PI-2. Expenditure composition outturn
Description
This indicator measures the extent to which reallocations between the main budget categories during execution have contributed to variance in expenditure composition. It contains three dimensions and uses the M1 (WL) method for aggregating dimension scores.
Dimensions and scoring
| Score | Minimum requirements for scores |
|---|---|
2.1. Expenditure composition outturn by function |
|
| A | Variance in expenditure composition by program, administrative or functional classification was less than 5% in at least two of the last three years. |
| B | Variance in expenditure composition by program, administrative or functional classification was less than 10% in at least two of the last three years. |
| C | Variance in expenditure composition by program, administrative or functional classification was less than 15% in at least two of the last three years. |
| D | Performance is less than required for a C score. |
2.2. Expenditure composition outturn by economic type |
|
| A | Variance in expenditure composition by economic classification was less than 5% in at least two of the last three years. |
| B | Variance in expenditure composition by economic classification was less than 10% in at least two of the last three years. |
| C | Variance in expenditure composition by economic classification was less than 15% in at least two of the last three years. |
| D | Performance is less than required for a C score. |
2.3. Expenditure from contingency reserves |
|
| A | Actual expenditure charged to a contingency vote was on average less than 3% of the original budget. |
| B | Actual expenditure charged to a contingency vote was averaging between 3% and 6%, inclusive, of the original budget. |
| C | Actual expenditure charged to a contingency vote was on average more than 6% but less than 10% of the original budget. |
| D | Performance is less than required for a C score. |
Coverage
BCG.
Time period
Last three completed fiscal years.
Measurement guidance
Functional or program comparisons provide the most useful basis for assessment of policy intent. However budgets are usually adopted and managed on the basis of an administrative (ministry/department/agency) and economic classification. The same basis should be used for comparison between appropriation and execution.
