The use of formulae has become widespread in recent years across most developed countries. In the UK, a conservative estimate is that annually £150 billion of public service expenditure is distributed using formulae, in services such as health care, local government, social security and higher education. This book offers a comprehensive introduction to the theory and practice underlying the use of such formulae as a basis for funding public services. The philosophy, design and economic consequences of funding formulae have become key policy issues worldwide. However, till now, there has been no text which brings together the economic, statistical and political issues underlying formula funding. This key book fills that gap. Written by a leading international expert on the design of funding formulae, this important book includes empirical evidence from a range of countries and will be a valuable resource for all those involved in this field.

The complexity of the formulae used by government departments to provide funding to local public bodies is partly down to the nature of the services being funded, and partly to the fact that the formulae attempt to achieve multiple objectives. The different approaches to formula funding have evolved over time, but key choices in the design and operation of the formulae remain open to question. Of the three funding arrangements on which it reports, the NAO concludes that the Department for Education and the Department for Communities and Local Government have not set out clearly, or explicitly prioritised, their multiple objectives for the design and distribution of Dedicated Schools Grant and Formula Grant. This prevents analysis of the extent to which the formulae represent the best way to satisfy objectives. Each of the formulae is grounded in an assessment of relative needs, but other aspects of their design differ. All of the funding arrangements include provisions to ensure funding stability. Stability reduces budget variation from year to year, making financial planning and stable service provision less problematic. But this has led to some local bodies being funded for extended periods significantly above or below needs-assessed levels. Population data are the biggest determinants of funding, and Departments use the most current data available. As many inputs are census-based, a quarter of those used in Formula Grant and ten per cent of those used for Primary Care Trust allocations, are based on data sources that are now ten or more years old.

This report examines existing approaches to formula funding across government, and the principles that should be carried forward to new arrangements. Government departments distributed £152 billion, one-fifth of all government spending, to local public bodies in 2011-12 based on the three grants considered: Primary Care Trust Allocations; Dedicated Schools Grant; and the Department for Communities and Local Government's Formula Grant. These distribute funding to local public bodies in a range of sectors, including health, education, local government, police and fire and rescue services. The formula funding systems are complex, difficult to understand, and have led to inequitable allocations. For Dedicated Schools Grant, based mainly on historical spending patterns, per pupil funding for schools with similar characteristics can vary by as much as 40%. Under Formula Grant, nearly 20% of authorities received allocations which are more than 10% different from calculated needs. The priorities accorded to different elements of the formulae are judgements which have a direct impact on the distribution of funds. In some cases the basis for the judgement is guided by authoritative, published independent advice. In other cases, the basis for judgement lacks transparency, and external advice lacks status and influence. Only 4% of respondents to DCLG's consultation supported the current version of the model used to calculate Formula Grant. Some of the data used by departments in calculating relative needs is inaccurate and out of date. Current reviews of formula funding provide opportunities to address the weaknesses identified in this report.

The importance of public financial management for the health and wellbeing of citizens became dramatically apparent as governments sought to respond to the coronavirus pandemic in 2020. Now, governments and other public sector organizations face the challenge of recovering from the pandemic whilst also seeking to achieve Sustainable Development Goals, with squeezed budgets and ever-increasing demands for public services. Public sector managers are confronted daily with targets and demands that are often set in confusing accounting and financial language. In Financial Management and Accounting in the Public Sector, Gary Bandy employs a clear and concise narrative to introduce the core concepts of public financial management to help those managers to deliver programmes, projects and services that are value for money. As the author puts it, managing public money is an art, not a science. This third edition has been revised and updated throughout, offering: a structure that is more clearly linked to the stages of the public financial management cycle greater coverage of transparency and accountability issues a broader view of public procurement to include goods, works and services and effective contract management; and an increased focus on public spending in the context of a post-COVID environment. With a glossary of terms to help managers understand and be understood by accountants, as well as learning objectives, discussion questions and exercises, this practical textbook will help students of public management and administration to understand the financial and accounting aspects of managing public services.

Publisher description

This book explores new forms of private, mutual municipal, public-private and 'reverse' state funding of public investments, co-payments and shared contributions, vouchers, and pooled public risk-financing. It includes case studies taken from the Nordic countries, UK, Spain, Slovenia, Slovakia, Turkey and South Korea.

A key part of the New Public Sector in the UK has been an increased use of delegated budgeting in health and education. Initiatives such as the Local Management of Schools, GP-Fundholders and the Purchaser-Provider split in the National Health Service have required resources and associated budgets to be allocated down to smaller, more local entities than previously, on the basis of an explicit funding formula. This paper examines the relative merits of such a system of devoted budgeting and formula funding compared to other possible approaches to public sector budgeting from the viewpoint of the extent to which these different approaches are likely to promote equity in the funding of public services to disadvantaged groups. The paper illustrates the issues involved by reference both the UK experience and to the impact that health care funding formulae have on one particularly disadvantaged group in an otherwise advanced economy, namely the Aboriginal population of the Northern Territory of Australia.