Performance Based Budgeting Training Course

Duration 10 days 20 modules · 65 contact hours
Level Intermediate Certificate on completion
Who attends Budget Officers, Ministry Planners and others
Fee from USD 2,200 KSh 190,000 for Kenyan organisations
Where 52 cities + online See dates by city
Next start 16 Nov 2026 Course code SD-PFM-015

Before you join: Participants should understand their institution’s annual budget cycle, basic public expenditure terminology and the distinction between recurrent and capital spending.

Dates & prices

Two start dates a month in every city, and live online on weekdays or weekends. Fees are per participant; classroom fees include tuition, materials, lunch and refreshments, and the certificate.

Suggest a date or city

Showing the next six months. Later dates, other cities and private deliveries for your team are available on request.

Course overview

Public institutions are expected to show what public funds achieve, not only whether they were spent according to appropriation rules. Performance-based budgeting connects policy priorities, service-delivery results, programme costs and annual budget decisions. It helps finance and planning teams challenge weak proposals, protect essential services, identify underperforming spending and explain resource choices to ministers, legislatures, audit bodies, development partners and citizens.

This course teaches participants to design and operate a performance-based budgeting system suited to public-sector rules and institutional capacity. Participants work through programme classification, results chains, indicators, baselines, targets, costing, medium-term expenditure frameworks, budget submissions, performance-informed allocation and reporting. The course addresses common implementation problems, including unreliable administrative data, excessive indicators, poorly defined programmes, unfunded targets, fragmented planning and budget calendars, and incentives to report favourable results.

Instructor-led briefings are combined with public-sector cases, guided calculations, document reviews, group planning and budget decision simulations. Participants progressively build a performance-based budget package using a realistic ministry or agency case, then refine it through peer review and challenge sessions. They leave with reusable templates for programme design, indicator specification, costing, performance reports and a budget submission narrative.

The course is suited to officials responsible for budget preparation, planning, programme management, monitoring and evaluation, treasury, internal audit and public-sector reform. It is also relevant to donor-funded programme teams working with government budget systems.

What you will be able to do

  • Design programme structures linking appropriations, outputs, outcomes and accountable managers
  • Construct results chains using logic models and measurable performance indicators
  • Set credible baselines and annual targets using administrative, survey and financial data
  • Cost programmes and prepare performance-informed budget submissions
  • Apply medium-term expenditure framework methods to align priorities and resource ceilings
  • Assess budget proposals using performance evidence, unit costs and delivery risks
  • Produce performance reports that explain variances, corrective actions and resource implications
  • Present a complete performance-based budget package for management review

Benefits of attending

For you

  • Prepare defensible programme budget submissions linked to measurable service results
  • Challenge proposed spending using unit costs, targets and performance evidence
  • Translate policy commitments into funded outputs and outcome indicators
  • Communicate budget trade-offs clearly to senior officials and review committees
  • Build a portfolio of reusable public budgeting templates and decision tools

For your organisation

  • Stronger links between annual appropriations, policy priorities and service-delivery commitments
  • More credible budget submissions supported by costs, baselines and delivery assumptions
  • Earlier identification of poorly performing programmes requiring management action
  • Better quality performance information for cabinet, legislative and treasury review
  • Improved accountability for programme managers and public resource use

Course modules

20 modules over 10 days

Participants can explain how performance information informs public budget decisions.

  • Performance-based budgeting compared with line-item and incremental budgeting approaches
  • Appropriation authority, fiscal discipline and service-delivery accountability requirements
  • Results, efficiency and economy as distinct budget decision criteria
  • Programme budgeting as the operating structure for performance information
  • Performance-informed allocation versus formula funding and entitlement financing
  • Common reform failures: indicator overload, weak data and symbolic reporting

Participants can locate performance budgeting within the wider public financial management system.

  • Budget cycle stages from strategic planning through audit and evaluation
  • Roles of finance ministry, line ministry, legislature and audit institution
  • Annual appropriations, virement rules and expenditure commitment controls
  • Medium-term expenditure frameworks linking policy priorities with resource ceilings
  • Chart of accounts dimensions supporting programme and performance reporting
  • PEFA assessment dimensions relevant to policy-based fiscal strategy

Participants can translate policy priorities into budgetable public-service interventions.

