- World Bank-Backed Review to Assess Financial Management in All 261 Districts
Ghana’s Metropolitan, Municipal and District Assemblies have improved their average public financial management score, but nearly half still fall below the minimum benchmark, exposing a gap between progress on paper and the systems needed to account for public money.
At the launch of a new assessment of local government finances, World Bank representative Raymond Muhula cited a league table prepared by the Centre for Local Governance Advocacy. The average score rose from 22.00% in 2023 to 56.00% in 2025, a 34-percentage-point increase.
Yet Muhula said nearly half of assemblies remained below the minimum standard, with procurement planning, financial reporting, internal audits and follow-up on audit findings still weak.
The Ministry of Finance and the World Bank have launched a Sub-National Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability Assessment and Public Financial Management Review.
The exercise is intended to examine local public finance systems across the full budget cycle and cover all 261 districts.
The figures point to a mixed picture. A rising average suggests that some aspects of financial management have improved, but it does not show how evenly those improvements are distributed. Nor does an average explain whether assemblies are consistently planning procurement, reporting transactions, conducting internal audits and acting on audit recommendations. The finding that nearly half remain below the benchmark makes that unevenness central to the debate.
The distinction matters because local assemblies translate national and local resources into services and infrastructure for communities. Weak financial controls can make it harder to track whether budgets are followed, whether procurement is planned effectively and whether problems identified by auditors are corrected.
Stronger systems do not guarantee better outcomes by themselves, but without them, it becomes more difficult for residents and oversight bodies to see how public money has been used.
The review’s broad coverage could help clarify where the weaknesses lie. By examining the full budget cycle in every district, it may reveal whether problems are concentrated in particular stages, such as planning or reporting, or whether they reflect wider capacity and accountability challenges.
The announcement does not yet provide the assessment’s detailed methodology, timetable or district-level results, so it is too early to identify which assemblies are performing well or poorly.
That is why the league-table score should be treated as a signal, not a complete diagnosis. The increase from 22.00% to 56.00% is significant, but the score alone does not show which controls improved, whether the improvements were sustained or how they affected spending decisions.
The new review will need to explain what its benchmarks measure and how the findings can be compared with previous assessments.
The weaknesses identified are also connected. Procurement planning affects how assemblies prepare to spend; financial reporting records what they actually spend; internal audit checks whether processes are working; and follow-up determines whether identified problems are addressed.
A weakness at one stage can undermine controls elsewhere. For example, an audit that identifies a problem has limited value if there is no clear process to ensure corrective action.
Muhula’s warning that follow-up on audit findings remains weak is particularly important. Auditing is not an end in itself. Its public value depends on whether findings lead to changes in practice, recovery of funds where appropriate, stronger controls or sanctions when rules have been breached. The available information does not quantify the value of unresolved audit findings or explain how assemblies currently track implementation. Those are questions the review could help answer.
Speaking on behalf of the Finance Minister, the Ministry’s Chief Director, Dr Patrick Nomo, reaffirmed the government’s commitment to transparency and accountability in managing local public resources.
The challenge will be to turn that commitment into routine practice across 261 assemblies, each of which must plan, spend, report and account for public funds under local conditions.
The exercise also raises a question about responsibility. Weak performance may reflect gaps in systems, staff capacity or oversight, but the available information does not assign causes to individual assemblies.
A useful assessment will need to distinguish between these factors. If the same weakness appears across many districts, national guidance or common systems may be needed. If performance varies sharply, targeted support and stronger local accountability may be more effective.
For communities, the stakes are practical. Financial reporting and internal audits can seem like administrative matters, but they shape whether residents can follow the trail from approved budgets to completed projects and services.
When records are incomplete or audit findings are not acted on, the public has fewer ways to determine whether resources have delivered the intended results.
The review is expected to produce recommendations to improve financial management and accountability. Its value will depend on what happens after the assessment: whether findings are published in a form the public can understand, whether each assembly receives clear actions and deadlines, and whether progress is measured over time.
Without follow-through, the exercise could become another diagnosis of problems that remain unresolved.
Ghana’s local-government record therefore contains both evidence of improvement and a warning about the limits of averages. A rise in the league-table score is encouraging, but it cannot conceal the number of assemblies that remain below the minimum benchmark.
The task now is to determine what lies behind that gap, identify the controls that are failing and ensure that audit recommendations are acted on.
The new assessment provides an opportunity to move the discussion beyond broad commitments to transparency. If it establishes a clear baseline for all 261 districts and tracks progress against specific reforms, it could help make local financial management more visible and accountable.
If it does not, the central finding will remain unchanged: average scores are rising, while nearly half of assemblies still fall short.
