This set comprises the data collected to inform the 2016 Cybersecurity Report entitled Cybersecurity Are we ready in Latin America and the Caribbean?, result of the collaboration between the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the Organization of American States (OAS), and the Global Cyber Security Capacity Centre (GCSCC) at the University of Oxford. It was collected through an online survey based on the Cybersecurity Capability Maturity Model (CMM) developed by the GCSCC and translated into two languages (English and Spanish). After a piloting stage, the survey was administered to a wide cross-section of national stakeholders in 32 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean. The responses received were aggregated, reviewed, cleaned and complimented with additional sources of information.

Click here to access the data: https://mydata.iadb.org/d/cd6z-sjjc

This dataset was created to support 2006 IPES - The Politics of Policies on the following topics: macroeconomics, government and democracy.

This database delivers information about several management systems, classified in five “pillars” of the public sector management cycle that are considered important for the implementation of Management for Development Results (MfDR): (i) results-based planning, (ii) results-based budgeting, (iii) public financial management (including auditing and procurement), (iv) program and project management (including the public investment system), and (v) monitoring and evaluation of public management. These pillars are broken down into components that track the maturity of institutional systems. The components are in turn composed of indicators and minimum requirements that these systems must have in an MfDR environment. The most of these requirements are categorized alternatively as: the requirement is met, partially met, or is not met.

Click here to access the data: https://mydata.iadb.org/d/wkuq-zrqa

This set comprises the data collected to inform the Discussion Paper: Advanced Experiences in Cybersecurity Policies and Practices- an Overview of Estonia, Israel, South Korea and the United States, result of the collaboration between Dr. James A. Lewis from the Center for Strategic International Studies (CSIS) and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). The data is based on the Cybersecurity Capability Maturity Model (CMM) jointly developed by the Organization of American States (OAS), the Inter-American Development Bank and the Global Cyber Security Capacity Center (GCSCC) at the University of Oxford and it supports the structured assessment of these four countries cybersecurity experiences and the lessons learned derived from them. This data set compliments the 2016 Cyber Security Report Data Set published in April 2016.

Click here to access the data: https://mydata.iadb.org/d/a9yc-jpsa

The Public Management Evaluation Tool (PET) evaluates five “pillars” of the public policies' management cycle that are considered important for the implementation of Management for Development Results (MfDR): (i) results-based planning, (ii) results-based budgeting, (iii) public financial management (including auditing and procurement), (iv) program and project management (including the public investment system), and (v) monitoring and evaluation of public management. These pillars are broken down into components that track the maturity of institutional systems. The components are in turn composed of indicators and minimum requirements that these systems must have in an MfDR environment. All of these measures (minimum requirements, indicators, components, and pillars) are scored on a scale from 0 to 5, where a 5 indicates an ideal institutional situation.

Click here to access the data: https://mydata.iadb.org/idb/dataset/c89t-dh9r

This data set corresponds to a survey performed between July and September of 2015 on 6 countries from Latin America and the Caribbean. 11,500 citizens provided information about their experience with a specific set of government services.


Click here to access the data: https://mydata.iadb.org/d/5x5h-9j6p

Results of the Civil Service Development Index (CSDI), obtained from diagnostics of the institutional quality of civil service systems in 16 Latin American countries. The IDB supported the design of a methodology that evaluates critical points to assess the civil services and carried out country evaluations in 2004. Between 2011 and 2013, a second group of diagnostics second group of diagnostics were completed (with the support of the Inter-American Development Bank, and in the case of Central American countries and Dominican Republic with the support of the Spanish Agency for International Cooperation and Development –AECID- and the Central American Integration System-SICA). Scores are available for 2004, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2015, 2017 and 2019 (year of second and/or third measurement varies per country). In 2015, 2017 and 2019, the IDB completed the third series of diagnosis. During the first assessment, 93 critical points were identified; each of those fed a subsystem and an index. In 2010 the methodology was simplified to 33 critical points and the base line was recalibrated to ensure comparability. The methodology is based in the identification of critical points that feed 8 subsystems: 1. Human Resources Planning, 2. Work Organization, 3. Employment management, 4. Performance management, 5. Compensation management, 6. Development management, 7. Human and social relations management, 8. HR Function organization; and 5 indexes: 1. Efficiency, 2. Merit, 3. Structural consistency, 4. Functional capacity, and 5. Integrating capacity.

Click here to access the data: https://mydata.iadb.org/idb/dataset/ddw5-db4y

The Database of Political Institutions presents institutional and electoral results data such as measures of checks and balances, tenure and stability of the government, identification of party affiliation and ideology, and fragmentation of opposition and government parties in the legislature, among others. The current version of the database, which is now hosted at the IDB, expands its coverage to about 180 countries for 40 years, 1975–2015. Researchers at the World Bank Development Research Group first compiled the database in 2000 (see citation information below). It has become one of the most cited databases in comparative political economy and comparative political institutions. Almost 3000 studies have used this database so far as a source of institutional and political data in their empirical analysis.

Click here to access the data: https://mydata.iadb.org/idb/dataset/ngy5-9h9d/

The Database of Political Institutions presents institutional and electoral results data such as measures of checks and balances, tenure and stability of the government, identification of party affiliation and ideology, and fragmentation of opposition and government parties in the legislature, among others. The current version of the database, which is now hosted at the IDB, expands its coverage to about 180 countries for 42 years, 1975–2017. Researchers at the World Bank Development Research Group first compiled the database in 2000 (see citation information below). It has become one of the most cited databases in comparative political economy and comparative political institutions. Almost 3000 studies have used this database so far as a source of institutional and political data in their empirical analysis.

Results of the Civil Service Development Index (CSDI), obtained from diagnostics of the institutional quality of civil service systems in 16 Latin American countries. The IDB supported the design of a methodology that evaluates critical points to assess the civil services and carried out country evaluations in 2004. Between 2011 and 2013, a second group of diagnostics second group of diagnostics were completed (with the support of the Inter-American Development Bank, and in the case of Central American countries and Dominican Republic with the support of the Spanish Agency for International Cooperation and Development –AECID- and the Central American Integration System-SICA). Scores are available for 2004, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2015 (year of second and/or third measurement varies per country). During the first assessment, 93 critical points were identified; each of those fed a subsystem and an index. In 2010 the methodology was simplified to 33 critical points and the base line was recalibrated to ensure comparability. The methodology is based in the identification of critical points that feed 8 subsystems: 1. Human Resources Planning, 2. Work Organization, 3. Employment management, 4. Performance management, 5. Compensation management, 6. Development management, 7. Human and social relations management, 8. HR Function organization; and 5 indexes: 1. Efficiency, 2. Merit, 3. Structural consistency, 4. Functional capacity, and 5. Integrating capacity.

Click here to access the data: https://mydata.iadb.org/d/ddw5-db4y