Northern Ireland’s Budget Programme for Government Alignment report, published in October, explores how public spending can be more closely linked to social wellbeing outcomes. It is one of the first steps towards outcome-based budgeting in the region, focusing on the impact of expenditure rather than the amount alone.
The report maps departmental budgets against four missions – people, planet, prosperity and peace – and their associated wellbeing domains.
Departments estimated the proportion of their spending that contributes to each of these domains. While the figures are indicative rather than exact, the exercise provides a valuable foundation for building greater transparency, measurement and accountability in public finance.
Learning in public builds more trust than concealing uncertainty
Transparent approach
The initiative is welcome for the openness, transparency and willingness to learn that it demonstrates. By documenting assumptions, data gaps and reasoning, we will find that learning in public builds more trust than concealing uncertainty. We have seen from similar policy systems that sustainable progress happens when institutions acknowledge imperfection and use feedback to refine their methods.
Key findings
Government departments estimated the percentage of each spending area that aligns with programme for government (PfG) components. The initial findings reveal that 95% of resource and 99% of capital budgets align with the wellbeing domains, and 97% of resource and 99% of capital budgets align with PfG missions (people, planet, prosperity and peace); 42% of the resource budget and 78% of the capital budget support PfG priorities.
However, the analysis is experimental and has limitations, such as lack of granularity, subjective departmental assessments and the absence of a standardised framework for mapping spend to outcomes. In addition, many departments contribute to multiple PfG outcomes, making precise attribution difficult.
The list of improvements proposed in the report include:
- adopting a bottom-up approach to budgeting, starting with wellbeing domains
- developing a PfG-specific budget classification system
- enhancing reporting to include gross spend and income
- continuing to publish alignment reports for transparency and accountability.
While the report is a foundational step, it highlights the need for structural reform in financial reporting to better align budgets with PfG outcomes. Future work will focus on refining methodology and embedding alignment into budget processes.
The report also highlights where the system continues to face challenges. Much of the analysis depends on professional judgment rather than structured data. This level of subjectivity makes comparisons difficult and limits reliability. The next step, in my view, should be to strengthen the data logic by developing consistent rules, shared definitions and measurable indicators that allow departments to align evidence to outcomes with confidence.
Recognising overlaps
Budgets rarely operate in isolation. A single programme can support several outcomes at once: health spending influences education, infrastructure affects prosperity and environmental policy shapes public wellbeing. The report avoids forcing narrow, one-to-one mappings between expenditure and outcomes.
Real impact sits in the intersections between sectors, policies and communities
Recognising these overlaps is essential. Governments often overestimate what linear models can capture. Real impact sits in the intersections between sectors, policies and communities. Capturing these interconnections will make future analyses more realistic and useful for decision-making.
Collective ownership
In my experience, data only changes behaviour when people can see their own contribution within it. Future versions of this framework should therefore move closer to the outcomes themselves, analysing progress at the wellbeing domain level rather than broad missions.
When departments and communities take part in defining what success looks like, data becomes a tool for collaboration rather than compliance. Performance evolves into something shared and dynamic. This shift transforms accountability from a top-down exercise into collective ownership, where learning and leadership emerge from every level.
Lessons for others
Northern Ireland’s approach offers valuable lessons for policymakers elsewhere. Building systems that learn requires starting with what is available, being transparent about what is not, and continually improving through evidence and engagement.
Progress in governance comes from systems that evolve, not those that aim to be flawless
Other governments can take three key insights from this experience:
- Begin before the system is perfect. Early experimentation accelerates institutional learning.
- Be open about uncertainty. Transparency earns credibility and attracts constructive input.
- Design for shared ownership. When those implementing policy help define outcomes, data becomes more meaningful and sustainable.
Progress in governance comes from systems that evolve and learn, not those that aim to be flawless. By embedding transparency, learning and participation at its core, the report takes a meaningful step towards more adaptive, outcome-orientated public finance.
With stronger data foundations and deeper collaboration across departments, this approach could become a model for how governments align budgets with the outcomes that matter most.
