2017年-世界发展银行全球_Albania_Public_Expenditure_and_Financial_Accountability_Performance_Assessment_Report_184页_3mb

Summary of Albania PEFA Performance Assessment Report (Based on PEFA 2016)

Core Content

This report presents the results of the Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA) performance assessment of Albania, conducted in December 2017 using the 2016 PEFA methodology. It provides a comprehensive evaluation of the country's public financial management (PFM) system, highlighting both strengths and weaknesses across seven key pillars. The assessment also outlines the reform process and the impact of PFM weaknesses on national outcomes.

Main Pillars and Key Findings

1. Budget Reliability

• PI-1: Aggregate expenditure outturn – Scores A, indicating that the overall expenditure aligns with the approved budget.
• PI-2: Expenditure composition outturn – Scores D+, showing significant variance in spending by function, which undermines budget credibility.
• PI-3: Revenue outturn – Scores B+, suggesting that revenue performance is generally good, though there were issues in 2015.

2. Transparency of Public Finances

• PI-4: Budget classification – Scores A, indicating strong classification practices.
• PI-5: Budget documentation – Scores A, showing that budget documentation is comprehensive.
• PI-6: Central government operations outside financial reports – Scores D, indicating poor transparency of non-financial operations.
• PI-7: Transfers to subnational governments – Scores C+, with some progress but still limited transparency.
• PI-8: Performance information for service delivery – Scores C+, with gaps in performance data.
• PI-9: Public access to fiscal information – Scores B, showing that key fiscal information is accessible but not fully transparent.

3. Management of Assets and Liabilities

• PI-10: Fiscal risk reporting – Scores C, indicating that fiscal risk reporting needs improvement.
• PI-11: Public investment management – Scores C+, with challenges in project selection, monitoring, and data completeness.
• PI-12: Public asset management – Scores D+, highlighting a lack of comprehensive records of non-financial assets.
• PI-13: Debt management – Scores A, showing strong performance in debt management.

4. Policy-Based Fiscal Strategy and Budgeting

• PI-14: Macroeconomic and fiscal forecasting – Scores A, indicating good forecasting practices.
• PI-15: Fiscal strategy – Scores A, with a well-developed fiscal strategy.
• PI-16: Medium-term perspective in expenditure budgeting – Scores C+, showing limited integration of medium-term planning.
• PI-17: Budget preparation process – Scores B, with room for improvement in the process.
• PI-18: Legislative scrutiny of budgets – Scores C+, with limited parliamentary involvement in budget oversight.

5. Predictability and Control in Budget Execution

• PI-19: Revenue administration – Scores C+, with room for improvement in revenue collection.
• PI-20: Accounting for revenue – Scores A, showing strong revenue accounting practices.
• PI-21: Predictability of in-year resource allocation – Scores B, with some progress in predictability.
• PI-22: Expenditure arrears – Scores C+, with partial improvement in managing arrears.
• PI-23: Payroll controls – Scores C+, showing moderate control over payroll.
• PI-24: Procurement management – Scores B+, with some improvements in procurement transparency.
• PI-25: Internal controls on non-salary expenditure – Scores B, with mixed effectiveness.
• PI-26: Internal audit – Scores C+, indicating that internal audit is not fully focused on performance issues.

6. Accounting and Reporting

• PI-27: Financial data integrity – Scores B+, with good data integrity.
• PI-28: In-year budget reports – Scores D+, showing that real-time budget reporting is inadequate.
• PI-29: Annual financial reports – Scores D+, with limited use of reports for monitoring and evaluation.

7. External Scrutiny and Audit

• PI-30: External audit – Scores C+, with extensive coverage but limited implementation of recommendations.
• PI-31: Legislative scrutiny of audit reports – Scores B, showing that legislative oversight of audit findings is lacking.

Key Information and Main Points

• The assessment covers the Central Government and reflects the PFM system status as of April 2017.
• 15 out of 31 indicators are rated in the A-B range, indicating strong performance.
• 16 out of 31 indicators are rated in the C-D range, indicating weak performance.
• The PEFA score profile shows that debt management and revenue accounting are strong, while transparency of extrabudgetary units and public asset management are weak.
• The government has made progress in several areas, such as revenue forecasting, expenditure arrears management, and procurement transparency.
• However, challenges remain, particularly in fiscal transparency, public investment management, and internal audit effectiveness.
• PFM weaknesses impact aggregate fiscal discipline, strategic allocation of resources, and efficient use of resources for service delivery.
• The reform process is ongoing and includes efforts to strengthen institutional frameworks, improve data collection, and enhance accountability mechanisms.

Reform Process and Challenges

• The PFM reform agenda is ambitious and includes institutional arrangements, legislative drafting, and monitoring frameworks.
• Capacity constraints and organizational changes (such as the 2017 government restructuring) pose challenges to the successful implementation of reforms.
• Peer review and quality assurance were integral to the process, with the report being finalized after incorporating feedback from various stakeholders, including the World Bank, IMF, and EU.

Conclusion

The PEFA assessment highlights mixed performance across the PFM system in Albania, with some strong areas and significant weaknesses. While the government has made progress in several dimensions, including debt management and revenue accounting, there are still gaps in transparency, internal control, and budget execution predictability. The assessment aims to support the implementation of the 2014-2020 PFM Reform Strategy and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of public financial management in the country.