[ SC ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 28-2001, April 25, 2001 ]

[ SC ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 28-2001, April 25, 2001 ]

[ SC ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 28-2001, April 25, 2001 ]

RE: :ATTENDANCE IN THE PLANNING AND BUDGETING WORKSHOP

DATE: : 25 April 2001

As part of the Supreme Court's judicial reform efforts and its 2002 budget preparation activities, a Planning and Budgeting Workshop for key officials and personnel will be held on 2-3 May 2001 at the 3'd Floor, SC Centennial Building. The Workshop primarily aims to enhance the Supreme Court's budget preparation and management system, in view of recent developments in the government's budget preparation process and also in support of the Court's judicial reform efforts. The Workshop's outputs will be integral to the 2002 budget of the Court. The two-day activity will be facilitated by the Project Management Office (PMO) for the World Bank-PHRD Grant for Judicial Reform, in cooperation with the Department of Budget and Management.

The activity shall be participated in by the following officials and personnel:

Offices of the Chief Justice and Associate Justices

Mr. Joseph Bryan Hilary P. Davide

Atty. Anna Ty-Capacite

Ms. Emily Vasquez

Ms. Karen V. Mara

Ms. Ludeva A. Medina

Ms. Corazon E. Poblador

Ms. Marilyn P. Santiago

Mr. Rick O. Vitug

Mr. Horacio Virgilio R. Kapunan

Ms. Arsenia M. Mendoza

Mr. F. Roberto D. Quilala

Ms. Ilonah de Jesus

Mr. Victor P. Pardo

Ms. Rosario Fatima Buena

Ms. Vanya G. Galos

Ms. Dulce Rodevillo

Ms. Marichi M. Pescador

Ms. Ma. Lourdes R. Castillo

Office of the Clerk of Court

Atty. Luzviminda D. Puno

Atty. Virginia A. Soriano (also representing the Committee on Halls of Justice)

Atty. Tomasita M. Dris

Atty. Julieta Y. Carreon

Fiscal Management and Budget Office

Ms. Corazon Ordoñez

Ms. Agripina Bumanglag

Ms. Estrella Eje

Ms. Araceli Bayuga

Ms. Ursula San Pedro

Office of Administrative Services

Atty. Eden Candelaria

Mr. Romeo M. Salazar

Mr. Jacinto Serrano

Ms. Patrocinio Salazar

Mr. Jaime Mendoza

Engr. Rodolfo Bondoc

Public Information Office

Atty. Ismael G. Khan, Jr.

Judicial Records Office

Atty. Teresita Dimaisip

Office of the Reporter

Atty. Ma. Piedad Campaña

Office of the Bar Confidant

Atty. Ma. Cristina Layusa

Management Information Systems Office

Atty. Ivan John Uy

Philippine Judicial Academy

Justice Antonio M. Martinez

Judge Priscila S. Agana

Ms. Dolores T. Lopez

Office of the Court Administrator

ACA Antonio H. Dujua

Atty. Thelma C. Bahia

Ms. Antonina A. Soria

Ms. Corazon M. Molo

Judicial and Bar Council

Ms. Benedicta C. Rocillo

Committee on Appropriations

Atty. Charito Zamora

Library Services

Ms. Milagros Ong

Printing Services

Mr. Emmanuel Ignacio

Medical Services

Dr. Prudencio P. Banzon

Abovenamed officials and personnel are enjoined to participate in the workshop and give utmost priority to the undertaking.

Attendance in the workshop shall be on OFFICIAL TIME. All queries relative to this activity may be addressed to the PMO, particularly Ms. Theresa B. Espeleta at tel. nos. 522-5090 and 522-5094, Ms. Cecile V. Dumdum at 521-8023, or Atty. Conrad S. Tolentino at 523-4824 and 522-2236.

Attached is the Activity Brief describing the Workshop's rationale, objectives, and program of activities.

(Sgd.) HILARIO G. DAVIDE, JR .

Chief Justice

Supreme Court Planning and Budgeting Workshop 2-3 May 2001

Workshop Rationale

Recent years have shown innovations in the preparation of the national budget. Essentially, these innovations involve a Public Expenditure Management (PEM) system, within the context of the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF).

The PEM is a public resource allocation system that: (a) gives reasonable assurance that new expenditures approved in a given year can be funded over the medium-term (3 years in the Philippine budgeting context, at present) and (b) accords priority to expenditures that are oriented towards achieving the higher goals of the sector/agency.

