80 likes | 180 Vues
This review examines the effectiveness of government policy pilots, emphasizing evidence-informed decision-making, risk assessment, and promoting innovation through evaluation methods. It identifies obstacles, including resource constraints and pitfalls in current practices, and offers 27 recommendations for improving pilot programs across government sectors.
E N D
‘Trying it out’ Review of effectiveness of government pilots Roger Jowell Centre for Comparative Social Surveys City University, London with Annette King, Government Chief Social Researcher’s Office, Cabinet Office 1 July 2004
Roger Jowell (Chair), City UWaqar Ahmad, DETRSue Duncan, PM’s Strategy UnitJohn Fox, DoHEdward Page, LSEMichael Richardson, DWPJudy Sebba, DfESAnn Taggart, HM TreasuryRobert Walker, Nottingham UPaul Wiles, Home Office CABINET OFFICE TEAM: Phil DaviesAnnette KingRebecca StanleyTess RidgeLucy Woodward Panel of Enquiry
Components of the Review Expert Workshop Literature Review Postal survey of 11 Departments Interviews with senior civil servants Interviews with selected ministers Case studies
Advantages of policy pilots Evidence-informed policy and delivery Prior assessment of risks and benefits Identifying fault-lines and potentially expensive failures Promoting innovation
Forms of evaluation Summative and formative Systematic Reviews Before-and-after studies Quasi-experimental designs Randomised controlled trials – of individuals or areas
Obstacles Issues of ‘clinical equipoise’ Election cycles and legislative time frames Lack of resources Hazards of false positives/negatives
Consequences of present practice Pilots that aren’t pilots Insufficient planning and training Overlooking what is already known Inadequate rigour
Conclusions 27 recommendations, adding up to case for … • greater use of ‘genuine’ pilots across government • early discussion of ethical and practical difficulties • pilots as part of continuous policy evaluation • pilots must run their course • distinction between negative results & failures • more rigour, more RCTs, more independence, more time, more resources • “an indispensable tool of modern government”