Over the past decade, Latin America and the Caribbean has fundamentally reshaped its approach to integrity and anti-corruption. Supported by strong regional commitments, growing alignment with OECD standards and innovative national reforms, countries have moved beyond reactive anti-corruption measures towards comprehensive integrity systems that promote transparency, accountability, participation and ethical governance. This chapter highlights the region’s major achievements and showcases how governments have built stronger foundations for a culture of integrity and transparency.
The Next Decade of Action for Public Integrity in Latin America and the Caribbean
Abstract
Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) countries face a set of interconnected policy challenges, including persistently low economic growth and productivity, high levels of inequality and labour-market informality, growing climate-related risks, and migration pressures. At the same time, fiscal constraints and rising debt levels restrict governments’ ability to finance development priorities (OECD et al., 2025[1]). Moreover, organised crime, violence and weak governance remain major obstacles to investment, state capacity and public trust (OECD, 2025[2]; Bisca et al., 2024[3]). Indeed, trust is lower in LAC than in OECD countries: slightly more than one-third (35%) of people in LAC place high or moderately high trust in the national government, compared to 39%, on average, across OECD countries (OECD, 2025[2]).
Promoting integrity and transparency is not only a governance objective and relevant means to promote trust in government; it is also a development imperative. The region has been a frontrunner in responding to this challenge. The Americas was the first region to develop a regional anti-corruption convention. Even before the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) was adopted in 2003, the region had taken significant steps. As early as 1996, the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption (IACAC) was adopted by the member countries of the Organization of American States (OAS). In 2001, the OAS General Assembly adopted the Follow-up Mechanism for the Implementation of the Inter-American Convention against Corruption (MESICIC) to support the development of the IACAC, with the OECD contributing to the mechanism’s peer-review process.
The region’s growing alignment with OECD integrity standards over the past 25 years reflects a clear shift from reactive and fragmented approaches focused on fighting corruption, towards designing and implementing more proactive, strategic, coherent and sustainable integrity frameworks that consider the broader governance environment. This evolution has been supported by strategic and technical support from the OECD, as well as by IDB-supported reforms to strengthen institutional capacity, transparency, accountability and public sector effectiveness (Box 1.1). A growing number of countries in the region are actively participating in the OECD policy dialogues and formally adhering to OECD legal instruments. Seven LAC countries are parties to the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions and adherents to the OECD Recommendation of the Council for Further Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico and Peru), seven have adhered to the OECD Recommendation on Public Integrity, five have adhered to the OECD Recommendation on Transparency and Integrity in Lobbying and Influence, and seven have adhered to the OECD Recommendation on Open Government.
The OECD and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) have developed a strong partnership to support and reinforce the region’s commitment to public integrity, through complementary approaches combining international standards, policy dialogue, technical assistance, financing, knowledge generation and implementation support. Regional platforms such as the OECD-IDB Public Integrity Network for Latin America and the Caribbean and the OECD Latin-America and Caribbean Law Enforcement Network (LAC LEN) have fostered peer learning, policy dialogue and the exchange of good practices among countries across the region. Strengthening institutions and good governance is also recognised as a key objective of the OECD Strategic Framework for Latin America and the Caribbean.
The OECD has supported 10 LAC countries through over 35 country projects and 18 monitoring reports to support integrity and anti-corruption reforms as well as open government reforms (see Annex B). In parallel, the IDB has supported countries across the region through policy dialogue, technical co-operation, lending operations and knowledge products aimed at strengthening transparency, integrity, accountability and institutional effectiveness.
Moreover, 15 LAC countries participate in the OECD Public Integrity Indicators (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay) and the region was featured for the first time in the OECD Anti-Corruption and Integrity Outlook 2026 (OECD, 2026[4]).
Source: (OECD, 2026[4]) and Annex B.
