Modernizing reporting on the execution of budget allocated to MOE in Myanmar: Lessons Learned1 Massimo Mastruzzi and Khin Thet Swe January 2019 This paper is a product of the staff of The World Bank. The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of the World Bank, its Executive Directors or the governments they represent. 1This note was prepared as part of the World Bank’s engagements on Data-driven Analysis for Better Public Spending in Myanmar (P162753), Myanmar Programmatic Poverty Analysis (P167819), and Inclusive access and Quality Education Project (P163389), led by Giorgia Demarchi (Poverty and Equity Global Practice) and Thomas Poulsen (Education Global Practice). Authors can be reached at mmastruzzi@worldbank.org and kswe@worldbank.org. 1 I. Introduction This technical note discusses the findings, challenges and lessons learned from an ongoing World Bank technical assistance initiative to support to the Ministry of Education (MOE) in introducing electronic submissions of monthly budget implementation reports (BIRs). The aim of this note is to summarize the work itself and provide some lessons and suggestions for next steps. It is hoped that these reflections can inform and inspire similar initiatives in other sectors in Myanmar – which likely share similar challenges, financial management practices and institutional arrangements – as well as stimulate policy dialogues over broader public financial management (PFM) challenges, hindering better performance of public finances. In this respect, while the note is primarily addressed to policymakers and donors involved in education by deepening the knowledge base of budgeting process in the sector, practitioners in other sectors might also benefit from its findings. The objective of the technical assistance was to introduce electronic production and submission of the monthly forms that all spending agencies produce and submit (called the “Hta-sa” forms). And with such electronic preparation and submission, the higher order objective of the support is to create more timely, more detailed and higher quality information on how public resources are spent in education, with the hope that such information will be used to improve decision making. Why is this important? Each month over 650 Hta-sa forms are produced and typically circulated in hard copy, leading to significant processing times, a substantial vulnerability to mistakes and loss of informational potential. By the time the execution report (Sa-ya) has been generated and shared with the Ministry of Planning and Finance, all information about individual townships and teaching institutions has been lost. Besides these efficiency losses, the process also suffers from breakdown of communication flows at critical junctures of the budget cycle, low capacity and high staff turnovers at lower tiers of reporting agencies (townships), and lack of clarity in formal reporting protocols which further affect the soundness, timeliness, comprehensiveness and transparency of fiscal reporting. Documenting these capacity and efficiency gaps could go a long way towards establishing a meaningful dialogue on the need for reform in the sector. While we expect this note to offer notable contributions towards a greater and better understanding of existing challenges in fiscal reporting, the note does not cover the broader spectrum of PFM challenges in the sector. For instance, issues of cash flow management, accounting and payment systems, account reconciliation, internal auditing, commitment controls, timeliness of funds flows, corruption, and quality of decision making lie outside the scope of this note. Similarly, the note does not question the rationale behind the current reporting system, limiting itself to providing descriptive information of its features, shortcomings and burdensome nature. In spite of these limitations, the note still provides an important entry point to inform future policy dialogue towards a PFM reform roadmap to modernize not only the reporting requirements but also budget planning and execution practices. The remainder of the technical note is structured as follows. Section II presents an overview of the current status of BIR submissions, highlighting various bottlenecks hindering more efficient information flows. Section III describes the instruments that were developed as well as the approach implemented to ensure familiarization with such templates. Section IV presents the basic challenges most townships are confronted with when complying with their duties. Section V discusses basic findings learned by the team 2 about existing practices - and more broadly about financial management arrangements. Section VI summarizes key analytical findings on spending patterns by townships vis-à-vis central agencies and States/Region (S&R) offices. Finally, Section VII presents recommendations for way forward. II. Current status of BIR submissions The section answers the following four questions: (i) who is involved in preparing and submitting the forms; (ii) what is reported on? (iii) how is the reporting currently done (including details on where loss of information takes place and what gets computerized), and (iii) how long each of the steps takes. The conclusion of this section is that the current reporting processes suffer from three main weaknesses. First, important information is lost in the process: as a result of how information gets aggregated at each level of the reporting process, the Ministry is unable to break down spending by township, by state/region, or by college/higher education institution. Second, the reporting process is highly time-consuming because, thus far, there has been very little use of modern technology to speed up and automatize the process: almost 40% of townships still fill in the reports by hand, and another 30% are submitting the reports only in hard copy (see discussion of survey findings in Section IV). And, although some of the forms are designed to pull information from other forms, no one is relying on modern software’s ability to do these steps automatically. Third, the current processes are prone to cause mistakes: with the majority of data entries being done by hand, and with S&R officials involved in having to manually enter reports received in hand, mistakes are frequent and inevitable. Who is involved in preparing and submitting the forms? Every month over 650 “Hta-sa” reports are produced and submitted to capture the extent of budget execution across the Ministry of Education. These forms are produced by each one of the 12 central agencies (and their minor heads), as well as by each of the 208 vocational colleges and higher teaching institutions, 18 State/Region offices, 64 districts and 330 townships (figure 1). The expenditure flow section of these forms (“Hta-sa 10”) is then processed and converted into Oo-sa forms (for internal accounting purposes) and Sa-ya forms (submitted to Finance as part of budget execution reporting) by S&R officers and central agencies. In particular, S&R officers aggregate individual townships’ Hta-sa forms into one aggregate report (for both Oo-sa2, Oo-sa4 and Sa- ya) per region (i.e. 18 forms on aggregate for each report); while staff from Department of Higher Education (DHE) and Department of Vocational and Educational Training (DVET) aggregate individual colleges/teaching institution according to their administrative structure (1 Oo-sa/Sa-ya report for DVET and 3 Oo-sa/Sa-ya reports for DHE). What is reported on Hta-sa 10? Hta-sa 10 summarizes monthly expenditure flows. Most institutions report only one table with the sole exception of townships which report 5 tables (one for each minor head /account holder of DBE). A Hta-sa (table 1) reports information for 8 fields captured in columns (current month income and expenditure, budget allocation, cumulative income and expenses up to previous month, cumulative income and expenses to current month and balance up to previous month). This information is disaggregated across five major headers (current and capital income, current and capital expenditure and advance payment/suspense account) further divided into several minor headers and primary units capturing economic disaggregation of spending flows (also referred to as budget codes). 3 Table 1: Extract from a Typical Hta-sa 10 How is Hta-sa 10 linked to Oo-sa reports? Once Hta-sa reporting is complete, the next stage is the production of Oo-sa forms. These are generated by central agencies as well as S&R officers which combine individual Hta-sa reports from their offices with Hta-sa reports from their respective townships and districts. There are two main Oo-sa forms: Oo-sa2 and Oo-sa4. Oo-sa2 is the combination of individual Hta-sa 10 for all minor heads for each available month in the fiscal year. It means the spending of all 5 minor heads in DBE in each S&R and all colleges and institutions under DHE and DTVET are presented in different columns of the table for the particular month. Oo-sa4 on the other hand presents information at minor head level (this means 5 tables for townships and up to 160 tables for DHE institutions) broken down across typical Hta-sa budget codes and also presenting current and past months cumulative amounts as per below screenshot. 