Author(s)
Government of Nepal Ministry of FinanceKeywords
LIQUIDITYCENTRAL BUDGET
PUBLIC EXPENDITURE
ECONOMIC POLICY
REVENUES
ACCOUNTABILITY
BUDGET CREDIBILITY
PUBLIC ENTERPRISES
PUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
CENTRAL BANK
EXPENDITURE POLICY
ROLLING MEDIUM-TERM EXPENDITURE FRAMEWORK
PROGRAM CLASSIFICATION
DOMESTIC DEBT
TAX REVENUE
DEFICIT
EXPENDITURE PROGRAMS
FISCAL DATA
INTERNAL AUDIT
FISCAL INFORMATION
DEBT
GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
BUDGET IMPLEMENTATION
BUDGET MANAGERS
TAX PAYMENTS
BUDGET FRAMEWORK
FISCAL EXPENDITURES
BASIC SERVICES
ALLOCATION
BUDGET REVIEW
AUDITOR GENERAL
FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS
ANNUAL REPORTS
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURE
UNCERTAINTY
FINANCIAL SECTOR
SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTION
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
FISCAL AGGREGATE
FINANCIAL STATEMENT
EXPENDITURE CATEGORIES
ANNUAL TARGETS
PROGRAMS
EXTERNAL ASSISTANCE
CAPACITY BUILDING
REVENUE FORECASTING
BUDGET LAW
PUBLIC PROCUREMENT
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
MEDIUM-TERM EXPENDITURE FRAMEWORK
ANNUAL REPORT
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
ANNUAL BUDGET
SOCIAL EXPENDITURE
APPROPRIATION
EXPENDITURE TRACKING
FISCAL YEAR
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
POVERTY REDUCTION
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM
BUDGET DATA
BUDGET PROPOSAL
FISCAL CONTRACTION
AGGREGATE EXPENDITURE
TRANSPARENCY
BUSINESS PLANS
EXCHANGE RATES
ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS
ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES
FISCAL DEFICIT
REVENUE ASSIGNMENTS
NATIONAL GOVERNMENTS
AGGREGATE FISCAL FRAMEWORK
ANNUAL BUDGET FORMULATION
BUDGETARY IMPACT
FINANCIAL PROGRAM
TAX REVENUES
AUDIT INSTITUTIONS
ACCOUNTING
COMPETITION
REALLOCATIONS
TAX EXPENDITURES
COMPTROLLER GENERAL
DEBT MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM BUDGETING
FISCAL POLICIES
DEBT SUSTAINABILITY
MUNICIPALITIES
QUALITY CONTROL
PERFORMANCE AUDITING
BUDGET SIZE
CAPITAL EXPENDITURE
INTERNAL CONTROL
FISCAL DISCIPLINE
PUBLIC SECTOR
SUSTAINABILITY ANALYSIS
TAX SYSTEM
FINANCIAL ASSETS
CHART OF ACCOUNTS
TAX COLLECTION
BUDGET DOCUMENTATION
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
EXTERNAL AUDIT
DATA COLLECTION
BUDGET PREPARATION PROCESS
EXPENDITURES
EXPENDITURE PLANS
EXTERNAL DEBT
FISCAL ACTIVITIES
BUDGET DISCUSSION
EXTERNAL AUDITS
ECONOMIES OF SCALE
AUDITORS
GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES
REVENUE GROWTH
FISCAL OUTTURN
OUTCOMES
BUDGET PREPARATION
EFFICIENCY GAINS
BLOCK GRANTS
REVENUE POLICY
BUDGET PROCESS
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
FINANCIAL REPORTS
BUDGETS
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
PROGRAM BUDGETS
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
FISCAL RELATIONS
ACCESS TO INFORMATION
GOVERNMENT FINANCE STATISTICS
SOCIAL SECURITY
EXPENDITURE CEILINGS
FISCAL FRAMEWORK
EXCHANGE RATE
SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTIONS
BUDGET COVERAGE
GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURE
FISCAL RISK
GOVERNMENT FINANCE
ECONOMIC GROWTH
TAXPAYERS
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
PUBLIC EXPENDITURE TRACKING
EXPENDITURE FRAMEWORK
PUBLIC OFFICIALS
BUDGET FORMULATION
QUALITY ASSURANCE
FISCAL YEARS
ASSESSMENT PROCESS
BUDGET OUTTURN
INCOME TAX
BUDGET OUTTURNS
DOMESTIC REVENUE
SERVICE DELIVERY
DISCRETIONARY POWER
LEGISLATIVE SCRUTINY
BUDGET INSTITUTIONS
NATIONAL PLANNING
FISCAL POSITION
PUBLIC INVESTMENT
EXPENDITURE
BUDGET FORMULATION PROCESS
FOREIGN EXCHANGE
SERVICES
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
EXPENDITURE CONTROL
STRATEGIC ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES
PUBLIC SECTOR ACCOUNTING
BUDGET EXECUTION
TOTAL EXPENDITURE
BUDGET OUTCOMES
BUDGET PLANNING
MEDIUM-TERM EXPENDITURE
BUDGET
PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT
FISCAL RISKS
SOCIAL SERVICE
STRATEGIC ALLOCATION
AGGREGATE FISCAL
DEBT SERVICING
BUDGET SUPPORT
CASH BALANCES
MACROECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
BUDGET CYCLE
TAXES
BUDGETARY POLICY
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT INFORMATION
INFLATION
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
BUDGET MANAGEMENT
BUDGET INFORMATION
BUDGETARY OPERATIONS
DEFICIT FINANCING
PUBLIC FINANCE
BUDGET EXPENDITURE
CASH FLOW
TREASURY MANAGEMENT
AGGREGATE REVENUE
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
FISCAL PRUDENCE
FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY
INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
AGGREGATE FISCAL DISCIPLINE
RESOURCE ALLOCATIONS
PUBLIC SECTOR ENTITIES
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
CIVIL SERVANTS
Full record
Show full item recordOnline Access
http://hdl.handle.net/10986/22368Abstract
The objective of this assessment is to
 update the public expenditure and financial accountability
 (PEFA) assessment published in early 2008. The assessment is
 expected to assist the Government of Nepal to: (a) establish
 indicator led assessment of the country’s public financial
 management (PFM) system, (b) update the fiduciary
 environment of the PFM systems and processes of the country,
 and (c) assist in identifying those parts of the PFM system
 that may need further reform and development. The
 institutional and organizational approach taken by the
 Government of Nepal ensured coordination among various
 government institutions. The assessment included collection
 of additional documentation, including meeting minutes, and
 interviews with government counterpart teams and main
 stakeholders. The report was updated and refined following
 advice from a World Bank team. A specialist in the use of
