Budget Search, Business Proposal Example

Introduction

Budgets are of paramount importance to agencies and organization as they represent a clear pictorial of the monitory paths. A budget shows the expected revenues and the anticipated expenses in an organization (Smith, & Lynch, 2004). It typically shows the potentiality of an agency. This paper discusses the budget for three agencies:

1) The European Food and Safety Authority (EFSA)

2) The European Medicines Agency (EMA)

3) European Environment Agency (EEA)

The European Food Safety Authority is a program to improve EU food safety. EFSA locates in Parma, Italy. The EFSA is an agency whose budget revolves around improvement of food safety, maintenance and confidentiality in the food supply in EU (Smith & Lynch, 2004). It is to set aside sufficient funds to cover for food and feed safety, plant protection, animal health and welfare, nutrition, and plant health. The EFSA had a provisional budget of 174.7M€. This amount caters for staff payment, overtime payment, and European community development, family allowances, travelling expenses, .insurance against sickness, training expenses, and expenses on building equipments among other expenses.

However, disputes between the chairperson of the EFSA Management Board and the food industry arose due to the budgetary allocation for executive meetings. For example, a meeting of around 15-strong Management Board can cost up to €92.630 (an equivalent of €6.175 per member).

The European medical agency’s 2012 work program drives the agency towards implementation of the pharmacovigilance legislation. The EMA anticipates for 112 applications as compared with 111 in 2011. There is an expected 52 applications for new medicines for human use, 13 new orphan medicines and 39 generic applications.  The work program has a budgetary amounting to 222.5 million Euros ($290 million). This marks an increase of 6.5% compared to 2011. The amount is inclusive of fee revenue of 171 million euros plus a European Union contribution of 51 million Euros. The EU fund the outstanding orphan medicines, an amount that has increased from 4.9 million 6 million Euros (Fitzpatrick & Bauch, 2011). There is of course the workforce of 737 staff members whose pay is inclusive in the budget.

The European Environmental agency has set its budgetary allocation strategically. The revenues expected amount to of €33,791. The expenditure divided into staff payment, administrative e expenditure, and operating expenditure, among many others.

Of the three agencies, the most appealing is the European Medical Agency. This is because they have a clear budgetary in their allocation of cash. Take, for example, the number of applicants expected in the EMA. They do not have a very high expectation, only an additional student as compared to the previous year. The way cash allocated to particular orphans programs is so encouraging such that it attracts donors to support the project. The EFSA presents the most disappointing budgetary that where the leaders focus on enriching themselves. The budgetary allocation during meetings presents a remarkable fraction of the total amount allocated for EFSA. It is a shame that three quarters of the amount allocated to perform the tasks of ensuring food and feed safety lands into the executive’s pockets. In fact, out of the 174.7M€ allocated for the agency, €92.630 is to go to executive members, which does not present viability and responsibility. The European Environmental agency is not badly off in its budgetary allocation. However, they do not give a thorough explanation of their expenditures, thus raising questions. Thus, the European Medical Agency remains the most appealing.

References

Fitzpatrick T, & Bauch CT, (2011).The potential impact of immunization campaign budget re-allocation on global eradication of pediatric infectious diseases. BMC Public Health [BMC Public Health], vol  11, pp. 739.

Nollenberger, Karl,Maher, Craig,Beach, Paul,Mcgee, M. Kevin. (2012). Budget Priorities and Community Perceptions of Service Quality and Importance.  Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management. 24 (2) p255-277. 23p.

Smith, R., & Lynch, T. (2004). Public Budgeting in America. (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River,NJ: Prentice Hall.