The MTEF is the PEM component, which ensures that approved expenditures will be automatically given budgetary allocations on an annual basis over the medium-term. It is a framework designed specifically to link planning, which has a medium-term outlook, with budgeting, which generally has a one year horizon. By integrating the planning and budgeting exercises, the MTEF allows the tracking of the funding requirements of identified expenditure items and assess their budgetary implications over a 3-year period. Through this, better control of expenditure trends is expected, and, whenever necessary, the restructuring of the budget towards programs of higher priority within scarce budgetary resources is facilitated.

Although these innovations were introduced as early as 1999, government institutions, including the Supreme Court, have yet to fully employ these concepts in the preparation of their plans and budgets. However, given current fiscal constraints, it is imperative that the integrated planning and budgeting system be adopted in order to achieve a more effective allocation and utilization of a limited national budget.

In the case of the Supreme Court, it still follows the traditional budget preparation process. Annual budget preparation is based on incremental estimation relative to the previous year's budget and actual expenditures, in the absence of a coordinated planning and budgeting system. As an exercise of its fiscal autonomy, the Supreme Court also currently maintains a one-line-item budget in the GAA, with the rationale that this allows it more flexibility in the allocation and utilization of its budget.

Even as the Judiciary budget submitted to Congress is no longer subject to cuts, it has not been exempt from budget execution policies. Hence, it is still vulnerable to expenditure cuts by DBM during budget preparation, in the meantime that no common agreement on the scope and mechanics of the Judiciary's fiscal autonomy has been reached, particularly with the Executive branch.

By applying the PEM/MTEF concepts in the preparation of the Court's budget (where PAPs are identified and prioritized, the MFOs are defined, and performance indicators are set), it would be easier to justify and rationalize a higher budget for the Court at the DBM level, thus mitigating substantial cuts in the budget proposal submitted to DBM.

A detailed budget is a helpful tool in the internal management of the budget as it could provide the prioritization of programs, activities, and projects. Such prioritization, on the other hand, will serve as a guide in determining allocation of available resources, such that projects of higher priority will also get priority in the budget.

Relative to the foregoing and consistent with the judicial reform efforts, a planning/budgeting exercise among key offices of the Court, employing the basic principles of the PEM/MTEF, should be implemented, especially since the Court intends to pursue capital-intensive projects under its Judicial Reform Program

Looking beyond the budget preparation, the process of identifying and prioritizing PAPs over the medium-term or a 3-year period and determining the approximate amount of resources required for their implementation would indicate the extent of funding requirements, which would help the Court in determining their financial sustainability. The MFOs and performance indicators, on the other hand, would be the benchmark, at the end of the first fiscal year of the medium-term, in determining whether a PAP is still worth pursuing (i.e., a PAP that falls short of the performance target may be given less priority in funding).

Workshop Objectives

To orient key officials of the court on the principles of PEM and the MTEF;

To conduct basic planning and budgeting exercises by office applying the principles of PEM/MTEF

To consolidate outputs of planning and budgeting exercises by office, agree on prioritization of PAPs, and translate such prioritization into budgetary levels

To prepare working draft of SC budget for 2002-2004

Workshop Program

To cover the scope of the workshop objectives, a two-day planning and budgeting exercise is proposed, with the following activities:

Day 1:

(morning session)

I. Registration (20 mins.)

II. Opening Session

- National Anthem/Invocation (5 mins.)

- Introduction (5 mins.)

- Remarks by the Chief Justice (10 mins.)

- Remarks by DBM Undersecretary Mario Relampagos (10 mins.)

- Perspective/Objectives Setting (10 mins.)

III. Overview of the PEM/MTEF (1 hr.)

IV. Organizational Performance Indicator Framework (30 mins.)

V. Open Forum (30 mins.)

VI. Wrap-up (15 mins.)

( afternoon session )

VII. Orientation on Workshop Guidelines and Mechanics (20 mins.)

VIII. Workshop I: Planning and Budgeting by Office (2 hrs)

Specific Activities:

-

identification and classification of projects, activities and programs (PAPs) as high, medium, and low priority, indicating budgetary requirements for each PAP;

- identification of major final outputs (MFOs) associated with the PAPs

- identification of outcome-oriented organizational performance indicators

IX. Debriefing (20 mins.)

Day 2:

( morning session )

I. Review of Previous Day's Activities

II. Plenary Session: Presentation of Plans and Budget by Office

(afternoon session)

III. Workshop II: Discussion and Agreement on Prioritization of Proposed PAPs

IV. Presentation of Proposed Budget

V. Debriefing

VI. Closing Remarks by DBM Secretary Emilia Boncodin