What is RBB at the UN?
The UN Planning and Budgeting Cycle
History of Budgeting in the UN (Timeline)
Why change the Budgeting System?
Why Results-Based Budgeting?
Why budgeting at all?
Why Measure Performance?
Why Results-Based Budgeting?
Advantages and Limitations of RBB
Rules and Regulations concerning budgeting of programmes
What are results in results-based budgeting?
Does results-based budgeting prove that a programme is effective?
Why measure results?
What are the practical benefits of results-based management?
Where do results fit in the logical framework?
Where does the measurement of results fit into other United Nations
evaluation processes?
What is RBB at the UN?
 Results-based budgeting at the U N is
“Working towards achieving results and not only towards delivery of
outputs”
The current definition of results-based budgeting within the UN is as
follows:
Results-based budgeting (RBB) is a budget process in which
(a) Missions formulate budgets around a set of pre-defined objectives and
expected accomplishments, and
(b) Expected accomplishments justify the resource requirements which are
derived from and linked to outputs required to achieve such
accomplishments, and
(c) Actual performance in achieving expected accomplishments is measured
by indicators of achievementi.
Budgeting is about dividing up available resources to do certain things.
Results-based budgeting refers to a budget process that directly connects
resource allocation to specific, measurable results. It is a process in which
budgets are used to drive progress and leverage accountability, rather than
simply to maintain the status quo.ii
Goals of RBB within the UN are:
 To measure performance in order to show whether the activities of the
Organization actually make a difference.
 To establish a top-down, logical framework, using a number of
strictly defined concepts, such as objectives for the biennium,
expected results, performance indicators and outputs.1
 To use the biennial programme budget as a direct link between
expected accomplishments and resource requirements.
 To become a management and planning tool, rather than another
budgeting methodology by mapping the expected results for a
biennium in advance and continuously tracking them.
 To focus on the question of “why performance was below
expectations” and enable managers to detect deficiencies (rather than
be a simple cost-cutting tool).
1
For details on those elements see chapter 2.3 of this reference binder.
Note that RBB does not expose programme managers to disproportionate
responsibility by penalizing them for sub-programmes that have not met
desired results. “Expected accomplishments” are not to be understood as
irrevocable production targets that one would find in commercial
enterprises. They should measure the progress towards objectives and should
be a signal whether the programme is on the right track.
Results-based budgeting is not intended to be yet another exercise that takes
time away from the “real work” of United Nations programmes.
Paying systematic attention to your results provides important information to
help your programme determine whether the activities that are keeping staff
very busy are making a positive difference.
Results measurement is a way to know whether the “real work” is the most
effective work or whether the “real work” would benefit from fine-tuning or
shifting your programme’s resources and activities to maximize
effectiveness.
Results measurement involves everyone in the programme, to the extent that
everyone has a sharp focus on the intended results and contributes towards
that end.
Results measurement also involves everyone in the programme, to the extent
that they provide an opportunity to recognize the progressive steps of
success and to celebrate the positive contributions of United Nations
programmes.
The UN Planning and Budgeting Cycle
The following graph shows the planning hierarchy within
the United Nations. Planning becomes more concrete from
one level down to the next.
History of Budgeting in the UN (Timeline)
The following table provides an overview of the development
of budgeting within the UN:
Year
Methodolo
Focus and Goals
gy
Expenditu 
Measuring inputs
1974 re

Budget Sections were
Budgeting
defined in terms of major
objects of expenditure
1974 Programm 
Input focus was
e
replaced by programme
Budgeting
focus
1987

Refinements in the
definition of programmes,
activities, outputs were
formalized
Resource
Base,
Measurem
ent of

Modifications in the
presentation and
methodology

Increased
Regulation/Docu
ments
Regulations
Governing
Programme
Planning, the
Programme
Aspects of the
Budget, the
Monitoring of
Implementation
and the Methods
of Evaluation
(ST/SGB/PPBME
Rules/1(1987))
Year
Methodolo
Focus and Goals
gy
Growth,
transparency and clarity
Recosting
1992 Approval

Focus on the
of changes
relationship between
in
mandates, programmes,
methodolo
budget sections and the
gy and
structure of the Secretariat
format

Direct responsibility
and accountability of
programme managers

Improvement in
evaluation and
performance reporting

Clearly formulated
objectives “to bring about
observable change”iii
1997 ResultsBased
Budgeting
- The First
Steps

