THE GREEN BOOK Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
A Short Guide: the NAO's Work on HM Treasury
1 The NAO’s work on HM Treasury A ShoRT GUIDE The NAO’s work on HM Treasury June 2010 2 The NAO’s work on HM Treasury Our vision is to help the nation spend wisely. We apply the unique perspective of public audit to help Parliament and government drive lasting improvement in public services. The National Audit Office scrutinises public spending on behalf of Parliament. The Comptroller and Auditor General, Amyas Morse, is an Officer of the House of Commons. He is the head of the National Audit Office which employs some 900 staff. He and the National Audit Office are totally independent of Government. He certifies the accounts of all Government departments and a wide range of other public sector bodies; and he has statutory authority to report to Parliament on the economy, efficiency and effectiveness with which departments and other bodies have used their resources. Our work leads to savings and other efficiency gains worth many millions of pounds: £890 million in 2009-10. Contents Introduction 5 About the Department 6 The Department’s responsibilities 6 Where the Department spends its money 7 Financial management 10 Financial governance and reporting 10 Financial management across government 10 Efficiency 11 Use of information 12 Testing the reliability of performance data across government 12 Use of information by HM Treasury 13 Our audit of the budget assumptions 13 Service delivery 14 Financial stability measures 14 Procurement across government 15 Appendices 18 5 The NAO’s work on HM Treasury This short guide is one of 17 we have produced covering our work on each major government department. -
Water Services Regulation Authority (Ofwat): Annual Report and Accounts 2010-11 HC
Ofwat (The Water Services Regulation Authority) is a non-ministerial government Water Services Regulation Authority (Ofwat) department. We are responsible for making sure that the water and sewerage sectors in England and Wales provide consumers with a good quality and efficient Annual report and accounts 2010-11 service at a fair price. For the period 1 April 2010 to 31 March 2011 Water Services Regulation Authority (Ofwat) Annual report and accounts 2010-11 Sustainable water. information & publishing solutions Published by TSO (The Stationery Office) and available from: Ofwat Centre City Tower Online 7 Hill Street www.tsoshop.co.uk Birmingham B5 4UA Phone: 0121 644 7500 Mail, telephone, fax and email Fax: 0121 644 7699 Website: www.ofwat.gov.uk TSO Email: [email protected] PO Box 29, Norwich NR3 1GN Photographs © Des56, Environment Agency, Forwardcom, Telephone orders/general enquiries: 0870 600 5522 Getty Images, Highways Agency, Hirekatsu, Shine Pix, Order through the Parliamentary Hotline Lo-Call: 0845 7 023474 Transport for London, Toetipoten © Crown copyright 2011 Fax orders: 0870 600 5533 You may reuse this information (excluding logos) free of Email: [email protected] charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Textphone: 0870 240 3701 Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government- licence/ or email [email protected]. The Parliamentary Bookshop Water today, water tomorrow Where we have identified any third party copyright 12 Bridge Street, Parliament Square, London SW1A 2JX information you will need to obtain permission from the Telephone orders/general enquiries: 020 7219 3890 copyright holders concerned. -
TAPPED in from Passive Customer to Active Participant
TAPPED IN From passive customer to active participant Commissioned by #tappedin CONSIDERING CUSTOMERS Reaping the benefits of active relationships It is too easy to say ‘we all know what I am not suggesting the move from viewing customers want – safe, reliable drinking customers as passive recipients to active water and waste taken away’. Of course participants will be easy. No innovation is. But customers want the basics delivered, and the opportunity is there, as forward-thinking delivered well. But doing the basics well can’t companies in other sectors have shown. be the scale of our ambition. And the size of the prize is immense – great At PR14, companies made great strides in customer service and resilient supply at a customer engagement, holding more than price all of us can afford. But it is more than 250,000 conversations with customers. that. Together we can deliver a stronger As a result, companies are more focused sector, which commands the trust of THE WATER AND WASTE WATER SECTOR on delivering what customers and society customers and is ready for the future. PROVIDES VITAL PUBLIC SERVICES, ON need and want. WHICH CUSTOMERS, SOCIETY AND THE ECONOMY DEPEND. Now is the time to build on that engagement That those services are often taken for and innovate. Companies need to move from granted is perhaps an indication of the seeing customers as recipients of services, success of the sector. But that success has to seeing them as active participants in the also fed a misguided idea that customers delivery of those services. Customers and communities have knowledge, skills and are merely passive users of a service. -
Performance of the Water Companies in England and Wales 2007-08 Ofwat – Protecting Consumers, Promoting Value and Safeguarding the Future
Service and delivery – performance of the water companies in England and Wales 2007-08 Ofwat – Protecting consumers, promoting value and safeguarding the future www.ofwat.go v.uk Service and delivery – performance of the water companies in England and Wales 2007-08 report _________________________________________________________________________________ About this document Two of the key priorities of ‘Ofwat’s strategy – taking a forward look’ are to regulate effectively where competition will not protect consumers and to keep companies accountable. We make sure that the water and sewerage sectors in England and Wales deliver the service their consumers expect and meet their legal obligations. We also require them to take responsibility for the needs and concerns of all consumers. We monitor the performance of the companies in the absence of a competitive market so that we can be sure that they are delivering the services customers are paying for. We also compare aspects of their performance to drive improvements. Consumers can use these comparisons to find out how well their local company is performing. If a company fails to deliver, we take action on behalf of consumers. This report sets out how the companies performed in 2007-08 in delivering services to consumers. It includes our analysis of companies’ performance and where we are taking action – if necessary – on behalf of consumers. It summarises the companies’ performance: • in delivering the broad range of services provided to consumers (measured using the overall performance assessment – OPA); • against minimum service standards (called ‘DG’ or ‘levels of service’ indicators); • in maintaining their assets for the long term and the investments they have made; and • in managing water supplies in 2007-08, including dealing with issues such as leakage and flooding. -
