In the course of more than two decades, the mechanism of market management introduced into the economy by the executive power does not work. It is proved that the reason is not in theeconomy but in our knowledge of the economy and the mechanisms used to manage it. When drawingup a forecast plan for the next fiscal year, fundamentally new program-targeted approaches are neededfor its realization on the basis of the knowledge economy. The analysis shows that in the process ofmarket transformation of the Ukrainian economy, the executive branch restricted the participation of theconstitutionally independent Supreme Audit Institution of Ukraine in carrying out an audit of the effectiveness of the funds’ use. Such control is the most important and integral function of the managementof state budget resources. Given the diversity of problems of economic growth, we can come to theconclusion that they are separate parts of a single interconnected system. Therefore, it is the systemapproach that is necessary first of all for a proper understanding of the growth of the economy, and, mostimportantly, for finding ways to solve them. From what has been said, the directions of the methods ofthe economic growth are obvious: scientific and technical directions (ensuring scientific and technological progress) and socio-political ones (creation of such social and political conditions that make it possible to solve these problems in practice). There was an objective need to consider the interaction between society and the system of government (legislative, executive and judicial one), allocating specialcontrol bodies, in which control is a primarily function. It is about controlling power. This topic is specialand requires careful study and argumentation, as there is a system of bodies of higher power that are notincluded in any branch of government. We obtained the results of research in the following areas: 1) itis proved that public administration and control are not antagonists in relation to market regulators ofthe economy; 2) economic decline is the result of state self-drowning from conducting a strategic initiative industrial policy; 3) management of the Ukrainian economy on the part of “organized crime” continues to threaten the existence of the state itself; 4) today’s consumer choice is not achieved due to thediversity of domestic production, but solely at the expense of imports; 5) absolute priority of macroeconomic indicators is characteristic, as in Soviet times; 6) the problem of creating conditions for a largescale development does not arise from the lack of money, but from the inability to manage money; 7)increase of wages depends on the main problem: productivity and quality of labor and it is directlyproportional to the technical level of production; 8) ineffective state management of public finances isthe main problem of Ukraine; 9) the absence of the institutionalization of state financial control andapproval of the structure of their powers in the state; 10) non-recognition of the Accounting Chamberby the Supreme Body of State Financial Control of Ukraine is an inappropriate criterion for a democraticsociety; 11) vision of the picture of the future development of the state requires strategic managementof the economic development posing the task of creating a control branch of government. At present,the development of the country’s economy inevitably necessitates an increase in the efficiency of thepublic administration system. The wide-ranging reforms of public administration started in Ukraine,including in the area of increasing the efficiency of using budget funds, require the implementation ofan adequate modernization of the system of state external financial control.