In 2018, the Lima Commitment adopted at the VIII Summit of the Americas on “Democratic Governance and Corruption” marked a milestone and reiterated the commitment of countries in the region to fight corruption to rebuild trust and shift towards an inclusive and sustainable growth model. Following up on the high-level Lima Commitment, the Ministerial Meeting of the OECD LAC Regional Programme on “Integrity for Good Governance in Latin America and the Caribbean: from commitments to action” held in Lima, Peru on 18-19 October 2018, provided the forum for LAC countries to agree on a set of concrete measures, approved in the “Action Plan Integrity for Good Governance” (OECD, 2018[5]).
Evidence from the OECD Public Integrity Indicators (PII) show that LAC countries have developed comparatively strong regulatory frameworks in key dimensions of integrity systems, except on lobbying where only few LAC countries have regulations. However, their effective implementation often remains a challenge, undermining impact. Across all key dimensions assessed, the PII provide comparative evidence for implementation gaps, defined as the difference between the standard regulations and standard practices. For instance, the implementation gap in political finance reaches 41 percentage points in LAC countries, compared to just 20 in OECD non-LAC countries (Figure 1.1). In conflict of interest, the gap is 53 percentage points in LAC countries and 35 in OECD non-LAC countries (Figure 1.1). In judicial integrity, the gap stands at 30 percentage points in LAC countries, versus 23 in non-LAC OECD countries (Figure 1.1). Therefore, although implementation is a widespread issue across the OECD, the challenge is more pronounced in the LAC region.
While these figures provide valuable evidence on regulatory frameworks and their implementation in practice, assessing their full effectiveness requires complementary indicators that capture changes in institutional behaviour, the prevention of misconduct, the quality of administrative decision-making, and people’s experiences in their interactions with the State. Such indicators would help further determine whether integrity measures translate into tangible improvements in public sector integrity and trust.
Note: For “Strategy”, regulation refers to criteria covering strategic objectives and practice refers to criteria on implementation of the strategy. For “Lobbying”, “Political finance”, “Conflict of interest”, “Access to information”, “Corruption risk management”, “Judicial integrity”, “Disciplinary system” and “Prosecutorial integrity” regulation refers to criteria covering the regulatory framework (primary and secondary legislation) and practice refers to criteria covering good practices in place.
The LAC averages for “Strategy”, “Lobbying”, “Political finance”, “Conflict of interest” and “Access to information” do not include Uruguay, as data is not available. The LAC average for “Corruption risk management” does not include Bolivia, Paraguay and Uruguay, as data is not available. The LAC average for “Disciplinary system” do not include Bolivia, Paraguay and Uruguay, as data is not available. The LAC average for “Judicial integrity” do not include Bolivia, Mexico, Paraguay and Uruguay, as data is not available. The LAC average for “Prosecutorial integrity” do not include Bolivia, Colombia, Paraguay and Uruguay, as data is not available.
OECD non-LAC refers to the average of available data for OECD countries, excluding data for the four LAC member countries: Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, and Mexico.
How to read: For “Political finance”, LAC countries fulfil 89% of standard regulatory criteria and 48% of standard criteria on practice, which translates into an implementation gap of 41 percentage points. OECD non-LAC countries fulfil 74% of standard regulatory criteria and 55% of standard criteria on practice, which translates into an implementation gap of 19 percentage points.
Source: OECD Public Integrity Indicators database (Data extracted on 16 September 2026).
Promoting integrity and transparency is a team exercise: while there may be leaders and formal mandates, meaningful impact requires co-ordination and co-operation across the whole of government as well as reaching out and involving the whole of society. The following sections focus on key areas where the LAC region has made significant progress and that could serve as inspiration for other regions aiming at achieving real co-ordination and co-operation within and beyond the state. These include establishing effective co-ordination mechanisms to enhance dialogue and coherence across public institutions as well as national integrity strategies to set evidence-based policy priorities, developing mainstreaming mechanisms and policies to promote proactive implementation throughout the entire public administration, and promoting transparency, participation, and accountability as the foundation for engaging with the whole of society. Finally, several countries in the region have been particularly innovative in the use of data analytics in procurement, audit and risk management, an area of growing interest that could help in bridging existing implementation gaps.
