I. Credibility of the Budget
Scores by Dimension
Overall Indicator Score
1. Aggregate expenditure out-turn compared to original approved budget
A
Notes:
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)
A
Notes:
The deviations were less than 1 percent in all of these three years (2004-2006): - 2004: 0.4% - 2005: 0.7% - 2006: 0.2% (p. 16)
2. Composition of expenditure out-turn compared to original approved budget
A
Notes:
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)
A
Notes:
Analysis of budget deviations for primary expenditure between budgeted amounts and actual out-turns, by ministry, shows that deviations have averaged less than 5 percent of the budgeted amounts in the three most recent years. The average variance in excess of overall deviation was 3.2 percent in 2005, 3.4 percent in 2005 and 2.4 percent in 2006. (p. 16)
2.2 The average amount of expenditure actually charged to the contingency vote over the last three years
NU
Notes:
3. Aggregate revenue out-turn compared to original approved budget
A
Notes:
3.1 Actual domestic revenue collection compared to domestic revenue in the originally approved budget
A
Notes:
Actual domestic revenue collection, including net revenue from petroleum activity, was 10-15 percent higher than the estimates in original approved budget in the three years 2004-2006. Revenue exclusive net revenue from petroleum was estimated with little deviation from actual revenue collection. In 2004 and 2005 revenue exclusive petroleum was 98.3 percent and 101.2 percent of budgeted domestic revenue estimates and in 2006 105.6 percent. (p. 16)
4. Stock and monitoring of expenditure payment arrears
A
Notes:
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
A
Notes:
The total stock of payments arrears is assessed to be at a low rate. There is no central data system on the stock of arrears. However there have been few comments from the Auditor General the last three years on the agencies systems as regard to errors of expenditure payments. Furthermore in the two cases were the Auditor General had comments the errors were below 1 percent of total expenditure in these agencies, and the comments in this agencies have been followed up. This indicates that expenditure payments arrears are at a very low level. (p. 17)
4.2 Availability of data for monitoring the stock of expenditure payment arrears
A
Notes:
Each agency is responsible to establish systems and procedures for expenditure payment to be registered, disbursed and controlled, and that there are measures to expose and correct arrears in systems or routines. There is no central data system on the stock of arrears, but each agency has data system to monitor expenditure payment arrears and to generate data on this. Several of the agencies have started to use e-based invoice system. (p. 17)
II. Comprehensiveness and Transparency
Scores by Dimension
Overall Indicator Score
5. Classification of the budget
A
Notes:
5.1 The classification system used for formulation, execution and reporting of the central government's budget
A
Notes:
The Budget Proposition shows budget broken down by agency, i.e. administrative classification. There is a presentation of expenditures by economic classification (current operations, capital operations, financial operations etc.), by functional classification (by functions of government such as health, education and defence), and by sub-functional classification. The Budget Proposition is not presented according to GFS/COFOG standards, however, the standard used is considered to be able to produce consistent documentation according to GFS/COFOG standards. Statistics Norway prepares presentations of national accounts by GFS/COFOG standards in a timely manner. (p. 18)
6. Comprehensiveness of information included in budget documentation
A
Notes:
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)
A
Notes:
"The budget documents submitted to Parliament provide a comprehensive picture of central government fiscal activities. The information cover: 1. Macroeconomic assumptions, including estimates of aggregate growth, inflation, exchange rate; 2. Fiscal surplus; 3. Information on use of surplus; 4. Debt stock, including details at least for the beginning of the current year; 5. Financial assets, including details at least from the beginning of the current year; 6. Prior year’s budget outturns presented in the same format as the budget proposal; 7. The annual budget presents the current year’s budget in the same format as the budget proposal. At disaggregated level the current year’s budget presented, is the original approved budget. In addition the status of the current budget per 1 half year is presented at aggregated and at programme level; 8. Summarised budget data for both revenue and expenditure, including the current and previous year; 9. Explanation of budget implications of new policy initiatives with estimates of the budgetary impact of all major revenue policy changes and some major changes to expenditure programmes. (p. 18-19)"
7. Extent of unreported government operations
A
Notes:
7.1 The level of extra-budgetary expenditure (other than donor funded projects) which is unreported i.e. not included in fiscal reports.
