## Statistics Capacity Development in Uganda

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [Statistics Capacity Development in Uganda](https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/capacity-developement/d4d/june-2023/01-case-study-uganda.pdf)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/-/media/files/capacity-developement/d4d/june-2023/01-case-study-uganda.pdf.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/-/media/files/capacity-developement/d4d/june-2023/01-case-study-uganda.pdf.json)

---

### Introduction
- Fiscal and public debt data were compiled as a requirement of the legal framework — The PFM Act.
- Prior data compilation was not based on International best practices.
- Adopted national nomenclature and aspects of GFSM 2001.
- Salient issues — Gaps in Uganda GFS data:
  - Timeliness
  - Comprehensiveness
  - Comparability
  - GFS data produced not according to the e-GDDS criteria
  - GFS mainly produced for budgetary central government
  - GFS data produced according to the GFSM 1986 and aspects of GFSM 2001 but not GFSM 2014

### Progress — Improvement in Government Finance Statistics, Uganda
- Drivers of progress:
  - Increased focus on GFS following a request for Technical Assistance from the IMF as part of the EAC single currency project and PEFA requirements.
  - IMF Technical Assistance provided through AFRITAC East.
- Approach:
  - Regional perspective geared towards establishment of single currency among 6 member states of EAC (hence need for harmonized statistics and methods).
  - Established a regional and national GFS/PSDS Technical Working Groups.
  - Developed a time-bound GFS M 2014 concept-based implementation workplan focusing on flows first and then stocks.
  - Developed EAC-wide GFS compilation guidelines based on GFSM2014 methodology.
- Achievements:
  - Significant progress achieved on improvement in quality of fiscal and public debt data although still on-going.
  - Significant progress on adoption of best practices (GFSM 2014 methodology) achieved.
- Specific coverage improvements (ongoing):
  - SOEs — on going
  - PSIT — General Government — Fiscal data coverage from BCG to Public Sector
  - Budgetary Central Government — Public debt data coverage from BCG to General Government
  - Progress General Government — On-going

### Contribution to decision making, transparency and accountability
- Availability of high frequency data to support decision making:
  - Monthly and quarterly BCG fiscal data
  - Quarterly BCG public debt data
- Institutional changes and transparency:
  - Adopted the macro-fiscal framework (fiscal strategy) to GFSM2014 concepts — improved transparency
  - Partial adoption of GFSM 2014 concepts in budgeting (budget execution reports) thereby enhancing accountability
  - Partial availability of stock data (Balance sheet) based on GFSM 2014 concepts

### Lessons learnt
- Improving quality of fiscal data is tenable but requires:
  - Institutional and legal arrangement
  - Commitment — political commitment/good will
  - Advocacy to improve timeliness in data production to inform decision making
  - Improved use of GFSM 2014 concepts in budgeting — Budget execution reports adopting GFSM 2014 concepts will enhance transparency
  - Enhanced collaboration with accountant general, revenue authority, etc., to improve quality of source data
  - Continuous improvement in government accounting systems including lower governments
  - Automation of government systems is fundamental (real time data)
  - Staff rotation — requires continued capacity building and TA of compilers in compiling institution/MoF; having a business processes document is one of the solutions
  - Regional approach with a goal of economic integration (eg EAMU) helps fast track improvement of fiscal statistics
  - Technical support by IMF is key and required on a continuous basis especially in developing countries

---


_Source: https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/capacity-developement/d4d/june-2023/01-case-study-uganda.pdf_