Budget Analysis Guide | Budget | Psychology & Cognitive Science

1

Guide to Preparing PA 132 Group Project

The project is a written paper reporting the findings, analysis and lessons from the study of the
various dimensions of the budget of a national government agency over the past years.

Purpose. The purpose of the project is to test your ability to apply the concepts, theories, principles
and procedures in government budgeting by studying in detail the components and evolution of the
budget of a particular government agency.

Outputs. The project shall be done in groups. As such, members of the group are expected to help
each other in data gathering and conduct collective analysis. The specific outputs of each group are:

1. A Written Report – which contains the findings, analysis and lessons learned; maximum of
15 pages (short paper, excluding annexes), Times New Roman font size 11, and 1.5 spacing,
1” margin on all sides.
2. Oral Report – 30-minute presentation of the salient findings/conclusions and lessons learned.

Selection of Agency. The group shall choose from among the major national government agencies
subject to my approval.

Basis of Grading:

1. Group Rating. This will be equivalent to 70% of total individual grade. It shall consist of
70% written report and 30% oral report. The group rating will be the same for all members
of the group.

Grading criteria for written report:
• Content 25 pts. - Depth in analysis and insight; focused discussion; well-developed
arguments and support to main ideas/assertions; appropriate use of relevant
data/information;
• Organization 20 pts. - Logical and cohesive presentation of ideas; clarity in establishing
linkages of elements/paragraphs; avoids unnecessary, superfluous and/or ambiguous
elements.
• Style 15 pts. - Sentences are precise, succinct and direct to the point; errors in grammar,
spelling, and sentence structure are minimized;
• Referencing 10 pts. - quoted, paraphrased or summarized sources a correctly cited within
the text and in bibliography; use of credible and relevant sources.

Grading criteria for oral report (to be graded by the non-reporting students and the
instructor)
• Organization 5 pts – The report was clearly organized into appropriate sections.
• Delivery 10 pts – The speakers delivered the report in clear and audible tone; presented
in a smooth manner; showed confidence and indicate that they understand what they
reported.
• Effective use of visual aids 10 pts – The visual aids added quality to the report;
effectively used to clarify the points being raised; helped focus the attention on the
2
important/major points; did not distract and or confuse the audience.
• Overall effectiveness 5 pts. - The report enabled the audience to learn something new;
sparked the interest of the audience throughout the duration of the report; clarified more
than confused the audience on the subject of the report.

2. Peer Rating. This will be equivalent to 30% of total individual grade. This will be based on
the Peer Evaluation Form which should be submitted by each group member together with
the final paper. (see Peer Evaluation Form below)

Peer Evaluation Form


Deadline for submission is September 23, 2011.
Name:
Group (Agency):
Name of Groupmate
A.
B.
C.
D.
L.
l.
Category A.
Category B.
Category C.
Instructions: \rite the names oí your groupmates and rate each one
according to three categories ,columns A, B, C, with 1 being the lowest.
Careíully read the description oí each category below beíore you start
rating. Increments oí .1 are accepted in grading ,ex. 2.0, 2.1, 2.2,. lor
Category A, the highest possible score is 4.0, íor Categories B and C, the
the highest possible score is 3.0.
Category A
(J.0 to 4.0)
Category B
(J.0 to 3.0)
Category C
(J.0 to 3.0)
le,she participated acti·ely in discussing analysis and
interpretation oí data and writing oí the íinal report.
le,she contributed greatly in data gathering, including
conducting inter·iews and íormulation oí questions,
encoding,organizing data and construction oí tables and
charts.
le,she contributed extensi·e time and resources in the
conduct oí acti·ities necessary íor this project.
3
Guide Questions

The group should consider the following guide questions in conducting the project. The papers
should provide substantive answers on the basic questions provided below and are encouraged to
elaborate on issues/further questions encountered by the group in the conduct of their study.

I. What are the bases of the agency's budgeting?

1. Explain the mandate of the agency and its core functions/programs?
2. Does the agency have a medium-term plan? What are the priority programs and projects
identified in this plan?
3. Are there international standards or benchmarks for public spending programs by the
agency?
4. How is the agency faring in terms of the performance of its mandate? What are the
implications on financing requirements?

