Coverage

CG. Services managed and financed by other tiers of government should be included if the CG significantly finances such services through reimbursements or earmarked grants, or uses other tiers of government as implementing agents.

Time period

Dimension 8.1: Performance indicators and planned outputs and outcomes for the next fiscal year.

Dimension 8.2: Outputs and outcomes of the last completed fiscal year.

Dimensions 8.3 and 8.4: Last three completed fiscal years.

Measurement guidance

This indicator focuses on the availability, coverage, and timeliness of performance information on the delivery of public services and on the extent to which such information is likely to promote improvements in the effectiveness and operational efficiency of those services. It is also important for the legislature, government officials, and the general public to know whether budget resources reach service delivery units as planned.

Promoting operational efficiency in public service delivery is a core objective of the PFM system. The inclusion of performance information within budgetary documentation is considered to be international good practice. It strengthens the accountability of the executive for the planned and achieved outputs and outcomes of government programs and services. Increasingly, legislatures demand to see such performance information as part of their consideration of the executive’s budget proposal, although the legislature may not be required to approve planned performance.

Ministries have been selected as the government unit for publication of performance information in this indicator. Different organizational units may be substituted for ministries if performance information is published solely by other units—for example, individual budgetary and institutional units, or a combination of ministries and other units.

Dimension 8.1 assesses the extent to which key performance indicators for the planned outputs and outcomes of programs or services that are financed through the budget are included in the executive’s budget proposal or related documentation, at the function, program or entity level.

Dimension 8.2 examines the extent to which performance results for outputs and outcomes are presented either in the executive’s budget proposal or in an annual report or other public document, in a format and at a level (program or unit) that is comparable to the plans previously adopted within the annual or medium-term budget.

Dimension 8.3 measures the extent to which information is available on the level of resources actually received by service delivery units of at least two large ministries (such as schools and primary health clinics) and the sources of those funds. The information captured by ministries on resources should support the comparison of service performance with the actual resources received. The reasons for selecting the ministries for this dimension should be explained in the report narrative.

Dimension 8.4 considers the extent to which the design of public services and the appropriateness, efficiency, and effectiveness of those services is assessed in a systematic way through program or performance evaluations. The evaluations are considered within the scope of this dimension if they cover all or a material part of service delivery or if they are cross-functional and incorporate service delivery functions. Independent evaluations in this context are those undertaken by a body that is separate from, and not subordinate to, the body that delivers the service. It could be a part of the same unit that has a separate reporting line to the CEO, or a senior management committee. For example, it could be a department with specific responsibilities for independent evaluation or review across the unit, including an internal audit department. Such evaluations may also be undertaken by the government’s external auditor and may be called “performance audits.” Performance audits are included in this dimension and are not covered in PI-30: External audit.