More transparency among private entities evaluated this year by the Council, but more than half does not reach 50% compliance

although the average degree of compliance achieved by all entities is insufficient, one 47.5 %, there is an improvement on the assessment made by the Council in 2025, when the average Mandatory Information Compliance Index (ICIO) achieved by the category of private subjects was 34.4%.

In this year’s assessment, there is once again a large compliance disparity by entity, with some achieving very high standards or full compliance, and others that still have huge shortcomings. There are 27 entities that achieve an ICIO of more than 80%, while 70 (56% of the total analyzed), do not reach even 50%.

To obtain the data of the ICIO, the Council reviews whether the entities publish on their web pages the information to which they are obliged and whether they do so properly (with sufficient degree of updating, accessibility, in reusable formats, etc. ).

The selection of the evaluated entities has been made through random sampling between entities receiving subsidies or public aid amounting to more than 500,000 euros in the period of one year, based on the information contained in the National Database of Subsidies.

Of the 125 entities analyzed, 62 had already been evaluated by the Council, and 63 entities were analyzed for the first time in 2026. The subjects evaluated include companies, foundations, associations, sports federations and NGOs.

Seven out of ten entities analysed have a transparency portal on their institutional website. It is noteworthy that 23 entities that were already evaluated by the Council in 2025 still do not enable one, despite the indications to that effect given by the independent authority responsible for ensuring transparency in Spain.

By type of entities, within the analyzed sample, in general the level of compliance is much higher among sports federations, with an average ICIO of 63%, followed by private foundations (51.4%), NGOs (38.3%) and associations (35.3%). Companies are the ones with the worst average level of compliance (32.1%).

The mandatory information that is least published by the entities analyzed are the description of the organizational structure and the profile and professional trajectory and the remuneration of their top managers, as well as the information related to contracts and agreements signed with public administrations.

Regarding the quality of the published information, the most frequent problems are the lack of the date on which it was reviewed or updated, and the publication in non-reusable formats.

The Council’s working philosophy is to help subjects obliged to comply with the Transparency Act. To do this, after reviewing its web pages, it formulates specific recommendations to the entities to improve their level of compliance. In the time granted for the formulation of observations and allegations, 44 entities have proceeded to incorporate improvements in their transparency portals, with which their ICIO has increased almost 40 percentage points. The Council recalls that the involvement of the entities is fundamental to advancing transparency and accountability in Spain.

There are 27 entities that obtain an ICIO higher than 80%, and five of them reach full compliance: the Royal Spanish Cycling Federation, Full Inclusion Confederation Spain, Royal Spanish Golf Federation, Foundation for Climate Research, Santa María la Real Foundation.

These data represent a step forward compared to the 2025 evaluation, when only 4 of the 82 entities evaluated that year (4.9%) were above that threshold. Likewise, 14 entities have more than 90% of ICIO.

For those that do not reach a satisfactory level of compliance, the Council recalls that companies and private entities receiving public funds must strictly comply with the obligations of transparency imposed on them by law. The evaluation work carried out by the Council and the specific recommendations it makes contribute to improving compliance and boosting the level of transparency of many obliged subjects; however, the current law does not provide for a sanctioning regime and does not give the Council coercive powers to ensure full compliance with legal mandates.

Share: