- Companies Index
- Government Index
- Home
- About Us
- Our Work
- Why It Matters
- Defence Corruption Risks Typology
- Diagnosing Corruption Risks
- Metrics & Surveys
- Self-Assessment Process
- research
- Companies Index
- Preliminary Results
- Northrop Grumman
- MTU Aero Engines
- Babcock International
- DCNS
- EMBRAER
- Fujitsu
- Lockheed Martin
- Rolls Royce
- Safran
- Thales
- BAE Systems
- Dyncorp
- General Electric
- Harris Corporation
- Hewlett Packard
- Raytheon
- Honeywell
- ITT Corporation
- KBR Inc
- L3 Communications
- Nec Corporation
- Rockwell Collins
- SAIC
- ST Engineering
- Meggit
- Arsenal AD
- Cobham
- Curtiss Wright
- Day & Zimmermann
- General Dynamics
- Patria
- QinetiQ
- Rafael Advanced Defense Systems
- RUAG
- Russian Helicopters
- Saab
- Textron
- Ultra Electronics
- Serco
- EADS
- Dassault Aviation
- Fluor
- Diehl Stiftung
- CAE Inc
- MDBA Missile Systems
- Thyssen Krupp 2
- Finmeccanica 2
- Goodrich Corporation
- United Technologies
- Aselsan
- Agility
- Jacobs Engineering
- Wyle
- Cubic Corporation
- AAR
- Alion Science and Technology
- ATK
- Booz Allen Hamilton
- CSC
- FLIR
- Mantech
- Teledyne Technologies
- VSE Corporation
- Nammo
- Daewoo
- Samsung
- MTU
- Otokar
- Oshkosh Corporation
- Krauss-Maffei Wegmann
- Damen Schelde
- LIG Nex 1
- Poongsan
- Chemring
- Rheinmetall
- Hindustan Aeronautics
- Navantia
- CACI International
- General Atomics
- SRA International
- SRC Inc
- URS Corporation
- Fincantieri
- Mitsubishi Heavy Industries
- Indra
- Aviation Industry Corporation
- Avibras
- Avio
- Battelle
- Bharat Earth Movers Limited
- Bharat Electronics
- Boustead
- Bumar Group
- China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation
- Navistar
- Doosan DST
- Elbit Systems
- GKN
- Gorky Automobile Plant
- Israel Aerospace Industries
- Israel Military Industries
- Kawasaki Heavy Industries
- Mitsubishi Electric
- Nexter
- Zodiac SA Holding
- Denel
- RTI Systems
- Accenture
- Abu Dhabi Shipbuilding
- Tatra
- testing
- Defence Companies Anti-Corruption Index: Preliminary results - Part B
- Preliminary Results
- Government Index
- Gov Index Preliminary Results
- Kenya
- Russia
- Ghana
- Hungary
- Cyprus
- Argentina
- France
- Cote D'Ivoire
- Serbia
- Afghanistan
- Iran
- Bulgaria
- Kazakhstan
- Croatia
- Algeria
- Jordan
- Thailand
- Ukraine
- Italy
- India
- Nigeria
- Iraq
- Eritrea
- Cameroon
- Syria
- Sweden
- Somalia
- China
- Democratic Republic of the Congo
- South Africa
- Israel
- Kuwait
- Latvia
- West Bank
- Rwanda
- Singapore
- Ethiopia
- Nepal
- Turkey
- Pakistan
- United Kingdom
- Bangladesh
- Brazil
- USA
- Belarus
- Australia
- Georgia
- Poland
- Qatar
- Uzbekistan
- Venezuela
- Colombia
- Greece
- Saudi Arabia
- Austria
- Morocco
- Yemen
- Zimbabwe
- Indonesia
- Bahrain
- Sri Lanka
- Angola
- Tunisia
- South Korea
- Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Mexico
- Czech Republic
- Lebanon
- Singapore
- Norway
- Philippines
- UAE
- Tanzania
- Japan
- Malaysia
- Germany
- Oman
- Slovakia
- Chile
- Spain
- Uganda
- Lybia
- Egypt
- Taiwan
- With Governments & Armed Forces
- With the Defence Industry
- Education & Training
- Tackling Defence Corruption Around the World
- Focus Areas
- Tools & Resources
- Publications
- FAQ
- Media Room
- Defence Corruption News Digest
- News Archive
- Upcoming Events
- Our Programme in the Media
- What we are Reading/Listening to
- Press Releases
- Events Archive
- 'The Transparency of Defence Budgets' got high media attention in launch in Malaysia
- Blog
- jobs
Self-Assessment Process
|
The process begins with a detailed questionnaire to be filled in by senior members of national defence ministries. Upon completing the questionnaire, a draft report is produced by an expert team, consisting, for example, of Transparency International and national experts. The draft report is then followed up by an in-country visit of the expert team, which leads to in-depth interviews with relevant actors in the defence establishments before submitting a final report. For NATO members, the process is similar and also begins with a detailed questionnaire to be filled out by senior members of national defence ministries. Upon completing the questionnaire and submitting it to NATO, a draft report is produced which is distributed to an expert team consisting of NATO international staff, members of the working group that developed the process, and Transparency International. The expert team then conducts an in-country visit to interview senior personnel in the defence establishment on the basis of the previous responses. Following the visit, the expert team prepares a short report highlighting strengths and weaknesses and recommendations for reform, and presents this to the country's Ambassador to NATO. Nations are encouraged to repeat the process on an annual or biennial cycle. The Self-Assessment QuestionnaireThe document contains a set of questions that cover all the key topics relevant to building integrity and reducing corruption risk. The content of the questionnaire is under nine headings:
1. Democratic control and engagement The NATO Self-Assessment questionnaire can be downloaded here. You can also read an example of a Self-Assessment Peer Review report from Bulgaria's MOD here. Read more on Diagnosing Corruption Risks. Read more on Our Work. |






The Integrity Self-Assessment Process is a detailed process designed to allow nations to assess the strength of the current integrity system in the