4 The final step in the budget implementation report cycle is the production of a Sa-ya report, which forms the basis for the provisional actuals that are provided to the Ministry of Planning and Finance on a monthly basis to monitor budget execution. Much like Oo-sa, Sa-ya forms are completely generated from information collected through Hta-sa 10 and just like Oo-sa, a Sa-ya report does not preserve any information about individual colleges or townships but only an aggregate among subsets of them (townships are organized across 18 regions while colleges are aggregated under DVET and universities are aggregated across three ‘zones’ under DHE). Unlike Oo-sa forms, however, Sa-ya reports are much more comprehensive, providing a range of summary information of spending flows on income, revenue and debt as summarized in table 2 below. Table 2: Structure and content of a typical Sa-ya A TYPICAL SA-YA Structure Current income report form Revenue from foreign aids Part 1 (revenue and Eight debt receipts expenditure of recurrent Current expenditure report form (all minor heads) budget) Current expenditure report form (each minor head) Current expenditure (interest payment) Capital income report form Part 2 (revenue and Capital expenditure report form up to 2 digits expenditure of capital budget) Capital expenditure report form up to 4 digits Part 3 (debts and loans, credit Debt head (credit) report and debit) Debt head (debit) report Part 4 Proof of correctness of account Part 5 Monthly summary debts, deposits and remittance How is reporting currently done? Where does aggregation take place and what gets computerized? The majority of Hta-sa forms are initially generated in hard copy, often hand written in the case of townships (see section IV for more details) and then manually digitalized into excel files, prior to be aggregated and converted into Oo-sa2, Oo-sa3 and Sa-ya forms. Besides being time consuming, the process leads to substantial loss of details. Given the large amount of information being collected through hard copy, only a subset of this information is processed electronically and converted into the “provisional actuals” provided to Ministry of Finance each month. By the time Sa-ya reports are completed much of the information about actual spending at the township and teaching institution levels for instance is lost, available only through hard copy archives in the Ministry of Education. How long does each of the step take? The steps described above typically take up to 45 days to bring to completion from preparation/submissions of Hta sa 10 forms to aggregation and conversion into Sa-ya which form the basis for computing provisional actuals. This is the result of two combining forces. First, it takes time for hard copies to reach their destination (S&R offices), especially from remote townships. Secondly, it takes additional time to validate, process and convert these hard copies in digital format, aggregate and populate Oo-sa and Sa-ya forms in digital formats, requiring multiple, massive data entries by financial clerks and accounting units. 5 Figure 2.1: Timeline of BIR Submissions in Education Most prepared within a week Prepared each month by 30 minor heads from central agencies, but may take up 330 townships, 67 regions, 18 States/regions and 208 institutions to 25 days to reach S&R Both forms are prepared each month by each minor head from central agencies, with DHE/DVET aggregating 208 teaching institutions/colleges and with the 18 S&R offices 2-3 weeks aggregating 330 townships, 64 districts and their own units. typically needed to complete processing and At this stage, only aggregate conversion of amounts at central agency Hta-sa into level are available these forms III. Steps taken to introduce electronic submissions of BIRs The technical assistance to introduce electronic submissions have proceeded in three phases with additional proposed phases discussed at the end of this note. Phase 1, which took place between July and November 2017 involved doing a desk study of available BIRs to understand their structure and build a draft “electronic template”. Phase 2 (December 2017) involved further refining the template through a field visit to colleges and S&R offices (see Box 1 for a description of its main features). Phase 3 (February and May 2018) involved intensive training and hand-holding to budget officers involved in preparing and submitting the forms. This training was delivered to central agencies, S&R offices, districts, colleges and townships (described in more detail in Box 2). Additional phases are envisioned to continue the roll out of digital reports and increase the extent and quality of data being collected across the Ministry during the budget cycle. These are presented at the end of Section IV. Box 1: What is the “template” and how does it work? The template is an excel based file that was developed to guide users into the digitalization of their hta-sa to facilitate aggregation. Two instruments were created to help streamline electronic production of hta-sa forms. The first template (“Hta-sa institution”) ambitiously tried to digitalize the entire ensemble of day to day accounting as well as main expenditure flows but turned out to be quite difficult for most budget officers to internalize given existing low capacity. Therefore, the team developed a simplified version (“Hta-sa 10”) based on the recognition that Hta-sa 10 is at the core of monthly budget execution report and no other form captured in the fuller Hta-sa was needed for this purpose. Both instruments share similar characteristics. For instance, they are designed to be universally applicable to all users by displaying all potential budget codes. Also, they are meant to standardize data entries (i.e. budget codes and cumulative amounts are in the same rows/columns for every submissions), an essential precondition for automatic collection, aggregation and quick conversion of individual Hta-sa into Oo-sa and Sa-ya form. Finally, background datasheets collect, store and structure information to preserve all the original data collected through the 650 Hta-sa (while automatically populating Oo-sa and Sa-ya reports). It is this background data function that provided the data for the analytical work presented in Section VI. Box 2: Conducting training on how to use the template 6 Different stages and modalities of training sessions were administered to build awareness and familiarization with the templates that were developed. First and foremost, the team invested considerable time and resources for training of central agencies and S&R officers on both how to use the template as well as on performing aggregation and preparation of Oo-sa and Sa-ya reports. This was a critical task especially in order to ensure the formation of a cadre of professional trainers that would help institutionalize routine training across the Ministry, and thus sustain the process in the long term (a task needed particularly to account for high staff turnover in townships). In this respect, several manuals were created along with video tutorials on both how to fill Hta-sa as well as aggregate forms and troubleshoot. Intensive training sessions were given to ensure that townships were able to comply with reporting their data electronically using this template (similar training was given to colleges however only on the full hta-sa instrument). The sessions were mostly hands-on training where participants were asked to populate their March 2018 Hta-sa 10 using the electronic templates. S&R officers played a very active role in both helping townships comply with the new instrument as well as in presenting sections of the tool. This was an important signal of the level of commitment within the Ministry in institutionalizing this process. Moving forward, additional training sessions might be conducted, primarily in support of S&R officers (as well as DHE/DVET staff) in aggregating individual Hta-sa forms as well as develop further skills in analyzing electronic submissions and monitor pace of compliance by their respective townships/colleges. These are expected to take place each month around the time when individual Hta-sa forms are received and converted into Oo-sa and Sa- ya reports. IV. Are townships ready to move towards electronic preparation and submission of BIRs? Survey results suggest that they are. To better understand the current processes and the capacity of townships to use an electronic submission process, the World Bank team administered a survey to all townships. Information was collected on the number and