"Hi Sylvestor..
Thanks for checking on me. I am very busy these days and jumping between North and South of my country. I hope that things will be better for our Sudans"
Integrated Results-Based Budgeting (RBB)
Discussions on the RBB Component of the IRBM system has been concluded in early August. However, in the interest of continuity and maintaining the critical link with the personnel management topic, we will still allow discussions on the RBB component where relevant.
Please do join the discussions on both the RBB and the PPS in the coming weeks.
Aru Rasappan
Please do join the discussions on both the RBB and the PPS in the coming weeks.
Aru Rasappan
Views: 55
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Arunaselam Rasappan on -
Dear AfCoP Members - this is just a short note to inform you that the planned discussions on the RBB under the IRBM in this forum will commence a bit later than originally scheduled. This is because we have decided to wait for the Francophone section of the Forum to catch up with the Anglophone section. We expect this to happen by the end of this week and will commence discussions on the RBB from 23 June, 2008.
We apologise for the delay and we look forward to seeing you online next week.
Regards.
Aru Rasappan
Principal Facilitator
AfCoP Online Forum on IRBM
-
Permalink Reply by Arunaselam Rasappan on
-
Here are the three files. Welcome feedback, comments, questions, or experiences from other countries.
Ragards
Aru Rasappan
-
Permalink Reply by Arunaselam Rasappan on
-
Dear Colleagues,
As planned, we are starting off the discussion series on Results-Based Budgeting (RBB) under the IRBM System. To kick start the discussions, I am posting 3 articles on RBB and related topics for your review and discussions. Please feel free to comment or post questions on any aspect of the articles or on RBB itself.
This series of discussions on the RBB will be on for two weeks, so I hope all of you will be able to participate actively.
Best regards.
Aru Rasappan
Principal Facilitator
AfCoP Online Discussion Forum on IRBM
-
Permalink Reply by Arunaselam Rasappan on
-
Dear Colleagues,
As planned, we are starting off the discussion series on Results-Based Budgeting (RBB) under the IRBM System. To kick start the discussions, I am posting 3 articles on RBB and related topics for your review and discussions. Please feel free to comment or post questions on any aspect of the articles or on RBB itself.
This series of discussions on the RBB will be on for three weeks, so I hope all of you will be able to participate actively.
Best regards.
Aru Rasappan
Principal Facilitator
AfCoP Online Discussion Forum on IRBM
-
Permalink Reply by Arunaselam Rasappan on
-
Dear Colleagues,
As planned, we are starting off the discussion series on Results-Based Budgeting (RBB) under the IRBM System. To kick start the discussions, I am posting 3 articles on RBB and related topics for your review and discussions. Please feel free to comment or post questions on any aspect of the articles or on RBB itself.
This series of discussions on the RBB will be on for three weeks, so I hope all of you will be able to participate actively.
Best regards.
Aru Rasappan
Principal Facilitator
AfCoP Online Discussion Forum on IRBM
-
Permalink Reply by Arunaselam Rasappan on
-
Dear AfCoP Members,
As planned, we are starting off the discussion series on Results-Based Budgeting (RBB) under the IRBM System. To kick start the discussions, I am posting 3 articles on RBB and related topics for your review and discussions. Please feel free to comment or post questions on any aspect of the articles or on RBB itself.
This series of discussions on the RBB will be on for three weeks until 14 July, 2008, so I hope all of you will be able to participate actively.
Best regards.
Aru Rasappan
Principal Facilitator
AfCoP Online Discussion Forum on IRBM - Attachments:
-
Permalink Reply by Devendra Parsad Ruhee on -
Dear Dr. Aru,
I have perused with great interest the Papers/documents on Results-based budgetting which give us a very good insight into the mechanisms of the budget management tools.
You will be pleased to know that the present Government in Mauritius is fully committed to two major and strategic reforms, namely, Programme-based Budgetting led by the Ministry of Finance & Economic Devt and the Performance Management System led by the Ministry of Civil Service & Administrative Reforms.
The Programme-based Budgetting ( PBB ) has been introduced in the 2008/2009 Government Budget since 1 July 2008. This project is being implemented in collaboration with the World Bank which has provided invaluable support, especially for the sensitization and training of public officers in the use of this strategic tool of prudent budget management and optimum use of scarce resources.
Clear guidelines on the process and assistance were given to the Accounting Officers of Ministries and Govt departments and goals and objectives were defined and targets set against set performance indicators.
