1. When and why was TI founded?
2. Why doesn't TI investigate and expose cases of corruption?
3. If TI doesn't get involved in individual cases of corruption,why then do you give the TI Integrity Awards to individualsthat have become engaged in the fight against corruption?
4. How is TI financed?
5. TI is partly funded by private sector companies,some of which have in the past even been implicatedin high-profile corruption cases. Doesn't this compromiseTI's independence?
6. Is there income that TI would not accept?
7. TI has National Chapters in more than 80 countries - but why isn't it present in such important countries as China, Saudi Arabia, or Japan?
8. Given TI's philosophy of working independently of governments,if a government asked TI to develop an anti-corruption programme,would TI agree to work as a consultant?
9. TI's annual Corruption Perceptions Index claims to be an indexof corruption in the world - why then does it include only 91 countries?
10. TI has been in existence for several years, but what effect has it really had on levels of corruption around the world?

When and why was TI founded?
TI was established in 1993 by a group of people who shared the vision of TI's founding chairman Peter Eigen. With backgrounds in inter-governmental and business environments, they shared in common the experience of having witnessed first hand the devastating effects of cross-border corruption. It was this desire to fight global corruption that prompted the launch of the fledgling non-governmental organisation, Transparency International, in May 1993. The convening conference brought together an array of international figures, including the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate and former President of Costa Rica Oscar Arias Sanchez, the former Foreign Minister of Mauritania Ahmedou Ould Abdallah, the former Foreign Minister of Bolivia Robert MacLean Abaroa, and Olusegun Obasanjo, then of the African Leadership Forum, now President of Nigeria.Together with Peter Eigen, the founding members were Hansjörg Elshorst, Joe Githongo, Fritz Heimann, Michael Hershman, Kamal Hossain, Dolores L. Español, George Moody Stewart, Jerry Parfitt, Jeremy Pope and Frank Vogl.When TI was established, it was still legal in most countries to make bribe payments abroad. It was this situation that the founders of TI wanted to change. For more information see TI history.

Why doesn't TI investigate and expose cases of corruption?
While TI and many human rights organisations often work closely together and have much in common, TI does not actively investigate individual cases of corruption. There are several reasons for this policy, both strategic and pragmatic:

TI is a politically non-partisan organisation whose primary function is the raising of awareness about corruption on a global level. Direct intervention by TI to uncover individual cases of corruption would not only deflect from that stated mission, but would also mean concentrating on specific instances of corruption to the detriment of TI's ongoing work in highlighting corruption.

TI believes that it is the right and proper place of institutions such as the media, police, prosecutors and auditors to expose and investigate individual cases of corruption. TI is not a corruption watchdog, but rather a facilitator in the struggle towards increased global good governance. In this respect, TI is better able to help investigators fight corruption.

The private sector needs to be convinced that high standards of integrity in corporate practice are imperative. TI's non-partisan viewpoint allows for constructive dialogue with both governments and big corporations. However, this does not prevent TI from publicly criticising the private sector or government agencies for failing to take meaningful steps towards reform.

TI National Chapter members often operate in politically volatile countries. Investigating individual cases of corruption would risk exposing TI members and supporters to incalculable risks. Similarly, it is typically easier for governments to refute specific allegations than to ignore the clamour for political reform.

If TI doesn't get involved in individual cases of corruption, why then do you give the TI Integrity Awards to individuals that have become engaged in the fight against corruption?
While TI itself refrains from an investigative role, many journalists, civil servants or civil society groups demonstrate considerable courage in exposing and denouncing corruption. TI stands behind these individuals. Their firmness deserves recognition. This is why TI has created the TI Integrity Awards, and this is also the reason why on many occasions TI and its National Chapters have drawn public attention to the case of whistleblowers that have become the target of persecution.

How is TI financed?
TI values its independence very highly, and we maintain it through the transparency of our funding and the diversity of our sources. The bulk of TI's income comes from government development agency budgets and foundations. Other sources of income include project funds from international organisations, donations from private sector companies and income from honoraria and publications. By not relying on just one source, TI is able to maintain its independence. In order to guarantee financial independence, TI is planning to set up an endowment fund. TI's National Chapters are financed independently from the international TI movement. This means that, with few and strictly limited exceptions, TI neither contributes to the budgets of its National Chapters, nor is it funded by them. Sources of income of National Chapters include membership fees, donations from individuals and corporations, court-imposed fines and project funds from donor agencies and governments.