quality of existing computers in the office, staff familiarity with Microsoft applications and emails, on connectivity issues and common challenges when preparing/submitting hta- sa (see Annex 2 for a list of survey questions). The survey was conducted live during the basic excel training 7 provided to all townships and submitted electronically via email. Overall 326 survey responses were received. For half of the sample, the survey also asked additional questions on the role of townships in budget process to better understand existing financial management arrangements in the sector. This section presents an overview of basic challenges, quality of infrastructure and capacity levels, while the broader financial management arrangements are discussed at length in Section V. Although results vary across townships, the findings are encouraging: 80% of townships have computers, basic excel skills, access to internet (through phones), and are currently able to prepare and submit their reports with a week, although the majority do so via hard copy. This suggests a very solid foundation for introducing electronic submissions of BIRs. At the same time, the survey also reveals that a smaller number of townships – around 25 townships – will need more support (including computer upgrade) as indicated by the longer time it takes for them to prepare their monthly forms (see Annex 3 for a full list). There seems to be an adequate number of functioning computers in every township. All but two townships reported having at least one functioning laptop in their office while only 14% of the sample reported having no desktops. There is however still margin for improvement since almost half of the townships reported no more than 2 desktops/laptops available, meaning not every education staff might have permanent access to computers. Furthermore, quite an extensive number of townships reported outdated versions of operating systems and poor IT equipment maintenance practices. Throughout the 2-week sessions, the team identified 25 townships who had unlicensed operating systems that did not allow them to perform basic functions needed to populate the Hta-sa electronic templates (see figure 1 and annex 2 for details) FIGURE 4.1: Availability of computers in each township Most townships All but 2 township education offices education offices have at least one 1% have at least one 5% functioning 15% 14% functioning laptop desktop with 8% available 25% reporting no 41% availability 43% 0 0 56% 1-2 1-2 3-4 3-4 5 or more 5 or more Most of the townships typically manage to submit their Hta-sa forms within a week of month closing. While this is a positive development, two potential offsetting aspects should be highlighted. First, 12% of townships reported taking up to a month to produce their Hta-sa form the end of the closing month (see annex 3 for full list), requiring further investigation on the likely determinants of this delay, as this might undermine the overall efficiency of the process. Secondly, over 60% of townships reported submitting Hta-sa forms in hard copy, with almost 40% only in hand written formats. This process will likely improve as a result of current intervention as submissions of Hta-sa reports shift to electronic formats (Figure 4.2). FIGURE 4.2: Timing and Format of Hta-sa Submissions 8 Most townships manage to submit hta-sa forms within a week ..However, there is wide variation in formats of submissions 12% within 1 week after Hard copy (hand end of the month written) 8% 36% 37% 1-2 week after end of Hard copy (typed by the month computer) 2-4 weeks after end Soft copy 80% of the month 27% Most townships reported familiarity with excel, a fact confirmed by their ability to comply with the excel based templates which they submitted. While this is again a positive development, two offsetting aspects should be highlighted. On one hand with only one exception, all townships have outdated version to excel. Most importantly, while most townships exhibited familiarity with basic excel functions, this number decreased dramatically when asked about more sophisticated knowledge (Figure 4.3). While this is not an impediment for compliance with Hta-sa 10 form – as documented by the successful round of submissions – it might become an obstacle for more complex applications, including complying with the full Hta-sa template. FIGURE 4.3 – Familiarity with Excel Most townships Most townships have only basic excel skills 0% 6%3% work daily in 160 excel... 140 Every day ( 120 Every week 100 ( 91% Every month ( 80 60 Rarely or never 40 20 ...but most 0 townships 1% 0% education offices have old versions 41% of excel... 58% 2007 and below 2010 version 2013 version 2016 version I have never heard about it I have used this a few times I use this a lot 9 Poor internet connectivity is one of greatest challenges for electronic submissions of Hta-sa forms. The majority of townships reported accessing the internet primarily through their phones. While the overall Figure 4.4 Biggest challenges to hta-sa compilation connectivity is strong and reliable (Figure 4.5) and 10e. Poor internet connection township staff have experience with using phones as 10d. Reconciling the account hotspots – including sending documents from their 10c. Lack of revelant skills to fill in forms office – this did not translate into a comfortable attitude 10b. Lack of computer towards doing so for submission of Hta-sa form likely reflecting both discomfort with using mobile interfaces 10a. Electricity outrage for a large number of fields as well as higher costs 0 50 100 150 200 250 very challenging a bit challenging not a problem associated with web-based interfaces. Townships however displayed strong level of comfort in submitting electronic Hta-sa forms using their phones as hotpots with over 90% of submissions received by email, given the low costs. Lack of relevant skills to fill in forms and particularly reconciling accounting entries with reporting of budgetary flows were also listed as a major impediment for Hta-sa compilation (Figure 4.4). Figure 4.5: Quality of connectivity Quality of phone connectivity is good... ....with good record of using as hotspot but not 160 for hta-sa forms 140 11f. Would you feel comfortable submitting 120 hta-sa forms using your mobile phone? 100 11e. Have you ever sent documents from 80 your office's computer using the phone as… 60 11d. Have you used your mobile phone to send information/submit forms online? 40 20 11c. Have you used the internet from your phone in your office over the past week? 0 Always Most of the times Few times Never 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 11a. Do you have connectivity on your phone at work? 11b. If so, is the connectivity reliable? No Yes V. The training sessions provided key insights on quality of reporting and existing financial management challenges The workshops with townships revealed important insights about the role of townships in the budget process and the nature of their reporting. These insights ranged from flaws in existing reporting practices surrounding Hta-sa 10 forms which potentially diminish the overall quality of information collected each month to the identification of overarching pubic financial management challenges affecting the efficiency of budget process from planning to formulation and execution. The rest of the section dissects some of the key findings. The information included on cumulative spending is potentially misleading. Each month, townships report information only for the budget codes that were actually used. This makes sense for that month. However, the Hta-sa 10 form is also meant to report cumulative spending for the year. For this field, there appears to be a mistaken practice of omitting cumulative spending amounts for the budget codes which 10 are not being used in that particular month. In short, the cumulative expenditure column for a given month only report data for budget codes in use that month, therefore under-estimating total cumulative expenditure. During the workshop, townships were encouraged to populate electronic Hta-sa form with proper cumulative expenditure (i.e. not what was reported in March but for every budget code used throughout the year) and most were able to comply with that instruction. Data entry on budget allocation follows similar trends as with cumulative amounts: townships report the budget they have available for the codes on which they plan to spend in that particular month, not on the overall available envelope. This problem (of not reporting the total budget envelope) is further compounded by the fact that the budget envelope, reportedly, changes several times a year. During the workshop, townships were encouraged to also report budget amounts for the entire year including the share of unused budget allocations that were returned (since March totals already presented net amounts) and once again most townships were able to comply with that instruction. Township education officers reported that they do not formally receive a yearly budget envelope at the beginning of the cycle. Parliament approved budgets are a very aggregate level: totals for each department (e.g. the initial budget which was approved for the department of basic education for 2017/18 was 1.295 trillion kyats for recurrent and 143 billion kyats for capital, with minimal upward revision in mid-year). The task of converting that “spending envelope” into more detailed spending plans are, then, the task of departments. During the budget preparation process (i.e., before parliament approves) each department prepares a detailed breakdown by “minor head” and, within each minor head, a break down by “primary unit” (i.e. the most detailed economic classification which exists in the budget structure). However, as discussed in more details below, those details do not seem to be translated into budgets (a) which are communicated to townships; and (b) which townships are, then, asked to operate within. Indeed, the workshop revealed three important insights related to townships’ (and that of other agencies under MOE) role in the preparation and execution of budgets: first, townships, S&R and higher education institutions are involved in providing inputs into the budget proposals which DBE submits to MOFP (and then to parliament). Second, once parliament has approved the aggregate for, say, DBE (“spending ceilings”), there is no process in place whereby MOE’s Union level departments converts those aggregates into detailed budgets for the various spending agencies (e.g. S&R, townships, and higher education institutions). Third, as a result of this, townships do not have an annual budget within each they can plan as these amounts are not further distributed across them (outside of basic notification on selected capital projects). This disconnect between planning and budget formulation is amplified during execution when allocations to townships are often linked to previous year figures with limited room for maneuver for non-salary recurrent items. Possibly, the same would hold true for in Ministries. Instead, townships are being given indicative “budget amounts” several times during the fiscal year and often at different intervals across townships. As highlighted in box 3, townships receive several budget allocations at various intervals. While salary allocations are provided regularly every quarter, budget allocation for non-salary items vary: most townships receive major allocations on the third and ninth month of the fiscal year while others receive these allocations at different intervals. To further compound the problem, budget allocations to townships are typically based on incremental principles rather than economic need considerations. While the team was not able to access previous years’ hta-sa (to compare individual budget codes from the previous year), focus group discussions with townships indicated that both overall budgets for townships as well as individual codes tend to experience 11 minimal variation across years. Given the large disparity in performance, per capita expenditures and initial conditions (discussed in section VI) there is great scope for improving targeting of budget allocations by the Department of Basic Education visa cross-referencing of township expenditure, administrative and poverty data. Box 3: Key Dates on Townships Reporting, 2017/18 July 2017 – Townships and S&Rs budget officers prepare yearly proposals via multiple interactions and submit to DBE for the next fiscal year April 2017 – Townships receive the first allocation of the fiscal year (only salaries) from DBE May-June 2017 – Townships receive (at different intervals) first batch of non-recurrent funding, typically for same budget codes as previous year; minor supplementary budgets are negotiated between townships and DBE on monthly basis hereafter July 2017 – Townships receive new quarterly allocations for salaries October 2017 – Townships receive new quarterly allocation for salaries Sep-Dec 2017 – Townships receive second batch of non-recurrent funding, mostly around December Dec–Feb 2018 – Townships returns excess funding to the center, first time in December and second time in February April 2018 – Townships submit final Hta-sas to S&R officers Allocation of non-salary recurrent budget is often delayed. In the first two months of the fiscal year, only funds for salaries are released. Other recurrent codes are typically distributed from the third month onwards with one major revision (typically on the 9th month of the fiscal year) and several minor supplementary monthly requests. The delay in receiving the first batch of funding for non-salary expenses are the primary cause for out of pocket advance payments (70% of the time to cover transportation costs as reported in the survey) by township officers which are later reimbursed once funds from respective budget codes are made available. Through the survey, it is estimated that in around 65% of townships, education officers had to advance some money during the 2017/18 cycle for an average amount of 1.5 million kyats, with peaks of over 10 million kyats in some townships! Note: Question was asked only to 165 townships – Bar indicates number of townships receiving allocation in a given month 12 An important exception to this is the school improvement funds (or “school grants”). In particular, since 2013/14, townships have received a “block grant” two times per year, based on a formula which the townships, then, distributed to schools. Schools, in turn, can, then, spend those resources against any of 13 budget codes, in accordance with procedures spelled out in guidelines provided for the “school grant program” (supported under a World Bank/DFAT operation). Townships do not manage any capital expenditure. While townships include capital investment proposals in their yearly submissions, they do not implement the projects that are included in the budget cycle (which are managed mostly by central DBE and for a small fraction by S&R offices). Their primary function is to monitor implementation of capital projects and report back to respective S&R officers at the end of the month (not through Hta-sa). As a result, no disaggregation by township is available for capital projects, but only regional aggregates as reported by S&R officers for the small proportion of capital projects managed by their units. Townships have little flexibility in shifting funds across budget codes. Townships cannot typically re- assign funds across budget codes. Exceeding amounts in specific budget codes cannot be used to address needs in other areas, the only option being returning funds to the center and requesting allocation on a different primary code. According to findings emerging from focus group sessions, virtually none of the townships have been able to do so in 2017/18 despite having reported the need to do so. This was corroborated by survey findings where 90% of townships respondents negatively to the question on whether they were allowed to move funds across budget codes.2 Some budget codes are administered on a flat basis to all townships regardless of need. This has generated financial strains for townships in greater needs of such earmarked allocation. For instance, allocation for code 0304 (transportation) was often viewed as being insufficient to cover basic needs of the township. Upon analyzing submissions received, however, the team was not able to confirm this claim. During the fiscal year, townships return unused portion of the budget allocations. There is no uniform practice, with some townships returning funds on the 11th month of the fiscal year while others (i.e. Yangon region) doing so the previous month. Typically, however, this portion is very small, since townships are often able to spend all their budget allocation. The survey indicated that while over 80% of townships reported returning unused funds, in only 3% of the sample did this amount exceed 1% of total budget allocation.3 The above findings suggest there is room for technical improvements on several fronts. These will be discussed at length in the recommendation section, presenting measures to improve the quality of data reported in Hta-sa, measures to help improve transparency and alignment of planning with budgeting, measures to help institutionalize and streamline the electronic process. 2 This question was only asked to 168 townships so this figure is not fully representative. 3 Only half of the sample (168 townships) were asked this question, so the data is not fully representative. 13 VI. What can we learn from looking at more detailed information collected from electronic submissions? This section provides some preliminary findings from the data collected for 2017/18. The underlying data include budget and expenditure disaggregated information for most of the 330 townships, in addition to spending by S&R regions and central agencies.4 While only analysis for Department of Basic Education is presented here – accounting for over 80% of Figure 6.1 Shares of spending across total spending by the Ministry of Education - levels by primary units college level information was also collected for the Department of Higher Education and Capital Department of Vocational Training, accounting for Other Recurrent 0500 Transfer Payments another 17% of total spending. 0400 Maintenance Charges 0300 Expenses of Goods and… There is quite a sharp division of roles between 0200 Travelling Allowance central agency and townships: capital spending is 0100 Pay and Allowance… a union responsibility, while townships manage 0% 50% 100% the bulk of recurrent spending. The Department of Basic Education manages most of capital Central Region Townships expenditures (94% of total capital spending in the sector) with State and Regions accounting for a small fraction. When it comes to recurrent, on the other hand, townships account for over 90% of overall spending, covering all major expenses from salaries of teachers to various non-salary responsibilities, while the central agency is mostly in charge of textbooks, uniforms and other centrally procured items. Figure 6.2 Division of roles across levels of government Execution of capital rests mostly with While recurrent is devolved to townships central agency.... 5% Central 6% Central 13% Region Region Townships 82% Townships 94% Significant spending is recorded in the last month of the fiscal year. The most significant spending occurs on capital expenses for States/Regions, where spending in the last month of the fiscal year accounts for over 70% of entire year spending. In some states, 100% of total capital spending was concentrated in the 4 There are in fact 329 townships as two Yangon townships were merged into one. Out of the full universe, 2 townships provided empty data while 6 more townships provided highly incomplete data (i.e. not reporting data for primary/middle/high schools). Few others did not report last month expenditure; in those cases, budget allocations instead of cumulative expenses were used (since these amounts typically match); and in three cases the opposite happened (i.e. last month expenditure was reported but not overall cumulative and budget, and so had to be dropped). Therefore, most of the analysis is done for 318 townships. 14 last month as displayed in below chart. Significant concentration of spending is also recorded for recurrent at both central and state/region levels although the nature of spending is different. Central agencies’ spike in spending in the last month of the fiscal year is dominated by goods and services with 50% of yearly expenditures in this category occurring in March 2018 while States and Region offices concentrate 40% of their year maintenance expenses in the last month. In both cases, this bulk increase is related to late releases of funds. Townships on the other hand experience smoother spending patterns across the year. Figure 6.3 Significant spending is recorded in the last month, especially by S&R in capital 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Capital Recurrent Central Region Townships Figure 6.5b Drivers of last month concentration for DBE Figure 6.5a Most significant spending in last 0309 Books, Periodical and Newspaper 35% month for central is on goods and services 100.0% 0308 Electricit y and Power 76% Central Region Townships 80.0% 0304 Transport charges 41% 60.0% 0325 Exhibition and Convocation Charges 29% 40.0% 0301 Labour charges 12% 20.0% 0313 Consumable stores 25% 0.0% 0320 Print ing and Publication Charges 56% 0100 Pay and 0200 Travelling 0300 Expenses 0400 0500 Transfer - 10 20 Allowance Allowance of Goods and Maintenance Payments Billions Honoraria, etc. Services Charges The level of granularity of collected data allows for multiple iterations and drill down to identify drivers of particular spending patterns. In this case, Figure 6.5c Last month township spending in figure 6.4 identifies the regions that spent the transportation (as % total) by region 40% most capital (as share of total) in the last 37% 36% 33% 33% month. Figure 6.5b drills down on individual 28% 30% 30% 30% 28% 27% primary units behind DBE large spending in 21% 25% 23% 26% 24% 26% 21% goods and service in the last month while 6.5c identifies the regions with the greatest concentration of spending by townships on traveling allowance in the last month. 15 Turning the attention to townships, there is interesting variation in per student spending which warrants further analysis. Total per pupil recurrent spending on education is in the 50-120k Kyats range (figure 6.6). More analysis will be needed to examine this variation further to answer Figure 6.6 Geographical distribution of per pupil some key questions: Is there “enough” primary spending variation to help off-set the large underlying differences in needs? A word of caution: figures for “primary schools”, “middle schools” and “high schools” do not represent spending by level of education. Even though each township reports spending by minor heads that sound like sub-sectors of the education system, namely, “160413 Primary Schools”, “160412 Middle Schools” and “160411 High Schools”) this division is not spending by the primary, middle and high school sector. Rather, the three groups represent spending by schools that are designed as primary schools, spending by schools that are designated as middle schools, and spending by schools who are designated as high schools. However, most high schools also enroll primary and middle schools. And most middle schools also enroll primary schools. A simple analysis of spending by level using data reported by townships would produce a bias towards high schools spending (Figure 6.7a present relative shares of unadjusted per pupil spending at each level). 16 Figure 6.7a Un-adjusted Per pupil spending Figure 6.7b Adjusted Per pupil spending 22% primary 33% 43% middle 12% high 66% 24% Note: Both pie charts present relative shares of per pupil spending across the three levels However, for analysts interested in obtaining spending by level of education, such numbers can be imputed using the number of teachers at each level. Specifically, we used the number of teachers (available for 2015 across the three levels) as “weights” to provide estimates of spending by level of education.5 Namely, to compute weights to adjust calculations for high schools, the total number of teachers for each level was computed at township level, excluding the number of teachers in schools where only primary/middle students were listed (i.e. no high school). Similar calculations were done to derive weights for middle schools (i.e. excluding from the overall count the number of primary students in schools with only primary level). 2 sets of weights were then calculated on the basis of teacher shares for the two scenarios (i.e. first set of weights for high schools with primary and middle, and second set of weights for schools with middle and primary) and applied to the total spending amount reported for high schools and middle schools6. The resulting data portrays a more balanced picture of spending across the three levels (Figure 6.7b). Finally, the township level expenditure data provide two new insights on the “school improvement funds”: first, a good number of townships spend substantially more on the “school improvement fund budget codes” than what is provided under the program. Secondly, townships might be misreporting their budget allocations on their forms. Figure 6.8 displays actual spending on the 13 budget codes that townships can distribute onwards to schools to use for spending under the resources they receive for the “school improvement fund” (Y axis) vis-à-vis how much townships should have received for those 13 codes using the SIF formula7 combined with “primary/middle/high schools” minor heads. For some townships 5 Given dominance of salary expenses teachers seem a fit than student population to serve as weight since teacher/pupil ratios vary substantially across level but salary differences are not as marked. 6 Formulas for spending redistribution was as follows: adjusted amount of high school spending was equal to the unadjusted amount (i.e. spending associated with 160411 high schools) times the relative weight of teachers in high school. For primary schools, the adjusted amount was the sum of the unadjusted amount plus relative weight of primary teachers under high school scenario times unadjusted high school spending and relative weight of primary teachers under middle school scenario times unadjusted middle school spending. Finally, middle school adjusted spending was equal to the unadjusted amount times relative weight of scenario 2 plus relative weight of middle teachers under high school scenario times unadjusted high school spending. 7 0201 Internal Travelling Allowance, 0301 Labour charges, 0303 Hiring and manufacturing charges, 0304 Transport charges, 0305 Office equipment, 0307 Postage, telegram and telephone, 0308 Electricity and Power, 0309 Books, Periodical and Newspaper, 0313 Consumable stores, 0314 Subscription and Registration Fees, 0320 Printing and Publication Charges, 0325 Exhibition and Convocation Charges, 0409 Others 17 the actual allocations are bigger than rule-based, confirming scope for improvement of accuracy of the allocation amount to reduce discretionality. For the majority of townships, the chart suggests that final allocations are smaller than the formula-based amount. There could be two likely drivers of this result: under one scenario, townships might be diverting SIF allocations to head office expenses instead of transferring these grants to schools. Under the (more likely) alternative scenario, townships might be misreporting budget allocations under head office instead of education levels. In both cases, it would be important to investigate the nature of these discrepancies to improve use/reporting of these funds. Finally, for about 30 townships,8 overall budget allocations across all minor heads still result in a lower amount than predicted by the formula. Field visits to these townships might be required to understand the nature and likely cause of this manifestation. Figure 6.8 School Grants (million kyats) by township, formula- based vs. actual allocations, 2017/18 Actual, million kyats 800 Bago 700 Htantabin Buthidaung 600 Phyu Kyauktaga 500 Yedashe Kyauktaw Kawa 400 300 200 Taunggyi Hpa-An 100 Hlaungtharya - - 100 200 300 400 500 600 Formula 700 VII Way Forward Leveraging the wealth of information that has been collected through this technical engagement, this section presents a set of recommendations intended to help streamline the adoption of electronic submissions, addressing the key bottlenecks identified in this note. Our recommendations are structured along three categories: measures to improve the quality of data reported in Hta-sa, initial measures to help improve transparency and alignment of planning and budgeting processes, and measures to help institutionalize and streamline the electronic process. First, a few targeted technical fixes would help improve the quality of data captured in Hta-sa forms, with the main objective of improving the quality and suitability of these reports for analytics. First, reporting on cumulative expenditure (and budget allocations) could be improved by including cumulative 8Pyinmana, Poke Ba Thi Ri, Tatkon, Mawlamyinegyun, Hinthada, Kangyidaunt, Mongton, Kutkai, Tangyan, Loilen, Pinlaung (Pa-O SAZ), Ywangan (Da-nu SAZ), Kalaw, Hsihseng (Pa-O SAZ), Taunggyi, Kamaryut, Thongwa, Dagon Myothit (North), Tamwe, South Okkalapa, Thingangyun, Hmawbi, Insein, Pauktaw, Sittwe, Paung, Mahlaing, Salin, Taungdwingyi, Taungoo, Kani, Kalewa, Banmauk, Hakha, Mindat, Mansi, Shwegu, Waingmaw 18 figures for all budget codes irrespective of which ones were used in a particular month and by keeping track of returned budget allocations. This modification would give instant access to cumulative figures without the need of collecting previous months’ Hta-sa forms. Secondly, there is margin for improving reporting of capital projects which are currently only presented at aggregate level, because townships do not report capital expenditures on their Hta-sa (since they are not account holders). Since these projects are managed by Central DBE and S&R offices, it is recommended for these agencies to disaggregate on their templates capital spending across the respective townships where spending is directed. This will allow better tracking and analysis of capital projects at township level. Secondly, a series of minor adjustments to existing reporting practices would help improve transparency of planning with budgeting. These include first the introduction of an additional field in the digital Hta-sa template that would allow to capture monthly budget allocations disaggregated by each budget code to keep track of all supplementary budget allocations as well as compare final allocations with cumulative expenditures. Secondly, the introduction of an additional field would help capture original plans submitted by townships, disaggregated by each budget code as per attached table. This will allow to compare township proposals with actual budget allocations without disrupting existing protocols (i.e. field and format of Hta-sa 10 form will not change). Finally, the current framework could be strengthened by ensuring that reporting agencies to improve the quality of reporting of cumulative actuals to include every month data for every available budget code, as opposed to current practice of reporting cumulative actuals only for those budget codes for which an expenditure was recorded. In time, these incremental gains in reporting practices could translate into opportunities for providing townships with greater autonomy and responsibilities to plan and execute their budgets. Table 3: Adding a tab in digital Hta-sa 10 to capture additional information Finally, the following measures would help institutionalize and streamline the electronic process to help solidify gains achieved so far to foster long term viability of the activity. These include i) establishing a cadre of professionals capable of leading the effort moving forward as an important milestone to foster 19 ownership of the process by the Ministry; ii) encouraging the exploration of technological solutions to further help streamline the production of Hta-sa reports; and iii) ensuring commitment for improving analytics in central agencies (and later townships). These activities are strongly aligned with the objective of the ongoing PFM IAQE project and will be integrated into its envisioned components. Streamlining and sustaining electronic hta-sa reporting requires a cadre of Ministry staff capable of leading the effort moving forward. In the case of education, these were identified in the officers from the 18 S&R units in charge of collecting hta-sa from respective townships and districts for DBE, as well as DHE and DVET unit staff in charge of collecting hta-sa forms from 208 colleges and higher teaching institutions. In this respect, the long-term sustainability of the intervention can only be secured via institutionalization of regular trainings to ensure compliance with instruments, particularly relevant for townships (and to a lesser extent colleges) which typically are characterized by low capacity and high staff turnover. Several workshops were organized to build capacity of S/R officers and central agencies on properly coordinating all aspects of the process of electronic submissions from preparation and submission to validation, aggregation and analysis. This approach offers important lessons for extending the framework to additional ministries. It will be important to explore long term adoption of technological solutions to further help streamline the production of hta-sas. While relying initially on excel based templates was essential given the townships familiarity with the interface, there is scope to further streamline electronic monthly reporting by means of web-based platforms for data entries. While such a platform displaying a user interface for reporting of Hta-sa 10 submissions similar to front end available in the excel templates could be easily developed, several challenges are likely to be encountered, including connectivity issues, capacity levels and related difficulties presented by usage of outdated computers. Identifying options to alleviate these constraints to gradually phase in web-based platforms as a standard for future monthly submissions should therefore be prioritized, taking client counterparts absorption capacity into account. Finally, it will be important to integrate this framework into broader MoE systems to inform decision making and accountability. Given the wealth of data that will be collected electronically, there is great potential for expanded analytics to inform policy making, improve monitoring of in year execution, 20 encourage greater evidence-based policy making in the Ministry, and potentially integrate data collected electronically to feed into budget dashboards as planned under NESP. In conclusion, streamlining electronic submissions of budget implementation reports offers great potential for several positive spillovers. On one hand, it already allowed for quick and efficient access to highly disaggregated data with significant prospects for mainstreaming this process to guide future monthly submissions. On the other, it offers important insights about the role of townships in the budget process, the nature of their reporting and the disconnect between planning, formulation and execution. The latter will likely inform and inspire similar interventions in other sectors, thus triggering a new generation of data informed policy making and budget monitoring. Most of the instruments created for MoE could be tailored to any sector with minimal adaptation. Given its transformational potential, greater investment on data infrastructure and analytics across all sectors will represent a fundamental endeavor to deepen the knowledge base of public spending in Myanmar. 