 PEFA methodology assisted in the later drafts and visited
 Nepal in August 17-20, 2014. Meetings were held with the
 PEFA Secretariat at the Financial Comptroller General Office
 (FCGO) and with the Ministry of Finance (MoF) Budget
 Division. This final draft of the report addresses all the
 comments received up to November 31, 2014. The findings of
 the assessment were shared with the donors in September 2014
 and their comments assisted the finalization of the draft
 report. The World Bank also provided continuous quality
 control support.Date
2015-05Type
ReportIdentifier
oai:openknowledge.worldbank.org:10986/22368http://hdl.handle.net/10986/22368
Copyright/License
CC BY 3.0 IGOCollections
Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
Mongolia Public Financial Management Performance ReportWorld Bank (Washington, DC, 2015-04)This public financial management
 performance report (PFM-PR) is the first assessment of
 Mongolia’s PFM system using the public expenditure and
 financial accountability (PEFA) framework. The report aims
 principally to establish an objective baseline measure of
 current PFM performance, highlighting areas of absolute and
 relative strength and weakness, thereby enabling a
 stock-taking of over a decade of PFM reforms in Mongolia and
 guiding the government in its reform priorities. The
 assessment covers PFM at the budgetary central government
 level. The PEFA is an evidence-based methodology that
 measures the performance of a country’s PFM system at a
 particular point in time using a set of standardized
 indicators. The assessment is done on six dimensions of an
 open and orderly PFM system identified by the framework,
 which are: credibility of the budget; comprehensiveness and
 transparency; policy-based budgeting; predictability and
 control in budget execution; accounting, recording, and
 reporting; and external scrutiny and audit. This PEFA
 assessment will complement the considerable work that has
 already taken place on public expenditure management, which
 includes regular economic updates, public investment
 reviews, procurement reviews, analytic work conducted and
 supported by the World Bank funded technical assistance
 projects, as well as technical assistance mission reports of
 the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
-
Colombia - National Level Public Financial Management and Procurement Report : Public Financial Management PerformanceInter-American Development Bank; World Bank (World Bank, 2012-03-19)This Public Financial Management
 Performance Report (PFMPR) analyzes the performance of
 Colombia's public financial management (PFM)
 institutions, systems and processes. It documents areas
 where performance is close to or follows international good
 practice, as well as opportunities to further enhance PFM
 contribution to the goals of strengthening fiscal
 discipline, enabling more efficient allocation of resources,
 increasing operational efficiency, and fostering
 transparency. It is expected that the identified
 opportunities will strengthen further the Government of
 Colombia's programs of continuous PFM improvement, as
 provided for under the National Development Plan pillar
 regarding a state at the service of its citizens: efficient
 and effective Government. The main challenges cited in the
 report could also be an important reference to future
 development plans and PFM reforms. Ensuring the
 sustainability and trajectory of PFM programs becomes even
 more critical in the context of public expenditure policies
 to deal with the current international economic crisis. The
 study is based on the 28 high-level indicators and 69
 individual dimensions that compose the PFM performance
 measurement framework. Each indicator seeks to measure
 performance of a key PFM element against a scale from A to
 D. The highest score is warranted for an individual
 indicator if the core PFM element meets the relevant
 objective in a complete, orderly, accurate, timely and
 coordinated way, based on existing good international practices.
-
Indonesia : Repeat Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability Report and Performance IndicatorsWorld Bank (World Bank, Jakarta, 2012-12)This public expenditure and financial
 accountability (PEFA) assessment for Indonesia was
 undertaken by a team of World Bank staff and development
 partners with close involvement of counterparts from the
 Government of Indonesia, including the ministry of finance,
 state ministry of development planning (Bappenas), and some
 line ministries. The objective of the assessment is to
 update the integrated, standardized, indicator-led
 assessment of public financial management (PFM) systems,
 processes, and institutions as a whole against good
 international practices. This PEFA assessment has been
 funded by the Bank and a multi-donor trust fund, supported
 by contributions from the European Commission, the
 Governments of the Netherlands and the Swiss Confederation,
 and United States Agency for International Development
 (USAID). This report focuses mainly on the changes in the
 performance of the PFM system from 2007 to 2011. This report
 focuses largely on the major changes since 2007, and also on
 the ongoing reforms that should impact an assessment in the
 future organizations. It provides an integrated,
 standardized, and indicator-led methodology to measure and
 monitor PFM performance over time. The objective is to help
 assess the performance of PFM systems, processes, and
 institutions relative to internationally recognized good
 system characteristics. The rating methodology, covering a
 set of 31 high level performance indicators, with over 70
 dimensions, emphasizes empirical and observable facets for
 each PFM area.