Part of the
organization-wide reformprocess

Elements of RBB
were introduced, however,
in a piece-meal fashion
and with weak impact
1998 Request of 
Further justification
a detailed
of the proposed change
report on
RBB
1998 Medium
Term Plan
2001

Focus on objectives
rather than on detailed
descriptions of activities
and outputs

Better link of
Regulation/Docu
ments
32nd Session of
the Committee on
Programme and
Coordination
33rd Session of
the Committee on
Programme and
Coordination
(A/48/16, para.
235)
A/51/950, para.
45, 46 and 240)
Upon
recommendation
of ACABQ,
General
Assembly
Resolution
52/12B
Year
Methodolo
gy
1998
1999
1999 SG Report
A/54/456
2000 ResultsBasedBudgeting
–
Implemen
-tation of
a full
RBB
cycle
Focus and Goals
programmes and budget
sections

Efforts to formulate
clear objectives, but
budget document still
presented activities and
outputs to be delivered

Introduction of RBB
logical framework
prototype to GA

Focus on an
integrated planning,
management and
measurement cycle
Regulation/Docu
ments
Regulations and
Rules Governing
Programme
Planning, the
Programme
Aspects of the
Budget, the
Monitoring of
Implementation
and the Methods
of Evaluation
(ST/SGB/2000/8)
Why change the Budgeting System?
RBB is not just a new budget methodology, but involves significant changes
in the budget format by placing higher standards on programme design and
planning. By mapping the expected results for a biennium in advance and by
tracking to what extent these have been actually met, this budget format is
also a versatile management tool (see chapter 1.5 for the benefits of using
RBB).
Previous budgeting and evaluation methods did not meet the requirements
for an integrated planning, budgeting and measurement system. The budget
throughout the years (see timeline for details) continued to present activities
and outputs to be delivered, rather than results to be achieved.
The deficiencies of the current methodologies are more specifically:
 They do not allow for adequate means of assessing changes or
achievements relative to objectives. Previous programme
performance reporting was limited to a review of the status and
pattern of output delivery. This was largely a quantitative exercise,
showing the implementation rate in terms of outputs programmed,
implemented, postponed, terminated etc.
 They do not reveal the quality and relevance of the output and to
what extent the output leads to the achievement the objectives of the
medium-term plan. In this respect, the Committee on Programme and
Coordination (CPC) has recommended that the programme and
budget performance reports should detail the achievements relative to
the objectives of the programme framework and the resources of the
programme budget (A/48/16, para. 236).
 They primarily focus on short-term management issues, with
recommendations addressing needs assessment, programme design,
problem solving, quality of outputs, timeliness, requirements of endusers, etc., rather than achievement of results.
 RBB elements were, however, introduced in a piece-meal fashion and
have not been consolidated in one interrelated whole. The link
between results or objectives and resources has remained very weak:
resource requirements are still correlated to outputs and activities.
 Programme objectives, while incorporated in the MTP and reflected
in the programme budget for the biennium, are formulated in a
virtual vacuum since no mechanism is in place to measure to what
extent these objectives have been met.
Without a corresponding change in performance monitoring and evaluation
of results, rather than outputs, the impact of defining objectives has been
practically negligible. Moreover, the shift from input to output budgets has
not resulted in reduced input control relaxation, which could allow
programme managers to determine and adjust the “mix” of resources
required to achieve objectives. The current programme budget still combines
a number of restrictive elements of both input and output budgeting without
according any significant discretionary flexibility to programme managers.
Why Results-Based-Budgeting?
Why budgeting at all?
The UN Rules and Regulations require a programme budget and a
programme performance report, in which the Secretariat is committed to
precise work plans involving delivery of output and where implementation
thereof is monitored and reported.iv
Budgeting fulfils a major role within the organization and is an important
element of the planning, programming, budgeting, monitoring and
evaluation cycle. Budgets combine a managerial and a monitoring and
appraisal function.v
A managerial function:
 By defining the resources likely to be available
 By linking performance to resource availability
 By identifying the constraints under which an organisation operates –
recognising what can and cannot be achieved within given resources
and optimising their use
 By encouraging initiative, how inputs may be effectively managed to
produce the desired outcomes
 By clarifying responsibilities, accountability and ownership of
problems and opportunities.
A monitoring/appraisal function:
 By setting periods for review of the cost-effectiveness of operations
 By enabling continuous monitoring, e.g. by appropriate phasing of the
budget and comparison of budget with actual
 By highlighting areas for change i.e. reduce, consolidate or expand.
Why Measure Performance?
Planning and budgeting for programmes only makes sense if these
programmes are also tracked and their performance is measured. This is also
considered in the UN cycle with the elements “monitoring” and
“evaluation”.vi
There are a few compelling reasons for measuring our programmes:
 To see if programmes really make a difference in the relations
between nations and in the lives of people.
 To improve accountability. Measurement makes clear who is
accountable for which contribution to the accomplishments.
 To help programmes improve services. Measurement provides a
learning loop that feeds information back into programmes (on how
well they are doing). It offers findings that managers can use to adapt,
improve, and become more effective.vii
 To measure progress towards accomplishments on a regular basis,
instead of or in addition to ex-post evaluations. Ongoing measurement
toward specific outcomes allows corrective actions to be taken before
the budget period is over.
Other reasons for measuring results of UN programmes include:
 To clarify and confirm objectives
 To provide feedback into programmes for the future
 To retain or adjust funding.
 To focus attention of Member States on policy issues
 To promote support for the specific programme or project
 To recruit and retain talented staffviii
In sum, establishing a measurement system helps address
 why the organisation is measuring,
 what it needs to measure and
 how it should go about implementing measurement.
The answers to these questions give management and staff a clearer picture
of the purpose of their efforts. That alone frequently leads to more focused
and productive delivery of programmes.ix
Why Results-Based Budgeting?
As mentioned before, previous budgeting systems were lacking in several
regards. They allowed the Organization to track the number of inputs and
outputs, showing us whether quantitative targets have been met and - at best
- whether programmes have been efficient in the use of resources. They did
not show, however, elements to assess the impact of those programmes.
Results-based budgeting was therefore chosen as a planning and budgeting
tool because of the following characteristics:
 To determine the effectiveness and quality – rather than only the
quantity – of our services.
 To provide convincing justification for the UN’s existence and its
activities. RBB helps to formulate such justification by compelling us
to focus on why we are doing the things we do and by providing a tool
to measure the actual results of our work.
 To have a tool that combines strategic planning, budgeting and
performance measurement.
 To improve the clarity and consistency of programme or project
designs and
 To facilitate a common understanding and better communication
between Member States, programme managers and staff in general of
the desired results of programmes of the Organization.
 To keep good records, set targets and meet deadlines.
RBB allows the Organization to attain a unified sense of purpose and
direction.
RBB has also been proposed by the Secretary-General as a means to release
programme managers from overly restrictive input and/or central controls
and to accord them more discretion in determining the right mix of resources
to meet expected accomplishments. In RBB, the increase in accountability of
programme managers (a consequence of holding them responsible for the
contribution to accomplishments) is designed to go hand in hand with an
amplified authority for managing financial and human resources.
Advantages and Limitations of RBB
Advantages
Organizations that have implemented results-oriented budgeting and
measurement systems mention two big advantages they could generate:
increasing service effectiveness and communicating programme value.
Several advantages of RBB have already been mentioned from an external
perspective. Apart from positive external effects, the results-based approach
can generate considerable internal value as well, for example:x
 Guide budget development and resource allocation
Expected accomplishments provide a framework to identify resource
requirements.
 Support annual and long-term planning
It is possible to differentiate between short-term accomplishments and
long-term objectives.
 Identify effective best practices
More transparency will lead to more information about possible
internal benchmarks.
 Provide direction for staff
Staff know how their activities in the programme relate to the overall
objective.
 Identify staff and volunteer training needs
Training needs are derived from expected accomplishments and what
it needs from the staff to achieve them.
Limitations
Results-based budgeting, however, is not a remedy for everything. While
there are some clear benefits to gain, it is important to keep in mind what
you can and cannot expect from RBB. Only then will managers and staff be
clear about how and when to use RBB and when other methodologies might
be required to complement it.
Limitations of RBB are:xi
 Outcome findings will not show whether this is the right outcome to
measure.
 They will not statistically prove that it was the programme that caused
the outcome.
 They will not explain why this level of outcome was achieved.
 They will not, by themselves, tell what to change to improve the
outcome.
 RBB is not a substitute, but has to be seen as an addition to existing
data collection efforts.
 Indicators of achievement and outputs may not be readily available. In
order to make RBB work, you may have to invest resources in
developing meaningful measurements.
Results-based budgeting should also not be mixed up with other
methodologies that track performance. RBB is not:
 Experimental research
 Programme evaluation
 A replacement for tracking inputs, activities and outputs
and…
…is not the answer to all problems!
Rules and Regulations concerning budgeting of programmes
The basic rules concerning budgeting of programmes are laid down in
“Regulations and Rules Governing Programme Planning, the Programme
Aspects of the Budget, the Monitoring of Implementation and the Methods
of Evaluation” (ST/SGB/2000/8).
 Article III describes the rules on the planning, programming and
budgeting process.
 Article V refers to the programme aspects of the budget. Rule 105.2
lays out in more detail the results-based budgeting approach:
“ No activity or output shall be included in the proposed programme
budget unless it is clearly in implementation of the medium-term plan
strategy and likely to help to achieve the plan objectives, or it is in
implementation of legislation passed subsequent to the approval or
revision of the plan.”
What are results in results-based budgeting?
 Results are the programme’s intended benefits for the end-users of
United Nations programmes; namely individuals, populations,
communities, organizations, nations and regions.
 Results address the “so what” question: What difference did this
programme make to individuals, populations, communities,
organizations, nations and/or regions?
 Results are the logical expected accomplishment that occurs during or
after the delivery of programme outputs.
Results involve a change in Knowledge, Skills, Attitude, Behavior,
Condition, Policy etc
Does results-based budgeting prove that a programme is effective?
Results data do not ‘prove’ that a specific programme ‘caused’ an expected
accomplishment. Measurement for results-based budgeting does not usually
control all other possible influences on an expected accomplishment.
Results typically occur because a number of factors contribute to an
expected accomplishment. Results data provide a basis for a ‘plausible’
claim that a specific programme ‘contributed’ to an expected
accomplishment.
Why measure results?
 Results-based management encourages programmes to make midcourse adjustments that are based on how well end-users are benefiting
from the selected outputs.
 Results-based management focuses performance measurement
attention on benefits to end-users, rather than counting levels of
activity.
 Results-based management is a dynamic process, providing feedback
throughout the full programme cycle: planning, programming,
budgeting, monitoring and evaluation.
What are the practical benefits of results-based management?
 Results-based management can be applied many ways. For example:
 To determine effectiveness and continued relevance of activities
 To provide feedback to programmes for future actions
 To focus Member States on policy issues
 To promote support for effective programmes
 To develop and adjust programme budgets
 To recruit and retain talented staff
 To identify and celebrate progress being made
Where do results fit in the logical framework?
Results provide a critical linkage to the broad objectives of programmes and
the implementation process.
Planning
Objectives Results
Outputs
Inputs
Activities
Linkages
are
critical!!!
Performance
Measurement
Implementation
Where does the measurement of results fit into other United Nations
evaluation processes?
 Measurement of results is an extension of the periodic ‘self-evaluation’
that programmes currently conduct.
 The past focus of self-evaluation has been primarily on subprogramme
outputs and activities.
 Results-based budgeting extends the focus to include subprogramme
results.
 These additional data provide more complete management information
for strengthening programme effectiveness and impact.
 Results data may also be useful to the more rigorous and extensive ‘indepth’ evaluations that are selectively undertaken.
i
UN Guide to RBB (Version 1.1), Office of Programme Planning, Budget and Accounts, 23
October 1998, Glossary.
ii Melaville, Atelia I. A Guide to Selecting Results and Indicators. Prepared for the Finance Project,
May 1997, p. 3
iii
UN Guide to RBB (Version 1.1), Office of Programme Planning, Budget and Accounts, 23
October 1998, p. 8
iv Regulations and Rules Governing Programme Planning, the Programme Aspects of the Budget,
the Monitoring of Implementation and the Methods of Evaluation, ST/SGB/2000/8, 19 April 2000,
p.1
v A Guide to Devolved Budgeting, Chartered Institute of Management Accountants, CIMA
Education Group, p. 3
vi
Regulations and Rules Governing Programme Planning, the Programme Aspects of the Budget,
the Monitoring of Implementation and the Methods of Evaluation, ST/SGB/2000/8, 19 April 2000,
p.1
vii Measuring Program Outcomes: A Practical Approach, United Way of America, 1996, p. 4
viii Results-Based Budgeting and Management in a Nutshell, Programme Planning and
Budget Division, United Nations, April 2002, p. 17
ix
Measuring Program Outcomes: A Practical Approach, United Way of America, 1996, p. 4
x
Outcome Measurement: Are You Making a Difference?, Learning Institute for Nonprofit
Organizations, 2000, p. 4
xi
Outcome Measurement: Are You Making a Difference?, Learning Institute for Nonprofit
Organizations, 2000, p. 4 and Measuring Program Outcomes: A Practical Approach,
United Way of America, 1996, p. 21-23