21 Annex A: About Hta-sa, Oo-sa and Sa-ya reports Hta-sa - All departments or institutions which have financial management accounts need to report Hta- sa (called monthly budget implementation report) at the beginning of every month for previous month expenditure. The main structure of Hta-sa forms is as follows: Name in Electronic Template Hta-sa Form Name HS 5 Hta-sa Form (5): Cash Book HS 6 Hta-sa Form (6): Cash Balance Certificate HS 7 Hta-sa Form (7): Register of Bank Receipts HS 8 Hta-sa Form (8): Register of Bank Payments HS 9 (income), HS 9 (expenditure), HS 9 Hta-sa Form (9): Base Table for Each Primary Unit (suspense) HS 10 Hta-sa Form (10): Monthly Statement of Balance HS 11 Hta-sa Form (11): Monthly Bank Reconciliation Statement HS 12 Hta-sa Form (12): Opening and Closing Statement for Debt Accounts HS 14 Hta-sa Form (14): Register for Advance Payment HS 15 Hta-sa Form (15): Register for Deposit HS 16 Hta-sa Form (16): Register for Advance Payment (income and receipt) In the electronic template, one sheet per Hta-sa form is created except Hta-sa Form 9. In manual form, Hta-sa (9) is created as one page per primary unit including income, expenditure for each minor head (5 minor heads in DBE) and suspense accounts. In the electronic template, separate sheets are created for each category i.e., 1 sheet for Hta-sa 9 income, 5 sheets for Hta-sa 9 expenditure, 2 sheets for suspense account (income and expenditure). Figure i: Simple outline illustration of data entry in Hta-Sa Forms. Hta-Sa 5 Daily Balance Income Expenditure Hta-sa 6 Hta-Sa 7 Hta-Sa 8 Hta-Sa 9 Hta-Sa 9 Hta-Sa 9 income expenditure suspense Hta-Sa 10 22 1. Hta-sa Form (5): Cash Book It is a daily register for every revenue and expenditure for each institution or department. For instance, the revenue from school registration fee (from daily schedule register), bank withdrawal for salary of staff and others are entered daily in the revenue section. Expenditures such as salary of teacher, travel allowance and also daily bank deposit are entered in the receipt section. At the end of each day, the difference between daily total receipt and the daily total income is recorded as closing balance for that day. If the closing balance is not zero, the amount of cash that is in hand of the account section needs to be reported in Hta-sa 6 for daily basic. 2. Hta-sa Form (6): Cash Balance Certificate It is to certify the daily closing amount in the account at the end of each day. It is reported by type of cash note and number for each cash note. This closing balance will be the opening balance for the next working day. 3. Hta-sa Form (7): Register for Bank Receipts The Hta-sa Form 7 is recorded for every cash amount received with the respective number from the bank deposit. It is the same as recorded in Hta-sa (5) revenue section. In the manual form, it is only recorded as a lump sum for each ‘challan number’ receipt). The staff will figure it out manually to transfer the revenue for respective primary unit in Hta-sa (9) form. In our electronic template, we let staff sort out the revenue by primary unit so that it can be directly linked with Hta- sa 9 income form. 4. Hta-sa Form (8): Register for Bank Payments Hta-sa 8 is recorded for every cash payment with voucher number. It is also recorded in the expenditure section in Hta-sa (5). In the original manual form, the user did not match each voucher to a type of primary unit budget code. So, the user needed to manually identify again when it is filled out in Hta-sa (9) and Hta-sa (10). In the electronic template, we let the user fill out each voucher with respective primary unit, thus linking automatically to Hta-sa 9 expenditure and Hta- sa 9 suspense. In Hta-sa 8, only the expenditure amount that is actually paid is recorded. For instance, gross salary might be 500,000 kyats, but Hta-sa 8 shows only the net amount after subtracting the other advance expenses (those listed in our electronic template in Hta-sa 8). However, in Hta-sa 9, the gross amount should be recorded. It is also true with negative expenditure. In the manual form, staff needs to manually adjust between Hta-sa 8 and Hta-sa 9. To be able to systematically link transaction, in our electronic template, amounts that need to be adjusted between Hta-sa 8 and Hta-sa 9 are fill out in respective columns in Hta-sa 8. The amount adjusted for Hta- sa 9 will appear automatically in the respective primary unit after entering the voucher number. 5. Hta-sa Form (9): Base Table for Each Primary Unit HS 9 (income) – Each table in HS 9 is for each primary unit for the revenue section. It is directly linked with HS 7, except “Refund 50” and one of the types of “House Rent”. “Refund 50” is recorded in HS 8 and it is transferred into HS 9 (income) as negative value. There are three types of “House Rent”: (i) those which are recorded in HS 7 and linked with HS 9 (income); 23 (ii) those which are recorded in HS 8 (one of the items that is subtracted from salary) and linked with HS 9 (suspense); (iii) those which are not recorded elsewhere but subtracted from salary. It is linked with HS 9 (income). HS 9 (expenditure) – There are 5 identical sheets for HS 9 (expenditure) accounting for 5 minor heads in DBE. Each table is directly linked from each primary unit in HS 8. As explained in Hta- sa 8, some of the budget codes appeared as gross amount (salary) and some as net amount (minus expenditure). HS 9 (suspense) – There are two parts in Hta-sa 9 suspense account: (i) Suspense, income: It comes from the individual data that is subtracted from salary in Hta-sa 8. (ii) Suspense, expenditure: It comes from cross-cheque (lump sum of all the individual data) that is recorded under suspense primary unit in Hta-sa 8. 6. Hta-sa Form (10): Monthly Statement of Balance Total payment from each cheque in Hta-Sa 8 and total payment in Hta-Sa 10 are theoretically the same when there is no suspense account. The difference between Hta-Sa 8 and Hta-Sa 10 expenditure is the suspense account not included in Hta-Sa 8. It is equal to the difference between total revenue from Hta-Sa 7 and Hta-Sa 10 income. Hta-Sa 10 is the fundamental form for compiling the institution’s monthly implementation data. We extract the data from Hta-sa 10 into the “Boost” database tab and later use it for the data compilation. 7. Hta-sa Form (11): Monthly Bank Reconciliation Statement This statement can be finalized after each institution gets the bank statement which is typically done in second week of every month. Oo-sa 2 and Oo-sa 4 Oo-sa 2 and Oo-sa 4 are compiled from individual Hta-sa (specifically Hta-sa 10). Oo-sa 2 is the monthly implementation report for each institution or each minor head for all primary units. Each sheet represents one month, and each column represents each minor head (or institution), and each row is the primary unit. Oo-sa 4 is the cumulative implementing report of each minor head. Each sheet in excel represents a minor head, each column represents a month, and the amount is cumulatively added after every month. The rows are also listed by each primary unit. All the fields are pre-defined in Oo-sa 2 and Oo-sa 4 and the value will be automatically generated from “boost” tab after aggregating individual “boost” tabs from Hta-sas. By following simple steps, the staff (the central staff from each agencies and state and region officers from the Department of Basic Education) can generate the standardized Oo-sa 2 and Oo-sa 4 in real time. (i) Place all Hta-sa files into only one folder (only Hta-sa files that wants to be combined into Oo-sa) (ii) Right click one of the file in folder  properties  Copy the location. (iii) Open Oo-sa 2 file  Change folder path in macro setting from copied location in step (ii). 