  • Policy objectives converted into specific public-service delivery commitments
  • Problem trees identifying causes, affected groups and service gaps
  • Theory of change assumptions tested against institutional delivery capacity
  • Prioritisation matrices comparing urgency, impact, cost and political feasibility
  • Distributional analysis identifying beneficiaries, exclusions and regional disparities
  • Policy directives reconciled with statutory mandates and fiscal constraints

Participants can create a programme structure suitable for appropriation and accountability.

  • Programme hierarchy: policy area, programme, subprogramme and activity
  • COFOG classification used to compare government functions consistently
  • Programme boundaries defined by objectives, clients and accountable managers
  • Administrative units mapped to programmes without duplicating expenditure responsibility
  • Output groups specified for services, transfers and regulatory functions
  • Cross-cutting programmes assigned clear lead-accountability and contribution arrangements

Participants can build results chains that connect funded activities to intended outcomes.

  • Logic model components: inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes and impacts
  • Causal pathways linking public expenditure to citizen-level service changes
  • Assumptions and external risks documented beside each causal link
  • Output definitions distinguish deliverables from internal administrative processes
  • Outcome statements framed as observable changes for defined populations
  • Results chains tested for attribution, plausibility and management usefulness

Participants can specify decision-useful indicators for programmes and subprogrammes.

  • SMART criteria applied to output, outcome, efficiency and quality indicators
  • Indicator reference sheets documenting definition, source, frequency and ownership
  • Numerators, denominators and disaggregation rules specified without ambiguity
  • Proxy indicators selected when direct outcome measurement remains impractical
  • Leading and lagging indicators balanced within programme performance frameworks
  • Indicator sets limited to information needed for management decisions

Participants can establish credible baselines and targets supported by evidence.

  • Baseline values established from administrative records, surveys and financial systems
  • Target-setting methods: trend analysis, benchmarking and capacity-based forecasting
  • Annual targets reconciled with budget resources and implementation schedules
  • Disaggregated targets address gender, geography, poverty and disability considerations
  • Data quality assessments test accuracy, completeness, timeliness and consistency
  • Data verification protocols assign responsibilities, evidence and approval dates

Participants can estimate programme costs and relate them to planned outputs.

  • Cost drivers identified for staffing, facilities, transfers and procurement
  • Activity-based costing allocates shared support costs to programme outputs
  • Unit cost calculations compare expenditure with service delivery volumes
  • Fixed, variable and step costs modelled under alternative output scenarios
  • Standard costing used where service specifications and volumes remain stable
  • Cost assumptions documented for review, updating and variance analysis

Participants can assemble an initial programme budget package from core planning materials.

  • Programme profile combines mandate, beneficiaries, outputs and accountable manager
  • Results framework aligns objectives, indicators, baselines and annual targets
  • Costed workplan links activities, procurement milestones and resource requirements
  • Initial budget estimates separated into recurrent and capital expenditure
  • Performance risks recorded with mitigation actions and monitoring responsibilities
  • Budget narrative explains requested funding and expected service improvements

Participants can prepare multi-year programme estimates within fiscal constraints.

  • Aggregate fiscal ceilings translated into sector and programme expenditure limits
  • Baseline estimates distinguish existing policies from new spending proposals
  • Forward estimates capture wage drift, contracts, maintenance and demographic pressures
  • Policy costings identify fiscal effects across budget-year and outer-years
  • Scenario analysis compares service levels under alternative resource ceilings
  • Medium-term estimates reconciled with annual appropriation and cash limits

Participants can prepare a performance-informed budget submission for central review.

  • Budget circular instructions translated into programme submission requirements
  • Performance information integrated with ceilings, estimates and financing sources
  • New policy proposals supported by options, costings and expected results
  • Submission narratives state trade-offs, delivery risks and implementation dependencies
  • Budget bid templates completed with consistent financial and nonfinancial data
  • Quality assurance checks test arithmetic, classification and narrative consistency

Participants can assess allocation options using performance evidence and policy criteria.

  • Decision criteria combine strategic alignment, effectiveness, efficiency and equity
  • Performance scorecards compare programmes against agreed funding priorities
  • Marginal analysis assesses outputs gained from additional budget resources
  • Unit cost comparisons identify unexplained variation between delivery locations
  • Spending reviews distinguish savings options from service reduction consequences
  • Allocation recommendations document evidence, assumptions and unresolved risks

Participants can defend programme proposals during budget challenge and negotiation.

