Levels of advancement
Funding for the VS is neither stable nor clearly
The ability of the VS to access financial resources adequate for their continued operations, independent of political pressure.
defined but depends on resources allocated irregularly.
Funding for the VS is clearly defined and regular, but
is inadequate for their required base operations.
Funding for the VS is clearly defined and regular, and
is adequate for their base operations, but there is no provision for new or expanded operations. 4. Funding for new or expanded operations is on a case‐ by‐case basis. 5. Funding for all aspects of VS activities is adequate; all funding is provided under full transparency and allows for
full technical independence.
Results Strengths : Base operations and salaries are all covered, at least at the current staffing level During the last 5 years, the VS have received adequate funding with slight annual increases. There is a mechanism for submitting justifications for budget increases on a yearly basis Legislation and regulations under the Financial Act assures continuous VS funding Private services, when provided by the CVL and state veterinarians are charged according to pre‐ established professional tariffs Weaknesses : Insufficient funding in case of unexpected events (e.g. vehicle and travel allowance, vaccine supplies) Diminishing resources as payments for services provided must be returned to Treasury. There is currently no mechanism for adjusting laboratory and SVO budgets in accordance with services rendered, although revenues are collected and sent to Treasury. Due to multiple vacancies significant amount of budget allocated to salaries is being redirected to cover shortfalls in operations and other services. Supporting documentation (documents or photos): Financial Act Directorate of Veterinary Services ‐ Annual Report 2005 Directorate of Veterinary Services ‐ Annual Report 2006