typeIndicator20

4.1.4.5Contract titleIndicator13.3

4.1.4.6Contract priceIndicator8.3

4.1.4.7Contract start dateIndicator8.3

4.1.4.8Contract durationIndicator10.3

4.1.4.9Contract firm/individualIndicator18.7

4.1.4.10Contract scope of workIndicator20.3

4.1.5Execution contract implementationSub-variable22.8

4.1.5.1Variation to contract priceIndicator31.7

4.1.5.2Reasons for price changesIndicator25

4.1.5.3Variation to contract durationIndicator31.7

4.1.5.4Reasons for contract duration changesIndicator15.3

4.1.5.5Variation to contract scopeIndicator26.7

4.1.5.6Reasons for scope changesIndicator18.3

4.1.6Supervision contract implementationSub-variable19

4.1.6.1Variation to contract priceIndicator20.3

4.1.6.2Reasons for price changesIndicator15.3

4.1.6.3Variation to contract durationIndicator23.3

4.1.6.4Reasons for duration changesIndicator16.3

4.1.6.5Variation to contract scopeIndicator23.3

4.1.6.6Reasons for scope changesIndicator21.7

Ghana 2025: strong rules, weak institutional capacity

Ghana enters the index at 35.8 of 100

Where the score comes from

How 30 procuring entities compare

Inspect one entity in depth

Compare this country with others