Portugal
OECD member since 1960
This set of indicators covers countries’ strategic frameworks on anti-corruption. These could consist of a single strategy or be spread across multiple strategies, but all strategies must be adopted at the highest level of government (council of ministers/cabinet, president or parliament/congress). Data for OECD members was published in 2021 and 2024 with information relating to 2020 and 2023, respectively. Data for non-OECD countries was published in 2024, with information relating to 2023.
| ARG | AUS | AUT | BRA | CAN | CHL | CRI | CZE | DNK | EST | FIN | FRA | GRC | IRL | MEX | NLD | NOR | PER | POL | PRT | SVK | SVN | ESP | SWE | TUR | UKR | USA | ARG | AUS | AUT | BRA | CAN | CHL | CRI | CZE | DNK | EST | FIN | FRA | GRC | IRL | MEX | NLD | NOR | PER | POL | PRT | SVK | SVN | ESP | SWE | TUR | UKR | USA | OECD_AVG | OECD_AVG | APAC_AVG | APAC_AVG | EU27_AVG | EU27_AVG | Eurasia_AVG | Eurasia_AVG | LAC_AVG | LAC_AVG | BEST | BEST | BEST | ALL_AVG | ALL_AVG | ALL_AVG | OECD_ACC_AVG | OECD_ACC_AVG | OECD_PARTNER_AVG | OECD_PARTNER_AVG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 90 | 70 | 40 | 90 | 100 | 70 | 100 | 60 | 50 | 100 | 90 | 90 | 100 | 90 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 40 | 80 | 80 | 80 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 40 | 70 | 100 | 90 | 70 | 40 | 90 | 100 | 70 | 100 | 60 | 50 | 100 | 90 | 90 | 100 | 90 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 40 | 80 | 80 | 80 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 40 | 70 | 100 | 84.3 | 84.3 | 70 | 70 | 84 | 84 | 70 | 70 | 81.7 | 81.7 | 100 | 70 | 100 | 83.1 | 70 | 82.6 | 73.3 | 73.3 | 70 | 70 |
List of indicators for Effectiveness of internal control and risk management
Click on an indicator to see the criteria that are used to calculate it.
Top performing and underperforming criteria in Portugal
This table shows the criteria within this dataset where the selected country performs the most above and below average. OECD countries are compared to the OECD average and partner countries are compared to the partner country average. Only criteria fulfilled by less than 40% of countries are shown as leading, and only criteria fulfilled by more than 40% of countries are shown as lagging.
Integrity risk assessments for at least half of sample organisations apply either a qualitative or quantitative scoring methodology (e.g. risk likelihood, impact and velocity) that enables prioritisation of high versus low risks. | 11% of OECD countries fulfill | 6% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill | Leading | |
The body with direct responsibility for managing integrity risks is not part of the IA function and reports directly to the head of the institution in all sample organisations. | 13% of OECD countries fulfill | 6% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill | Leading | |
All sample organisations have conducted at least one risk assessment exercise in the past 3 years. | 16% of OECD countries fulfill | 3% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill | Leading | |
The definition of IC and IA in policy or regulatory documents are defined according to international standards. | 63% of OECD countries fulfill | 9% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill | Lagging | |
Regulations on IC define managerial responsibility regarding the implementation of IC and IA. | 61% of OECD countries fulfill | 9% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill | Lagging | |
Processes and procedures are established for addressing the risks and actions that management must take, including reporting procedures or addressing weaknesses in the internal control system. | 50% of OECD countries fulfill | 6% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill | Lagging |
One central government body (CHU) develops the IC and IA systems. | 39% of OECD countries fulfill | 9% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill | Leading | |
A central function develops the IC system. | 50% of OECD countries fulfill | 9% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill | ||
A central function develops the IA system. | 50% of OECD countries fulfill | 9% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill | ||
The CHU promotes IC and IA methodologies based on international standards. | 39% of OECD countries fulfill | 9% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill | Leading | |
A central function promotes IC methodologies based on international standards. | 50% of OECD countries fulfill | 9% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill | ||
A central function promotes IA methodologies based on international standards. | 50% of OECD countries fulfill | 9% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill | ||
The CHU has conducted a government-wide review on the IC and IA systems, annually during the last 3 years. | 26% of OECD countries fulfill | 6% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill | ||
The central function has conducted a government-wide review of the IC system, annually during the last 3 years. | 29% of OECD countries fulfill | 6% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill | Leading | |
The central function has conducted a government-wide review of the IA system, annually during the last 3 years. | 34% of OECD countries fulfill | 9% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill | ||
The CHU or the central IA function co-ordinates training and certification of internal auditors. | 21% of OECD countries fulfill | 6% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill | ||
Guidelines on assessing integrity risks have been issued within the last 5 years by the CHU or the central function for IC to all public sector institutions implementing IC. | 32% of OECD countries fulfill | 6% of OECD partner and accession countries fulfill |