NABO has recently released its Fiscal Program Evaluation for Fiscal Year 2015 in two volumes, based on the FY 2015 National Finance Settlement Report submitted by the government. The NABO evaluation includes analysis and assessment of major government fiscal programs, in support of National Assembly deliberations on settlement of accounts.

 Volume I of the publication is a report on the meta-evaluation of the government’s performance management system, including its performance management scheme for fiscal programs, fund management and maintenance assessments, cost sharing policy, and performance evaluations of government-subsidized programs. In particular, the report assesses whether the recently introduced Comprehensive Evaluation of Fiscal Programs is effective in addressing existing issues, and suggests measures to improve effectiveness.
 Volume II classifies major fiscal programs into sections titled Inter-Ministry, Economy & Industry, and Society & Administration for in-depth assessment. The Inter-Ministry section analyzes five programs, including one to prevent repeat offenses involving domestic violence, sexual assault or prostitution. The Economy & Industry section covers four programs, including the program of support for agricultural food product exports, while the Society & Administration section addresses five programs that include the national scholarship program.

 The analysis suggests 38 items in total for enactment and towards improvement of policy, including 22 requests for correction, such as considering the growing number of young women among North Korean refugees when running the Settlement Support Program for North Korean Refugees. They also include four proposals for legal amendments, with one being to amend the National Finance Act to stipulate that the Minister of Strategy and Finance shall not increase the total program budget during the preliminary feasibility study phase without the consent of responsible agencies. Another nine items are about performance management, one of which is related to the Local Industrial Hub Institution Support Program to group similar programs together to manage them separately and identify the performance of the variety of sub-programs. The remaining three proposals are regarding budget allocation, including one which suggests that the budget for the Provincial River Renewal Program be increased to improve the renewal rate of provincial rivers and minimize their damage.

 Of particular note is that the assessment of fiscal program performance reviews the root causes for gaps between statistical indices, such as the KPI Achievement or Satisfaction Survey, set by the government for certain programs, and perceived performance, thereby leading to recommendations for a ‘Perceived KPI.’ For the Basic Pension Support Program, use of a subjective index is recommended, such as one on improvement of living standards, as well as objective indices such as those that indicate changes in income and expenses for elderly households and the poverty rate among seniors. For the Culture Day Program, our analysis suggests examination of the causes for complaints among ineligible groups and the need to address them to improve the program.