  • Budget challenge questions test need, affordability, performance and delivery readiness
  • Evidence packs organise costings, indicators, evaluations and implementation data
  • Negotiation positions identify non-negotiables, tradeable items and fallback options
  • Efficiency measures separated from arbitrary across-the-board expenditure cuts
  • Review committees record decisions, conditions and required follow-up evidence
  • Ministerial briefing notes present concise choices and fiscal consequences

Participants can align approved programme budgets with execution and delivery controls.

  • Annual workplans sequence outputs, procurement actions and expenditure commitments
  • Cash plans align quarterly releases with delivery and contract milestones
  • Commitment controls prevent expenditure beyond appropriations and cash authority
  • Procurement plans identify lead times, market risks and contract dependencies
  • Budget reallocations assessed against authorised virement and performance rules
  • Implementation dashboards flag delayed outputs, underspending and cost overruns

Participants can produce performance reports that support timely management action.

  • Performance reporting compares actual results against approved targets and budgets
  • Variance analysis separates volume, price, timing and efficiency explanations
  • Traffic-light reporting uses thresholds agreed before performance results emerge
  • Narrative commentary explains causes, consequences and corrective management actions
  • Quarterly reports connect financial execution with output delivery progress
  • Annual performance reports distinguish achievements, shortfalls and unresolved risks

Participants can use evaluation findings to improve programme funding decisions.

  • Evaluation questions distinguish relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability
  • Theory-based evaluation tests whether expected causal mechanisms operated
  • Cost-effectiveness analysis compares alternative approaches using common outcome measures
  • Spending review scopes identify fiscal savings, redesign and reprioritisation options
  • Evaluation findings translated into budget actions, conditions and future targets
  • Evidence registers track recommendations, owners, deadlines and implementation status

Participants can establish governance arrangements that protect performance information quality.

  • Accountability agreements assign results, budgets and reporting responsibilities
  • Internal controls protect data integrity, expenditure authority and audit trails
  • Internal audit reviews performance information systems and management responses
  • Supreme audit institution findings inform corrective action and budget scrutiny
  • Legislative committee reporting links appropriation oversight with reported results
  • Public disclosure balances transparency, confidentiality and understandable performance communication

Participants can plan a realistic transition to performance-based budgeting.

  • Readiness assessments examine legal mandates, systems, skills and leadership commitment
  • Phased implementation selects pilot entities, milestones and decision gates
  • Stakeholder mapping identifies interests, influence, resistance and communication needs
  • Training plans target budget analysts, programme managers and data custodians
  • Governance roadmaps establish steering committees, working groups and escalation routes
  • Maturity assessments sequence improvements from compliance reporting to decision use

Participants can adapt performance budgeting methods to differing public-service delivery models.

  • Health programmes link facility outputs with coverage, quality and equity indicators
  • Education budgets connect enrolment, learning outcomes and teacher deployment costs
  • Infrastructure programmes track asset completion, maintenance and service reliability
  • Social protection transfers monitor eligibility, payment timeliness and beneficiary outcomes
  • Municipal services measure waste collection, water continuity and citizen satisfaction
  • Regulatory agencies define inspection outputs, compliance outcomes and risk reduction

Participants can build, review and present a complete performance-based budget package for a public programme.

  • Programme structure defines mandate, beneficiaries, outputs and managerial accountability
  • Results chain links funded activities to measurable service-delivery outcomes
  • Indicator sheets specify baselines, targets, sources and verification procedures
  • Costed estimates align planned outputs with annual and medium-term ceilings
  • Budget narrative justifies allocation choices, risks and implementation arrangements
  • Peer review challenges evidence, affordability, indicator quality and reporting design

Exercises and examples are adapted to each cohort's sectors and roles.

What you take back to work

  1. Programme structure template
  2. Results chain and indicator reference sheet
  3. Costed programme budget model
  4. Medium-term expenditure projection template
  5. Performance-informed budget submission checklist
  6. Quarterly performance reporting dashboard

Who should attend

  • Budget Officers — prepare and assess ministry budget submissions
  • Ministry Planners — connect policy objectives with funded programmes
  • Programme Managers — define service results, costs and performance commitments
  • Treasury Officials — review allocations against fiscal ceilings and results evidence
  • Monitoring and Evaluation Specialists — develop indicators usable in budget decisions
  • Internal Auditors — assess performance information, controls and reporting quality

Skills and tools covered

Programme budgetingResults framework designIndicator specificationPublic expenditure costingBudget performance analysisMedium-term planning

Tools and standards

PEFA Framework, COFOG Classification, IMF Government Finance Statistics Manual 2014, Logical Framework Approach

How the course runs

Training methodology

The course uses short instructor briefings to establish methods, followed by public-sector cases, budget document reviews, group exercises and decision simulations. Participants apply each method to a continuing ministry or agency case, building programme structures, indicators, costings and budget narratives during the first week. The second week tests these materials against fiscal ceilings, performance evidence and review questions. Facilitated peer critique and individual application planning help participants adapt the methods to their own budget calendar, data sources and approval arrangements.

Requirements and prerequisites

Participants should understand their institution’s annual budget cycle, basic public expenditure terminology and the distinction between recurrent and capital spending. Experience preparing budgets, plans, programme reports, monitoring data or project proposals is useful. Participants should be comfortable reading tables, calculating percentages and discussing service-delivery results. The course does not require advanced accounting, econometrics, specialist statistical software or prior experience with a formal performance-based budgeting system. It is appropriate for officials moving from line-item budgeting toward programme and results-oriented budget management.

A typical training day

08:30 – 10:30First session
10:30 – 10:45Refreshment break
10:45 – 12:30Second session
12:30 – 13:30Lunch and networking
13:30 – 15:00Third session
15:00 – 15:15Refreshment break
15:15 – 16:30Workshop and daily review

Live online deliveries follow the same structure in East Africa Time, with shorter screen blocks and longer breaks.

What the fee includes

  • Instruction by a practitioner facilitator
  • Full course workbook and materials
  • Exercise files, templates and case studies
  • Refreshments and lunch on classroom deliveries
  • Certificate of completion
  • Post-course application plan

Frequently asked questions

Participants should understand basic public budgeting terminology and their institution's budget cycle. Prior work in budgeting, planning, programme management, monitoring or reporting is helpful, but advanced accounting and statistics are not required.

Participants should bring a laptop and, where permitted, a recent budget circular, programme plan, performance report or budget submission from their institution. Sensitive documents can be anonymised; course cases are provided for those unable to bring workplace materials.

It is designed for government and public-agency staff involved in budget preparation, planning, programme delivery, treasury functions, monitoring and evaluation, or internal audit. It also suits development partners supporting public financial management reform.

General public financial management courses cover the full control and accountability system, including revenue, accounting, procurement, treasury and audit. This course concentrates on linking programme results, costs, targets and performance evidence to budget formulation and resource allocation.

Participants can use the templates to revise programme structures, improve indicator definitions, cost service outputs and strengthen budget narratives. The implementation planning modules also help teams identify data, governance and capability changes needed for adoption.

Each training day runs from 08:30 to 16:30 and provides about 6.5 contact hours. The first week builds core programme, results, indicator and costing materials; the second week applies them to medium-term planning, allocation, reporting, governance and the final capstone.

Questions about this course?

Ask about dates, fees, group bookings or running it for your team. Our training team replies by email.

Ask on WhatsApp info@skillsetdevelopment.com

More courses in Public Financial Management

Public Financial Management Budget Analysis and Management Training Course 5 days · from USD 1,100 · next 16 Nov Public Financial Management Budget Execution and Fiscal Space Training Course 10 days · from USD 2,200 · next 16 Nov Public Financial Management Budget Preparation Training Course 10 days · from USD 2,200 · next 16 Nov Public Financial Management Gender Statistics and Budgeting Training Course 10 days · from USD 2,200 · next 16 Nov Public Financial Management Public Debt Management Training Course 5 days · from USD 1,100 · next 16 Nov Public Financial Management Public Expenditure Budgeting and Management Training Course 10 days · from USD 2,200 · next 16 Nov Public Financial Management Public Financial Management and Budget Execution Training Course 5 days · from USD 1,100 · next 16 Nov Public Financial Management Public Investment Management Training Course 10 days · from USD 2,200 · next 16 Nov