The Programme-Based Budget is embedded in a Medium Term Expenditure Framework ( MTEF ). Our own efforts are aligned in a South African initiative, the Collaborative African Budget Reform Initiative ( CABRI ). Many Member
countries of SADC and COMESA and the Commonwealth are embarking on similar reforms.
We are reviewing our financial regulations and procedures to bring them in line with the new reform paradigm.
An ambitious PBB training programme was mounted for all staff and other stakeholders in the Mauritian public sector.
The paper produced by Koshy Thomas of Malaysia on the Malaysian model of Integrated results -based management illustrates clearly the benefits that a country can derive if the tools of budgetary planning, monitoring , and evaluation are used efficiently and effectively.
We, in Mauritius, are in the preliminary stage of implementation of the PBB. We shall need to draw on the experiences and best practices of colleagues and countries which have already implemented the RBM projects/programmes successfully. We won't re-invent the wheel ! We will definitely need additional support by way of capacity building and development.
Dev
-
Permalink Reply by Devendra Parsad Ruhee on
-
I am following comments of other fellow members on this important topic.
Dev
-
Permalink Reply by MBAYANI YUDICA SARUNI on -
Koshy/Arun
First of all I thank you for posting the above documents which are very informative.
I have perused the IRBM_ADB document and I just want your guidance with regard to development budget. In Tanzania and many other LDCs, development budget is less than 35 percent, out of which more than 60 percent is foreign component (grants and loans). According to Tanzania experience, more than 50 percent of donor pledges are not fulfilled and thus render some programs/projects stalled. How can the IRBM be carried out under such uncertain circumstances/dependency?
Second, I think I need to be educated further because IRBM to me seem to be just the change of the names but content-wise is more or less the same. For instance, what is the difference between MfDR and IRBM?. Moreover, in Tanzania we have adopted programs similar to those mentioned in the document. If I understand you correctly (paragraph 8 of the document), IPMF is a budgeting tool and the whole process in it is similar to what we use in Tanzania by the name of SBAS. Again on paragraph 12, PPS is used by all Civil Servant in Tanzania in the name of OPRAS (Open Performance Appraisal System). My question is whether there is any value addition by implementing the IRBM system in lieu of what we are currently using in Tanzania. If you come to Tanzania, your first assignment will be to undertake the SWOT analysis of the existing tools and justify the need to replace them with (perhaps) IRBM. One of the weakness in Tanzania is inadequate use of the results for informed decision making. May be this is where you can start with.
Lastly, if possible, try to minimize the number of terminologies because some are confusing or add no value e.g PPBS, MBO, RBM, IRBM, MBS, IPMF, PPS, MIS, M&E, RBB
As part of capacity building and given the confusion of terminologies and systems addressing the same thing, I would propose a group training for AfCoP members on the above subject to be facilitated by Koshy and Arun.
Regards
Saruni
-
Permalink Reply by Arunaselam Rasappan on
-
Dear Saruni,
You raise a problem than many donor dependent countries are facing.
The lack of certainty of donor funds poses serious problems and very often result in development plans being adversely affected. Its a pity that Tanzania is also facing this problem. It would be interesting to hear from you as to the reasons why donors dont live up to their promises in Tanzania. I do know for a fact that in other countries, donors do change their mind about their promised funding due to many reasons - most of which are due to the apparent weaknesses in the local development context rather than purely lack of money from the donors.
For example, in some countries, the donors find it difficult to promise funding as there is no proper development planning and donors often decide and determine where or which program they want to put thier money in. Often, these funds are not issued out 100% due to the lack of proper implementation, poor accountability, deviation of funds, lack of proper monitoring and performance data etc. I know one country inSouthern Africa where more than 60% of budget is from donors but there is a constant challenge of the donors wanting to pull out due to the lack of proper budgeting, accountability, poor planning, implementation and a host of other such issues - which often result in the donors not being able to put more money into a program/programs or budget support though promises were made earlier.
Given the above, it would be interesting to see how countries which implement the IRBM system are able to secure steady donor funding and perhaps face less problems of donors withdrawing their funds or reducing the quantum of funds promised initially. In this respect, the onus is on the recipient country to ensure that its development planning and implementation and M&E systems are sound and results-based and well complemented with a sound M&E and accountability system - this will go a long way towards encouraging donors to not only pledge funds for focused and well-planned development programs/projects, but also help prevent them from reducing or withdrawing their funds during the course of implementation.