1.2.1. Inter-institutional co-ordination mechanisms
Countries frequently face significant co-ordination challenges, including fragmented institutional mandates, overlapping responsibilities, weak information-sharing arrangements, competition among agencies and the limited involvement of key actors outside the executive branch. These challenges can result in isolated initiatives, inconsistent implementation and reduced effectiveness of integrity policies. The OECD Recommendation on Public Integrity stresses the relevance of establishing clear responsibilities at the relevant levels and promoting mechanisms for horizontal and vertical co-operation (OECD, 2017[6]). Co-ordination mechanisms can help align priorities, avoid duplication, close institutional gaps and ensure that prevention, detection, enforcement and accountability measures reinforce one another.
The LAC region has broadly put in place relevant mechanisms, such as inter-institutional commissions, platforms or committees, that contribute to improving co-ordination and coherence in support of the country’s strategic vision on anti-corruption and integrity. Establishing these mechanisms can also signal political commitment, as they can contribute to shifting the national policy dialogue towards achieving effective implementation of laws and policies. 10 out of the 15 countries in the LAC region that participate in the OECD Public Integrity Indicators have established formal mechanisms to promote inter-institutional co-operation (Figure 1.2 and Table A A.1 in Annex A). These co-ordination mechanisms for integrity and anti-corruption policies in Latin America display significant institutional diversity, ranging from informal arrangements to highly formalised, multi-stakeholder systems. Some of these mechanisms include the legislative and/or judiciary branches, autonomous control bodies such as Supreme Audit Institutions, and in some cases, formal participation from civil society or the private sector. Some countries have set up formalised structures (e.g. Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Peru), while others have favoured a more flexible and informal approach (e.g. Argentina, Chile).
Source: Own elaboration based on Table A A.1 in Annex A.
1.2.2. National integrity and anti-corruption strategies
This co-ordinated inter-institutional approach in the region has contributed to the development of comparatively strong national strategic integrity frameworks that bring together diverse perspectives and foster a shared understanding of corruption risks and policy solutions across the public administration. According to the OECD Public Integrity Indicators, the LAC region stands out in the quality of its strategic framework, scoring above OECD non-LAC average in both regulation and practice dimensions that assess the quality of strategic frameworks. Indeed, on average, LAC countries fulfil 46% of regulation criteria and 37% of practice criteria, while, on average, OECD non-LAC countries fulfill 34% and 28%, respectively (Figure 1.3). The number does not capture yet ongoing positive trends. For example, the Dominican Republic (with support from the OECD) is currently developing its first national integrity strategy, which will be assessed once adopted.
A common strength of the national strategies in the region is the highly participatory process through which they have been developed, involving the whole of government and society. Bolivia, Brazil, Chile and Costa Rica stand out as positive examples for such inclusive engagement. Furthermore, countries such as Mexico succeed in leveraging multiple data sources and conducting public integrity risk assessments, which are critical elements for adopting an evidence-based approach to set priorities. Chile has developed a transparent mechanism to monitor the implementation of its national integrity strategy; an area where other LAC countries could still improve.
On average, however, the region lags behind on several key elements needed to ensure an effective implementation of these national integrity strategies. For instance, only 4 out of 14 LAC countries track implementation rates, meaning that just 29% of LAC countries monitor whether their strategies are being implemented, while only 5 out of 14 LAC countries publish monitoring reports for all action plans at least once a year, no later than 3 months after the defined reporting schedule. Beyond tracking the completion of activities, monitoring should be complemented by evaluating whether interventions are effectively addressing the problems they were designed to tackle. Financial sustainability is another major challenge. None of the LAC countries has a financial plan that is multi-annual or linked to the medium-term expenditure framework, which limits the extent to which integrity strategies can be supported by predictable and sustained financial resources. Effective strategies require interventions to be prioritised based on identified integrity risks, institutional capacities and expected results, with these priorities clearly linked to available resources. As such, investing in stronger monitoring and evaluation frameworks, along with ensuring financial sustainability, could significantly enhance their impact and drive meaningful change by timely identifying and addressing implementation gaps.
