Open Budget Survey Results
Open Budget Survey 2021
Government budget decisions – what taxes to levy, what services to provide, and how much debt to take on – have important consequences for all people in society. When governments provide information and meaningful channels for the public to engage in these decisions, we can better ensure public money is spent on public interests.
The Open Budget Survey (OBS) is the world’s only independent, comparative and fact-based research instrument that uses internationally accepted criteria to assess public access to central government budget information; formal opportunities for the public to participate in the national budget process; and the role of budget oversight institutions, such as legislatures and national audit offices, in the budget process.
The survey helps local civil society assess and confer with their government on the reporting and use of public funds. This 8th edition of the OBS covers 120 countries.
This part of the OBS measures public access to information on how the central government raises and spends public resources. It assesses the online availability, timeliness, and comprehensiveness of eight key budget documents using 109 equally weighted indicators and scores each country on a scale of 0 to 100. A transparency score of 61 or above indicates a country is likely publishing enough material to support informed public debate on the budget.
Transparency in Sudan compared to others
Sudan’s ranking: 116 of 120 countries
How has the transparency score for Sudan changed over time?
Public availability of budget documents in Sudan
|Executive’s Budget Proposal|
How comprehensive is the content of the key budget documents that Sudan makes available to the public?
|Key budget document||Document purpose and contents||Fiscal year assessed||Document content score|
|Pre-Budget Statement||Discloses the broad parameters of fiscal policies in advance of the Executive's Budget Proposal; outlines the government's economic forecast, anticipated revenue, expenditures, and debt.||2021||22|
|Executive’s Budget Proposal||Submitted by the executive to the legislature for approval; details the sources of revenue, the allocations to ministries, proposed policy changes, and other information important for understanding the country's fiscal situation.||2020||Internal Use|
|Enacted Budget||The budget that has been approved by the legislature.||2020||Internal Use|
|Citizens Budget||A simpler and less technical version of the government's Executive’s Budget Proposal or the Enacted Budget, designed to convey key information to the public.||2020||Not Produced|
|In-Year Reports||Include information on actual revenues collected, actual expenditures made, and debt incurred at different intervals; issued quarterly or monthly.||2020||Published Late|
|Mid-Year Review||A comprehensive update on the implementation of the budget as of the middle of the fiscal year; includes a review of economic assumptions and an updated forecast of budget outcomes.||2020||Internal Use|
|Year-End Report||Describes the situation of the government's accounts at the end of the fiscal year and, ideally, an evaluation of the progress made toward achieving the budget's policy goals.||2019||Internal Use|
|Audit Report||Issued by the supreme audit institution, this document examines the soundness and completeness of the government's year-end accounts.||2018||Not Produced|
Sudan’s transparency score of 1 in the OBS 2021 is near its score in 2019.
Sudan should prioritize the following actions to improve budget transparency:
The OBS assesses the formal opportunities offered to the public for meaningful participation in the different stages of the budget process. It examines the practices of the central government’s executive, the legislature, and the supreme audit institution (SAI) using 18 equally weighted indicators, aligned with the Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency’s Principles of Public Participation in Fiscal Policies , and scores each country on a scale from 0 to 100.
Sudan has a public participation score of 4 (out of 100).
Public participation in Sudan compared to others
Extent of opportunities for public participation in the budget process
(supreme audit institution)
In 2020, there was intermittent participation in the budget process by the public under the auspices of the Ministry of Finance. Members of the economic resistance attended budget approval meetings, but their inputs into the public budget were limited. To further strengthen public participation in the budget process, the executive should prioritize the following actions:
Sudan's National Audit Chamber should prioritize the following actions to improve public participation in the budget process:
The OBS examines the role that legislatures and supreme audit institutions (SAIs) play in the budget process and the extent to which they provide oversight; each country is scored on a scale from 0 to 100 based on 18 equally weighted indicators. In addition, the survey collects supplementary information on independent fiscal institutions (see Box).
Taken individually, the extent of each institution’s oversight in Sudan is shown below:
Sudan's interim legislative authority was assessed during this round of the Open Budget Survey, but since the close of research, that authority - the joint Sovereign and Cabinet Council - was dissolved. In future:
To strengthen independence and improve audit oversight by the Sudan National Audit Chamber, the following actions are recommended:
The emerging practice of establishing independent fiscal institutions
Sudan does not have an independent fiscal institution (IFI). IFIs are increasingly recognized as valuable independent and nonpartisan information providers to the Executive and/or Parliament during the budget process.
*These indicators are *not* scored in the Open Budget Survey.
- Only documents published and events, activities, or developments that took place through 31 December 2020 were assessed in the OBS 2021.
- The survey is based on a questionnaire completed in each country by an independent budget expert:
- To further strengthen the research, each country’s draft questionnaire is also reviewed by an anonymous independent expert.