Author(s)
World BankKeywords
EFFICIENCY OF PUBLIC SPENDINGPROVINCIAL LEVEL
ECONOMIC CLASSIFICATION
EXPENDITURE COMMITMENTS
ECONOMIC POLICY
PUBLIC EXPENDITURE
INTEREST PAYMENTS
EDUCATION SPENDING
MATCHING GRANTS
GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE
PUBLIC ENTERPRISES
PUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT
ANNUAL BUDGET PREPARATION
FISCAL IMPACT
PUBLIC EXPENDITURE REVIEW
FISCAL ACCOUNTS
REFORM AGENDA
DEBT
FISCAL ADJUSTMENTS
GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT
HEALTH EXPENDITURE
PUBLIC FINANCES
ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES
BUDGET FRAMEWORK
LOCAL CURRENCY
BUDGETARY EXPENDITURE
BASIC SERVICES
HEALTH SERVICES
FISCAL REFORM
ALLOCATION
PENSION FUND
PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY
BUDGETARY RESOURCES
TAX BASE
TAX POLICY
HARD BUDGET CONSTRAINT
HEALTH DEPARTMENTS
TOTAL PUBLIC SECTOR
REFORM PROCESS
PROGRAMS
PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS
ANNUAL BUDGET
RECURRENT EXPENDITURE
NET LENDING
APPROPRIATION
CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENDITURES
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
FISCAL REFORMS
SANITATION
ASSIGNMENT OF TAX REVENUES
BUDGET ALLOCATIONS
PUBLIC SECTOR BUDGETING
TAX BURDEN
TAX ASSIGNMENT
NATURAL DISASTERS
TAX EXEMPTIONS
PRIVATE SECTOR
FISCAL SQUEEZE
INCOME DIFFERENTIALS
FISCAL AGGREGATES
BUDGETARY REFORMS
TRANSPARENCY
FEDERAL GRANTS
PROVINCIAL LEVELS
HEALTH OUTCOMES
TAX DESIGN
FINANCIAL SYSTEMS
FEDERAL TRANSFERS
ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES
HEALTH CARE
FISCAL SOVEREIGNTY
FISCAL DEFICIT
FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY
REFORM PROGRAM
ANNUAL RATE
DEBT INTEREST
SECTOR EXPENDITURE
TAX REVENUES
ACCOUNTING
DONOR FINANCING
POVERTY ASSESSMENT
BUDGET STRATEGY
DEBT MANAGEMENT
SALES TAX
TAX ADMINISTRATION
SOCIAL OUTCOMES
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT
OUTCOME INDICATORS
PUBLIC SERVICES
PUBLIC HEALTH
CAPITAL EXPENDITURE
FISCAL TRANSFERS
REVENUE INCREASES
PUBLIC SECTOR
SOCIAL INDICATORS
FINANCIAL POSITION
TAX SYSTEM
HEALTH UNIT
GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT
SECTOR BUDGET
TAX COLLECTION
COLLECTED REVENUES
BUDGET DOCUMENTS
IMPROVING BUDGET PREPARATION
FISCAL STANCE
DATA COLLECTION
SECTOR POLICIES
PROVISION OF HEALTH SERVICES
EXPENDITURES
EXPENDITURE PLANNING
HEALTH SECTOR
FISCAL ACTIONS
DISCRETIONARY ACTION
EXPENDITURE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
FISCAL DECENTRALIZATION
FINANCIAL HEALTH
OPERATING EXPENSES
PROVINCIAL REVENUES
FIDUCIARY RISK
BUDGETING PROCESS
DONOR ASSISTANCE
HEALTH FINANCING
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
BUDGET PROCESS
TRANSFER PAYMENTS
FOREIGN GRANTS
FISCAL CRISIS
PUBLIC SERVICE
EXPENDITURE LEVELS
FISCAL AUTONOMY
GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURE
REVENUE SHARING
ECONOMIC GROWTH
BUDGETARY ALLOCATIONS
HEALTH SPENDING
MISALLOCATION OF RESOURCES
RESOURCE ALLOCATION
TAXABLE CAPACITY
PENSION LIABILITIES
BUDGET FORMULATION
TAX BASES
FISCAL YEARS
INCOME TAX
KEY FISCAL INDICATORS
SERVICE PROVISION
ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISM
COMMUNITY SERVICES
SERVICE DELIVERY
RECURRENT EXPENDITURES
HEALTH EXPENDITURES
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT
SALES TAXES
EXPENDITURE LEVEL
STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT
FISCAL POSITION
PUBLIC INVESTMENT
EFFICIENCY OF EXPENDITURE
PROVINCIAL FINANCES
FOREIGN EXCHANGE
PUBLIC EXPENDITURE MANAGEMENT
WAGE EXPENDITURE
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
SECTOR POLICY
GROWTH RATE
REVENUE ASSIGNMENT
BUDGET ALLOCATION
TOTAL EXPENDITURE
FISCAL MANAGEMENT
EDUCATION SERVICES
ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE
PRIVATE SECTOR GROWTH
FISCAL POLICY
EFFECTIVENESS OF GOVERNMENT
DEBT SERVICING
CASH BALANCES
PUBLIC EXPENDITURES
MONETARY INCENTIVES
FISCAL DEFICITS
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
PUBLIC SCHOOLS
PUBLIC SECTOR EMPLOYMENT
AMALGAMATION
SOCIAL SERVICES
PUBLIC FINANCE
DONOR FUNDS
QUALITY OF LIFE
ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
FINANCIAL SUPPORT
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE
FISCAL PRUDENCE
TAX RATES
EDUCATION EXPENDITURES
FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY
PROVINCIAL EXPENDITURE
PUBLIC SPENDING
INTERGOVERNMENTAL TRANSFERS
TAX STRUCTURE
Full record
Show full item recordOnline Access
http://hdl.handle.net/10986/16034Abstract
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) is one of the
 least-developed and crisis-prone provinces in Pakistan.
 Located in far north of the country, the province covers 10
 percent of the total land area and is a home to 13 percent
 of the country's population spread over seven
 administrative districts. Majority of the population (83
 percent) is rural, averaging 7.6 members per household-well
 above the national average of 6.6. The literacy rate remains
 low at 49 percent with more than half of population having
 no access to tap water while unemployment runs at 8.5
 percent. KP's relative underperformance is primarily
 due to low levels of growth, socio-economic underdevelopment
 and lack of public services compared to other provinces of
 Pakistan. Cognizant of the challenges to growth in KP and
 acting upon the assessment of Pakistan Government's
 Post-Crisis Needs Assessment (PCNA) of the region in October
 2010, the donors agreed on a harmonized approach to meet the
 short- and medium-term social and economic needs of KP,
 including the establishment of a Multi-Donor Trust Fund
 (MDTF). This Public Expenditure Review (PER) of KP was
 undertaken in partnership with the government of KP and is
 one of the important outcomes of PCNA funded by the MDTF.
 The report on Operationalization of Post Crisis Needs
 Assessment (OPCNA) highlighted the need for strengthening
 KP's public financial management (PFM) as fundamental
 to improving public services and therefore the quality of
 life in KP. The report acknowledges the strong government
 ownership of reform initiatives which are taken with a view
 of strengthening all aspects of public finances. KP adopted
 a comprehensive fiscal reform program in 2001-02 based on
 four pillars, namely: 1) enhancing resources; 2)
 strengthening ex-ante and ex-post PFM reforms; 3) fiscal
 decentralization; and 4) instituting an output-based
 accountability mechanism.Date
2013-10-02Type
Economic & Sector WorkIdentifier
oai:openknowledge.worldbank.org:10986/16034http://hdl.handle.net/10986/16034
Copyright/License
CC BY 3.0 IGOCollections
Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
Pakistan, Sindh Province - Public
 financial management accountability assessmentWorld Bank (World Bank, 2009-09-18)This report presents the public
 financial management and accountability assessment (PFMAA)
 for Pakistan's Sindh province. The assessment uses the
 public expenditure and financial accountability (PEFA) 2005
 framework, which comprises 31 performance indicators to
 evaluate: (i) the six core public financial management (PFM)
 dimensions (credibility of the budget; transparency and
 comprehensiveness; policy-based budgeting; predictability
 and control in budget execution; accounting, recording, and
 reporting; and external scrutiny), and (ii) the extent to
 which donor practices and the management of donor funds
 affect the PFM systems in the country. This assessment
 report highlights the likely impact of PFM weaknesses on
 budgetary outcomes, aggregate fiscal discipline, the
 strategic allocation of resources, and efficient service delivery.
-
Province of Buenos Aires, Republic of Argentina : Public Financial Management AssessmentWorld Bank (Washington, DC, 2012-07)The assessment for the Province of
 Buenos Aires was prepared jointly by the Ministry of Finance
 of the Province of Buenos Aires and the World Bank (WB) on
 the basis of findings from missions. It seeks to: (i)
 provide the provincial government with a reference tool for
 dialogue and action to strengthen their public financial
 management systems; (ii) assess the province's PFM
 systems and identify and address their main fiduciary
 issues, as well as their impact on the implementation of
 World Bank operations; and (iii) contribute in a broader
 sense to the dialogue between the Bank and Argentina's
 national and provincial authorities regarding fiduciary
 portfolio management and reliance on the country's
 systems. The assessment was prepared based on the findings
 of missions that visited Argentina in the period 2006-2009
 and is based on 2006 to 2008 fiscal years. It was completed
 with a closing mission and workshop that took place in La
 Plata, on June 25, 2012 to incorporate the provincial
 government comments in the final version.
-
Pakistan Punjab Province : Public Financial Management and Accountability AssessmentWorld Bank (Islamabad: World Bank, 2013-09-25)This document reports on a Public
 Financial Management and Accountability Assessment (PFMAA)
 for the Government of the Punjab. The assessment was
 conducted with the particular objective of updating the
 PFMAA published in May 2007 to provide the Punjab Government
 with an objective, indicator-led assessment of the
 provincial Public Financial Management (PFM) system in a
 concise and standardized manner, to form an updated
 understanding of the overall fiduciary environment of the
 PFM system and to assist in identifying those areas in need
 of further reform and development. The assessment was
 conducted as per the revised PEFA PFM Performance
 Measurement Framework of 2011 (PEFA Framework). The scope of
 the current assessment was comprehensive with due
 consideration of the PEFA Secretariat guidance for repeat
 assessments. The PFMAA was conducted against 31 PFM
 performance management indicators (28 for government
 performance and 3 for donor practices) which are grouped
 into the critical dimensions of performance of an open and
 orderly PFM system.