Government’s Expenditure Review Initiative Progress 2002 - 2004

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?