Read without ads and support Scribd by becoming a Scribd Premium Reader.
See Premium Plans
 
 
FreeBalance
®
 
Government “Budget 2.0”
 
Government Budget 2.0 Framework:
a framework for evaluating technology for government transparency and Public Financial Management reform
 
Doug Hadden, VP Products, FreeBalance
 
 
FreeBalance
 ® 
 
2
Introduction
 
This paper proposes a budget-centric and technology-focused framework to assess the government transparency and publicfinancial maturity. Governments leverage technology to manage public finances and enable transparency. Most assessments of Public Financial Management (PFM) tend to be technology - neutral by providing little or no guidance about the use of IntegratedFinancial Management Information Systems
i
(IFMIS), also known as Government Resource Planning (GRP) [Figure 2]. Theseassessments focus primarily on procedures and practices because no GRP can improve PFM quality when procedures or practicesare ineffective.E-government and open government technology is increasingly being leveraged by governments to enable transparency,
accountability, citizen services and citizen engagement.“
The real benefit of e-government lies not in the use of technology per se,but in its application to processes of transformation
ii
.” E
-government and open government frameworks tend to combinetechnology methods with procedure and practices but have little PFM guidance with the exception of managing transactions[Figure 2].
Budget Centric Approach to GovernmentTransparency
 
Budget management is the core to public financial management. Often called
the “organic budget law” or the “vote”, it is 
the legal embodiment
iii
of government policy. Budget formulation and execution traditionally 
“focused
primarily on resource allocation and input control
iv
” is maturing“
towards afocus on results
v
” or government performance. New tools coupled with citizen
demand have created a demand for more open and transparent participatory
 budgeting“
to extend and deepen
vi
" democratic processes. This trend for opengovernment, open data and Government 2.0 affects the core of governmentmanagement: the budget.Open government often includes budgetary and transactional information suchas budget plans, e-procurement opportunities and financial reports. Opengovernment can also include what might seem as non-budgetary informationsuch as census statistics, economic data or health advice. The collection and publication of this information requires funding viabudgets. Budget management is core to open government [Figure 1]. And, budgets are tied to this government outputs andoutcomes. Therefore, budget management is core to government performance management, unlike in the private sector.
“
Inbusiness the budget is only an internal document. In governments and not-for-profits, the budget is the key fiscal document.
vii
”
 
From Government 1.0 to Government 2.0
Tim O’Reilly of O’Reilly media coined the term “Web 2.0”
viii
in 2005 to describe a technological evolution where the web had
 become a platform for software. This differs from “Web 1.0” where data generated by client/server software was deployed through
the Internet. Other characteristics of Web 2.0 included harnessing collective intelligence, focusing on data, supporting multipletechnology platforms and deploying rich user experiences. M.I.T. Sloan and Harvard professor Andrew McAfee extended theseconcepts to the business domain by describing Enterprise 2.0
ix
in 2006.This technology transition enabled observers to describe Government 2.0, Aid 2.0, Civil Society 2.0, etc. The concept of 
Government 2.0 includes what Tim O’Reilly calls “government as platform
x
”.
 Governments build physical infrastructure like
highways and communications satellites that generate economic growth according to O’Reilly. Economic growth can also begenerated through technology by making government open. O’Reilly sees an intersection be
tween technology open standards and
open government:“
open standards spark innovation and growth
xi
.”
 
This “openness” intersection is critical to understanding how open technology enables governm
ent openness in the Government2.0 world. For the purposes of this paper, the following definitions are used:
 
Figure 1: Budget-Centric View ofOpen Government
Government Performance ManagementData from Government OperationsExpenditures RevenueBudgetformulationBudgetexecution HumanTreasury ResourcesData from Government OperationsGovernment Performance Management
 
 
FreeBalance
 ® 
 
3
 
 Budget 1.0
: Traditional mechanisms of budget management that are primarily internally-
focused (often called “back 
-
office”), where control and comp
liance are major concerns
 
Transitional 
: Increase of externally focused or “front
-
office” budget management where transparency, web transactionsand government reporting are important characteristics but do not achieve “Web 2.0” characteristics
 
 
 Budget 2.0
: Social and Web 2.0 mechanisms that attempt to leverage the network effect to improve governmentperformance and service delivery while leveraging the integration of front and back office systems
Figure 2: Survey of Common PFM and E-Government Assessment Methods
Evaluation Method ScopeBudgetImplicationBack-OfficeTechnologyFront-Office Technology
Public Expenditure and FinancialAccountability (PEFA) Comprehensive PFMassessmentYesNo technology guidance although PEFA assessmentsattribute some achievements to the use of technologyCommonwealth Public FinancialManagement Self-AssessmentToolkit (CPFM-SAT) Comprehensive PFMassessmentYesA3: Use of IFMISB2: Use of DebtManagement softwareNo technology guidance forpublishing informationThe Chartered Institute of PublicFinance & Accountancy (CIPFA)Whole Systems Approach Comprehensive PFMassessmentYesO7: Financialmanagementinformation systemsRevenue Watch Institute Index Extractive IndustriestransparencyYesParis Declaration and AccraAgenda for Action Aid effectiveness YesUse of country systems for PFM and procurementdoes not specify use of technologyInternational Budget PartnershipOpen Budget Index (OBI) Budget preparationand reportingtransparencyYesInternet publishing of budget documents gainshigher rating for manycategoriesGartner Group OpenGovernment Maturity Model Open government NoProvides open governmenttechnology insightInstitute for ElectronicGovernment e-Democracy Model E-Democracy No Use of e-mail systemsUse of web technologyAndersen & Henriksen E-Government Maturity E-Government NoLayne and Lee Framework of E-Government E-Government NoHorizontal and verticalintegration withingovernmentWorld Bank World GovernanceIndicators Meta collection of 3
rd
 party indicatorsNoNo technology guidanceGlobal Integrity Report Governance and anti-corruptionNo
Technology-Enabled Transparency
The Internet supports government transparency initiatives like open data, procurement, recruitment and grants portals.
Transparency mechanisms have evolved from “freedom of information” processes to proactive publication of machine
- readabledata sites. Data that was once packaged by governments to generate revenue are being offered at no cost to enhance businessopportunities. Information timeliness has also become more critical with governments releasing information without lengthy
Search
Search History:
Searching...
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
  • p.

    • More From This User

    15 p.
    Automating Good Governance through Government Resource Planning sof...
    FreeBalanceGRP
    35 Reads
    19 p.
    FreeBalance Public Financial Management Sustainability the Governme...
    FreeBalanceGRP
    41 Reads
    86 p.
    2013-05-07 AfDB Lessons Learned on the PFM Front Lines
    FreeBalanceGRP
    84 Reads
    13 p.
    Good Practices in Government Resource Planning Vendor Specialization
    FreeBalanceGRP
    167 Reads
    11 p.
    Good Practices in Government Resource Planning, Developed vs Develo...
    FreeBalanceGRP
    224 Reads
    5 p.
    Public Financial Management Good Practices Multiple Year Chart of A...
    FreeBalanceGRP
    187 Reads
    8 p.
    Public Financial Management Good Practice GRP Reform Sequencing
    FreeBalanceGRP
    125 Reads
    11 p.
    Public Financial Management Good Practice Anti-Corruption using Fin...
    FreeBalanceGRP
    239 Reads
    14 p.
    Public Financial Management Good Practice Budget Formulation
    FreeBalanceGRP
    252 Reads
    9 p.
    Public Financial Management Good Practice GRP TCO
    FreeBalanceGRP
    206 Reads
    6 p.
    FreeBalance Good Practice GRP and TCO
    FreeBalanceGRP
    137 Reads
    408 p.
    2012-09-10 FMIS Training at Crown Agents
    FreeBalanceGRP
    366 Reads
    32 p.
    FreeBalance Shared Services Solution
    FreeBalanceGRP
    64 Reads
    27 p.
    2011-10-27 IFMIS and Debt Management Integration
    FreeBalanceGRP
    72 Reads
    60 p.
    2011-11-21 FreeBalance Customer Update
    FreeBalanceGRP
    75 Reads
    82 p.
    2011-11-22 Speed to Savings in Government Shared Services
    FreeBalanceGRP
    119 Reads
    83 p.
    2011-06-14 Shared Services We Can't Get There From Here
    FreeBalanceGRP
    69 Reads
    31 p.
    Technology Leapfrog in Developing Countries
    FreeBalanceGRP
    279 Reads
    17 p.
    Open Systems Enabling Transparency Leapfrog
    FreeBalanceGRP
    78 Reads
    12 p.
    Nummy: Sequencing Public Financial Management
    FreeBalanceGRP
    75 Reads
    28 p.
    2012-07 Decentralization, Governance and GRP Final
    FreeBalanceGRP
    228 Reads
    27 p.
    2009-07-18 makingpfmtechnologywork
    FreeBalanceGRP
    63 Reads
    73 p.
    2012-05-28whatcanwelearnaboutsustainabilityfromdevelopingnationgove...
    FreeBalanceGRP
    67 Reads
    81 p.
    2009-12governmentperformancemanagementespanol-091202203314-phpapp01
    FreeBalanceGRP
    142 Reads
    73 p.
    What Can We Learn About Sustainability From Developing Nation Gover...
    FreeBalanceGRP
    97 Reads
    Notes
    Load more