A
Notes:
"The level of unreported extra-budgetary expenditure is assumed to be insignificant. There are extra-budgetary activities which are not direct part of the state budget. Such extra-budgetary activities are reported in the state budget by the ministries or through separate annual reports. (p. 19, 22)"
7.2 Income/expenditure information on donor-funded projects which is included in fiscal reports.
NA
Notes:
There are no donor-funded projects in Norway. Dimension (ii) is therefore not applicable to Norway. (p. 22)
8. Transparency of inter-governmental fiscal relations
B
Notes:
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);
A
Notes:
Some more than half of the state transfers are unconditional block transfers. These general grants are distributed to municipalities and counties based on objective and transparent criteria to compensate costs and needs that the municipality in short term can not control (demographical criteria etc.). The earmarked grants to child care, disabled and elderly care are allocated based on transparent and rules based systems. Overall more than 90 percent of the transfers are determined by transparent and rules based systems. (p. 19-20)
8.2 Timeliness of reliable information to SN governments on their allocations from central government for the coming year;
B
Notes:
The final information to sub-national government is issued late December or at the start of the fiscal year. However the sub-national governments are provided reliable preliminary information on the allocations to be transferred ahead of completing their budget proposal. (p. 22)
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.
C
Notes:
Reports of sub-national government revenue and expenditure according to sector categories based on accounting data, is collected and consolidated by Statistics Norway by June the following year. There is no collected and consolidated ex-ante (budget) fiscal information. (p. 22)
9. Oversight of aggregate fiscal risk from other public sector entities.
C+
Notes:
9.1 Extent of central government monitoring of AGAs and PEs.
C
Notes:
The autonomous government agencies and public enterprises submit fiscal reports to their responsible line ministry at least annually, but there is no overview or reporting of the total risk for central government. Since the Ministry of Finance has distanced itself from the role of controlling the spending activities and risk management to line ministries, the Norwegian system is predicated on a high degree of trust between the Ministry of Finance and spending ministries. (p. 21)
9.2 Extent of central government monitoring of SN government's fiscal position
A
Notes:
Local governments can not generate fiscal liabilities for central government. In addition, if a sub-national government has not budgeted in balance, or not established short term accounting deficit in balance after two year, it will no longer be allowed to lend without permission from the central government. (p. 21)
10. Public access to key fiscal information
B
Notes:
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)
B
Notes:
"The public has access to the following key fiscal information: - Annual budget documentation: A complete set of documents can be obtained by the public when it has been submitted to the legislature. All documents are available on the internet, where annotated information on various subjects is also available. - Year-end financial statements: The statements are made available to the public within four months after the completion of the financial year. The document is available on the internet. - External audit reports: All reports on central government consolidated operations are made available to the public are made available to the public within six months of completed audit. The reports are posted on the internet. - Contract awards: Award of all state contracts with value above NOK1.1 million (USD178 000) and municipality contracts above NOK1.7 million (USD275 000) are published on the internet. Start up of a procurement competition for contracts above NOK0.5 million (USD80 000) are obliged to be published, but there is no obligation to publish the contract award. Public access to information elements not fulfilled: - In-year budget execution reports are reported monthly to a central agency (The Government Agency for Financial Management), but are not made available to the public. - There are no central regulations to make sure that information on resources available to primary service units are publicized or made available up on request. The actual availability of such information from the municipalities’ primary schools and health clinics, have not been further examined as a part of the PEFA assessment. (p. 21-22)"
III. Policy-Based Budgeting
Scores by Dimension
Overall Indicator Score
11. Orderliness and participation in the annual budget process
A
Notes:
11.1 Existence of and adherence to a fixed budget calendar;
A
Notes:
A clear annual budget calendar exists, is general adhered to and allows ministries enough time to prepare their detailed budget proposals. (p. 25)
11.2 Clarity/comprehensiveness of and political involvement in the guidance on the preparation of budget submissions (budget circular or equivalent);
A
Notes:
Cabinet approves ministry expenditure ceilings before the budget circular is issued. (p. 25)
11.3 Timely budget approval by the legislature or similarly mandated body (within the last three years);
A
Notes:
The legislature has, during the last three years, approved the budget before the start of the fiscal year. (p. 25)
12. Multi-year perspective in fiscal planning, expenditure policy and budgeting
C+
Notes:
12.1 Preparation of multi -year fiscal forecasts and functional allocations
D
Notes:
Forecasts of fiscal aggregates are prepared for 3 years on a rolling annual basis. The forecasts include expenditures for each ministry with details of the main items, but are only on the basis of unchanged policy. The aggregates are not presented according to economic classification and there is not a clear link to annual budget sector ceilings. (p. 25)
12.2 Scope and frequency of debt sustainability analysis
A
Notes:
Analysis of the sustainability of fiscal deficits is undertaken each year. (p. 25)
12.3 Existence of sector strategies with multi-year costing of recurrent and investment expenditure;
C
Notes:
Sector goals and strategies with costing exist for some sectors, but are not consistent linked with aggregate fiscal forecasts. (p. 25)
12.4 Linkages between investment budgets and forward expenditure estimates.
B
Notes:
The majority of important investments are selected on the basis of sector strategies and include recurrent cost implications. (p. 25)
IV. Predictability and Control in Budget Execution
Scores by Dimension
Overall Indicator Score
13. Transparency of taxpayer obligations and liabilities
A
Notes:
13.1 Clarity and comprehensiveness of tax liabilities
A
Notes:
The Norwegian Tax Administration is responsible for collecting and administering direct and indirect taxes. The legislative basis for taxation and the administrative procedures are clear and comprehensive. (p. 25)
13.2 Taxpayer access to information on tax liabilities and administrative procedures.
A
Notes:
Information on taxpayer liabilities is widely available. Up-to-date information on tax liabilities and administrative procedures is posted on the Revenue Autority ’s (RA) website. Information is also sent to all tax payers every year with information on expected salary and expected tax liability. The information posted on the website is considered to be quite user- friendly. (p. 25)
13.3 Existence and functioning of a tax appeals mechanism.
A
Notes:
A tax appeal mechanism is functional. It includes several different appeals authorities dependent on the nature of the appeal. Appeals can be made to independent institutions. There is a comprehensive and transparent system with independent tax tribunals, and disputes with the RAs can also be treated within the ordinary court of law. There are many independent appellate bodies, which guaranties the tax payer a complete and fair treatment. (p. 25)
14. Effectiveness of measures for taxpayer registration and tax assessment
A
Notes:
14.1 Controls in the taxpayer registration system.
A
Notes:
Taxpayers are registered in a complete database system with comprehensive direct linkages to other relevant government registration systems (directory of residents, social security and pension register, shareholders register, official registration and property register) and information from financial institutions (financial assets and liabilities). (p. 26)
14.3 Planning and monitoring of tax audit and fraud investigation programs.
A
Notes:
Planning and monitoring of tax audit and fraud investigation in the Central Tax Administration are managed and reported according to comprehensive and documented audit plans, with clear risk assessments criteria for all major taxes that apply self-assessment. (p. 26)
14.2 Effectiveness of penalties for non-compliance with registration and declaration obligations
A
Notes:
The revenue administration can fine taxes at an estimated level and penalty taxes if incomplete or wrong information are given by taxpayers. The penalties for non-compliance with registration and declaration obligations have been sufficiently high (up to 60 percent penalty tax). New guidelines from the European Human Rights Convention, and limited capacity in the prosecuting authorities (police), may have weakened the ability to impose strict penalties to some degree. The penalties are fairly and consistently administrated. (p. 26)
15. Effectiveness in collection of tax payments
A
Notes:
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).
A
Notes:
The total amount of tax collected were around 99 percent of total claims in 2004 and 2005. The arrears are therefore considered insignificant. (p. 26)
15.2 Effectiveness of transfer of tax collections to the Treasury by the revenue administration.
A
Notes:
Revenues from income and payroll taxes are collected jointly by central and local governments. All income and payroll taxes are paid to accounts controlled by local governments, but every cash balance is transferred to accounts controlled by the Treasury daily and placed at the Ministry of Finance disposal. (p. 26)
15.3 Frequency of complete accounts reconciliation between tax assessments, collections, arrears records and receipts by the Treasury.