24 (iv) Run the macro  Oo-sa 2 will be generated in a few minutes. (v) After running the Oo-sa 2, copy the “boost” tab from Oo-sa 2  paste into the “boost” tab in Oo-sa 4  Oo-sa 4 will be generated in real time. Figure ii: Step by step illustration for generating Oo-sa 2 and Oo-sa 4 from Hta-sa files Put Hta-sa files into one folder Right click on Copy the file any of Hta-sa file location from in folder properties Open U-sa 2 Change folder path in aggregration macro (by pasting the copied location) U-sa 2 is generated Copy “boost ” Paste into “boost ” tab in tab from U-sa 2 U-sa 4 U-sa 4 is generated 25 Annex B: Township survey questions Q1. Position of respondent Q2a. How many functioning laptops are in your township education office? Q2b. How many functioning desktops are in your township education office? Q3a. Who currently uses them on a regular basis? Q3b. For what type of work the laptops/desktops are used for? Q3c. Do you have regular maintenance or services for IT issues? Q4. When does your township typically submit Hta-sa form to State and Region office? Q5. In which format do you typically send hta-sa forms? (Multiple answers allowed) Q6. How often do you work with Microsoft Excel? Q6. How often do you work with Microsoft Word? Q6. How often do you work with Microsoft Powerpoint? Q7a. Do you have anyone in the office who knows how to send emails to the States/Regions officers? Q7b. How often does your office use email to communicate with States/Region officers? Q7c. How many township education office staff have gmail accounts? Q7d. Does township education office have an official contact email account? Q8. Which version of excel does your computer have? Q9 How familiar are you with following functions of excel? 9a. Open and save file in excel 9b. Move and/or copy data in excel 9c. Use SUM and AVERAGE function 9d. Creating charts based on worksheet data 9e. Switching between workbooks, and copying a worksheet to another workbook 9f. Using the IF, SUMIF, and ROUND functions 9g. Using the VLOOKUP function 9h. Creating, rearranging, and formatting PivotTables 9i. Working with macros Q10. How relevant are these challenges when submitting Hta-sa form? 10a. Electricity outrage 10b. Lack of computer 10c. Lack of relevant skills to fill in forms 10d. Mending the account 10e. Poor internet connection 10f. Others (please specify in remarks) Q11. About the quality of mobile connectivity in your township office: 11a. Do you have connectivity on your phone at work? 11b. If so, is the connectivity reliable? 26 11c. Have you used the internet from your phone in your office over the past week? 11d. Have you used your mobile phone to send information/submit forms online? 11e. Have you ever sent documents from your office's computer using the phone as hotspot? 11f. Would you feel comfortable submitting Hta-sa forms using your mobile phone? Q12. About the 2017/18 budget cycle: Q12a. In 2017/18 when did your township receive the first major non-salary allocation? Q12b. In 2017/18 cycle when did your township receive the second major non-salary allocation? Q12c. For the 2017/18 cycle, how much money did you return in whole 2017-2018? Q12d. For the 2017/18 cycle, how much percentage of non-salary accounting for that return? Q 12e. What are the reasons for returning the money except for non-salary? Q13. About the 2017/18 budget cycle: Q13a. Throughout 2017/18 cycle, how much money did you have to advance out of your own pocket? Q13b. For what purpose? Q13c. What was the percentage increase of your budget compared to previous fiscal year (2016/17)? Q13f. How many capital projects did you present in your budget proposal for 2017/18? Q13g. How many were included and implemented in 2017/18 budget? Q13h. Were you allowed to move funds across budget codes? 27 Annex C: List of townships with biggest capacity/infrastructure challenges Q2b. How many functi oni ng des ktops are Q7c. How many towns hi p educati on 10c. Lack of revel ant s ki l l s i n your towns hi p educati on offi ce? ( offi ce s taff have gmai l accounts ? to fi l l i n forms (မမ ြို့ ယ ညာ ေးမေးရေး ွင des ktop ( င၏ မမ ြို့ ယ ညာ ေးမေးရေး ွင 11a. Do you have ( ာေး ည ကျွမေး ာ 10d. Mendi ng the account 10e. Poor i nternet ကွ ပ ြူ ာ( ၍ ာ) gmai l ေး မေး ာရ ည ူ connecti vi ty on your 10a. El ectri ci ty outrage 10b. Lack of computer ဝ ထမေး ာကမရပြ ( ာ ငေးကကည ာင connecti on ဘယ ာကရ ါ ဲ။) ဘယန ယာကရ ါ ဲ။) phone at work? ( ျှ မေးမ ရမှု ) (ကွ ပ ြူ ာမရပြငေး ) ငေး ) ြ ယူ ပြငေး) ( င ာ ကမ ရမှု) NO DESKTOPS NO EMAIL No connectivity Very challenging Very challenging Very challenging Very challenging Very challenging 0303006 Kawkarei k 0301001 Hpa-An 0802013 Monyo 1002012 Thabei kkyi n 1002012 Thabei kkyi n 0304003 Hpapun 0702014 Htantabi n 0702010 Yedas he 0801004 Paungde 0301002 Hl ai ngbwe 1003015 Myi ttha 1003015 Myi ttha 1003015 Myi ttha 0702010 Yedas he 1002012 Thabei kkyi n 0702012 Phyu 1001001 Aungmyaythazan 0702014 Htantabi n 1007028 Mei kti l a 1006024 Pyawbwe 1102008 Paung 0702014 Htantabi n 1004019 Natogyi 0801001 Pyay 1001005 Pyi gyi tagon 0801004 Paungde 1007030 Thazi 1304034 Pabedan 1301008 Hl aungtharya 1002008 Pyi nool wi n 1004021 Ngazun 1001002 Chanayethazan 1002010 Si ngu 0802013 Monyo 1802007 Lewe 1304041 Kamaryut 1303027 Twantay 1002012 Thabei kkyi n 1005022 Nyaung-U 1001006 Amarapura 1002012 Thabei kkyi n 1002012 Thabei kkyi n 1301005 Tai kkyi 1704018 Mawl amyi negyun 1304041 Kamaryut 1004019 Natogyi 1802002 Za Bu Thi Ri 1001007 Pathei ngyi 1003016 Tada-U 1801005 Poke Ba Thi Ri 1701005 Kyonpyaw 1706025 Kyai kl at 0603010 Bokpyi n 1005020 Kyaukpadaung 1802004 Det Khi Na Thi Ri 1004018 Taungtha 1007028 Mei kti l a 1702013 Ingapu 0101003 Inj angyang 0603010 Bokpyi n 0101004 Tanai 1006024 Pyawbwe 1301004 Hl egu 1005022 Nyaung-U 1007029 Mahl ai ng 0101003 Inj angyang 0101005 Chi pwi 0101004 Tanai 0103011 Shwegu 1007030 Thazi 1301005 Tai kkyi 1006024 Pyawbwe 1801005 Poke Ba Thi Ri 0101006 Ts awl aw 0101006 Ts awl aw 0101006 Ts awl aw 0104014 Puta-O 1101003 Chaungzon 1302010 Yanki n 1007028 Mei kti l a 1802007 Lewe 0102008 Mogaung 0104018 Khaungl anhpu 0103011 Shwegu 0104018 Khaungl anhpu 1101006 Ye 1304034 Pabedan 1007030 Thazi 1302019 Dagon Myothi t (North) 0104015 Sumprabum 1402016 Mongkai ng 0104014 Puta-O 1501004 Tangyan 1801008 Oke Ta Ra Thi Ri 1304043 Dagon 1101002 Kyai kmaraw 0601002 Laungl on 0402006 Mi ndat 0104015 Sumprabum 1507005 Pangs ang (Wa SAZ) 1802004 Det Khi Na Thi Ri 0602008 Tani ntharyi 1102008 Paung 0104015 Sumprabum 1401006 Pi ndaya (Da-nu SAZ) 0104018 Khaungl anhpu 1503013 Nawnghki o 1301001 Ins ei n 010101 Myi tkyi na 1801001 Zay Yar Thi Ri 0104018 Khaungl anhpu 1402015 Kyethi 0402007 Matupi 1503016 Namhs an (Pal aung SAZ) 1301004 Hl egu 0102008 Mogaung 1801005 Poke Ba Thi Ri 0403002 Hakha 1501002 Hs eni 1501004 Tangyan 1503019 Manton (Pal aung SAZ)1302011 South Okkal apa 0103011 Shwegu 1802002 Za Bu Thi Ri 0401005 Tonzang 1506007 Pangwaun (Wa SAZ) 1503016 Namhs an (Pal aung SAZ) 1504020 Kunl ong 1302015 Tamwe 0403002 Hakha 1802004 Det Khi Na Thi Ri 1401004 Hs i hs eng (Pa-O SAZ) 1504020 Kunl ong 1503018 Mabei n 1601003 Mongyang 1302020 Dagon Myothi t (Eas t) 0403003 Thantl ang 1802007 Lewe 1401010 Pekon 1505023 Konkyan 1504020 Kunl ong 0202007 Mes e 1304036 Latha 0402007 Matupi 1301001 Ins ei n 1503018 Mabei n 1602008 Mongton 1506021 Hopang (Wa SAZ) 0504023 Banmauk 1304043 Dagon 1507005 Pangs ang (Wa SAZ) 1301004 Hl egu 1505023 Konkyan 0201002 Demos o 1601003 Mongyang 0504025 Wuntho 1706026 Dedaye 1506008 Mongmao (Wa SAZ) 1301005 Tai kkyi 1601003 Mongyang 0502004 Shwebo 0202007 Mes e 0505027 Kal e 0602005 Myei k 1601003 Mongyang 1302013 Thaketa 1603011 Mongyawng 0903013 Mi nhl a 0502004 Shwebo 0509016 Yi nmarbi n 0602008 Tani ntharyi 0505027 Kal e 1303026 Kayan 0201004 Shadaw 0904019 Yes agyo 0505027 Kal e 1202009 Maungdaw 0603010 Bokpyi n 0901002 Yenangyaung 1303028 Kawhmu 0501001 Sagai ng 0505029 Mi ngi n 010101 Myi tkyi na 0903012 Thayet 1303029 Kungyangon 0501003 Myaung 0507031 Mawl ai k 0103011 Shwegu 0904021 Pauk 1304034 Pabedan 0502004 Shwebo 0507032 Paungbyi n 0104014 Puta-O 1204016 Toungup 1304038 Kyeemyi ndai ng 0502006 Wetl et 0508033 Hkamti 0403002 Hakha 1304042 Mayangone 0502007 Kanbal u 0508035 Lay Shi (Naga SAZ) 0402007 Matupi 1702013 Ingapu 0502008 Kyunhl a 0508036 Lahe (Naga SAZ) 1402013 Nans ang 1704018 Mawl amyi negyun 0502010 Tabeyi n 1202009 Maungdaw 1501002 Hs eni 0602005 Myei k 0502011 Taze 1202010 Buthi daung 1507006 Narphan (Wa SAZ) 0602008 Tani ntharyi 0503012 Monywa 1203012 Manaung 1506007 Pangwaun (Wa SAZ) 0603010 Bokpyi n 0504020 Khtha 1503013 Nawnghki o 0101002 Wai ngmaw 0504022 Ti gyai ng 1503016 Namhs an (Pal aung SAZ) 0101003 Inj angyang 0505029 Mi ngi n 1505022 Laukki ng 0101005 Chi pwi 0507031 Mawl ai k 1601002 Mongkhet 0101006 Ts awl aw 0507032 Paungbyi n 1601003 Mongyang 0102008 Mogaung 0508037 Nayun (Naga SAZ) 1603009 Tachi l ei k 0103011 Shwegu 0903016 Aungl an 0201003 Hprus o 0104015 Sumprabum 0904019 Yes agyo 0202007 Mes e 0104017 Nawngmun 1205005 Mi nbya 0501002 Myi nmu 0104018 Khaungl anhpu 1202010 Buthi daung 0502009 Ye-U 0401004 Tedi m 1203012 Manaung 0503012 Monywa 0401005 Tonzang 1204016 Toungup 0505027 Kal e 1401002 Nyaungs hwe 0505029 Mi ngi n 1401003 Hopong (Pa-O SAZ) 0507031 Mawl ai k 1401005 Kal aw 0508034 Homal i n 1401006 Pi ndaya (Da-nu SAZ) 0509016 Yi nmarbi n 1401007 Ywangan (Da-nu SAZ) 0901002 Yenangyaung 1402013 Nans ang 0901003 Chauk 1402015 Kyethi 0902008 Pwi ntbyu 1501001 Las hi o 0904021 Pauk 1506008 Mongmao (Wa SAZ) 1503013 Nawnghki o 1503016 Namhs an (Pal aung SAZ) 1505022 Laukki ng 1505023 Konkyan 1601003 Mongyang 0201003 Hprus o 0201004 Shadaw 0503014 Ayadaw 0504024 Kawl i n 0507031 Mawl ai k 0508034 Homal i n 0901005 Myothi t 1205003 Mrauk-U 1202009 Maungdaw 28