Ahern, MarkBeard, Victoria A.Gueorguieva, Anna I.Sri Handini, Retno2014-02-182014-02-182012-11https://hdl.handle.net/10986/17065Since 2000, there has been growing interest in reforming Indonesia s budgeting systems to promote a more performance-orientated process. Indonesia is in the initial stages of this reform. A major challenge is determining the information needs of the central coordinating ministries. To date, these ministries have taken separate paths, developing their own monitoring and evaluation (M&E) systems, which are not linked to the planning and budgeting system, and creating new regulations and institutions to manage them. The result has been underused information and a high reporting burden at all levels. Furthermore, the current system places a greater emphasis on monitoring rather than evaluation. In 2011, representatives from the coordinating ministries participated in a series of high-level round table discussions to identify the steps needed to rationalize and coordinate M&E practices across institutions and to strengthen the links among data collection, evaluation, planning and budgeting. The round table process has confirmed that, while coordination is needed, establishing incentives for the demand and use of M&E information is critical to making the systems effective. This note identifies priority areas for future action building on this finding.en-USCC BY 3.0 IGOACCESS TO INFORMATIONACCOUNTABILITYADMINISTRATIVE DECENTRALIZATIONANALYTICAL CAPACITYANNUAL BUDGETANNUAL BUDGET CYCLEATTRIBUTESBASICBENEFICIARIESBUDGET ALLOCATIONSBUDGET CLASSIFICATIONBUDGET CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMBUDGET IMPLEMENTATIONBUDGET PREPARATIONBUDGET PREPARATION CYCLEBUDGET PREPARATION PROCESSBUDGETING PROCESSCAPABILITIESCAPACITY BUILDINGCAPACITY-BUILDINGCAPITAL EXPENDITURESCENTRAL AGENCIESCENTRAL GOVERNMENTCITIESCOMMODITYCOMMODITY PRICESCOMMUNITIESCOMMUNITY LEVELDATA ACCESSDATA COLLECTIONDATA COLLECTION SYSTEMSDEBTDECENTRALIZATIONDECISION-MAKINGDECISION-MAKING PROCESSESDISTRICTDISTRICT LEVELDISTRICTSDOMAINEDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENTEMPLOYMENTEXPENDITUREFINANCE MINISTRIESFINANCIAL MANAGEMENTFINANCIAL MANAGEMENT INFORMATIONFINANCIAL MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMFINANCIAL TRANSACTIONSFISCAL CRISISFISCAL POSITIONFISCAL TRANSFERSFREE SPEECHGOVERNMENT OFFICESGOVERNMENT SPENDINGHARMONIZATIONHEALTH CAREINCOMEINFORMATION GAPSINFORMATION SHARINGINSTITUTIONAL SUPPORTINTERGOVERNMENTAL FISCAL TRANSFERSLABOR FORCELABOR MARKETLABOR MARKET CHARACTERISTICSLEGISLATIVE REFORMMACROECONOMIC MANAGEMENTMEDIAMEDIUM-TERM EXPENDITUREMEDIUM-TERM EXPENDITURE FRAMEWORKMINIMUM WAGEMINISTERIAL PERFORMANCEMINISTRIES OF HEALTHMINISTRY OF FINANCEMONITORSNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTNATIONAL PLANNINGOUTCOME INDICATORSOUTPUTSPERFORMANCE BUDGETINGPERFORMANCE EVALUATIONPERFORMANCE INDICATORSPERFORMANCE INFORMATIONPERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTPERFORMANCE MEASURESPERFORMANCE REPORTINGPERFORMANCE REPORTSPOLICY COORDINATIONPOLICY MAKERSPOLICY REFORMPOLITICAL ECONOMYPOVERTY ALLEVIATIONPOVERTY REDUCTIONPROGRAM IMPLEMENTATIONPROGRAM MANAGERSPROGRAM OUTCOMESPROGRAM PERFORMANCEPROGRAM PLANNINGPROGRAMSPROTOCOLSPROVINCESPUBLIC DOMAINPUBLIC EXPENDITUREPUBLIC EXPENDITURE REVIEWPUBLIC EXPENDITURESPUBLIC FINANCEPUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENTPUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMPUBLIC SECTORPUBLIC SECTOR MANAGEMENTPUBLIC SERVICEPUBLIC SERVICESPUBLIC SPENDINGPUBLIC WORKSQUALITY ASSURANCEQUANTIFIABLE INDICATORSREFORM AGENDARELIABILITYRESIGNATIONRESOURCE ALLOCATIONRESOURCE ALLOCATION SYSTEMRESULTRESULTSSOCIAL ASSISTANCESOCIAL PROTECTIONSUBNATIONALSUBNATIONAL GOVERNMENTSTECHNICAL ASSISTANCETRANSACTIONTRANSMISSIONTRANSMISSION OF INFORMATIONTRANSPARENCYTYPES OF ASSESSMENTSUSERSUSESVILLAGEWEBWEB SITEWHITE PAPER10.1596/17065