A
Notes:
The local tax collectors are daily reconciling the bank accounts for tax revenues. A complete reconciliation of tax assessments, collections and arrears on a national scale takes place every month within 3 weeks after the end of month. (p. 26)
16. Predictability in the availability of funds for commitment of expenditures
A
Notes:
16.2 Reliability and horizon of periodic in-year information to MDAs on ceilings for expenditure commitments
A
Notes:
The budget is always voted by Parliament before the start of the budget year. The line ministries are therefore authorised to commit expenditure from 1 January. (p. 28)
16.3 Frequency and transparency of adjustments to budget allocations, which are decided above the level of management of MDAs.
A
Notes:
Adjustments to budgetary allocations are generally made through issuing of a revised budget twice per year and are done in a transparent and predictable way. (p. 29)
16.1 Extent to which cash flows are forecast and monitored
A
Notes:
The Ministry of Finance is in charge of cash management, and the Central Bank of Norway is in charge of controlling the cash reserve on behalf of the Ministry of Finance. This includes making prognosis for the cash reserve. Cash flow forecast is prepared for the fiscal year, and are updated daily by the Central Bank on the basis of actual cash inflows and outflows. (p. 27)
17. Recording and management of cash balances, debt and guarantees
A
Notes:
17.1 Quality of debt data recording and reporting
A
Notes:
Debt data records are completed, currently updated and reconciled on a monthly basis with data considered of high integrity. Comprehensive management and statistical reports (cover debt service, stock and operations) are produced quarterly. (p. 28)
17.2 Extent of consolidation of the government’s cash balances
A
Notes:
All cash balances in government bank accounts are identified, calculated and consolidated daily. (p. 28)
17.3 Systems for contracting loans and issuance of guarantees.
A
Notes:
No guarantees of loans can be given without priori decision by the Parliament (as a part of the budget process). Overview of new guaranties and the detailed terms are reported in the budget documents. The limits for central governments borrowing are authorised by the Parliament. The contracting of loans is made against transparent criteria and fiscal targets and the management is centralized to the Ministry of Finance. (p. 29)
18. Effectiveness of payroll controls
A
Notes:
18.1 Degree of integration and reconciliation between personnel records and payroll data.
A
Notes:
Personnel database and payroll are directly linked to ensure data consistency and monthly reconciliation. (p. 31)
18.2 Timeliness of changes to personnel records and the payroll
A
Notes:
Required changes to personnel records and payroll are updated monthly, generally in time for the following month’s payments. Retroactive adjustments are rare. (p. 30)
18.3 Internal controls of changes to personnel records and the payroll.
A
Notes:
Authority to change records and payroll is restricted and results in an audit trail. (p. 31)
18.4 Existence of payroll audits to identify control weaknesses and/or ghost workers.
A
Notes:
The Office of the Auditor General’s annual external audit also covers payroll audits. This includes systematic controls on authority given and log reports from the payroll systems and an audit on whether the agencies have control weaknesses (or ghost workers). (p. 30)
19. Transparency, competition and complaints mechanisms in procurement
B
Notes:
19.1 Transparency, comprehensiveness and competition in the legal and regulatory framework
D
Notes:
There is statistics of the number (not the value) of contracts awards above the value of NOK1.1 million (USD178 000), but the data does not make it possible to estimate the use of open competition for award of contracts compared with total contract awards. (p. 32)
19.2 Use of competitive procurement methods
B
Notes:
The national regulations require that the use of other less competitive methods is to be justified. In cases with complains from competitors, the method used will be examined. The Office of the Auditor General has several comments on shortcomings in routines and documentations in the governmental agencies. (p. 30)
19.3 Public access to complete, reliable and timely procurement information
A
Notes:
An independent agency for complaints on public procurement was established in January 2003 (Klagenemda for offentlige anskaffelser). The setting up of the agency is regulated by law and government regulations have been established to regulate the functioning of the agency. Information of all complaints received and on all decisions made is available on the website of the agency. (p. 30)
19.4 Existence of an independent administrative procurement complaints system
NU
Notes:
20. Effectiveness of internal controls for non-salary expenditure
A
Notes:
