Register now for our next event 08.30-09.30 on 23 September with Sir Jeremy Heywood
Improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the delivery of public services
November 14 2016
Lessons learnt from the set-up phase of the ‘Regulatory Futures’ cross-functional review
Cross-functional reviews offer a unique opportunity for ALBs to explore ideas for reform by looking broadly across a wide scope of public bodies to learn from each other’s approaches, identifying efficiencies that could have been missed if reviewing bodies through the individual lens of the department. . The ‘regulatory futures’ review is expected to identify many reform opportunities across the regulatory sector. However, as the next cross-functional review is underway, the PCF and ACE, see much value in reflecting on what has worked well in this first review and taking the time to consider any potential areas for improvement.
The Public Chairs’ Forum (PCF) and the Association of Chief Executives (ACE) are pleased to publish this report aiming to highlight the key success indicators for setting-up a cross-functional review in the most efficienct and effective way.
November 04 2016
Departments’ oversight of arm’s-length bodies
The Public Accounts Committee reviewed and responded to the National Audit Office's report earlier this year, taking evidence from the Ministry of Justice, the Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, and the Cabinet Office on the oversight of arm’s-length bodies, They summarise the report as follows:
Government departments now have more than 460 ‘arm’s-length bodies’, through which they spend around £250 billion a year. Departments rely on their arm’s-length bodies to deliver important functions and services to the public. Yet over the years there has been no consistent rationale for deciding what is best done through an arm’slength body and what is best done directly by departments themselves. The Cabinet Office recognises that the resultant population of arm’s-length bodies is “an accident of history”.
The quality of oversight by departments of their arm’s-length bodies is inconsistent. They do not always have the information to understand how their bodies are performing and it is not clear that oversight arrangements are always proportionate to the relative risks and opportunities of particular bodies. While we heard some examples of effective oversight, there needs to be much more shared understanding of what works, with learning both within departmental groups and across departmental boundaries. Departments are also missing opportunities to improve services by capitalising on the operational experience and know-how of their arm’s-length bodies when developing policy. There is no one size fits all approach to departmental oversight, but the Cabinet Office needs to use its position at the centre of Government to ensure that departments improve the way they manage their business through arm’s-length bodies.
July 05 2016
Departments’ oversight of arm’s length bodies: a comparative study
The National Audit Office looked at four departments that oversee a large number of ALBs: Department for Business, Innovation & Skills, Ministry of Justice, Department for Environment, Department for Food & Rural Affairs, and Department for Culture, Media & Sport.
They found there is no collective understanding of what type of oversight is appropriate and cost effective for different types of arm’s-length bodies; the sector remains confused and incoherent. There is no single list of all ALBs across government nor a common understanding of when ALBs should be used, or what type of ALB is most appropriate for particular circumstances. Different departments define ALBs in different ways and some ALBs are uncertain about how they relate to their department’s objectives. The prevailing inconsistency hampers a coherent approach to overseeing ALBs that is consistent with their purpose, although the Cabinet Office is building on its Public Bodies Reform Programme and taking further steps to address this.
Amyas Morse, head of the National Audit Office, said:
“If one of the main reasons for having arm’s length bodies is to provide a zone of relative independence, the fact that oversight mechanisms focus predominantly on compliance and control means there is almost certainly room for improvement.”
Our newsletter features the most up to date news on the work of the PCF, along with guest articles on topical issues. Sign up to it here.
PCF Membership is open to all Chairs of Public Bodies, regardless of the size, status or remit of their organisation.
Relationship Web is a diagnostic self-assessment tool, for both ALBs and Departments to use to test the state of the relationship.
It is based on the diagnostic questions within the joint PCF and Institute for Government framework for effective relations and allows Departments and ALBs to identify strengths and weaknesses in their own relationships. The diagnostic statements are divided into five key areas for effectiveness, as identified in ‘It takes two’: accountabilities; strategic approach; financial and performance management; communication and engagement; and relationship management.
After completing the exercise, your results are then plotted on to a 'spider’s web' – the further away from the centre your responses, the more effective your relationship; the idea being to stretch the web over time to improve your performance. You will then be able to download a PDF version of the 'spider’s web' and save this on your computer. There will be an opportunity for individual ALBs and Departments to compare results to see how each party views their relationship. Rather than being the solution to any issues in the relationship, we hope that this exercise will act as a useful conversation starter between Department and ALB.
PUBLIC CHAIRS' FORUM WEB APPLICATION
Cabinet Office have recently produced a checklist to help Arms Length Bodies and Departments to ensure that the most important aspects of managing transitions are considered. Inevitably, no one transition is identical to another one and depending on the type of transition you are involved in, there will be certain things within the checklist that don't apply to the specific circumstances of your transition.
So, rather than having to explore which parts are relevant to your circumstances, the Public Chairs' Forum has designed an application that will do this for you. By answering some simple questions about your transition, the application will produce a customised report and checklist, ensuring you focus on the right issues at the right time. We hope that the combination of the checklist and application will help to bring clarity, focus and practical solutions to an often complex process. Download your personalised report here.