Liberia has indeed undertaken an ambitious reform program and should be congratulated for having the gumption to undertake this approach, albeit with ample safeguards. As inferred from the article, much of the success thus far can be attributed to the project champions - within and outside the government. The IFMIS project includes key leaders who have successfully worked with the same underlying system in Sierra Leone and other countries, helping to guide the project while mitigating the risks inherent with any large scale initiative.

There are many issues raised in Mr. Bessette's post. I would like to respond to one in particular - single entry versus double-entry accounting. We have found that having a system that allow users to specify and enter only a single entry significantly facilitates user adoption. Properly configured, the system will automatically generate the offsetting debit/credit entry, ensuring internal ledgers are appropriately maintained on a double-entry basis. This approach has a direct impact on user capacity because end-users can leverage their existing knowledge and training "quickly". As capacity increases over time and where appropriate, mainline staff can be exposed to more of the 'back end' accounts where needed. "Core" accountants will at all times have access to the full ledgers to maintain controls and oversight. In many fragile states double-entry accounting is like a double-edged sword :) It is the appropriate standard to follow to provide outturn information but the complexity prevents the state from adopting it. We have found that a more simplified single-entry front-end coupled with a double-entry back-end setup creates the bridge for many countries to achieve this goal.

Hello, What a great topic and overview. I notice the countries identified as using commitment appropriation are high income countries. Would the author know of any middle or low income countries that are practicing commitment appropriation? Within Canada, many departments are actually using an expanded form of commitment control. These departments separate the commitment appropriation into a "soft commitment" and a "hard commitment". The soft commitment would place a hold on a portion of the budget to reflect a request to spend a given amount. The soft commitment is not related to a legal instrument (PO or contract) but rather an internal organizational request to spend. Soft commitments (request to spend) that are approved are then reclassified as a hard commitment, or "obligation". The hard commitment is reflected in a spending instrument such as a purchase order that is sent to a vendor. This two-level commitment control allows the Canadian departments more discrete visibility and control in their budget execution. The budget minus the sum of the commitments (soft and hard) minus the actual disbursements for the fiscal year tells the budget manager the available budget balance that can be spent. This available budget balance is commonly called the "free balance". Thanks, Hal

Hi, Can the author comment if there are other external factors, if any, that could be influencing the acceleration of this approach? I was thinking of one in particular - where some countries with large natural resources are being provided direct aid, with such aid possibly having limited conditionality. My understanding on this is that this could pose a challenge to the normal control standards maintained by the standard lending institutions and accelerating the adoption of country systems is a reflection of a more competitive environment for 'aid'. Thanks, Hal

Hi Kylie, Your question on payroll is intriguing. In the payroll systems that I've seen, statutory obligations (such as taxes or pension contributions) are reflected in earnings and deductions. These can be mandated for either the entire civil service or selected groups. The audit function, software supported or internal audit, verifies if these are being met appropriately. Do you have a specific scenario or circumstance in mind? Thanks, Hal