20.1 Effectiveness of expenditure commitment controls.
A
Notes:
Each agency is responsible to establish systems and procedures for expenditure commitment controls. There are no cash availability limits but there are appropriation limits authorised by the responsible line ministry (approved budget allocations, as revised). Comprehensive expenditure commitment controls are generally in place. (p. 30)
20.2 Comprehensiveness, relevance and understanding of other internal control rules/ procedures
A
Notes:
Other internal control rules and procedures are relevant (based on a risk assessment), and incorporate a comprehensive and generally cost effective set of controls and are widely understood. (p. 32)
20.3 Degree of compliance with rules for processing and recording transactions
A
Notes:
Compliance with rules is high and any misuse of simplified and emergency procedures is insignificant of compliance with rules for processing and recording transactions. (p. 31)
21. Effectiveness of internal audit
D
Notes:
21.1 Coverage and quality of the internal audit function.
D
Notes:
The ministries do not have internal audit units. Only the largest agencies have internal audit units or internal audit systems. (p. 32)
21.2 Frequency and distribution of reports
D
Notes:
The largest agencies report to their management in the agency, but do not submit internal audit reports to their line ministry, The Ministry of Finance or to the Office of the Auditor General. (p. 32)
21.3 Extent of management response to internal audit findings.
D
Notes:
The extent of actions on internal audit findings is uncertain. Twelve agencies received repeated comments on same issues from the external audit in 2004 and 2005. (p. 32)
V. Accounting, Recording and Reporting
Scores by Dimension
Overall Indicator Score
22. Timeliness and regularity of accounts reconciliation
B+
Notes:
22.1 Regularity of bank reconciliations
A
Notes:
Bank reconciliations for all central government bank accounts take place at least monthly at aggregate and detailed level, within 4 weeks of end of period. (p. 32)
22.2 Regularity of reconciliation and clearance of suspense accounts and advances.
B
Notes:
Each agency accounts for its own reconciliation and clearance of suspense accounts and advances. There are no central rules and no central information on the practice in the different agencies. Reconciliation and clearance of suspense accounts and advances take place at least annually, within two months from the end of period and with few balances brought forward. (p. 32-33)
23. Availability of information on resources received by service delivery units
D
Notes:
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
D
Notes:
There is no central regulation to make sure that information on resources available to primary service units are publicized or available up on request. (p. 34)
24. Quality and timeliness of in-year budget reports
C+
Notes:
24.1 Scope of reports in terms of coverage and compatibility with budget estimates
C
Notes:
Classification of in-year budget execution reports at payment stage allows comparison to the budget. However the data usually don’t include expenditure at commitment stage. (p. 34)
24.2 Timeliness of the issue of reports
A
Notes:
Reports are prepared on a monthly base. The reports are issued within 4 weeks of end of period. (p. 33)
24.3 Quality of information
A
Notes:
There is no material concerns regarding accuracy of the data included in the in-year budget execution reports. (p. 33)
25. Quality and timeliness of annual financial statements
A
Notes:
25.1 Completeness of the financial statements
A
Notes:
The annual financial statements include details of revenue and expenditure for central government. The statements also include information on central government’s assets and liabilities. (p. 33)
25.2 Timeliness of submission of the financial statements
A
Notes:
The annual statements are submitted within four months of year-end. (p. 34)
25.3 Accounting standards used
A
Notes:
All statements are presented in a consistent format according to detailed national accounting standards established by the Ministry of Finance. (p. 33)
VI. External Scrutiny and Audit
Scores by Dimension
Overall Indicator Score
26. Scope, nature and follow-up of external audit
B+
Notes:
26.1 Scope/nature of audit performed (incl. adherence to auditing standards).
A
Notes:
All entities of central government are audited annually. The audit covers revenue, expenditure and assets/liabilities. Performance audits are undertaken for a number of entities/issues. (p. 34)
