Some PFM reforms are not suited to annual monitoring due to considerations of cost and complexity or where it is unlikely that there will be significant change over a relatively short time. Many PFM reforms can take several years to implement and be reflected in improvements in PEFA dimension or indicator scores. Many new governments consider that having a PEFA assessment early in their term of office is a useful check on the status of PFM and serves as a benchmark for reform initiatives. Nevertheless, it is therefore important to ensure PFM reform initiatives or action plans include realistic implementation timeframes.

10.2 Review and refine actions

PFM reform is an iterative process and rarely linear in its application. Reforms can encounter roadblocks and constraints and progress can be variable. Governments and development partners may need to respond to those constraints and continually adjust their reform plans. It is important therefore, that those tasked with implementing reforms provide regular progress reports to those responsible for monitoring progress, often head of the M&E unit. The head of the M&E unit, or other responsible officer, should prepare regular updates for the government to ensure that the PFM reform process is ongoing, transparent and accountable. Following an adequate period of monitoring and review (usually between three and five years) a successive PEFA assessment should be considered to examine progress more comprehensively. This would restart the PEFA assessment process.