1 / 24

Government’s Expenditure Review Initiative Progress 2002 - 2004

Government’s Expenditure Review Initiative Progress 2002 - 2004. Lunchtime seminar of Irish Evaluation Network 10 March 2005 Conor McGinn, Department of Finance (conor.mcginn@finance.gov.ie). Content. Expenditure Review history and processes Management structures

shadow
Download Presentation

Government’s Expenditure Review Initiative Progress 2002 - 2004

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Government’s Expenditure Review InitiativeProgress 2002 - 2004 Lunchtime seminar of Irish Evaluation Network 10 March 2005 Conor McGinn, Department of Finance (conor.mcginn@finance.gov.ie)

  2. Content • Expenditure Review history and processes • Management structures • Report on progress, 2002-2004 • Views of Depts & Quality Assessors • Conclusions and recommendations • What next?

  3. Some initial scepticisms • Departments reviewing themselves, making case for more resources • Why evaluate when the answer is obvious? • ERI yet another bureaucratic paper-generating-machine • Evaluation not a priority for top management and at political level

  4. ERI events since 1997 • The Strategic Mangement Initiative and the beginnings of expenditure review • Objectives of the ERI • C&AG value for money study of the ERI, October 2001 • Reforms to the process, 2002-2004

  5. Stages under each round of ERI • Selection of topics by each Dept’s Management Advisory Committee • In consultation with Dept of Finance • Topics submitted for Government approval • Local steering committees for each review appointed

  6. ERI stages (cont’d) • Terms of reference approved by relevant Secretary General • Data collection & analysis; report drafted • Draft report quality assessed externally • Publication; laying before Oireachtas • And hopefully… … review recommendations implemented

  7. Expenditure Review Central Steering Committee (ERCSC) • Chaired by Secretary General, Department of Finance • Vets progress in Departments regarding: • selection of topics • Progress with reviews, etc. • Monitors quality and assesses impact • Reports and makes recommendations to Minister & Government

  8. And the name…? • First called the Central Steering Committee, the CSC … • … ‘til the Civil Service Commission became upset! • ERCSC: You pronounce it! • Lord of the Rings: the Orcs • The ‘real’ CSC no longer exists • All very ERC-some

  9. Expenditure Reviewers’ Network • Our own mini-version of the IEN • For civil servants carrying out reviews - all Depts/Offices represented: 250+ members • Includes students of CMOD Masters course in public policy analysis • Overseeing committee chaired by Dept of Finance • Offers training, network events, & extranet

  10. Why produce a report now? • A good thing to do … (Still feels that way after being called before an Oireachtas Committee?) • To put focus on Departments • To take stock of progress of reforms & indicate areas for further change • To consider how ERI interlinks with other reforms/initiatives

  11. Report was based on • Discussions with Secretaries General • Views of Expenditure Reviewers’ Network • Committee’s own deliberations • Questionnaire responses received from the Quality Assessors

  12. Secretaries General on role & impact of ERI • Reviews help provide better information and so contribute to policy development • Clarify objectives of programmes reviewed • Highlight operational & efficiency improvements • Help set context for subsequent decisions • Contribute to the Estimates process • Foster a culture of evaluation

  13. Comments by Quality Assessors • Selection of topics for review • Quality of review report • Terms of reference • Evaluation approach

  14. Quality Assessors, cont’d • Planning and managing of reviews • Steering committees, external input • Evaluative capacity • Response to quality assessment process

  15. Criteria used by Quality Assessors in assessing reviews • Are ToR appropriate to the ERI? • Does report comprehensively address ToR? • Adequacy of analytical approach; robustness of methodologies used • Addresses future performance indicators? • Conclusions and recommendations supported by analysis? • Structure, presentation, clarity of report

  16. Some Departments currently showing strong engagement • Agriculture & Food • Foreign Affairs • Social and Family Affairs • Enterprise, Trade and Employment • New kid on the block: Community, Rural and Gaeltachts Affairs

  17. Some Departments that are still building evaluation capacity • Education and Science • Health … though many evaluation reports/studies produced • Communications, Marine & Natural Resources • Environment & Local Government • Arts, Sports and Tourism • Finance

  18. ERCSC’s main findings • Slippages in completing reviews on time • Number of reviews OK, taking other forms of evaluation into account • Implementation of reforms to the ERI has taken longer than expected • A need to build impact of reviews on resource allocation

  19. Main findings (cont’d) • Planning, managing and resourcing the review process has been a problem • Evaluation culture in Departments is variable, but improving • Synergies are possible with other elements of public service modernisation programme

  20. Report recommendations • Improving timeliness of reviews • Changes to structures & reporting arrangements within Depts/Offices • Detailing progress in Modernisation Action Plan updates under Sustaining Progress • Stating of reasons for each review

  21. Recommendations (cont’d) • Making review steering committees more independent • Strengthening of central supports • Smaller Offices • Systems to follow-up on review recommendations

  22. Recommendations (cont’d) • Annual Reports of Departments/Offices to detail review activity • Laying review reports before Oireachtas Committees • Linkages with Management Information Framework • Linkages with Policy Analysis training

  23. Where now? • Report was accepted and is being implemented • Call for 2005-2007 round of reviews has issued, with focus to be on important, key areas • ERI building interlinkages with other initiatives: • NDP/CSF evaluation, • policy analysis training, • Management Information Framework • Minister’s recent call for debate on Budgetary process will have implications for the ERI

  24. Longer-term issues • Moving beyond expenditure programmes • Administrative expenditure • Tax expenditures • Handling cross-departmental issues • Encouraging politicians to ask the right questions • Perhaps the time is ripe for another external evaluation of the ERI?

More Related