ATs will also usually commence scoring and drafting the narrative of section 3 of the report (assessment of PFM performance). This can help with early identification of any gaps in data or additional data required to corroborate the information that has been collected.

It is good practice to present the preliminary PEFA findings (including both scores and preliminary analysis) to the government. Following discussion of the findings with government officials, the assessment team will finalize the first draft of the report for peer review.


Peer review of a PEFA report is intended to provide an independent assessment of the report content. It is most effective where the reviewers, either individually or collectively, have a sound knowledge of the PEFA framework and the country or SNG being assessed.

The four reviewers have different roles:

  • The role of government is to verify that data and evidence is correct and complete and assess whether conclusions and scoring reflect reality as experienced by government.
  • The role of the PEFA Secretariat is to ensure that the PEFA Framework has been applied correctly, including that scoring is adequately evidenced and that the report structure and content follows the guidance provided.
  • The role of the other two peer reviewers (two PFM independent institutions) is to provide an independent review of whether the data and evidence is credible and reflect reality on the ground. These peer reviewers will therefore have to have a good knowledge of PFM in the country. The use of peer reviewers without current country knowledge is discouraged. To ensure that all major aspects of the report are adequately reviewed, there might be need to involve more than two reviewers in addition

to Government and the PEFA Secretariat.These reviewers could include, for example,an internal PFM reform group, an academicwith understanding of country PFM, other governments, or development partners.

When the report has been peer reviewed, the assessment team can have more confidence that they have produced a high-quality report and users of the report can be confident that it has been subject to informed external scrutiny and refinement.

The peer review process can only be effective if the assessment team addresses peer reviewers’ comments. This can be done either by making appropriate changes to the report, or by giving a reasonable explanation why the changes suggested by the comments are not appropriate.

The process of peer review is monitored by the PEFA Secretariat. This is part of the six-point PEFA Check QA process, explained in annex 1.2. It is essential for every assessment seeking to achieve PEFA Check recognition to complete this step comprehensively.

7.1 Submit draft report for peer review

The draft report is usually shared with a minimum of four peer reviewers (representing four independent PFM institutions) for comment and suggested refinement as discussed above.

The Secretariat will also examine whether the scope, approach and findings presented in the draft report are consistent with the requirements presented in the concept note/ToR.

PEFA Check reassures the users of PEFA reports that a reasonable consultation and peer review process has been conducted as part of the assessment. It provides the opportunity for the assessment to be critically reviewed by government and independent professionals before it is finalized.

Peer review of the draft report will take at least 15 business days. More complex or multiple reports such as a group of SNG reports may take longer.


Phase Three: The PEFA Report