Note: Regulation refers to criteria covering strategic objectives and practice refers to criteria on implementation of the strategy. Data for Uruguay is not available. OECD NON-LAC refers to the average of available data for OECD countries, excluding data for the four LAC member countries: Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, and Mexico.
Source: OECD Public Integrity Indicators database (Data extracted on 16 September 2026).
1.2.3. Mainstreaming integrity policies throughout the public sector
Establishing a dedicated function within public organisations responsible for ensuring compliance with integrity standards and co-ordinating their implementation can contribute significantly to strengthening implementation of laws and policies throughout the public sector. The mandate, functions and arrangements of such a function can vary significantly. In the LAC region, several countries have taken measures to translate and anchor integrity standards into a wide variety of sectorial, organisational and local realities. With the implementation of modern public compliance approaches, some countries are even at the forefront and can be considered international good practice. Dedicated integrity functions co-ordinate and support implementation at the organisational level, but do not replace the responsibility of each individual to uphold public integrity nor the responsibility of senior management and public managers to integrate integrity into planning, supervision and decision-making.
Two good practices stand out in the region: in Peru, the establishment of Offices of Institutional Integrity across all public entities, including other branches, autonomous bodies and local governments, has created a comprehensive and coherent institutional framework for integrity beyond branches and levels of government. In Brazil, the establishment of Integrity Sectorial Units across all entities of the federal executive branch has strengthened the institutional capacity to co-ordinate and implement integrity measures throughout the federal government. Mexico, Honduras and the Dominican Republic have established committees for promoting integrity at organisational levels (Figure 1.4 and Table A A.2 in Annex A provides more details on these arrangements). Dedicated units usually perform better than committees, where the members often lack the skills and, given the rotation of their members, the continuity required to achieve results. Colombia has followed a different path and opted for an Integrated Planning and Management Model (Modelo Integrado de Planeación y Gestión, MIPG). The MIPG requires all public managers to periodically report on their actions related to integrity, transparency and other cross-cutting policies.
Source: Own elaboration based on Table A A.2 in Annex A.
1.2.4. Open government: Access to information, citizen engagement and civic space
Countries across Latin America and the Caribbean have pioneered some of the world's most innovative reforms in transparency, participation, and accountability. For example, participatory budgeting was first developed in Brazil in the 1980s and has since become a widespread practice both across LAC and globally. The integrity and anti-corruption field is no exception: the LAC region is notable for its efforts to actively involve citizens and civil society in shaping integrity and anti-corruption agendas. Moreover, countries in the region have been adopting policies to improve access to information and government transparency, promote meaningful stakeholder participation and institutional arrangements that safeguard civic space, enabling citizens, oversight bodies and public institutions to contribute more effectively to policymaking and accountability.
Access to information and transparency
Transparency and access to information (ATI) are powerful tools to strengthen public integrity and curb corruption risks by enabling citizens to access government information, scrutinise public decisions and hold institutions accountable (OECD, 2024[7]). If public information is accessible, reliable, and easy to understand, citizens, journalists and oversight bodies can see how public decisions and policies are made and implemented, and how public money is spent. In this way, transparency and ATI support accountability while also playing an important preventive role: the prospect that decisions, actions and the use of public resources may be subject to public scrutiny can help deter misconduct and reduce risks of corruption, undue influence and other integrity breaches. When transparency is accompanied by effective accountability, including appropriate follow-up where information reveals misconduct or integrity risks, and combined with broader measures such as developing and enforcing strategic integrity frameworks and improving fairness, responsiveness and speed in service delivery, it can also contribute to strengthening public trust. According to the OECD Public Integrity Indicators, the LAC region is a good performer on the regulatory framework for transparency and access to public information. On average, countries fulfil 72% of criteria, on par with OECD countries. However, LAC countries fulfil on average 59% of practice criteria, slightly below the OECD average (62%).
Access to information has therefore remained a cornerstone of open government and democratic governance in the region. Strong ATI frameworks in LAC generally have broad scope across branches and levels of government. According to the OECD’s Government at a Glance Latin America and the Caribbean 2024, 86% of surveyed countries extend the application of ATI legislation to subnational authorities. Likewise, in 85% of LAC countries, the regulatory framework provides that all public institutions and private persons carrying out public duties are holders of public information; and that everyone, including non-citizens and legal persons, has the right to access information in all the forms available. Institutional implementation arrangements are also relatively robust: dedicated ATI officers or offices are required by law in 12 of the 14 surveyed countries, while 13 out of 15 countries for which PII data is available have established independent oversight bodies with a specific ATI mandate (OECD, 2024[7]). In parallel, governments have expanded the proactive disclosure of information. 77% of countries have published individualised data on public officials' remuneration and there has been universal disclosure of public tenders and their results on a centralised platform (Figure 1.5). However, as Figure 1.5 illustrates, countries may commit additional resources to make information on decision making available to the public, including government agendas and ministers’ agendas. Such proactive disclosure of information would reduce opacity on who accesses power; and how decision making is ultimately informed.
Source: OECD Public Integrity Database (16 September 2026).
Civic space
A protected civic space supports public integrity and is a key enabling condition for the effective implementation of open government reforms. By enabling citizens and civil society organisations to organise, participate in public life, express their views, scrutinise public action and contribute to policymaking, civic space supports more open, responsive and inclusive governance. It can also help identify integrity risks, bring diverse perspectives into public decision making and create channels through which concerns about corruption, undue influence or misconduct can be raised. Increasingly recognised as both a democratic safeguard and a governance asset, it can contribute to policy effectiveness, social cohesion, public integrity and public trust.
Performance in the region compares favourably at the global level, with nine surveyed LAC countries in the latest Survey on Open Government in 2021 scoring above the global average on measures of civic space (OECD, 2025[8]). Nevertheless, all 13 LAC countries examined in the paper face varying challenges in creating an enabling environment for civil society. At the same time, countries across the LAC region are introducing innovative mechanisms to strengthen the enabling environment for civil society and enhance transparency in state-civil society relations. In the Dominican Republic, for example, the National Centre for the Promotion and Support of Non-profit Associations (CASFL) maintains an open online platform providing information on civil society organisations' registration, funding, activities and areas of impact. By making this information publicly available, the platform strengthens transparency, supports accountability and facilitates a better understanding of the contribution of civil society organisations to public life and sustainable development.
A strong civic space also depends on the capacity and willingness of different stakeholders to uphold integrity in public life. Educating youth on integrity and engaging businesses through integrity initiatives contribute to a vibrant civic space by empowering citizens and economic actors to participate responsibly in public life, as also recognised by the OECD Recommendation on Public Integrity calling for a whole-of-society culture of public integrity.
LAC countries have adopted a range of approaches to fostering this culture of integrity, including integrating integrity education into school curricula, integrity education programmes delivered by integrity bodies, and partnering with civil society organisations and the private sector. For instance, since 2008, Brazil has implemented the programme “One for all and all for one! For ethics and citizenship”, which equips primary school students (ages 6-10) with the knowledge and skills related to ethics, citizenship, social participation and related values. The programme has achieved significant scale and expanded substantially following the introduction of its digital format. Between 2009 and 2018, an annual average of 548 schools and 73 210 students received the Programme’s content; between 2021 and 2024, annual average coverage increased to 1 324 schools and 211 188 students (Constantin, 2025[9]). In 2025, the programme reached 60 000 students across 650 schools, using printed and digital materials (Controladoria-Geral da União, 2026[10]). By extending integrity education to a large number of students from an early age, the programme provides a significant platform for developing knowledge and awareness of integrity and contributing to the longer-term promotion of a culture of integrity.
The private sector is another important partner in strengthening a whole-of-society approach to public integrity. LAC countries have implemented initiatives to engage the private sector in fostering a culture of integrity. Seven countries in the region are Parties to the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention and Adherents to the 2021 OECD Anti-Bribery Recommendation (OECD, 2021[11]). This Recommendation includes several provisions on business integrity including incentives for corporate anti-corruption compliance, whistleblower protection, and multistakeholder engagement. Two collective action initiatives that involve the private sector stand out in the LAC region (OECD, 2025[12]):
Pro-Ethics Company initiative in Brazil: established in 2010, the Pro-Ethics Company Initiative (Pro-Ética) is a voluntary programme that recognises companies that demonstrate strong compliance programmes. Historically, each of its editions has seen an increasing number of companies apply to the programme, demonstrating its impact on the Brazilian business environment.
Maritime Anti-Corruption Network (MACN) initiative in Argentina: MACN and national partners launched a collective action initiative with local industry stakeholders and the government, which resulted in an 85% drop in reported corruption incidents between 2014 and 2024 in Argentine ports.
1.2.5. Data and technology for integrity
Data and technology, including the use of artificial intelligence, can help bridge implementation gaps and achieve impact by enhancing the effectiveness, efficiency and openness of integrity policies in different areas. As emphasised in the 2026 OECD Anti-Corruption and Integrity Outlook, countries are using data and digital tools to strengthen integrity and boost implementation, but opportunities remain to enhance oversight, effectiveness and accountability (OECD, 2026[4]).
The availability and quality of relevant data, the existence of digital public infrastructure and public servants with the required skills and mindset are all important enablers for the adoption and use of data and technology (see Chapter 2). The LAC region has made progress and some countries even outperform the OECD in key areas such as the adoption of interoperability frameworks (adopted by all LAC countries compared to 91% of OECD countries) and shared networks (adopted by 86%, compared to 82% of OECD countries), which are crucial for communication and data exchange across government agencies (OECD, 2024[7]). Moreover, evidence from the OECD’s Digital Government Index, which assesses governments’ policies, governance, capabilities and institutions needed to become a fully digital, data-enabled public sector, shows that, in 2025, from the 7 LAC countries for which data is available, Brazil, Chile and Colombia score above OECD average, while Peru, Mexico, Argentina and Costa Rica score below OECD average (OECD, 2026[13]).
Note: 2025 data cover 1 January 2023 to 31 December 2024.
Source: (OECD, 2026[13]).
Digitalisation can make administrative processes and public service delivery more transparent and efficient, thereby reducing risks of corruption. In turn, the use of data analytics and artificial intelligence can help to identify red flags of potential fraudulent activities and corruption in a range of areas where governments tend to collect reliable data (OECD, 2025[14]), thereby strengthening integrity risk management, audit and detection. For LAC countries, these tools offer an opportunity to further strengthen their preventive, risk-based approach to public integrity. Realising this potential will require not only greater and more strategic use of digital technologies, but also improvements in the availability, quality and interoperability of public-sector data, alongside stronger institutional capacity to analyse identified risks and translate insights into preventive and corrective actions. At the same time, the use of data analytics and artificial intelligence by public administrations can itself create integrity risks, including opacity, bias and gaps in accountability. Appropriate safeguards for transparency, traceability, human oversight and accountability are therefore needed to ensure that AI-supported decisions remain consistent with integrity principles.
Public procurement
Given the availability of reliable and comparative data, the LAC region has made significant advances in the use of data analytics in public procurement. Several high-profile corruption scandals in the LAC region have confirmed again that procurement is a high-risk area. In response, many LAC countries have taken steps to strengthen integrity by advancing e-procurement systems, enhancing transparency, enabling the participation of independent observers, reinforcing beneficial ownership regulations, and leveraging innovative technologies to prevent and detect fraud and corruption. These efforts illustrate how data and technology can be leveraged to promote integrity in high-risk areas.
For instance, recent major procurement reforms have introduced measures to strengthen e-procurement systems in LAC countries such as Chile, Costa Rica, and Mexico. In 2022, the e-procurement systems of Chile, Colombia, and the Dominican Republic served all seven core functions analysed by the OECD (this is: announcing tenders, e-tendering, electronic submission of bids, notification of awards, ex post contract management, electronic submission of invoices, and business intelligence module). Among the 12 surveyed LAC countries, three had systems supporting six of these functionalities, while two countries’ systems supported five (OECD, 2024[7]).
Source: Adapted from (OECD, 2024[7]) to include only LAC countries in the OECD Public Integrity Indicators.
Data and technology play a vital role in enhancing transparency in public procurement. When combined with other measures that promote a culture of integrity, increased transparency can strengthen public trust by clearly communicating how resources are allocated and used in infrastructure projects and procurement processes. A notable example is Brazil’s Obrasgov platform, which was created to establish guidelines for the disclosure of public works data. The platform systematically compiles georeferenced information on projects funded wholly or partially with public resources. It presents infrastructure data in user-friendly, concise formats, such as interactive management dashboards. Additionally, it provides access to open data, enabling users to analyse trends, generate statistics, and conduct in-depth research. Another example is Brazil’s tool ALICE (Audit Trails, Bids and Contracts Analyser), a data analytics tool created by the CGU to strengthen corruption-risk detection in public procurement. ALICE automatically analyses procurement data and applies alerts based on 40 risk typologies, helping auditors identify potentially irregular processes. Between 2023 and 2025, the tool analysed more than 600 000 procurement processes and generated red-flag alerts to support audit activities. Together, Obrasgov and ALICE illustrate how combining open data initiatives with data-driven risk detection can strengthen transparency, integrity and risk management in public procurement.
Beyond data disclosure, countries can leverage innovative technologies to enhance transparency and oversight during contract execution. For example, Costa Rica’s Comptroller General Office has been implementing the dIAra project, using Artificial Intelligence and low-cost technology to provide real-time, transparent oversight of public works, enhancing citizen participation and accountability (Heyaca and Pallotta, 2026[15]). This open-source platform fosters collaboration among government, society, and contractors, driving a shift toward greater transparency and community empowerment (Box 1.2). Another good practice is Mexico's SAI, which uses data analytics to inform its audits of procurement processes, identify risks, and concentrate its resources for heightened effectiveness in detecting irregularities such as potential conflict of interest and collusive behaviours, including at the state and municipal levels. Finally, the SAI of Colombia, during the COVID-19 health emergency, was able to monitor resources in real time by comparing market prices and calculating alleged cost overruns, allowing for timely corrections in public procurement.
The dIAra project represents a pioneering initiative to integrate AI with Internet of Things (IoT) technology to enhance the public audit of infrastructure projects. Developed jointly by Universidad Cenfotec and Costa Rica’s CGR with support from the German Cooperation Agency, dIAra addresses the challenge of monitoring public construction works in real time, providing auditors with automated, data-driven insights that enhance oversight effectiveness and transparency.
At its core, dIAra is a monitoring system that supports public auditors by automating the collection and analysis of visual data from construction sites. Low-cost IoT cameras, assembled locally with microcontrollers and 3D-printed components, capture images of ongoing works. These images are analysed by an AI-powered computer vision model trained to identify key site elements such as workers and equipment. The AI’s output is structured into reports that indicate the presence and activity levels on the site, enabling auditors to detect work stoppages or irregularities requiring further investigation.
The system complements traditional audit methods, which depend on periodic site inspections and manual reporting. Such approaches can be resource-intensive and limited in scope, especially for large-scale or geographically dispersed projects. By contrast, dIAra enables continuous and objective monitoring without the need for an auditor's physical presence. From a technical perspective, the development of dIAra reflects a commitment to technological sovereignty and open innovation. The entire system, including hardware designs, software code, AI training datasets, and deployment documentation, is open source. This openness ensures that the platform is adaptable to local needs, repairable by local technicians, and free from dependency on third-party vendors. Such a model fosters sustainable technological growth within Costa Rica and can be readily adapted by other countries or institutions with similar oversight challenges.
A critical innovation in dIAra is its AI component, specifically a model known as Modelo_1_29, which was trained exclusively on images collected from the monitored sites. This model demonstrated strong performance, achieving an average Intersection over Union (IoU) score of 82.7% and a sensitivity rate of 85.4%. These metrics indicate reliable identification of objects such as workers within site images under the conditions of the training dataset. The AI system automatically generates structured output files that summarise detected objects along with confidence scores and spatial co-ordinates. This enables efficient data analysis and supports auditors in tracking daily site activity and progress patterns.
While the model’s accuracy is promising, the project acknowledges important limitations. Since the AI was trained on a specific dataset from a single site, its performance may decline when applied to other construction environments with different visual characteristics or operational conditions. Variations in lighting, equipment, or worker attire could affect the model’s accuracy. Nonetheless, the open-source and modular nature of the system facilitates retraining and customisation, enabling future deployments to refine the model for diverse contexts. The project is still under development and requires further definition of its scalability.
dIAra illustrates how AI and IoT technologies can be strategically applied to modernise public infrastructure audits. It offers a cost-effective and replicable solution that improves monitoring precision and frequency, enhances institutional oversight capabilities, and contributes to national technological development. By combining automated visual recognition with structured data outputs, dIAra advances a model of transparent, efficient, and scalable audit that other public institutions worldwide may consider in their efforts to ensure responsible management of public resources.
Source: (Heyaca and Pallotta, 2026[15]).
Risk management and audit
Internal audit bodies and Supreme Audit Institutions in the LAC region are also successfully using digital technologies to strengthen the fight against corruption. For instance, Brazil’s SAI (TCU) developed a chatbot called ChatTCU to enhance the efficiency with which auditors gather and review documentation. As part of the digital transformation of Brazil’s public administration, the TCU has shared the source code of this advanced generative AI tool with various courts of accounts, ministries and oversight bodies (TCU, 2025[16]). Colombia’s SAI created the Directorate of Information, Analysis and Immediate Reaction to monitor, through data analysis, outstanding issues such as the level of execution of infrastructure projects. Moreover, Mexico’s SAI recognises the critical role that data and analytics can play in the fulfilment of its mandate and achievement of strategic goals. As such, it has defined a digital transformation work programme which emphasises wider goals and objectives for equipping auditors with the infrastructure, architecture, skills and tools needed to effectively audit in a digital environment.
The OECD’s Tech Connect for Integrity initiative (part of the Galvanise the Private Sector programme), facilitated a peer-to-peer exchange between Brazil’s Office of the Comptroller General (Controladoria-Geral da União, CGU) and Oracle. As part of this collaboration, a scientific research project named Helene was developed to explore the application of risk analytics and machine learning techniques to publicly available Brazilian government data. The study focused on developing risk indicators and a predictive model to assess potential integrity risks among government suppliers, including the likelihood of future administrative sanctions. The project was conducted as an experimental research initiative aimed at exploring innovative, data-driven approaches to preventing and detecting fraud and corruption. While the Helene model offered important insights to all participants, it has not yet been institutionalised or incorporated into CGU’s operational systems.