II. Magnitude and composition of the proposed FY 2010 Budget (based on 2010 BESF and
2010 NEP)

1. What is the relative size of the agency's proposed budget relative to total budget? How
does it rank with other departments?
2. What is the relative size of the agency's proposed budget relative to the past couple of
years? Is it increasing or decreasing? What is the trend on a per capita basis?
3. What are the composition and relative shares of various expenditure classes? What are
the priority programs?
4. How is the budget proposed to be distributed across regions?

III. Effect of Budget Legislation on FY 2009 Budget (based on 2009 GAA AND 2009 NEP)

1. Describe the changes in the agency budget from what was proposed and what was finally
authorized.
2. What programs and budget items benefited in the course of budget authorization? Which
ones suffered budget cuts?
3. Looking at the 2009 NEP, describe the relative shares of new and existing
appropriations.

IV. Adjustments during budget implementation (based on BESF various years)

Analyzing the FY 2009 proposed budget (i.e., as reported in 2009 BESF) and adjusted budget (i.e.,
as reported in 2010 BESF), describe what adjustments have been made. What could be the reasons
for such adjustments? Can you explain whether such adjustments are justifiable?

V. Budget Accountability (based on latest COA Audit Report)

What for you are the most significant findings of the COA in its latest audit report? Why do you
think they are significant?
4

VI. Conclusions and Lessons Learned

What lessons and insights about government budgeting did you learn from the study? How do
the findings of your study relate, support or refute the public budgeting theories and principles
discussed in class?

# . Overall effectiveness 5 pts. This will be equivalent to 30% of total individual grade. clarified more than confused the audience on the subject of the report. . (see Peer Evaluation Form below) Peer Evaluation Form " # # )& '& ( ! "# ! # !# $ %& %" %% *+ *+ + *+ # . 2 . / Deadline for submission is September 23. 2. This will be based on the Peer Evaluation Form which should be submitted by each group member together with the final paper. ! # $ . did not distract and or confuse the audience.• important/major points.! . 2011.The report enabled the audience to learn something new. . Peer Rating. sparked the interest of the audience throughout the duration of the report.

Guide Questions The group should consider the following guide questions in conducting the project. Explain the mandate of the agency and its core functions/programs? 2. How is the agency faring in terms of the performance of its mandate? What are the implications on financing requirements? II. What are the bases of the agency's budgeting? 1. Effect of Budget Legislation on FY 2009 Budget (based on 2009 GAA AND 2009 NEP) 1.e. What is the relative size of the agency's proposed budget relative to the past couple of years? Is it increasing or decreasing? What is the trend on a per capita basis? 3. Does the agency have a medium-term plan? What are the priority programs and projects identified in this plan? 3. How is the budget proposed to be distributed across regions? III. Adjustments during budget implementation (based on BESF various years) Analyzing the FY 2009 proposed budget (i. I. Looking at the 2009 NEP.. describe what adjustments have been made. The papers should provide substantive answers on the basic questions provided below and are encouraged to elaborate on issues/further questions encountered by the group in the conduct of their study. Magnitude and composition of the proposed FY 2010 Budget (based on 2010 BESF and 2010 NEP) 1. What programs and budget items benefited in the course of budget authorization? Which ones suffered budget cuts? 3. What are the composition and relative shares of various expenditure classes? What are the priority programs? 4. as reported in 2009 BESF) and adjusted budget (i. What is the relative size of the agency's proposed budget relative to total budget? How does it rank with other departments? 2.. describe the relative shares of new and existing appropriations. Describe the changes in the agency budget from what was proposed and what was finally authorized. 2. Are there international standards or benchmarks for public spending programs by the agency? 4. as reported in 2010 BESF). What could be the reasons for such adjustments? Can you explain whether such adjustments are justifiable? V. Budget Accountability (based on latest COA Audit Report) What for you are the most significant findings of the COA in its latest audit report? Why do you think they are significant? 3 .e. IV.

support or refute the public budgeting theories and principles discussed in class? 4 . Conclusions and Lessons Learned What lessons and insights about government budgeting did you learn from the study? How do the findings of your study relate.VI.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful