St. Helena 2014

1.1 The difference between actual primary expenditure and the originally budgeted primary expenditure (i.e. excluding debt service charges, but also excluding externally financed project expenditure)

2.1 Extent of the variance in expenditure composition during the last three years, excluding contingency items (the methodolodgy to rate this dimension is set out in the footnote of the PFM PMF booklet)

2.2 The average amount of expenditure actually charged to the contingency vote over the last three years

3.1 Actual domestic revenue collection compared to domestic revenue in the originally approved budget

4.1 Stock of expenditure payment arrears (as a percentage of actual total expenditure for the corresponding fiscal year) and any recent change in the stock

4.2 Availability of data for monitoring the stock of expenditure payment arrears

5.1 The classification system used for formulation, execution and reporting of the central government's budget

6.1 Share of the listed information under PI-6 in the PFM PMF booklet in the budget documentation most recently issued by the central government (in order to count in the assessment, the full specification of the information benchmark must be met)

7.1 The level of extra-budgetary expenditure (other than donor funded projects) which is unreported i.e. not included in fiscal reports.

7.2 Income/expenditure information on donor-funded projects which is included in fiscal reports.

8.1 Transparent and rules based systems in the horizontal allocation among SN governments of unconditional and conditional transfers from central government (both budgeted and actual allocations);

8.2 Timeliness of reliable information to SN governments on their allocations from central government for the coming year;

8.3 Extent to which consolidated fiscal data (at least on revenue and expenditure) is collected and reported for general government according to sectoral categories.

9.1 Extent of central government monitoring of AGAs and PEs.

9.2 Extent of central government monitoring of SN government's fiscal position

10.1 Number of the above listed elements of public access to information that is fulfilled (in order to count in the assessment, the full specification of the information benchmark must be met)

11.1 Existence of and adherence to a fixed budget calendar;

11.2 Clarity/comprehensiveness of and political involvement in the guidance on the preparation of budget submissions (budget circular or equivalent);

11.3 Timely budget approval by the legislature or similarly mandated body (within the last three years);

12.1 Preparation of multi -year fiscal forecasts and functional allocations

12.2 Scope and frequency of debt sustainability analysis

12.3 Existence of sector strategies with multi-year costing of recurrent and investment expenditure;

12.4 Linkages between investment budgets and forward expenditure estimates.

13.1 Clarity and comprehensiveness of tax liabilities

13.2 Taxpayer access to information on tax liabilities and administrative procedures.

13.3 Existence and functioning of a tax appeals mechanism.

14.1 Controls in the taxpayer registration system.

14.3 Planning and monitoring of tax audit and fraud investigation programs.

14.2 Effectiveness of penalties for non-compliance with registration and declaration obligations

15.1 Collection ratio for gross tax arrears, being the percentage of tax arrears at the beginning of a fiscal year, which was collected during that fiscal year (average of the last two fiscal years).

15.2 Effectiveness of transfer of tax collections to the Treasury by the revenue administration.

15.3 Frequency of complete accounts reconciliation between tax assessments, collections, arrears records and receipts by the Treasury.

16.2 Reliability and horizon of periodic in-year information to MDAs on ceilings for expenditure commitments

16.3 Frequency and transparency of adjustments to budget allocations, which are decided above the level of management of MDAs.

16.1 Extent to which cash flows are forecast and monitored

17.1 Quality of debt data recording and reporting

17.2 Extent of consolidation of the government’s cash balances

17.3 Systems for contracting loans and issuance of guarantees.

18.1 Degree of integration and reconciliation between personnel records and payroll data.

18.2 Timeliness of changes to personnel records and the payroll

18.3 Internal controls of changes to personnel records and the payroll.

18.4 Existence of payroll audits to identify control weaknesses and/or ghost workers.

19.1 Transparency, comprehensiveness and competition in the legal and regulatory framework

19.2 Use of competitive procurement methods

19.3 Public access to complete, reliable and timely procurement information

19.4 Existence of an independent administrative procurement complaints system

20.1 Effectiveness of expenditure commitment controls.

20.2 Comprehensiveness, relevance and understanding of other internal control rules/ procedures

20.3 Degree of compliance with rules for processing and recording transactions

21.1 Coverage and quality of the internal audit function.

21.2 Frequency and distribution of reports

21.3 Extent of management response to internal audit findings.

22.1 Regularity of bank reconciliations

22.2 Regularity of reconciliation and clearance of suspense accounts and advances.

23.1 Collection and processing of information to demonstrate the resources that were actually received (in cash and kind) by the most common front-line service delivery units (focus on primary schools and primary health clinics) in relation to the overall

24.1 Scope of reports in terms of coverage and compatibility with budget estimates

24.2 Timeliness of the issue of reports

24.3 Quality of information

25.1 Completeness of the financial statements

25.2 Timeliness of submission of the financial statements

25.3 Accounting standards used

26.1 Scope/nature of audit performed (incl. adherence to auditing standards).

26.2 Timeliness of submission of audit reports to legislature.

26.3 Evidence of follow up on audit recommendations

27.1 Scope of the legislature’s scrutiny.

27.2 Extent to which the legislature’s procedures are well-established and respected.

27.3 Adequacy of time for the legislature to provide a response to budget proposals both the detailed estimates and, where applicable, for proposals on macro-fiscal aggregates earlier in the budget preparation cycyle (time allowed in practice for all stag

27.4 Rules for in-year amendments to the budget without ex-ante approval by the legislature.

28.1 Timeliness of examination of audit reports by the legislature (for reports received within the last three years).

28.2 Extent of hearings on key findings undertaken by the legislature.

28.3 Issuance of recommended actions by the legislature and implementation by the executive.

D-1.1 Annual deviation of actual budget support from the forecast provided by the donor agencies at least six weeks prior to the government submitting its budget proposals to the legislature (or equivalent approving body).

D-1.2 In-year timeliness of donor disbursements (compliance with aggregate quarterly estimates)

D-2.1 Completeness and timeliness of budget estimates by donors for project support.

D-2.2 Frequency and coverage of reporting by donors on actual donor flows for project support.

D-3.1 Overall proportation of aid funds to central government that are managed through national procedures