European Financial and Accounting Journal 2011, 6(2):28-47 | DOI: 10.18267/j.efaj.32

M&E and Budget Program Performance Measurement in Ukraine: Current State and Needs for Improvement

Sergii Slukhai
Dr. Sergii Slukhai - Professor; Economics Faculty, Taras Shevchenko Kyiv National University, 90a Vassylkivska Street, Kyiv 02033, Ukraine; <serg1955@meta.ua>.

The key elements of a performance-based budgeting methodology have already become a part of the mechanism for public expenditure management in Ukraine. At the same time, there still remains the issue of linking budget expenditures to specific results achieved by specific budget programs which defines the necessity of applying modern approaches to carrying out M&E. This study presents an analysis of the current state of M&E in Ukrainian public expenditure program management and offers some solutions which could improve its functioning. The analysis has revealed the absence of rigorous selection of performance indicators to evaluate budget program implementation, a need to better institutionalize the monitoring and evaluation activities through functional differentiation of budget programs and changes in approaches to their assessment.

Keywords: Budget program, Evaluation, Major spending unit, Monitoring, Performance-based budgeting
JEL classification: H50

Published: June 1, 2011  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Slukhai, S. (2011). M&E and Budget Program Performance Measurement in Ukraine: Current State and Needs for Improvement. European Financial and Accounting Journal6(2), 28-47. doi: 10.18267/j.efaj.32
Download citation

References

  1. Heyets, V. M. (ed.) (2008): State Purpose-Oriented Programs and Regulation of Programming Process in the Budget Sphere. Kyiv, Naukova Dumka, 2008.
  2. Jackson, P. M. (1995): Measures for Success in the Public Sector. London, Public Finance Foundation, 1995.
  3. Kusek, J. Z. - Rist, R. C. (2001): Building a Performance-Based Monitoring and Evaluation System. The Challenges Facing Developing Countries. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, December 2001, Vol. 1 (new series), No. 2, pp. 14-23. Go to original source...
  4. Kuzmin, A. I. - O'Sallivan, R. - Kosheleva, N. A. (eds.) (2009): Program Evaluation: Methodology and Practice. Moscow, PrestoRK, 2009.
  5. Mackay, K. (2007): How to Build M&E Systems to Support Better Government. Washington, D.C., World Bank, 2007. Go to original source...
  6. OECD (1998): Best Practice Guidelines for Evaluation. PUMA Policy Brief, May 1998, No. 5.
  7. OECD (2008): Performance Budgeting: A User's Guide. OECD Policy Brief, March 2008.
  8. Reed, E. - Morariu, J. (2010): State of Evaluation 2010. Evaluation Practice and Capacity in the Non-Profit Sector. Washington, D.C., Innovation Network, 2010.
  9. Robinson, M. - Last, D. (2009): A Basic Model of PerformanceBased Budgeting. Washington, D.C., IMF, 2009. Go to original source...
  10. Sanzharovskyi, I. - Polianski, Yu. (eds.) (2007): Handbook on Monitoring and Evaluation of Programs for Regional Development. Kyiv, KISS, 2007.
  11. Tertychka, V. (2002a): Governmental Policy: Analysis and Implementation in Ukraine. Kyiv, Osnovy, 2002.
  12. Tertychka, V. (2002b): Issues in Effectiveness and Efficiency Evaluation within Public Policy Analysis. Bulletin of Ukrainian Academy of Public Administration, 2002, No. 1.
  13. World Bank (2004): Monitoring and Evaluation: Some Tools, Methods & Approaches. Washington, D.C., World Bank, 2004.

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.