Capability and practice
The team may need applied learning or coaching: practical work on its own files, so people can apply the rules and methods with confidence.
Your choices are remembered on this device. Designed to WCAG 2.2 AA · keyboard: Tab to move, Esc to close. Read our accessibility statement.
Press / to search from any page · Esc to close
Home › Free tools › Paris Alignment and Climate Readiness Assessment
Multilateral development banks now assess new operations for alignment with the Paris Agreement. The World Bank has aligned all new operations since 1 July 2023, and IFC and MIGA reached all new operations from 1 July 2025. This assessment checks your project or pipeline against the joint MDB methodological principles: the mitigation test (BB1), the adaptation and resilience test (BB2), country climate strategies, greenhouse gas accounting and climate finance reporting. This is a real readiness tool: each question is drawn from the current official texts listed under "Based on", and Risalat's guideline monitor re-checks those sources every two weeks so the questions follow new editions.
Need a verified result? Ask for an independent assessment by Risalat.
Upcoming programmes whose content matches the areas this tool measures. Your results show which fit your weakest areas.
Nothing here for your exact need? Ask for an in-house programme built around your gaps, or browse all programmes.
The lender checks that the operation is consistent with the Paris Agreement goals: it should not lock in high-carbon assets and it should manage physical climate risks. The joint MDB principles call these the mitigation and adaptation building blocks.
The World Bank Group and the other major MDBs that signed the joint approach, such as ADB, AfDB, AIIB, EBRD, EIB and IDB, each apply them through their own procedures.
No. Screening focuses on climate hazards and the project's exposure to them. Its findings should feed into the environmental and social assessment and the design.
Lenders usually set thresholds for full accounting, but an estimate of the main emission sources helps you pass the mitigation test and prepare climate finance proposals.
Sources checked: October 2026. We check the official sources every month.
This is a self-assessment and training tool, not a lender's official alignment assessment. Each MDB applies the joint principles through its own procedures, so confirm requirements with the lender for your operation.
We use essential cookies to run this website securely. With your permission we also use cookies to remember your choices, to understand how the site is used, and to measure our advertising. You can change your choice at any time from “Cookie settings” at the bottom of every page. Privacy and cookie policy
Most likely fit
Also worth a look
Less indicated by this result
Bid document issued
Bids opened
Evaluation and award decision
Contract signed
Bid validity
Bid document issued late in {n} package(s): preparing specifications, estimates and documents is a skill the team can build.
Bid document issued late in {n} package(s): check internal clearance and prior review timing as well.
Bid opening moved in {n} package(s): check how addenda, clarifications and deadline extensions are approved.
Evaluation and award decision late in {n} package(s): check committee appointment, report approval and no-objection steps.
Evaluation and award decision late in {n} package(s): evaluation reports may need practice with real cases.
Contract signature late in {n} package(s): check signature approvals, securities and other dependencies.
Long gaps between stages in {n} package(s): look for steps that wait on another unit.
{x} late in {n} packages: a recurring pattern often points to a practice gap.
Evaluation outlasted the bid validity in {n} package(s): confirm extensions and their effect on bids before any award.
More than half of the bid validity used in {n} package(s): plan extensions before the deadline.
Bid preparation period below the minimum in {n} package(s): an independent check before award is advisable.
Signature soon after the award decision in {n} package(s): confirm the standstill period was respected.
{x}: {n}%
Matched from the type of tool, as this result has no scores by area.
Nothing in this result points here.
No clear gap in this result. If problems persist, a short conversation helps locate them.
Overall result: {n}%
Lowest areas: {x}
{n} package(s) analysed, {x} behind plan
{x}: late in {n} package(s)
Bid validity and rule flags: {n}
Score: {x}
Result: {x}
Please complete the highlighted fields.
Connection problem. Please try again.
Sending…
A work email helps us confirm your institution and reply faster. A personal address is accepted.
See your result ↓
Back to questions ↑
A late stage or a low score shows where time or quality is being lost. It does not, on its own, show why. The cards below suggest which kind of support is most likely to fit, so a first conversation starts in the right place.
The team may need applied learning or coaching: practical work on its own files, so people can apply the rules and methods with confidence.
The institution may need to review its steps, approvals and dependencies: who signs, in what order, how long each step takes and what waits on what.
Dates, deadlines or validity periods are under pressure. A verified independent assessment is advisable before acting, so decisions rest on confirmed facts.
Screening aid, not a verified assessment. The matching uses your answers and a few fixed rules. Our specialists confirm the cause with you before recommending anything.
A confirmation is on its way to your inbox.
New programme dates, free tools and short insights on procurement, safeguards, M&E and public-sector delivery. No spam; unsubscribe any time.
By subscribing you agree to receive our newsletter. Privacy policy