How the Aid Transparency Index rose from the dead

The Aid Transparency Index is back, and it’s got a new business model. The index, which has been published every two years since 2012, tracks the transparency of funders, using data published via the International Aid Transparency Initiative, or IATI, standard. It looked to have been canceled for 2026, after its publishers, United Kingdom-based nonprofit Publish What You Fund, announced they had not been able to secure funding. But Gary Forster, CEO of PWYF, said that after the index was canceled, approaches from the organizations involved led to a rethink of the business model. The index was funded in 2024 by IATI, which stepped in, somewhat reluctantly, after the index lost its largest funder for the first decade of its existence, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. But when it came to the 2026 edition, IATI decided not to renew its commitment, blaming “financial constraints.” However, after conversations with several of the organizations featured in previous editions, PWYF has changed course and announced that the Aid Transparency Index will be published as a paid-for service, allowing any eligible organization to apply and be independently assessed and ranked. The index previously featured 50 of the largest and most influential aid donors, but will now only include those donors that provide financial support. Those participating will receive an accreditation mark recognizing their level of transparency and engagement in the process. The index will be free to read. Forster said that after his organization announced the decision not to run the index in 2026, there was widespread disappointment across the development sector. He said organizations prized the recognition of a good score, but even more than that, they valued the detailed feedback of the assessment process. Many also talked about the importance of demonstrating transparency in a political and communications environment that is increasingly suspicious of aid organizations. Forster admitted that his team faces a careful balance in the future. If organizations are paying for accreditation, he explained, it becomes far more difficult to assess them impartially. “We’ll need to carefully manage our independence and any potential conflicts of interest, just as we have in the past,” he said. “But we’re confident in our ability to do so, to uphold a global standard, and to continue working with the aid and development sector to improve the quality, availability, and usefulness of aid data.”