26.2 Timeliness of submission of audit reports to legislature.
B
Notes:
Financial statements for the previous year are prepared by the government by 30 April each year. The Office of the Auditor General’s report is normally released in November the same year. Hence, the auditing takes less than 7 months. (p. 34)
26.3 Evidence of follow up on audit recommendations
B
Notes:
The audit of the financial statements of the budget year 2005 had 210 ended audits without comments and 23 audits with comments. The report of the auditor general includes information on the ministries’ follow-up of earlier comments made by the auditor general. The Office of the Auditor General’s comments are generally followed up by the agencies. However twelve agencies received repeated comments on the same issues from the Office of the Auditor General in 2005 and 2004. (p. 35)
27. Legislative scrutiny of the annual budget law
B+
Notes:
27.1 Scope of the legislature’s scrutiny.
B
Notes:
The Parliament’s review of the budget proposal covers the macroeconomic framework and medium term macroeconomic outlook, and details of expenditure and revenue. Medium term priorities are not reviewed by Parliament as they are not presented by the government. (p. 35)
27.2 Extent to which the legislature’s procedures are well-established and respected.
A
Notes:
The Parliament has established procedures for the budget review and decision making. The procedures include organisational arrangements such as review of the budget by the standing committees. (p. 35)
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
A
Notes:
The government’s budget proposal is presented to Parliament in early October. Parliament must vote on the budget no later than 15 December. Hence, Parliament has more than 2 months to review the proposal. (p. 35)
27.4 Rules for in-year amendments to the budget without ex-ante approval by the legislature.
A
Notes:
The government generally does not have the authority to make budget amendments without ex-ante approval by Parliament. However, minor budget increases, below approximately NOK5 million (USD0.8 million), that are regarded as uncontroversial, can be decided by the government. In cases where there is an urgent need to increase the budget, e.g. due to fire, accidents or other acute situations, the government may also decide on budget increase without prior approval by Parliament. However, in such cases an ex-post proposal must be made to Parliament as soon as possible. In all other cases Parliament’s ex-ante approval must be sought before amending the budget. (p. 35)
28. Legislative scrutiny of external audit reports
C+
Notes:
28.1 Timeliness of examination of audit reports by the legislature (for reports received within the last three years).
B
Notes:
The auditor general’s detailed annual audit report for the previous year is generally sent to Parliament in November. One of the standing committees (Control and Constitutional Committee) examines the report and the scrutiny is generally completed in March or April the following year. Hence, the scrutiny takes 4-5 months. (p. 35)
28.2 Extent of hearings on key findings undertaken by the legislature.
C
Notes:
When preparing the audit report the Office of the Auditor General sends the findings to each ministry. The ministries’ responses are included in the audit report and reviewed by Parliament. The Parliament generally does not conduct hearings on the key findings of the Office of the Auditor General. However, in the first half of 2007 the Parliament conducted three hearings on special issues where four responsible cabinet ministers and two agency leaders had to participate in the hearings. (p. 35)
28.3 Issuance of recommended actions by the legislature and implementation by the executive.
C
Notes:
Recommendations of actions from the Parliament are generally not issued directly to the executive, but do occur. However, the Parliament usually takes note of the comments from the Office of Auditor General. The executive generally follow up on the findings of the Office of the Auditor General, with some exceptions of repeated comments. (p. 36)
Donor Practices
Scores by Dimension
Overall Indicator Score
D-1 Predictability of Direct Budget Support
NA
Notes:
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).
NA
Notes:
D-1.2 In-year timeliness of donor disbursements (compliance with aggregate quarterly estimates)
NA
Notes:
D-2 Financial information provided by donors for budgeting and reporting on project and program aid
NA
Notes:
D-2.1 Completeness and timeliness of budget estimates by donors for project support.
NA
Notes:
D-2.2 Frequency and coverage of reporting by donors on actual donor flows for project support.
NA
Notes:
D-3 Proportion of aid that is managed by use of national procedures
NA
Notes:
D-3.1 Overall proportation of aid funds to central government that are managed through national procedures
NA
Notes: