Abstract
The article examines the theoretical and methodological foundations for aligning budget and public procurement cycles as a prerequisite for the efficient execution of state and local budgets. The issue is particularly relevant because budget and procurement planning, contract performance, payments, and results assessment often remain disconnected, creating risks of unused budget appropriations and failure to achieve budget programme objectives. The aim of the article is to advance the foundations for aligning the two cycles by defining the content and key dimensions of their interrelationship, systematising budget–procurement gaps, and substantiating tools for their identification and prevention. The study applies system and process approaches, as well as methods of theoretical generalisation, comparative and cause-and-effect analysis, modelling, and classification. The article substantiates the expediency of considering budget and procurement cycles as a single results chain linking a public need, budget programme objectives, budget appropriations, a procurement plan, the procurement procedure, contract performance, payments, and the actual outcome. Their alignment is defined as the continuous assurance of substantive, financial, temporal, operational, and informational consistency between budget and procurement decisions. Five dimensions of alignment are identified: goal-and-results, financial-and-cost, temporal, operational-and-contractual, and information-and-control. The concept of a budget–procurement gap is further developed and defined as a mismatch between the interconnected stages, parameters, or outcomes of the two cycles that causes delays in or prevents procurement, leads to the inefficient use of funds, or results in the failure to achieve the intended outcome. It is proposed to assess the interaction between the cycles according to three states: full alignment, partial alignment, and the presence of a gap. A budget–procurement alignment card is proposed as a practical tool for ensuring the traceability of links between a public need, a budget programme, procurement, a contract, payments, and the outcome achieved. The scientific novelty lies in improving the methodological approach to integrating budget and procurement cycles, identifying the dimensions of their alignment, and developing tools for diagnosing budget–procurement gaps. The practical application of the findings will contribute to better-substantiated budget and procurement decisions, timely procurement, and the efficient use of budget funds.