A S S E S S M E N T O F H O S T C O U N T R Y F I N A N C I A L S Y S T E M I N M A N A G I N G F O R E I G N G R A N T
25
B. DIRECT GRANTS
Direct grants do not pass through the planning phase and can be received at any time during the iscal year. Ministriesgovernment agencies assess the purpose of these grants are responsible
for them upon receipt, and will consult the most recent Direct Grant Utilization Plan along with the Minister of Finance, Minister of Planning, and other related MinistersHeads of Government
Agencies prior to the signing of the grant agreement.
Donor Planning Minister
Finance Minister
Committed to provide grants to the government
a. Assess the purpose of grants by considering
principles of grants receipt
b. Consultation with Minister of Finance, Minister
of Planning and other relevant Ministers
c. Enter into an agreement START
STOP Agreement
Agreement
Figure 3. Direct Grants Agreement
The Directorate General of KP3K received a direct grant in 2011 through the Directorate of Coastal and Marine Affairs work unit Satker of IDR 435,600,000.
The Coral Triangle Support Partnership CTSPMarine Protected Areas Governance program MPAG is one example of a program funded by a grant that is not channeled through the
government inancial mechanism, and that is thus also not included in the mechanisms of planning, budgeting, implementationfunds disbursement, and recording ‘off-budget, off-treasury’.
The COREMAP II project was also the recipient of a grant totalling USD 1.7 million that was not channeled through the government inancial mechanism. A grant from the Japan Fund for
Poverty Reduction JFPR through the Asian Development Bank ADB provided for three years up to 2008 was also not recorded in the National Government Financial Report LKPP. At
the end of the grant period, assets that remained included cars, motorcycles and laptops, with unclear direction provided on the management of unspent funds.
A S S E S S M E N T O F H O S T C O U N T R Y F I N A N C I A L S Y S T E M I N M A N A G I N G F O R E I G N G R A N T
26
C. CONCLUSIONS
• The planning processes within government work units are yet to be integrated with the results of monitoring from previous years or of program progress. This has been caused by a
lack of available baseline data for each program that would allow progress in each iscal year to be monitored and then used as an input for planning in subsequent periods.
• The decentralization of authority to the districtcity level has complicated the planning process with regard to the achievement of conservation targets. The MMAF cannot instruct
any districtcity to establish marine protected areas or to encourage more effective management. Subsequently, as some activities are located within districtscities and thus
fall under separate authorities, this poses a challenge for the planning mechanism and the achievement of national targets. In some cases, districtcity- and ministry-level planning
activities are not synchronized, with efforts to acutally achieve this further complicated by the issue of local autonomy.
• Planned grants accorded with the government planning mechanism, because such grants are already in the government inancial system and are generally associated with the receipt of
foreign loans. • Planned grants relating to these loans lowed along the loan period. Following this, at the
closing of the loangrant, activities were either not continued or the government assumed responsibility for funding, however now with a much lower budget than before, which
negatively affected the achievement of activity targets. • No direct grants, including grants in the form of goodsservices, were included in the inancial
system or in the planning processes at the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries. This eventually affected the processes of budgeting, funds disbursement etc.
A S S E S S M E N T O F H O S T C O U N T R Y F I N A N C I A L S Y S T E M I N M A N A G I N G F O R E I G N G R A N T
27
CHAPTER III BUDGETING
