RESULTS-BASED BUDGETING EXPERIENCE OF UNITED NATIONS … · 2018-01-31 · RBB Results-based budgeting UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNESCO United Nations Educational,

JIU/REP/99/3

RESULTS-BASED BUDGETING :

THE EXPERIENCE OF UNITED NATIONS SYSTEMORGANIZATIONS

Prepared by

Andrzej T. AbraszewskiFatih Bouayad-Agha

John D. FoxWolfgang Münch

Joint Inspection Unit

Geneva1999

- ii -

CONTENTSParagraph Page

ACRONYMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: OBJECTIVE, CONCLUSIONS ANDRECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v-vii

I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-7 . . . . 1-2

II. BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-17 . . . . 3-5

A. What is results-based budgeting? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-12 . . . . 3-4B. Overview of budgeting in the United Nations system . . . . . . 13-17 . . . . 4-5

III. CONCERNS REGARDING RESULTS-BASEDBUDGETING: EXPERIENCE OF UNITED NATIONSSYSTEM ORGANIZATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-75 . . . 6-16

A. Requirement for RBB to address the needs andreflect the characteristics of the United Nations . . . . . . . . . . 21-24 . . . . 6-7

B. Applicability of RBB concepts to all sections ofthe programme budget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25-27 . . . . . . 7

C. Definition of key RBB terms: objective, output,expected result, performance indicator, and performancemeasurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28-32 . . . . . . 8

D. Readiness for RBB: regulations, procedures,management information systems, and training . . . . . . . . . . 33-44 . . . 8-10

E. Governance and involvement of Member Statesin RBB decision-making . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-49 . . 10-11

F. RBB as a budget and/or staff reduction exercise . . . . . . . . . . 50-52 . . 11-12

G. Quantitative results as the sole basis for justificationof resource requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53-57 . . 12-13

H. Taking account of external factors in RBB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58-62 . . 13-14

- iii -

Paragraph Page

I. Personal involvement and leadership of ExecutiveHead for RBB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-66 . . 14-15

J. Impact of RBB on the role of expert programmeand budget review bodies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67-71 . . 15-16

K. Relationship between RBB and the Medium-Term Plan . . . 72-75 . . . . . 16

IV. LESSONS LEARNED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76-82 . . 17-19

ANNEX Glossary of results-based budgeting terms as defined byUnited Nations system organizations

- iv -

ACRONYMS

ACABQ Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions

ACC Administrative Committee on Coordination

CCAQ Consultative Committee on Administrative Questions

CPC Committee for Programme and Coordination

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization

ILO International Labour Organisation

IMO International Maritime Organization

ITU International Telecommunication Union

JIU Joint Inspection Unit

MTP Medium-Term Plan

RBB Results-based budgeting

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organization

UNITAR United Nations Institute for Training and Research

UPU Universal Postal Union

WHO World Health Organization

WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization

WMO World Meteorological Organization

- v -

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:OBJECTIVE, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Objective: To learn from the experience of other United Nations system organizationswith results-based budgeting (RBB) for assisting Member States inconsidering the proposal on results-based budgeting for the UnitedNations.

CONCLUSIONS

A. Applicability of the experience of thespecialized agencies and the InternationalAtomic Energy Agency (IAEA) with RBB,and RBB-like, techniques to the UnitedNations may be somewhat limited in view ofthe still preliminary level of development ofRBB in the other organizations and the needto adapt the methodology to the specialneeds and characteristics of eachorganization. (See paras. 17, 20, 77 and 81)

B. To the extent that the otherorganizations of the System have used RBBtechniques, their experience has been mixedin regard to concerns raised about the use ofRBB for the United Nations. (See para. 77)

C. Regarding some of these concerns,their experience indicates problems ordifficulties that require special attention inconsidering the Secretary-General’sproposal to apply RBB to the UnitedNations: (See para. 78)

i. The difficulty for some organizations inapplying RBB to all sections of theirprogramme budgets suggests this matterwill require careful examination for theUnited Nations. (See paras. 25-27)

ii. The lack of agreement among the otherorganizations on definitions for key

RBB terms highlights the need forcoherently developing definitions ofthese terms for the United Nationswithin a logical framework. (See paras.28-31)

iii. The measures taken by the otherorganizations in different areas to beready for RBB illustrate the need forgiving comprehensive attention tomeasures required for assuring thereadiness of the United Nations forRBB. (See paras. 33-41)

iv. The different approaches of the otherorganizations to taking account ofexternal factors, or uncontrollablecircumstances, in the use of RBBhighlight the need for determining thebest approach for the United Nations.(See paras. 58-61)

v. The experiences of the otherorganizations demonstrate that thepersonal leadership and involvement ofExecutive Heads in preparing for andimplementing RBB, including inparticular interaction with MemberStates, can be critically important. (Seeparas. 63-66)

vi. As demonstrated in the experience of theother organizations, both programmeand budget expert review bodies canplay an enhanced role under RBB in

- vi -

assisting legislative organs toperform their governance functionmore effectively. (See paras. 67-70)

D. Related to other concerns about theproposed adoption of RBB for the UnitedNations, although they still must beexamined and decided upon in the UnitedNations context, the experience of theSystem has been reassuring: (See para. 79)

i. The other organizations reported noquestion about RBB being able toaddress their own specific needs andcharacteristics. (See paras. 21-24)

ii. They all stressed the potential of RBBfor significantly enhancing thegovernance function of Member Statesby increasing and making more effectivetheir involvement in the full cycle of theprogramme budget process. (See paras.45-49)

iii. RBB has not been used in the otherorganizat ions for conduct ingbudget/staff reduction exercises; rather,it has served as a neutral managementtool to provide critical assistance inestablishing priorities on a moreinformed basis for achieving eitherincreases or r educ t ions , ascircumstances may require. (See paras.50-52)

iv. In the experience of the otherorganizations, qualitative as wellquantitative results have been requiredfor justifying resource requirements.(See paras. 53-57)

v. RBB techniques in the otherorganizations have given increasedimportance to the role of the medium-term plan as the principal policydirective for an organization by

strengthening the plan’s linkage toprogramme budgets. (See paras. 72-75)

E. Overall, there are among the otherorganizations of the System a growingcommon understanding of, and strongsupport for, the use of RBB techniques as atool to achieve increased budgettransparency and accountability by focusingon results and using performance indicatorsto link performance with the budget. (Seeparas. 22 and 80)

F. High expectations for what can beaccomplished with RBB must be temperedby recognition that, like any othermethodology, the benefits to be gained willbe determined by the care and judgement ofboth the Secretariat and Members States intheir concerted efforts to apply it. (See para.82)

G. Success in budgetary reforms,including RBB, require a climate of trustand understanding between Member Statesand the Secretariat and consensus amongMember States. (See para. 66)

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. In order to assure appropriateguidance from Member States inresolving the problem of the lack ofagreed definitions for key RBB terms, theGlossary of financial and budgetary terms,currently being updated by theC o n s u l t a t i v e C o m m i t t e e o nAdministrative Questions (CCAQ) of theAd min i s tra t ive Commit tee onCoordination (ACC), should be reviewedand commented upon by the appropriatebodies of the United Nations systemorganizations. (See para. 28-32)

- vii -

2. As a means for seeking to resolveexisting concerns about the possibleadaptation of RBB to the United Nations,and in order to assure an appropriateparticipatory role of Member States inadapting RBB to the United Nations, anOpen-Ended Working Group should beestablished at the level of the FifthCommittee, to meet during the 54thsession of the General Assembly and off-session as needed, within existingresource levels, at which Secretariatofficials, including from Secretariats ofother organizations to the extent possible,would provide briefings and respond toquestions on all aspects of RBB. (Seeparas. 25-42)

3. Subject to a General Assemblydecision to use RBB for the UnitedNations, the United Nations Staff Collegeand the United Nations Institute forTraining and Research (UNITAR) shouldbe invited to conduct seminars andworkshops to help familiarize staff andrepresentatives of Member States withRBB. (See paras. 33, 37, 40 and 43)

4. Future reporting from theSecretary-General of the United Nationson RBB should include a comprehensiveassessment of changes that would berequired to assure the readiness of theOrganization for RBB, regarding areassuch as regulations, procedures,management information systems, andtraining. (See paras. 33-44)

5. Reflecting the uncertainty abouthow to reflect external factors in theaccountability of programme managersunder RBB, the Secretary General of theUnited Nations should submit to theGeneral Assembly as soon as possible areport with recommendations on this

matter, accompanied by the comments oft h e A d v i s o r y Commit tee f orAdministrative and Budgetary Questions(ACABQ) and the Committee forProgramme and Coordination (CPC).(See paras. 58-62)

6. In view of their roles in the currentprogramme budget process, the CPC andthe ACABQ should be invited to commenton their respective roles under RBB. (Seeparas 67-71)

- 1 -

I. INTRODUCTION

1. United Nations General Assemblyresolution 53/205 of 18 December 1998,entitled “Results-based budgeting”,requested the Joint Inspection Unit inoperative paragraph 11 “to undertake ananalytical and comparative study of theexperience of the bodies of the UnitedNations system that are implementing anapproach similar to results-based budgetingand to submit its report no later than 31August 1999".

2. In accordance with this mandate, thepresent report reviews the experience oforganizations of the United Nations systemwith RBB regarding a number of issues orconcerns of Member States reflected in theconsensus-based resolution 53/205 and inthe debate preceding the adoption of thisresolution. Several additional issues also areconsidered that were not explicitlymentioned in the resolution or precedingdebate but have attracted notice and deserveattention in this report.

3. The review is restricted to the regularbudget experience with RBB techniques ofthe specialized agencies and theInternational Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) since the proposal before the UnitedNations General Assembly primarily relatesto the use of RBB for the regular budget ofthe United Nations. A number of UnitedNations operational funds and programmes,funded through voluntary contributions, theUnited Nations Development Programme(UNDP) in particular, are introducingbudgetary innovations focussing on a resultsframework and corporate goals. However,although of interest, these experiences gobeyond the scope of this report as they arenot directly relevant to the immediate issue

under consideration.

4. The programme budgets of theorganizations, including those issued mostrecently, and the mandates given by theirinter-governmental bodies with regard tobudgeting methodologies have beenreviewed. In addition, based on apreliminary desk review and the abovemandate of the General Assembly,questionnaires were forwarded to thespecialized agencies and IAEA. Thoseorganizations provided useful informationfor the preparation of the report throughtheir replies and/or during interviews withtheir knowledgeable officials responsible forbudgeting and performance measurement.The Joint Inspection Unit expresses itsgratefulness for their full and timelycooperation.

5. Following this introduction, thereport consists of three substantive parts.The second chapter discusses the concept ofRBB and contains a short overview of thecurrent situation with regard to the types ofbudget used by the specialized agencies andIAEA. The third chapter lists the mainconcerns of Member States regarding theuse of RBB and examines the experience ofthe specialized agencies and IAEA withrespect to these concerns. The fourth chapterincludes some general overall conclusionsregarding what can be learned from theexperience of the United Nations systemorganizations with RBB, or RBB-like,techniques.

6. The present report was completedwithout being able to take advantage of the“comprehensive and analytical report” of theUnited Nations Secretary-General on his

- 2 -

proposal for results-based budgeting that theGeneral Assembly requested forconsideration at its fifty-fourth session (para.8 of General Assembly resolution 53/205).7. This report is dedicated to thememory of the late Mr. Joachim Bilger, theformer Controller of the World IntellectualProperty Organization (WIPO). Hisuntimely and tragic death in the line of dutyis deeply regretted. He had led the way indeveloping the concept of RBB in theUnited Nations system, and in makingpractical application of this concept toWIPO. The System will greatly miss itsleading pioneer and expert in thedevelopment of RBB.

- 3 -

II. BACKGROUND

A. What is results-based budgeting?

8. Results-based budgeting is not new,having been used for a number of years inboth the public and private sectors of severaldeveloped and developing countries.However, the concept, with its methodologyand definitions, cannot be automaticallytransplanted to the environment ofinternational organizations in general, andUnited Nations system organizations inparticular. United Nations systemorganizations - with their multilateral,universal character - cover broad areas ofsensitive and complex political and socio-economic activities. Thus their decision-making processes seek to achieve a balanceof interests through finding consensusamong Member States which often havedifferent views on priorities, objectives andresults for the programmes of organizations.The search for improved budgetingprocesses must reflect these fundamentalcharacteristics.

9. There is no fully agreed definition ofwhat exactly constitutes results-basedbudgeting in general, and certainly not forthe international organizations of the UnitedNations system. Nevertheless, there is agrowing common understanding of the term,although the different definitions of themethodology being used stress differentelements or attributes of RBB.

10. For the purpose of this report, itseems appropriate to use the definition ofRBB offered by the Secretary-General of theUnited Nations:

A programme budget process in which:(a) programme formulation revolves

around a set of predefined objectives andexpected results; (b) expected resultsjustify the resource requirements whichare derived from and linked to outputsrequired to achieve such results; and (c)actual performance in achieving results ismeasured by objective performanceindicators. (A/53/500 of 15 October1998, Summary)

11. Also useful is a more compact formof the definition presented at an internalbriefing of the United Nations Secretariat on19 July 1999:

RBB is about formulating programmebudgets that are driven by a number ofdesired results which are articulated atthe outset of the budgetary process, andagainst which actual performance ismeasured at the end of a biennium.

12. RBB involves the creation of alogical framework, which is made up ofsuch elements as: objectives, expectedresults, outputs, and performance indicators.Throughout the United Nations system,there are differences among theorganizations in defining these terms (seeAnnex for “Glossary of results-basedbudgeting terms as defined by UnitedNations system organizations”). The logicalframework establishes a top-down link andinterrelationship among objectives andresults and resource requirements. A keyfeature of the RBB process is theestablishment of expected results, with theachievement of them measured by objectiveperformance indicators This leads toperformance measurement linking theachievement of results to the budget andthereby more transparency and direct

- 4 -

accountability of programme managers.

B. Overview of budgeting in theUnited Nations system

13. Until recently, two types of budgethave existed in United Nations systemorganizations. The first type is the object-of-expenditure budget, which allocatesresources to expenditures for items such assalaries, travel and equipment required toimplement activities during a given period.The second is the programme budget whichallocates resources to specific programmesand sub-programmes, generally based onsuccinct work plans and an indication ofpriorities.

14. Historically, there has been a generaltrend from the object-of-expenditure budgetto the programme budget in the developmentof budgeting methodologies of organizationsof the United Nation system. In 1989, fiveorganizations of the United Nations system(the International Civil Aviation Organi-zations (ICAO), the International MaritimeOrganization (IMO), the InternationalTelecommunication Union (ITU), theUniversal Postal Union (UPU) and WIPO)employed object-of-expenditure budgeting(see Table 1 of JIU/REP/89/9, Vol. II inA/45/130), while in 1995 only threeorganizations (IMO, UPU and WIPO) stillused this methodology (see Table 1 ofACC/1995/FB/R.49). In 1999, noorganization is using object-of-expenditurebudgeting.

15. The switch to programme budgetingby some specialized agencies, such as theInternational Labour Organization (ILO), theUnited Nations Educational, Scientific andCultural Organization (UNESCO), theWorld Health Organization (WHO), and the

Food and Agriculture Organization of theUnited Nations (FAO) goes as far back asthe 1950s and 1960s. Thus, severalorganizations had some 15 years ofexperience in programme budgeting whenthe United Nations adopted this budgetingmethodology in 1974.

16. RBB is a third type of budgeting nowemerging. The results-based budget is inlarge measure an evolutionary improvementon the programme budget. Both types ofbudget provide for resource allocations byspecific programmes, with work plans andan indication of priorities. Often programmebudgets have included elements related toexpected results and strategic planning. Thedistinguishing feature of the results-basedbudget, as stated earlier, is its primary focuson expected results and the use ofperformance indicators to measureachievement of those results.

17. As can be seen from the table on thefollowing page, with the exception ofWIPO, a full application of the RBB processis not reflected in the most recent budgetdocuments of the specialized agencies andIAEA; RBB is still at the developmentalphase for these organizations. Nevertheless,all of the organizations reported that they areexperimenting with RBB techniques, oralready have integrated significant attributesof RBB techniques into their programmebudgets. Thus, they are undertaking far-reaching budgetary reforms which aregradually leading towards the use of theRBB concept, and they are doing so inaccord with the special characteristics oftheir organizations, taking into account theirown existing procedures and traditions.

Table: Use of results-based budgeting elements in the budget documents ofthe Specialized Agencies and IAEA

- 5 -

ObjectivesExpected

resultsOutputs

Performanceindicators

Performancemeasurement in

terms of expectedresults and reported

to the MemberStates in a separate

document

ILO (Programme and BudgetProposals for 2000-2001) � � planned planned

FAO (Summary Programme ofWork and Budget 2000-2001) �

planned inthe MTP �

planned in theMTP

planned

UNESCO (Draft Programme andBudget 2000-2001) � � � planned planned

ICAO (Programme Budget of theOrganization 1999-2000-2001) � �

WHO (Proposed ProgrammeBudget 2000-2001) � � planned planned

UPU (Proposals for theProgramme and Budget 2000) � � �

ITU (Draft Budget for 2000-2001) �

WMO (Programme and Budgetfor 2000-2003) � �

IMO (Work Programme andBudget for the Twenty-FirstFinancial Period 2000-2001)

� � � planned planned

WIPO (Draft Programme andBudget 2000-2001) � � � � �

UNIDO (Programme andBudgets, 2000-2001) � �

IAEA (The Agency’s Programmeand Budget for 1999 and 2000) � �

“Indicators ofsuccess”

For comparison purposes

UN (Proposed Programme andBudget for the Biennium 2000-2001)

�

“Expectedaccomplish-

ments”�

- 6 -

III. CONCERNS REGARDING RESULTS-BASED BUDGETING:EXPERIENCE OF UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM ORGANIZATIONS

18. As mentioned in the introduction, inaccord with the mandate for this report inpara. 11 of resolution 53/205, this chapteranalyses and compares the experience of thespecialized agencies and IAEA regardingconcerns about the use of RBB for theUnited Nations, i.e., concerns of MemberStates reflected in the resolution, and in thedebate in the Fifth Committee precedingadoption of it, or concerns that otherwisehave attracted notice and deserve attentionin this report. The purpose is to see howother organizations of the United Nationssystem have addressed these concerns anddetermine what could be learned that wouldassist the General Assembly in itsconsideration of RBB.

19. Each section below addresses aspecific concern, beginning with a statementof the concern, followed by a review of therelevant experience of the other UnitedNations system organizations, and endingwith some comments or observations. Inreviewing the experience of theorganizations, the organizations are notnamed because the intent is to identifypatterns that have emerged in the handlingof a concern rather than to get into a detaileddescription of the practices of eachorganization. This approach also helps tocompact the text and make it more readable.

20. As noted previously, the experienceof other organizations of the United Nationssystem with RBB is still limited in varyingdegrees for each of them. This fact must beborne in mind when considering therelevance of that experience for applicationto the circumstances of the United Nations.

A. Requirement for RBB to address theneeds and reflect the characteristics of theUnited Nations

21. Concern: The point was made in theFifth Committee that, like a custom-madesuit, one model of RBB could not beborrowed from somewhere else and justapplied to the United Nations. As indicatedin resolution 53/205, there must beassurance that RBB addresses the needs andreflects the characteristics of the UnitedNations. Were the General Assembly toapprove the use of RBB, it would have to berefined to become a budget methodology byand for the United Nations. In particular, thenew methodology must be designed torespect fully the political nature of theUnited Nations.

22. Organization experience: None ofthe Secretariats of the other organizations ofthe System indicated concern about RBBtechniques addressing the needs andreflecting the characteristics of theirorganizations. Rather than concern about theuse of RBB techniques not being appropriatefor the special circumstances of theirorganizations, most of the responses fromthe organizations pointed out how the RBBtechniques they are using help to meet theneeds they now are facing, inter alia, to:

� provide Member States with actualresults;

� put scarce resources in priority areas;

� assure more transparency for MemberStates in the budget formulation,approval and implementation process;

- 7 -

� improve the dialogue with MemberStates on proposed programmes andactivities of the Organization; and

� ensure the competitive edge andrelevance of their Organization.

23. Comment: The fact that none of theother organizations of the United Nationssystem indicated concern about adaptingRBB to their specific needs andcharacteristics is significant because, asindicated in section B below, at least someorganizations have experienced difficulty inmaking RBB concepts applicable to allsections of their programme budgets.

24. The experience of otherorganizations thus suggests that therequirement for adapting RBB to thespecific needs and characteristics of anorganization goes without saying for them;rather than seeing this concern as a possibleblock to the adoption of RBB, they havefocused attention on resolving specificproblems encountered. Indeed, it is notablethat the other organizations, in theirresponses regarding this concern, stressedthe benefits of RBB in meeting importantneeds that United Nations organizations noware facing.

B. Applicability of RBB concepts to allsections of the programme budget

25. Concern: Concern was expressedregarding the possible difficulty of applyingbasic RBB concepts to all sections of theUnited Nations programme budget. Theneed for knowing how “expected results”,which are essentially unquantifiable orunpredictable, would be defined was cited.There also was reference to the difficulty ofevaluating, or measuring, the results of

complex and long lasting political activitiesin terms of “performance indicators”, anddoing so in a meaningful way within onebiennium. As one delegate observed, theUnited Nations Charter goal of savingsucceeding generations from the scourge ofwar is an objective that could not beachieved within one biennium.

26. Organization experience: None ofthe responses of the organizations regardingthis concern indicated that the basic RBBconcepts, such as “expected results” and“performance indicators”, could not beapplied to all sections of their programmebudget. In fact, one response specificallyassured that “there is no restriction in termsof size, complexity or ‘politically-charged’nature” of activities for the applicability ofRBB. Nevertheless, there was broad, if notuniversal, recognition among theorganizations that doing so for someprogramme budget sections is difficult, andeven so difficult in some cases that “oneshould not be too insistent”. An alternativesuggested for when the identification ofmeaningful results is not possible would bethe use of workload statistics and outputrecording. It was interesting that most ofthose reporting difficulties indicated thedifficulties were with the more quantifiablenon-substantive (administrative and support)activities rather than the usually morequalitative substantive activities.

27. Comment: The experience of otherorganizations of the United Nations systemindicates that application of basic RBBconcepts to all sections of the programmebudget can be difficult. Clearly how thisconcern is addressed for the specialcircumstances of the United Nations willrequire careful consideration by theSecretariat and the General Assembly.

- 8 -

C. Definition of key RBB terms:objective, output, expected result,performance indicator, and performancemeasurement

28. Concern: In order for RBB to besuccessful in the United Nations, there needsto be a good and precise definition of eachof the key RBB terms, such as “objective”,“output”, “expected result”, “performanceindicator”, and “performance measurement”.

29. Organization experience: As can beseen in the Annex, the organizations of theSystem do not agree on a specific definitionfor each of the key RBB terms. In fact, theorganizations do not all use the same terms.This lack of agreed definitions has beennoted in reports of the ACABQ (A/53/7 of16 September 1998) and the CCAQ(ACC/1998/6 of 21 September 1998 andACC/1999/6 of 10 February 1999).

30. While most organizations do havedefinitions for the terms they use, some haveindicated that their definitions are not yet“official” and others have not yet developedspecific definitions. Two organizations areusing, or mostly using, definitionsformulated by the United Nations in itsGuide to results-based budgeting (Version1.0 of 23 October 1998). Some useglossaries formulated for other purposes thatalready contain the terms being used, e.g., Aglossary of evaluation-related terms used inthe International Civil AviationOrganization (June 1997). Anotherorganization has no “official” definitions ofthe terms, but uses an interpretation of themthat for practical purposes is broadly inagreement with the JIU’s Glossary ofevaluation terms (JIU/REP/78/5 ofNovember 1978 in A/34/286).

31. Comment: The lack of agreementamong the organizations of the System on

definitions for the key RBB terms suggeststhat this is an area of RBB development thatstill requires further consideration in asystematic manner without being rushed. ASystem-wide glossary of key RBB termswould help Member States, who participatein essentially all of the United Nationssystem organizations, to make comparisonsamong the organizations of the use of RBBin order to identify best practices and takeadvantage of lessons learned in oneorganization for the benefit of theirparticipation in other organizations.

32. The key RBB terms will be includedin an update of the Glossary of financial andbudgetary terms that is being prepared bythe CCAQ of the ACC. In order to assureappropriate guidance from Member States,such a glossary should be commented uponby the appropriate bodies of the UnitedNations system organizations. (Recom-mendation 1)

D. Readiness for RBB: regulations,procedures, management informationsystems, and training

33. Concern: The need for caution inadopting RBB was stressed in view ofuncertainty about how ready both theSecretariat and Member States are for it.This concern for readiness relates to possiblerequirements for RBB, such as: revisedprogramme planning and financial rules andregulations; new procedures and a newmanagement culture in view of the increaseddecentralization and delegation of authority;management information systems to providefor enhanced monitoring, reporting andevaluation; and extensive training for theSecretariat at all levels. Related to training,there was a concern that Member Stateunderstanding of and consensus on RBB

- 9 -

would be essential for its successfulestablishment at the United Nations.

34. Organization experience: Responsesfrom the other organizations of the Systemindicated the significance of assuring thereadiness of organizations for RBB.Reflecting their different levels of RBBimplementation and their different internalcircumstances, the readiness for RBB of theother United Nations system organizationshas been quite varied. For example, oneorganization that is just beginning toimplement RBB techniques has not yetinitiated any specific readiness steps and isstill operating on a “trial and error” basis toidentify what would be required, whereasothers have made, or expect to make, somesignificant changes, e.g. one organizationwill even have to amend its statute to allowfor a biennial programme budget.

35. In regard to financial regulations andrules, some have found the new RBBtechniques largely compatible with whatnow exists and others have had to makechanges, e.g., to allow for transfers amongobjects of expenditures and to eliminatefinancial input controls. Most organizationsreported having to make changes ora d j u s t m e n t s i n t h e i r i n t e r n a ladministrative/budgetary and programmingprocedures to allow for, inter alia, financialauthorization being decentralized toprogramme managers with newaccountability and monitoring arrangementsto reflect this.

36. The vital need for an effectivemanagement information system toimplement RBB techniques was stressedgenerally by the organizations, with severalhaving developed, or planning to develop,new systems to improve the underlyingprocesses in the programme budgetformulation phase and, even more

importantly, the monitoring and reportingphases. One organization noted that itscurrent management information systemcurrently is too focused on inputs to provideadequate support for RBB and needs to berefocused on activities, outputs, andperformance measurement in general as abasis for decision-making. Anotherindicated the need to provide on a real timebasis indicators regarding the consumptionof resources and the level of the completionof activities.

37. The central importance of trainingfor implementation of RBB techniques alsowas stressed generally in the responses fromthe organizations. All of the organizationshave conducted training of staff in one formor another, including, inter alia, briefingsessions for senior managers, detailedinstruction on programme and budgetpreparations, presentations on the use ofperformance indicators, and workshops withexternal experts. Several organizations alsoreported on arranging for briefing sessionsand workshops with Member States to keepthem informed on changes for the newprogramme budget methodology.

38. Comment: The experience of otherUnited Nations system organizationsconfirms the importance of assuring thereadiness of both the Secretariat andMember States before adopting RBB for theUnited Nations.

39. Financial regulations and rules needto be reviewed to assure they are consistentwith the intent and processes of RBB, withspecial attention to reflecting the newemphasis on results. As regards regulationsand rules governing programme planning,the Secretary-General has suggestedmodification should await further experiencebecause the existing regulations and rulesfor programme planning already “presage

- 10 -

the introduction of a results-basedapproach”. (A/53/500, para. 33) Internaladministrative budgetary and programmingprocedures should be adjusted to reflect thenew management culture of RBB, includingincreased delegation of authority toprogramme managers and theiraccountabi l i ty for performance.Management information systems must notbe too focused on inputs for supportingeffectively the new RBB processes,including adequate reporting for the benefitof both senior management and MemberStates on resources being consumed andresults being achieved.

40. Ultimately, of course, none of theabove serves any purpose unless staff at alllevels - and their staff associationrepresentatives - are briefed fully on thenature and intent of RBB and given thespecific training required for implementationof the new budget methodology.

41. As the organizations stressed in theirresponses, a major purpose of RBBtechniques is to involve Member Statesmore meaningfully in all phases of theprogramme budget process. For this reason,arrangements must be made to assure theyare kept fully informed on changes plannedfor adapting to RBB, and to assure theyparticipate effectively in developing thesechanges.

42. As a means for seeking to resolveexisting concerns about the possibleadaptation of RBB to the United Nations,and in order to assure an appropriateparticipatory role of Member States inadapting RBB to the United Nations, anOpen-Ended Working Group should beestablished at the level of the FifthCommittee, to meet during the 54th sessionof the General Assembly and off-session asneeded, within existing resource levels, at

which Secretariat officials would providebriefings and respond to questions on allaspects of RBB. Officials from Secretariatsof other organizations should be invited toparticipate to the extent possible.(Recommendation 2)

43. Subject to a General Assemblydecision to use RBB for the United Nations,the United Nations Staff College and theUnited Nations Institute for Training andResearch (UNITAR) should be invited toconduct seminars and workshops to helpfamiliarize staff and representatives ofM e m b e r S t a t e s w i t h R B B .(Recommendation 3) This would be inaccord with Recommendation 1 of the JIUreport entitled Training institutions in theUnited Nations system: programmes andactivities. (JIU/REP/97/6 in A/52/559)

44. Future reporting from the Secretary-General of the United Nations on RBBshould include a comprehensive assessmentof changes that would be required to assurethe readiness of the Organization for RBB,regarding areas such as regulations,procedures, management informationsystems, and training. (Recommendation 4)

E. Governance and involvement ofMember States in RBB decision-making

45. Concern: There is a concern that theuse of RBB in the United Nations wouldmake it difficult for Member States toperform their proper governance function.This is because it is felt that RBB techniquesmight not allow Member States to be fullyinvolved, as at present, in the full cycle ofthe programme budget process inaccordance with existing United Nationsregulations, rules and programme budget

- 11 -

procedures. In particular, the view wasexpressed that, although RBB would focuson results, attention on input managementwould still be required in view of the UnitedNations being an intergovernmental body.

46. Organization experience: Whilesome of the other organizations of theSystem indicated they had not had sufficientexperience with RBB techniques tocomment on this concern, those with moreexperience reported that the use of RBBtechniques has enhanced the governance roleof Member States by increasing the effectiveinvolvement of Member States inprogramme budget decision-making. It wasnoted that it is the purpose of RBB tofacilitate the work of legislative organs inassessing the merits of programme budgetproposals.

47. Several of the organizationsindicated that there has been only a slowshift in the focus of Member States frominput control to monitoring the achievementof results. One organization indicated that,in fact, rather than a complete shift in focusfrom inputs to results, the mainimprovement of RBB is now a double focuson both inputs and results. They explainedthat, whereas the previous budget processfocused on input review and questions ofefficiency, the RBB approach focuses on theeffectiveness and relevance of theorganization. Thus there is now a doublefocus on both efficiency and effectiveness.

48. For some organizations, the use ofRBB techniques has made no change in thelevel of budgetary information provided toMember States. For others, the detail ofbudgetary information made available toMember States for decision-makingpurposes would be expected to decrease, butit was noted that nevertheless such dataoften would be made available in a more

effective manner for information purposes.One organization observed, however, it ishard in practice to distinguish whatinformation is for decision-making purposesand what is for information only.

49. Comment: The experience of theother United Nations system organizationsindicates that the use of RBB techniques hasenhanced the governance role of MemberStates by allowing them to be betterinformed and thereby have more meaningfulimpact in programme budget decision-making and implementation. In terms ofMember States remaining informed aboutinput management, the organizations’experience indicates that the use of RBBtechniques does not have to preclude thiskind of data being made fully available toMember States, at least for informationpurposes. The distinction between what isprovided for information purposes and whatis provided for decision-making purposes, ofcourse, in practice is not really as significantas it sounds since it is up to Member Statesthemselves to determine how they use theinformation they are given.

F. RBB as a budget and/or staff reductionexercise

50. Concern: The concern was expressedthat RBB would be used as a means forachieving cost and/or staff reductions inorder to have a lower budget level.

51. Organization experience: Noorganization reported having used RBBtechniques for budget or staff reductionpurposes. In fact, the point was made by oneorganization that the use of such techniqueshas increased the support of Member Statesfor the organization leading to expansion ofactivities and budget. Others observed that,

- 12 -

however, when faced with the need forreductions, the use of RBB techniques hasassisted the organization in prioritizing theiractivities and enhancing their efficiency. Asa tool to facilitate management oforganizations, RBB techniques have assistedsenior management in screening programmebudget proposals and in reprogrammingfunds and redeploying staff from phased outprojects to new priority areas. They also arereported to have led to efficiency gains insupport services (e.g., printing andtranslation) as a result of more effective useof these services by substantiveprogrammes.

52. Comment: United Nations systemexperience indicates there is no reason toconsider RBB in itself as a budget and/orstaff reduction exercise. Rather, theexperience indicates RBB is a neutralmanagement tool that can assist ExecutiveHeads and Member States in prioritizingactivities and rationalizing the use ofresources to achieve more effectively eitherincreases or reductions in budget and/orstaff, as circumstances may require. In fact,by more openly linking resources toexpected results, RBB serves to demonstratefor Member States and Executive Heads, intangible and explicit terms, the extent towhich there would or would not be negativeconsequences due to reductions in budgetand/or staff that might be underconsideration.

G. Quantitative results as the sole basisfor justification of resource requirements

53. Concern: In view of theinternational, multilateral character of theUnited Nations, there was a concern thatRBB would lead to expected quantitativeresults being used as the sole basis for

justification of resource requirements. It waspointed out that simple quantitativeinformation, as provided in the currentformat, is not a meaningful measure of aprogramme’s success unless it isaccompanied by qualitative information.Underlying this concern, there is perhaps amore fundamental one that basingjustifications solely on results, quantitativeor qualitative, raises questions about the roleof Member States in the budget process.

54. Organization experience: Quanti-tative results are not the sole basis for thejustification of resource requirements in theother organizations of the System. Most ofthem indicated that performance indicatorsfor results could be qualitative as well asquantitative. The point was made thatjustifying resource requirements solely onthe basis of quantitative results certainly wasnot the intent of RBB since it is meant toaddress qualitative aspects of results and ofthe impact of activities, in addition to justquantitative aspects. One organizationindicated in this regard that RBB techniqueshave assisted more on the qualitative side inthe justification of proposed activities.Nevertheless, at least some of theorganizations did indicate the desirability ofquantifying results where this is possible,and they are making efforts to developmeaningful performance indicators for thispurpose.

55. In regard to the role of MemberStates in the budget process, the responsesof the organizations stressed that the basicintent of RBB - with its focus on results, asthe term indicates - is to increase thetransparency of the programme budgetprocess. They indicated this is meant toallow for an improved dialogue withMember States throughout the budgetformulation, approval and implementationphases, and this intent largely has been

- 13 -

achieved. 56. Comment: While some of thetheoretical discussion about RBB mayindicate the need for quantified results toserve as the basis for justifying resourcerequirements, the experience of the otherorganizations in the System with RBBmakes it clear that this has not been the casein actual practice. The use of and need forconsidering qualitative aspects of results, aswell as quantitative, is well recognized bythe other organizations in the System, andthis could be the expected practice in theUnited Nations as well.

57. Regarding the more fundamentalconcern about the role of Member States inthe budget process, the experience of otherorganizations in the System makes it clearthat justifying resource requirements on thebasis of results, quantitative or qualitative,enhances that role rather than decreases it.The use of results for justifying resourcerequirements is intended to provide MemberStates with a more objective basis formaking their decisions on programmeproposals and for evaluating programmeperformance, but their judgement is stillrequired to evaluate and interpret themeaning and relevance of the results used.

H. Taking account of external factors inRBB

58. Concern: Although not explicitlyaddressed in resolution 53/205 or in theFifth Committee debate preceding adoptionof the resolution, a great uncertainty andunease about how to take account ofexternal factors, or uncontrollablecircumstances, in determining responsibilityfor results underlies concerns about the useof RBB. If programme managers are to beheld accountable for actual results and not

just outputs, how is their accountability to bemeasured since factors beyond their controlcan play such a large - and sometimesuncertain - role, both positive and negative,in determining actual results?

59. Organization experience: This is aconcern that is still being addressed withinthe other organizations. For example, theresponse from one organization noted “anobvious difficulty in the UN systemcontext”, which is that “actions by [theSpecialized Agencies] and their effectiveimpact are inextricably linked to, anddependent upon, action by Member Nationsthemselves”.

60. Different approaches are being usedamong the other organizations to deal withthis concern regarding external factors:

� The most common approach is to besure that work plans, and thus the logicalframework analyses, make allowance forthe impact of external factors, but it isrecognized that this is not alwaysfeasible.

� Addressing the problem of linkage toactions of Member States noted above,another approach is for the organizationto develop partnership with itsconstituents - by involving them asmuch as possible in the formulation ofprogramme budget proposals - so as toreduce the impact of at least thoseexternal factors related to the actions ofits constituents.

� A third approach is to usereprogramming when significantexternal factors occur, i.e., adjust theexpected results to the newcircumstances.

� A fourth option is to define expected

- 14 -

results narrowly so that theirachievement is largely within the controlof the organization. Although somemight think this represents little advancebeyond current output budgeting, thoseadvocating this option argue that“results” are not just “outputs” since“results” would record features thatallow for the identification ofeffectiveness and emphasize therelevance to end-users. Furthermore, itis suggested, the “results” could beviewed in the context of external factorsand thereby further demonstrate thedegree of effectiveness and relevance ofthe organization.

61.. Comment: A manner for handlingthis concern that is agreed and wellunderstood, both within the Secretariat andamong Member States, would be mostimportant for instituting RBB sinceaccountability of programme managers forresults is so central to the effectiveimplementation of this new budgetmethodology. The different approaches ofthe other organizations of the System inattempting to deal with this concern clearlyindicate that further attention is required indetermining how to take account of externalfactors, or uncontrollable circumstances,when using RBB techniques.

62.. In view of the above, the Secretary-General of the United Nations should berequested to submit to the General Assemblyas soon as possible a report withrecommendations on how to reflect externalfactors in the accountability of programmemanagers under RBB. This report should beaccompanied by the comments of theACABQ and the CPC. (Recommen-dation5)

I. Personal involvement and leadership ofExecutive Head for RBB

63.. Concern: To what extent does theeffective development, introduction andimplementation of RBB require the personalinvolvement and leadership of the ExecutiveHead of an organization? This is a concernthat deserves attention even though, similarto the previous one, it was not addressedexplicitly in either resolution 53/205 or inthe Fifth Committee debate precedingapproval of the resolution.

64.. Organization experience: For someorganizations, it appears that the MemberStates have been a major motivating force inefforts to institute the use of RBBtechniques. However, even in these cases,the Executive Head certainly supported suchefforts. The other organizations indicated aleading role and personal commitment bytheir Executive Heads toward the use ofRBB, although the extent of this did varyamong the organizations. Demonstrations ofthe personal leadership role of ExecutiveHeads include instances where performanceindicators were added at the personalinitiative of an Executive Head to thosealready mandated, or an Executive Headformed special senior expert andmanagement groups to assist in developingand coordinating the use of RBB techniquesin his organization. As one organizationreported, the personal commitment of theExecutive Head to the use of RBBtechniques is most important in order toassure that RBB techniques are readilyadopted by senior management and staff inthe organizations.

65.. Another important area whereExecutive Heads of the other organizationsplayed a key leadership role was inpresenting or introducing the use of RBBtechniques to Member States. The Executive

- 15 -

Heads of several organizations made specialefforts to consult with and involve MemberStates in the development of RBBtechniques for their organizations, and to besure that the needs and interests of MemberStates were being met.

66.. Comment: Success in budgetaryreforms, including RBB, requires a climateof trust and understanding between MemberStates and the Secretariat, and consensusamong Member States. The experience ofthe other organizations of the Systemdemonstrated the importance of ExecutiveHeads toward achieving this goal by playinga leading role in developing andimplementing RBB techniques, and also ininvolving Member States in thedevelopment process. Executive Headleadership toward the use of RBBtechniques can be critically important forassuring the commitment of anorganization’s secretariat to the use of RBBand for achieving the effective participationof Member States in the RBB process, bothof which are required for the use of RBBtechniques to be successful.

J. Impact of RBB on the role of expertprogramme and budget review bodies

67.. Concern: There has been a concernthat RBB’s shift in focus from inputs toresults would lead to a significant decreasein the role and influence of expertprogramme and budget review bodies, suchas the CPC and the ACABQ for the UnitedNations. Again this is a concern that is notexplicitly reflected in resolution 53/205 or inthe Fifth Committee debate precedingapproval of the resolution, but there havebeen expressions of it.

68.. Organization experience: Although

some organizations had not yet hadsufficient experience regarding this matter,those with experience indicated that theincreased focus of RBB techniques onresults has facilitated the work of expertreview bodies by increasing the transparencyof resource allocations, which wouldenhance their roles. Certainly none of theorganizations indicated any reducedsignificance in the roles of expert reviewbodies due to the use of RBB techniques.

69.. Comment: Judging from theexperience of the other organizations of theSystem with RBB, there appears to be noreason to expect that the adoption of RBBfor the United Nations would decrease therole and influence of either the CPC or theACABQ. Clearly the role of the CPC wouldbe significantly enhanced. The new focus onexpected results in the Secretary-General’sdraft programme budget would make theCPC review of the programme budgetproposals much more meaningful, and itsreport and recommendations thereforewould play a more significant role in FifthCommittee decision-making on the draftprogramme budget. Perhaps even moresignificantly, the voice of the CPC would begreatly strengthened by its review of a muchmore meaningful programme performancereport that would be based on actual resultsachieved. The CPC comments andrecommendations on this report wouldprovide critically important support for theFifth Committee governance function.

70.. However, although the role of theCPC would be enhanced, there would not bea corresponding decrease in the role of theACABQ; the two expert review bodies arenot in a zero-sum game situation. WhileRBB is intended to put more focus onexpected results, and the results actuallyachieved, the record of the otherorganizations is that RBB also increases the

- 16 -

transparency of resource allocations. Thiswould greatly assist the ACABQ inperforming its continuing important role. Asnoted in section E of this chapter above,regarding “Governance and involvement ofMember States in RBB decision-making”,one organization made the point that themain improvement to be gained from RBBtechniques is a double focus on both inputsand results. With a clearer linkage ofresource allocations to expected results, theACABQ’s review of resource allocationswould become even more meaningful in thefuture. Furthermore, the more meaningfulprogramme performance report also wouldprovide the Advisory Committee with agreatly improved basis for making itsrecommendations on the resourceallocations projected in a draft programmebudget.

71.. In view of their roles in the currentprogramme budget process, the CPC and theACABQ should be invited to comment ontheir respective roles under RBB.(Recommendation 6)

K. Relationship between RBB and theMedium-Term Plan

72.. Concern: Since the Medium-TermPlan is the principal policy directive for theUnited Nations, the possible adoption ofRBB by the United Nations requires clarityabout the relationship between RBB and theMedium-Term Plan (MTP). Like theprevious three concerns, this matter was notaddressed specifically in resolution 53/205or in the Fifth Committee debate precedingapproval of the resolution, but it is a concernabout which there should be no question.

73.. Organization experience: For thoseorganizations of the System that currently

are using medium- and long-term plans, theadoption of RBB techniques clearly has notdetracted from such plans serving as theprincipal source of policy guidance for theorganizations. Many of the organizationsreferred to the need for linking the RBBprocess to their medium- or long-term plans.Such plans provide a framework withinwhich the objectives of the organizations areestablished for a specified period of time,and the programme budgets of theorganizations serve as the instruments forimplementing those objectives.

74.. Comment: The experience of theother organizations of the System makes itsclear that RBB is just a methodology usedfor preparing and implementing programmebudgets without changing the source ofpolicy guidance and objectives to be servedby the programme budgets. The fact that theuse of RBB techniques would not change therole of the MTP as the principal policydirective for the Organization should beclearly understood in considering adoptionof RBB for the United Nations.

75.. Rather than detracting from the roleof the MTP, RBB techniques could bringnew life and meaning to the MTP. Theemphasis on defined results in the newmethodology would allow for a clearerrelationship between the programme budgetand the MTP. This, in turn, could serve toimprove the usefulness of the MTP byencouraging a more meaningfulidentification of tangible objectives in theMTP in order to serve as a solid basis forestablishing expected results.

- 17 -

IV. LESSONS LEARNED

76.. Chapter III demonstrates that theexperience to date of the specializedagencies and IAEA with RBB has beenmixed in regard to concerns raised about theuse of the methodology for the UnitedNations. For some of these concerns, it isimportant to have seen that the experiencecan be considered reassuring. Of more directsignificance for the purposes of this report,the experience of the organizations of theSystem also indicates a number of possibleproblems or difficulties related to some ofthe concerns that need to be given carefulconsideration in examining the Secretary-General’s proposal to use RBB techniquesfor the United Nations.

77.. As pointed out in previous chapters,however, the actual usage of RBBtechniques is still very much in adevelopmental stage among the otherorganizations of the System. Thus, thelessons to be learned from their experiencewith RBB must be somewhat qualified.

78.. Bearing this in mind, Chapter IIIindicates the following concerns requirespecial attention by the Fifth Committee ofthe General Assembly in its consideration ofthe Secretary-General’s proposal to applyRBB to the United Nations:

� Applicability of RBB concepts to allsections of the programme budget. Thedifficulty of some organizations inapplying RBB concepts to all sections oftheir programme budgets indicates thatthis could be especially difficult for theUnited Nations programme budget inview of the broad range of activitiesincluded in it.

� Definition of key RBB terms. The lackof agreed definitions for key RBB termsamong the organizations makes it clearthis is an aspect of the new methodologythat still requires further development.Without meaningful and wellunderstood definitions for terms such as“expected results” or “performanceindicators”, in particular, the use of RBBtechniques would fail to providesignificant benefit compared to currentprogramme budgeting techniques.

� Readiness for RBB. Readiness in allareas for RBB, including regulations,procedures, management informationsystem, and training, is clearly importantfor the successful introduction of RBB,and measures to assure this requirecomprehensive attention.

� Taking account of external factors inRBB. The different approaches of theother organizations to taking account ofexternal factors, or uncontrollablecircumstances, in their use of RBBmethodology indicates the need forgiving this matter great attention inorder to assure it is addressedeffectively, and in a manner appropriateto the circumstances of the UnitedNations.

� Personal involvement and leadership ofExecutive Head for RBB. The personalleadership and involvement ofExecutive Heads can be criticallyimportant for success in bothintroducing and, more importantly,implementing RBB.

- 18 -

� Impact of RBB on the role of expertprogramme and budget review bodies.Both programme and budget expertreview bodies could play an enhancedrole in assisting the Fifth Committee ofthe General Assembly in taking fulladvantage of using RBB techniques byassuring a double, and reinforcing, focuson both efficiency and effectiveness.

79.. While the concerns indicated abovewill require special attention in the FifthCommittee of the General Assembly, it isimportant to remember that chapter III alsoindicates the experience of the UnitedNations organizations has been reassuringregarding a number of other concerns. Theseother concerns, which of course still must beexamined and decided upon in the UnitedNations context, are:

� Requirement for RBB to address theneeds and reflect the characteristics ofthe United Nations. None of theorganizations reported any questionabout RBB being able to address theirown special needs and characteristics.

� Governance and involvement ofMember States in RBB decision-making. They all stressed the potentialof RBB techniques for enhancing thegovernance function of Member Statesby increasing and making more effectivetheir involvement in the full cycle of theprogramme budget process.

� RBB as a budget and/or staff reductionexercise. Rather than being used forconducting budget and/or staff reductionexercises, RBB techniques haveprovided for the organizations a neutralmanagement tool to assist in theprioritization of activities and resourcesso that either increases or reductions, ascircumstances may require, can be

achieved on a more informed basis.

� Quantitative results as the sole basis forjustification of resource requirements.Qualitative as well as quantitativeresults are required for justifyingresource requirements.

� Relationship between RBB and theMedium-Term Plan. The use of RBB inno way displaces the role of theMedium-Term Plan as the principalpolicy directive for an organization; thefocus on results may help to improve theusefulness of the MTP by providing fora clearer relationship between it and theprogramme budget.

80.. An overall point that emerges fromthis review of the experience of other UnitedNations system organizations with RBB isthe strong support that RBB, at least as aconcept, has gained throughout the UnitedNations system. All of the organizationsindicated they are using and/or developingRBB, or RBB-like, techniques as a tool toachieve increased transparency andaccountability for Member States throughbetter linkage of programme performance tothe budget.

81.. The experience of the other UnitedNation system organizations with RBB andRBB-like techniques, even if somewhatlimited, is an important source that certainlyought to be consulted in considering theproposed adoption of RBB for the UnitedNations. However, in trying to takeadvantage of this experience, as useful andimportant as it may be, one must keep inmind that possible lessons learned can beonly suggestive in view of the stillpreliminary level of development of RBB inthe other organizations, and the need toadapt the methodology to the special needsand characteristics of each organization. In

- 19 -

the end, the United Nations will have to becharting its own course in any decision itmay make on the use of RBB budgetmethodology.

82.. Many organizations have highexpectations about what can beaccomplished with RBB. While RBB couldgreatly assist in assuring the competitivenessand relevance of the United Nations for thenew century, such expectations must betempered by recognition that there is nothingmagic about it. Like any other budgetmethodology, the benefits to be gained fromthe use of RBB for the United Nationsultimately will be determined by the careand judgement of both the Secretariat andMember States in their concerted efforts toapply it.

Annex

Glossary of results-based budgeting terms as defined by UnitedNations system organizations

1

Organization Objective

United Nations An objective is an overall desired achievement, involving a process of change and aimed at meeting certain needs of identified end-users/clients within a given period of time. Objectives can be met through reaching certain results.

ILO The development objective essentially describes the ultimate reason for undertaking the programme/project. Development objectives are“higher-level objectives” and should be formulated within the context of the wider development objectives of the country and/or the socialpartners concerned. However, the development objectives of the programme/project should not necessarily be identical to the nationaldevelopment objectives, which may be too general for the programme/project concerned. The key word to the concept of the developmentobjective is to contribute.

The immediate objective describes the situation that is expected to exist at the end of the programme/project. It shows the change that theprogramme/project itself is expected to bring about. It shows in what way the target groups will be better off. The immediate objective,therefore, must be stated as ends to be achieved, not as actions to be undertaken or as means to be used. As far as possible, an immediateobjective should be stated in quantifiable or verifiable terms. The keyword to the concept of the immediate objective is to achieve.

FAO Objectives are the purposes and aims of an activity, representing the desired state which the activity is expected to achieve and areexpressed in terms of the benefits to be realized by the target group. Objectives are usually conceived of in terms of hierarchical levels:achievement of the specific short or medium-term objectives of an activity (level I) should contribute to the fulfilment of broader, long-range objectives at a higher level which are beyond the range which the activity could achieve by itself (level II). Clearly-stated objectivescan greatly facilitate evaluation, while vague or non-operational objectives make evaluation difficult.

UNESCO Objectives are long term commitments, against which results are scaled.

ICAO Objectives are the purpose and aims of an activity representing the desired state which is expected to be achieved within a given period,and directed towards an identified target group or location. Clearly-stated objectives can greatly facilitate evaluation, while vague or non-operational objectives make evaluation difficult. The conceptual framework of evaluation begins with the activity’s objectives. The latterare usually conceived in terms of hierarchical levels as described below:

Development (or higher level) objectives characterizes a programme level beyond or above the objective or purpose of a specificprogramme, project or process. It provides the reason for the activity and specifies a desired end towards which the efforts of ICAO, UNDPand/or the beneficiary country are being directed. It may be a macro- or multi-sectoral objective or simply a problem which a project orprogramme is expected to solve or make better. It is not synonymous with long-term objective.

Immediate objective of a project, a term coined by the UNDP, refers to the change which is to be created or accomplished by the projectfor the purpose of correcting an identified problem. The change is the effect or result the project is expected to achieve if completedsuccessfully and on time. The term immediate can be misleading. It implies there is another later objective, but a project has only oneobjective - due at project completion.

WHO Being finalized

UPU Objectives are established at the corporate level. The term “Goals” is used for objectives at the level of tactics.

ITU

WMO

IMO Objectives are the purpose and aim of a project/programme, describing the desired state which is expected to be achieved within a givenperiod (expected results).

WIPO An objective is an overall desired achievement, involving a process of change and aimed at meeting certain needs of identified end-users/clients/ customers within a given period of time. Objectives should be realistic and attainable. Objectives are formulated in a wayto reflect the aim at bringing about a change or benefit. Objectives must be achievable within the biennium.

UNIDO See definition by the United Nations

IAEA Objectives are the target or results to be achieved. They are what is expected ultimately to be achieved stated in terms of the need to beimproved through IAEA involvement, or intended or expected results/effects.

Overall objectives are the high-level targets to be achieved to which the programme element will contribute directly or indirectly.

Specific objectives are the shorter-term targets or expected results to be achieved for specific target groups.

Annex2

Organization Inputs

United Nations Inputs are personnel and other resources necessary for producing outputs and achieving results.

ILO Inputs are the resources necessary to carry out the activities and produce the outputs. Inputs should normally be listed by source of funds,i.e., international and national contributions. The former usually includes funds for experts, consultants, purchase of equipment, training,evaluation, etc.; the latter may include salaries of local support staff and office premises.

FAO Inputs are the goods, services, personnel and other resources provided for an activity with the expectation of producing outputs andachieving the activity’s objectives.

UNESCO

ICAO Inputs are the personnel, goods, services and other resources provided for an activity with the expectation that they will lead to outputsand to the achievement of the activity’s objectives within a specified time-frame.

WHO Being finalized

UPU See definition by the United Nations

ITU

WMO

IMO Inputs are personnel and other direct costs necessary for achieving outputs.

WIPO Inputs are the staff and other resources mobilized to achieve the programme objectives.


IAEA Inputs (resources) are the immediate products, services, or resources (financial, staffing, and support) sufficient to carry out the activitiesand produce the outputs.

Annex3

Organization Outputs

United Nations Outputs are final products or services delivered by a (sub)programme to end-users/clients.

ILO Outputs are the products which result from the programme/project activities. They might be training materials, reports, curricula, or peopletrained. Outputs should be described as concretely and precisely as possible and in quantifiable terms.

FAO Outputs are the specific products which an activity is expected to produce from its inputs in order to achieve its objectives. Since activitiesmay appear in sequence or in stages or at different levels, it is important to note that one activity’s output may serve as another activity’sinput, i.e., a training manual produced as an output of project A may be an input to project B. A project might also have intermediateoutputs and inputs.

UNESCO Outputs are products created by any action taken

ICAO Outputs are the specific final products or services which an activity is expected to produce from the inputs provided. Since activities mayappear in sequence or in stages or at different levels, it is important to note that one activity’s output may serve as another activity’s inputs,e.g., a training manual produced as an output of Project A may be an input to Project B. An activity might also have intermediate outputsand inputs.

WHO Being finalized


ITU

WMO

IMO Outputs are the specific products that can reasonably be expected to be produced by the project programme with the inputs provided andactivities undertaken in order to achieve the stated objective.

WIPO Outputs are services provided or products delivered irrespective of the benefits accruing from such services or products.


IAEA Outputs are the immediate product or service that can be guaranteed as a consequence of IAEA’s activities provided during programmedelivery or implementation, i.e., the “deliverables” the programme element aims at producing.

Annex4

Organization Expected results

United Nations Expected results are desired outcomes involving benefits to end-users/clients, expressed as a quantitative standard, value or rate. Resultsare the direct consequence or effect of the generation of outputs, leading to the fulfilment of a certain objective.

ILO Expected results are described in the statement of the immediate objectives (see the ILO definition of objectives).

FAO Expected results are the changes in the desired state which the activity is expected to achieve. There are as many levels in expected resultsas there are in objectives: the first level corresponds to effects, defined as the use to which outputs are put and by whom; the second levelcorresponds to impact, defined as a broader change in line with long-range strategic objectives and beyond that which the activity couldachieve by itself.

UNESCO Expected results are effects produced on reality by any action taken.

ICAO Expected results should reflect the major outputs of the activities. They should be related, when applicable, to the underlying objectivesof the Strategic Action Plan, which are to be achieved through the implementation of the respective activities and their outcomes. Expectedresults therefore contribute to the discussion of issues that are important for evaluation, such as the effectiveness and relevance of theactivities themselves.

Annual expected results should be placed at the sub-programme or programme element levels. They should represent precise and concreteresults to be achieved during a yearly period. Special attention should be given to the incorporation into each statement of annual expectedresults, of the anticipated outputs of the activities and the probable users of the outputs, as a basis of the formulation of indicators ofsuccess.

WHO Being finalized

UPU

ITU

WMO

IMO

WIPO Expected results describe the derived outcomes of a programme, involving benefit to the end-users/clients, expressed as a qualitative orquantitative standard, value or rate. Results are the direct and often tangible effect or consequence of the delivery or an output/service,leading to the attainment of a certain objective. Results may relate to improvement in knowledge, skills, attitude, behaviour, condition,quality and timeliness or services, etc. Results should be specific, measurable, realistic and time-based.


IAEA See the IAEA definition of objectives.

Annex5

Organization Performance indicators

United Nations A performance indicator is a feature or characteristic used to measure whether the results have been achieved.

ILO Indicators of achievement add precision to the formulation of the immediate objectives. Indicators provide verifiable evidence to assessthe progress made towards the achievement of the immediate objectives of the programme/project. When an objective is stated inquantifiable and measurable terms the need to identify indicators is diminished.

FAO Indicators are objectives and specific measures of changes and results expected from an activity. Specifically, they should measure actualversus the expected results; that is, the actual use made of outputs by the target beneficiaries. Performance indicators are user-focussedand “proxy” indicators are utilized where direct measurement is either difficult, costly or not feasible. They are built on pre-definedeffectiveness criteria, which provide indications as to whether the activity is moving towards achieving stated objectives, but they shouldnot be confused with impact indicators which are specifically developed to compare pre- and post-activity or project situation.

UNESCO Performance indicators are tools built together with the project to record its implementation.

ICAO Indicators are analytical tools which enable the objective of an activity to be represented in a format that is measurable against the actualoutcome of the activity. Indicators should be explicit and objectively verifiable. They may be either direct or indirect (proxy) but, in eithercase, must be specifically related to a specific level of project or programme design e.g., objective, outputs, etc. Types of indicators includebaseline date, end-of-project-status, performance indicators and progress indicators.

Performance indicators measure or specify expected results at the output level and can be quantitative, qualitative or both. They aredesigned to provide a scale against which to measure and show the activity’s progress towards producing its outputs and achieving itsobjectives. Indicators for performance should therefore provide the answer to the question: “What is going to show me that I haveaccomplished my objective?” To decide on an indicator, recall the objective of an activity and the target audience: What is the expectedresult of the effort and who is the intended user of the service?

Progress indicators, as the name implies, measure progress at the work/activities/tasks level and include “bench-marks”, “events” and“milestones”.

WHO Being finalized


ITU

WMO

IMO Indicators are quantified measures of the desired results and may be expressed in cost terms or other relevant measures of performance,e.g., levels of services or outputs.

WIPO Performance indicators describe features or characteristics used or measure the progress of the programme in reaching its expected results.A distinction is made between the indicator itself - characteristic - and its value, which is to be obtained by measurement. Indicators mustbe relevant, meaningful measurable, observable and verifiable. Indicators must be designed in a way that allows their measurement to becost-effective. Two types of indicators are used. First, quantitative indicators involving amount, numbers, ratios or percentages. Second,qualitative indicators, which cannot be measured be means of numbers, but examine whether a situation or feature is present or not.


IAEA Performance indicators are “yardsticks” or “indicators of success” for assessing whether the objective has been achieved or what progresshas been made towards the objective. “Performance indicators” are results-oriented indicators specifying what is expected to be obtainedthrough the use of IAEA in terms of benefits to Member States.

Annex6

Organization Performance measurement

United Nations Performance. measurement is the determination of values of performance indicators for a given period of time or at a certain referencedate

ILO

FAO Performance measurement is the process of applying performance indicators and assessing results.

UNESCO Performance measurement is reaching conclusions of adequate analysis of performance indicators

ICAO Programme performance assessment is used to describe those procedures and practices used to monitor the performance of programmesand projects and to judge their success. Performance assessment should place great emphasis on the acquisition of information aboutwhether the results were achieved than on why they were not achieved. Assessment should be made on the basis of an internalmonitoring/review system using qualitative as well as quantitative standards or criteria.

WHO Being finalized


ITU

WMO

IMO

WIPO Performance measurement is the process of evaluating, on the basis of the performance indicators, the extent to which expected resultshave been achieved.


IAEA

Annex7

Sources:

United Nations: United Nations Guide to results-based budgeting, Version 1.0, 23 October 1998.

ILO: Design, Monitoring and Evaluation of Technical Cooperation Programmes andProjects: A Training Manual, ILO, 1996.

FAO: Based upon Glossary of evaluation terms, JIU Report, JIU/REP/78/5 updated bycurrent practice, as indicated by FAO.

UNESCO: Definitions provided by the Secretariat in its reply to a JIU questionnaire.

ICAO: A Glossary of evaluation-related terms for use in the International Civil AviationOrganization (ICAO), June 1996.

WHO: Information provided by the Secretariat in its comment on the draft JIU report onRBB.

UPU: Definitions provided by the Secretariat in its reply to a JIU questionnaire.

IMO: Definitions provided by the Secretariat in its reply to a JIU questionnaire.

WIPO: Definitions provided by the Secretariat in its reply to a JIU questionnaire.

UNIDO: Definitions provided by the Secretariat in its reply to a JIU questionnaire.

IAEA: Definitions provided by the Secretariat in its reply to a JIU questionnaire.

��

The words in italics have been added by JIU.

Documents

RESULTS-BASED BUDGETING EXPERIENCE OF UNITED NATIONS … · 2018-01-31 · RBB Results-based budgeting UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNESCO United Nations Educational,