TI is partly funded by private sector companies, some of which have in the past even been implicated in high-profile corruption cases. Doesn't this compromise TI's independence?
First, TI alone determines its programmes and activities: no donor has any input into TI's policies. Of course, if donors don't like what TI is doing, donors can withdraw their funding. We publish all the donors' names in our annual report, which is available on our website.TI has a very diverse income structure, and donations from all private sector companies currently account for about two percent of our total budget. There are several companies among those contributing to our budget that have in the past been involved in high-profile corruption cases. TI works within the private sector in an attempt to reduce supply side bribery and it is not TI's aim to condemn companies with a questionable past. The stronger their commitment to a no-bribes future, the better for everyone - but it is their responsibility, and theirs alone, to match their words with appropriate action in every country where their company is doing business.Yet TI works on the understanding that these companies have broken with the practices of the past and that they are working towards a business environment in which bribery is no longer accepted. For a company that has built up a network of "overseas agents", that has come to rely on "good connections", it is difficult to break from these practices overnight. If any corporate donor is accused of having been involved in corruption, they can expect no protection from TI. We would not hesitate in publicly calling on them to come clean. It is their responsibility to live up to their words. This notwithstanding, it is still perfectly legitimate to raise the issue of TI's independence vis-à-vis its contributors. This is why the following question is so crucial.

Is there income that TI would not accept?
The acceptance of financial contributions is governed by a few key principles that are meant to ensure that TI is free in its decision-making. These include:

• TI does not accept donations that are tied to certain conditions imposed by the donor. Of course, just like any other organisation, TI obliges itself to fulfil certain criteria and to achieve defined objectives when it accepts funds for specific projects. But this only applies to projects that TI itself is developing and implementing.
• TI does allow companies to publicise the fact that they have donated money to TI or that they are corporate members of one of its National Chapter. However, this does not imply that TI testifies that the company in question is abstaining from corruption or that it meets certain integrity standards. TI would refuse any donation that would be given in the expectation of such a statement.
• TI is totally transparent about its funding. Its financial statement and an exhaustive list of its donors are regularly published on the TI web site. TI therefore does not accept contributions that the donor would not like to be publicly disclosed.
• TI would not accept a donation from a company that was found to have engaged in bribery and that could not demonstrate that this was a violation of the company's policies.

TI has close to 95 National Chapters around the world - but why isn't it present in such important countries as China, Saudi Arabia?
National Chapters are at the heart of the global TI movement. In order to achieve lasting change, these chapters need to be firmly rooted in their respective societies and they need to be owned by those most directly affected by corruption. For the same reason, TI chapters need to operate free from government intervention. TI chapters therefore do not exist in countries where civil society is not allowed to operate freely - such as China or Saudi Arabia.Likewise, the TI Secretariat in Berlin does not actively promote the establishment of TI chapters in countries where there is no civil society interest in it.

Given TI's philosophy of working independently of governments, if a government asked TI to develop an anti-corruption programme, would TI agree to work as a consultant?
It depends. The past record of government-sponsored anti-corruption campaigns is dismal. Most of them failed and very few achieved anything. In extreme cases the result has been the imposition of harsh prison terms or even executions, but little if any mechanisms to ensure that real change is put into effect. It is TI's experience that anti-corruption programmes work best when those affected by corruption become involved. They work well if civil society is allowed to make a meaningful contribution and is free to criticise the government. TI would thus insist that civil society organisations - including, for example, the local TI chapter but also others - be part of the process. However, these groups would not work like ordinary consultants in that they simply deliver a service without being able to voice dissent. Rather, their involvement would add an element of control and participation to the programme.

TI's annual Corruption Perceptions Index claims to be an index of corruption in the world - why then does it include only 159 countries?
No country has been included in the CPI without results from a minimum of three surveys - because we insist on a solid empirical basis for the index. As a result, there are only 159 countries in the CPI out of a total of more than 200 sovereign nations. In TI's experience, it is apparent that corruption is a major problem in many countries not included in the CPI. The CPI provides a snapshot of the views of decision-makers and business people, both locals and expatriates, about the level of corruption in a country. That is an incredibly important indicator of the image a country conveys to investors and potential business partners. A poor score in the CPI is a clear signal that a government has to make drastic changes - and to be seen to be doing so. For further information on the CPI as well as other surveys see "Corruption Surveys and Indices".

TI has been in existence for several years, but what effect has it really had on levels of corruption around the world?
Addressing a problem is the first step toward solving it. TI's main achievement is to have placed corruption squarely on the political agenda in many countries around the world. TI has managed to generate political pressure for substantive reforms around the globe. Some of these achievements are described in greater detail in a separate document. Internationally, the approach to corruption has changed dramatically. While corruption was very much a taboo issue in the early 1990s, thanks in part to the efforts of TI, there are now several important international conventions in effect, most notably the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention. TI has played a crucial role in arguing for co-ordinated, multilateral action against corruption.TI has also played a pivotal role in establishing an independent network of resource persons and in developing a solid knowledge base for those that are serious about fighting corruption. TI is making this knowledge accessible through its National Integrity Source Book and its database CORIS.