1: Financial Planning and Budget Reform

Context

Financial planning and budget reform is one of the most important initiatives in the development of effective public financial management, because it enhances the efficiency of allocating limited financial resources across different strategic priorities. This initiative aimed to achieve the following objectives:

• Enhance the government’s financial planning efficiency indicators,
  especially relating to the allocation of financial resources to
  strategic priorities
• Align the governance of the governmental budgeting and financial planning process with global best practice
• Develop expertise in the preparation of government financial plans
• Improve the transparency index

Approach:

The project was conducted in the following stages:

• Study and analyze current systems and processes to form an accurate understanding of the work context.
• Develop a targeted financial planning methodology based on best practice.
• Pilot the implementation of the financial planning methodology and communication plan.
• Update the methodology and develop a work procedures manual based on the outputs from the pilot phase.
• Develop an implementation roadmap and conduct knowledge transfer procedures.

The outcome:

• Redesigned the government financial planning methodology to improve the expected return on government spending, and
  reprioritized spending in line with strategic priorities.
• Implemented procedures to reduce the gaps between the planned and the actual spending, and to enhance the efficiency of the financial planning process.

 

2: Medium-Term Financial Planning Framework

Context

medium-term financial planning initiative provided an overarching framework for connecting the strategic planning and budgeting processes in line with the national priorities for spending. The initiative aimed to achieve the following objectives:

• Create a framework for regulating fiscal policy in the medium term.
• Improve financial sustainability.
• Tighten control of future spending .
• Increase the efficiency of financial forecasts.
• Limit the emergence of additional financial obligations that are not in line with the current strategic direction.

Approach:

The project was conducted in the following stages:

• Study and analyze central government financial governance, including policies and procedures, responsibilities and authority, timeframes, and legislation for the financial planning cycle.
• Develop the requirements for implementing a medium-term expenditure and revenue planning framework
• Create a roadmap for implementing the medium-term financial planning initiative.
• Provide operational support for the implementation of the roadmap, then perform the required knowledge transfer to the internal team.

The outcome:

• A new strategic financial planning process contributed to reprioritized public spending to achieve the government’s strategic direction.
• Achieved planned spending and revenue targets.

 

3: Budget Performance Monitoring Framework

Context

The need for a budget monitoring and controlling framework emerges from the fact that it enables periodic follow-up processes for measuring the performance of financial plans, as well as identifying and evaluating any change impact that requires updating the plans to ensure efficient public financial management. The framework also governs the process of measuring deviations between actual and planned performance, then recommends corrective actions. The development of such a framework aimed to achieve the following objectives:

• Enable accurate financial reports to be prepared in a timely manner.
• Increase the quality and readiness of the source data.
• Raise the level of transparency associated with the financial planning and budgeting process.
• Achieve sustainability in the allocation of financial resources to ensure business continuity.

Approach:

The project was conducted in the following stages:

• Study and analyze central government financial governance, including policies and procedures, responsibilities and authority, timeframes, and legislation for budget performance monitoring
• Develop the requirements for implementation.
• Institute control mechanisms for goods and services procurement and contracting, to ensure the availability of the necessary financial resources according to priorities.
• Design the reporting and decision-making framework including templates and dashboards.
• Provide operational support for the implementation of the framework, then perform the required knowledge transfer to the internal team.

The outcome:

• The availability of tools and techniques to enable and enhance the control of budget performance.
• Increased efficiency and effectiveness in managing public finances through proper alignment between planned versus target; allocated versus planned; and actual versus allocated.

 

4: Spending Review and Efficiency Improvement Framework

Context

Improving public financial management involves increasing the efficiency of deploying the available financial resources; discouraging financial waste and abuse; increasing returns on investment; and reallocating savings to finance development projects that are in line with strategic priorities. The spending review process must be formalized (including a proper governance model) to assess actual spending against planned, deviations, and root cause. This initiative aimed to achieve the following
objectives:

• Develop a periodic spending review framework based on best practice to improve public financial management efficiency indicators.
• Execute a spending review process covering the last three years, then draw conclusions and lessons learned to examine and enhance the developed methodology.
• Promote a spending efficiency culture amongst all stakeholders in the public financial management context.

Approach:

The project was conducted in the following stages:

• Study and analyze the current-state procedures, responsibilities, and tools covering the periodic review of spending.
• Benchmark current processes against best practice.
• Develop a methodology and operational model for the periodic spending review process.
• Provide operational support for applying the developed methodology, then executing knowledge transfer procedures.

The outcome:

• The availability of tools and techniques to enable and enhance the control of budget performance.
• Increased efficiency and effectiveness in managing public finances through proper alignment between planned versus target; allocated versus planned; and actual versus allocated.

 

5: Project Evaluation and Feasibility Study Framework

Context

Showing a positive rate of return is a key requirements for getting a new project approved in the private sector. Following the recent structural reforms that aim to improve the budget planning process and enhance efficiency, it has also become a prerequisite for gaining approval from the regulatory authorities for government projects. This initiative aimed to achieve the following objectives:

• Develop a framework, methodology, and success indicators for evaluating project feasibility.
• Working with key stakeholders, formalize an approach for determining how spending contributes to the achievement of strategic priorities.
• Strengthen the efficiency and consistency of the investment decision-making process by building a model for preserving all financial, administrative, and economic data for projects included in the strategic portfolios.

Approach:

The project was conducted in the following stages:

• Study and analyze methodologies and requirements for preparing
  feasibility studies and evaluating projects.
• Develop a framework and indicators for evaluating project
  feasibility.
• Build the underlying components and models to enable the
  preparation of detailed feasibility studies, covering the strategic,
  administrative, financial, commercial, and economic aspects of
  projects.
• Provide operational support for the implementation of the
  framework, models, and indicators, and execute training and
  knowledge transfer.

The outcome:

• Designed a framework for the project evaluation process.
• Enabled financial resource allocation decision-making in line with strategic priorities.
• Provided a mechanism for evaluating the return on investment on capital projects.
• Ensured the integrity of the cost and quality of the services being provided (value for money)