The fact remains that for most developing countries, there are many potential donors - but the challenge is for the recipient country to ensure that their developmen planning and implementation are able to meet the basic requirements of donors. Donor aid should be supported or complemented with results-based budgeting, implementation as well as a sound M&E system - that provide donors with timely, reliable, and accurate performance information for their money - something that is a requisite for donors.
On your second point on MfDR and RBM, there is a difference though the basic principles are similar. RBM is a general approach to ensuring that public sector management of resources are focused on meaningful results. The IRBM system takes this basic principle further by ensuring that there is appropriate integration of various aspects to make the development planning and resources management more holistic and results-focused.
On the other hand, though MfDR is more focused on the developmet agenda, the principles it uses or adheres to are the same as those under RBM i.e. focusing on the use of resources to focus on and produce substantive results in relevant development priority areas. However, the question still remains where under MfDR, we are adopting an integrated approach to development and results as advocated under the IRBM system.
On your observation on the Tanzanian system, I believe you are using some, if not most of the principles I have outlined above. But the question still remains as to whether all the initiatives are adopting an integrated approach, both using the vertical and horizontal integration considerations. From what I know, I believe that Tanzania has yet to adopt the full IRBM system and its components and that there is still only limited integration of the system components across the public sector. As you rightly point out, the M&E system is still very traditional in approach and implementation and that may well be one reason for the decision-making challenges you mentioned.
I would be interested to know more details of how Tanzania is planning and implementing its development initiatives and how (if it does) it integrates the development planning with budgeting, personnel performance systems, as well as the M&E and MIS aspects, among other things. Perhaps, you may be able to share more details?
Your point on the need for training and exposure and understanding on the terms, interpretations and application of various relevant aspects of the IRBM and MfDR are indeed a fact - AfCoP members do need this and I'm sure the next AfCoP meeting would be able to look into this.
Thanks for sharing your experiences and we look forward to more such interesting country cases and approaches.
Aru Rasappan
-
Permalink Reply by MBAYANI YUDICA SARUNI on
-
Dear Arun and AfCoP Members
Here are my observations/comments on the Budgeting Method as posted by Dr. Arun
I tried to go through the table but in short I didn’t understand some aspects. However, I have noticed some slight differences from the way we prepare budget in Tanzania. For instance on item 2: Preparation of Alternatives, the way I understand it is the possibility of preparing a separate budget to cater perhaps for some salient issues forgotten in the main budget or unforeseen events. This happened in Tanzania in the recent past where a mini-budget was prepared and approved by the parliament to mitigate the impact of drought which affected many parts of the country. The mini-budget is normally prepared by the ministry of finance in collaboration with the ministry in need of assistance.
Evaluation (Item 10) is done on two aspects: First on expenditure tracking and second on the outcome of the program (impact on the ground). In the preparation of budget, we use SBAS (Strategic Budget Allocation System) where every activity is costed. When come to the use of the fund, we normally ensure that the expenditures are in line with the SBAS. This is facilitated by the use of IFMS (Integrated Financial Management System) which track expenditures up to the District/Councils or local government level but we still experience some problems especially since not all districts are connected to this system.
With regard to outcome, every sector is supposed to prepare quarterly progress report and a consolidated annual report which is submitted to the “National Budget Guideline Committee” which is mandated to evaluate the performance of each sector and set the budget ceiling for every sector/ministry depending on the set/agreed priorities and resources envelop.
The funding control in Tanzania (item 17) is by line item while the funding approach (item 18) is monthly (i.e cash budget)
Other items may need clarification before comments
By Saruni
Get Involved
Latest Activity
Sylvestor Obong’o left a comment for Nuha"Nuha,
Hallo how have you been! You are lost, how is Sudan and work!
"
Sylvestor Obong’o left a comment for Benjamin Mlimbila"Benjamin,
Karibu African Community of Practice on Managing for Development Results"
Sylvestor Obong’o left a comment for Salima Madhany"Hi Salima,
Can see you have joined the community! Karibu sana and I hope you will enjoy it!
"
Ethirajan Soundararajan's discussion was featuredProject Level MfDR
While so much of emphasis is given for Managing for Development Results at the Partner Country level, it is essential that the same level of importance should be given at the Project Level as well. The accountability and ownership of all the stakeholders thus created through MfDR will ensure the successful implementation of the projects. Be it a donor or a government funded programme, the aspirations and needs of the beneficiaries need to be appropriately dovetailed in the plan and MfDR by its…See More
© 2012 Created by copafrica.
