general image - title


Published in August 2023

This report is the fourth in a series of stocktaking of public financial management (PFM) diagnostic tools undertaken by the PEFA Secretariat following the reports from 2004, 2011, and 2018. It is the most ambitious stocktaking to date, building upon the earlier PFM tools stocktaking reports and mapping the tools across additional PFM functions and custodians to examine trends and good practices in tool development and usage. 


Volume 1



Volume 1 presents the updated spectrum of PFM diagnostic tools and their use. It is intended to contribute to increased knowledge of all stakeholders (governments, custodians, development partners, practitioners, and academia) on the available PFM diagnostic tools, as well as good practices related to tool development and use.

Main categories of PFM tools mapped

The current mapping identifies 64 PFM diagnostic tools that were available at the end of 2019. The mapped PFM tools are grouped across four groups based on their characteristics. The following table provides a snapshot of the number of tools available in each category at the end of 2019.

Table 1


In total, 23 custodians led or coordinated the development of the mapped tools active during the period. Most of the tools across groups are managed by 18 previously mapped custodians that include multilateral and bilateral agencies, international organizations, and regional development banks.

Mapped tools

Out of 64 tools in total, the analysis of tool development focuses on 31 tools developed from 2013 to 2019. Among the 31 PFM diagnostic tools developed in the four groups in the period 2013–2019 concentration of tool development was in Group B (14 tools or 45 percent of all tools developed) and Group D (9 tools or 29 percent of all tools developed). Together, the tools developed in Group B to assess specific PFM functions and in Group D to assess PFM performance in specific sectors account for almost three quarters of all tools developed in the period. Development of tools in Group A to assess broad PFM and in Group C to address fiduciary concerns follows with a much smaller share (with 8 tools developed in both groups, or 26 percent of all tools in total).

Tools developed by group, 2013-2019

Tools developed by Groups

Trends in tool development in the period suggest that tool development in Groups A, B, and C reached its highest point by 2017, with an increase in development of Group D tools from 2018 onward.

Tools by groups according years, 2013-2019

Tools by groups according years

Technical Coverage

Tools across groups developed in the period 2013–2019 reflect and contribute to a trend of technical coverage focused on assessing countries’ performance in budget preparation (13 tools) and accounting and reporting (12 tools). This is followed by tools covering revenue management, budget execution, public procurement, and external scrutiny (9 tools each). A smaller number of tools developed in the period cover the debt management (1 broad-based tool) and asset management functions (3 tools).

Tools mapped and all tools

Check the graphs of all tools according categories, compared to those developed in the period 2013-2019:     Group A    Group B    Group C    Group D


Trends by region

Relative to other regions, the regions using higher number of PFM diagnostic tools are Sub-Saharan Africa and Europe and Central Asia. These regions are followed by Latin America and the Caribbean and East Asia and Pacific, with Middle East and North Africa, South Asia, and North America standing for a lower share of tools used, which in part reflects the number of countries in the region.

Tools by region

Trends by income

Lower-middle-income countries had a higher usage number of PFM diagnostic tools (36 percent of total uses) followed by the upper-middle-income countries (28 percent of total usage). Low-income countries follow with 22 percent of the total usage. The income level with the least number of PFM tools used is the high-income countries (14 percent of total usage). The highest usage by income level is 14 in low-income, 16 in lower-middle-income, 15 in upper-middle-income, and 7 in high-income countries.

Trends by income


Volume II



The 2022 PEFA Stocktaking of PFM tools is the fourth stocktaking exercise, following the reports from 2004, 2011 and 2018. This Stocktaking mapped the PFM diagnostic tools available as of end of 2019 (cut-off date). The Volume 2 presents a short overview of tool characteristics and a detailed description of each of the tools mapped. The detailed description of individual PFM tools is organized around four main themes: (i) Objective and features, (ii) Methodology, (iii) Development and use and (iv) Transparency, elaborated in 17 characteristics. 

The tool mapping provides an inventory of PFM diagnostic tools across four groups based on their characteristics.

Figure 1


Click the description of tool characteristics and any individual tool below to learn more.


image 4


View all characteristics

Objective and features

1. Objective

2. Institutional coverage

3. Technical coverage

4. Application method


5. Methodology

6. Benchmarking and scoring system.

7. Linkage to PEFA framework

8. Complementarity with PEFA framework

Development and use

9. Development and coordination

10. Assessment management

11. Uses by government and members of the PFM community

12. Sequencing with other tools

13. PFM capacity building

14. Tracking of changes and frequency of assessments

15. Resource requirements


16. Access to methodology

17. Access to assessment results