AWB Response Re PR19 Methodology
Anglian Water Business Block C, Western House, Peterborough Business Park, Lynch Wood, PR19 draft methodology Peterborough, Water 2020 PE2 6FZ Ofwat Centre City Tower Tel: 03450 704158 7 Hill Street Birmingham B5 4UA 30 August 2017 Dear Ofwat, DELIVERING WATER 2020: CONSULTATION ON OFWAT’S METHODOLOGY FOR THE 2019 PRICE REVIEW We are pleased to have the opportunity to respond to Ofwat’s consultation on the methodology for the 2019 price review (PR19). Whilst we are supportive of the overall principles and proposals for the full 2019 price review, we have focused on the elements most relevant to retailers providing services to business customers. Customer engagement We are pleased to see the increased focus on customer engagement and customer participation in PR19. Accordingly, we are keen to engage with wholesalers to represent our views and the views of our business customers and work together to clarify agreed outcomes. As we are operating nationally, we expect to engage with most wholesalers and we would like to see this engagement planned into wholesaler’s PR19 programmes with sufficient time allowed within the programme for meaningful discussions and input. We would like to work with wholesalers to assist with proposed activities to engage with our customers. Issues which are likely to be at the forefront of discussions with wholesalers will include levels of service provided to retailers (and our customers) and the large number and variations of wholesale tariffs across the industry. We will be able to identify where service improvements are needed along with priorities. To improve price transparency to customers we would like to see wholesale tariffs simplified and consolidated across the industry whilst maintaining reasonable cost reflectivity. -
HM Revenues and Customs (148KB Pdf)
FINANCE COMMITTEE CALL FOR EVIDENCE ON THE LAND AND BUILDINGS TRANSACTION TAX (SCOTLAND) BILL SUBMISSION FROM HM REVENUE & CUSTOMS 1. This submission is in response to the Committee’s invitation of 25 January 2013 to submit written evidence on the following specific issues: The transitional arrangements being made by HMRC with regards the operation of Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) and the switch over in Scotland to Land and Buildings Transactions Tax (LBTT); Liaison with Scottish Government (SG), Registers of Scotland (RoS) and Revenue Scotland over these arrangements; Costs associated with this ‘switch over’; and Outline of the present relationship with RoS in gathering SDLT in Scotland. 2. HMRC is responsible for the collection and management of UK taxes (other than those collected by local authorities). As such, it is responsible for SDLT, which currently applies to land transactions in the United Kingdom. Under provisions of the Scotland Act 2012, SDLT will be “switched off” in Scotland and replaced by a devolved tax, the LBTT. This is expected to apply from April 2015. The transitional arrangements being made by HMRC with regards the operation of SDLT and the switch over in Scotland to LBTT 3. Section 80J(2) of the Scotland Act 1998 (inserted by section 28 of the Scotland Act 2012) has the effect that LBTT cannot be charged on a land transaction if SDLT applies to it. Broadly this means that, if the effective date of a Scottish transaction (for SDLT purposes) is before the date on which SDLT is switched off in Scotland (the switch-off date) it will be subject to SDLT and if that date is on or after the switch-off date it will be subject to LBTT. -
South Carolina Forestry Commission
South Carolina Forestry Commission Annual Report 2000-2001 The South Carolina Forestry Commission prohibits discrimination in all programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. The Forestry Commission is an equal opportunity provider and employer. To file a complaint of discrimination, contact the Human Resources Director, SC Forestry Commission, P.O. Box 21707, Columbia, SC 29221, or call (803)896-8879. TABLE OF CONTENTS FORESTRY COMMISSIONERS AND ADMINISTRATION................................................. 3 MISSION ....................................................................................................................................... 4 FIELD OPERATIONS SUPPORT.............................................................................................. 5 FOREST MANAGEMENT ......................................................................................................................... 5 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................. 8 URBAN FORESTRY ............................................................................................................................... 9 FOREST STEWARDSHIP ....................................................................................................................12 FOREST INVENTORY AND MONITORING .....................................................................................12 -
Strategic Regional Water Resource Solutions: Guidance for 2021 Strategic Regional Water Resource Solutions: Guidance for 2021
Regulators’ Alliance for Progressing Infrastructure Development February 2021 Strategic regional water resource solutions: guidance for 2021 Strategic regional water resource solutions: guidance for 2021 About this document This document relates to the gated process for strategic regional water resource solutions. It provides guidance for submissions received in 2021 and their assessment – that is, for the standard gate one (July 2021) and the accelerated gate two (September 2021). ‘PR19 final determinations: Strategic regional water resource solutions’1 presents the details of gate allowances, activities at each gate and delivery incentives. The activities that should be completed prior to each gate are further detailed in a submission template for each gate. Solution owners should use these templates to present the progress made by each gate and the evidence to support it, and should use this document as guidance to the overall process for gates taking place in 2021. 1 https://www.ofwat.gov.uk/publication/pr19-final-determinations-strategic-regional-water- resource-solutions-appendix 1 Strategic regional water resource solutions: guidance for 2021 Contents 1. Introduction 3 2. Gated process for solutions funded in PR19 5 3. Timetable 7 4. Assessment 8 5. Queries process 14 6. New solutions 15 7. Flexibility 18 2 Strategic regional water resource solutions: guidance for 2021 1. Introduction 1.1 Background At PR19 Ofwat announced a £469 million ring-fenced development fund for companies to investigate and develop strategic water resource solutions that benefit customers, protect and enhance the environment and benefit wider society. This funding provides companies with the ability and certainty to accelerate the development of solutions to be ‘construction ready’ for the 2025-2030 period; it encourages joint working, enables additional analysis where required and provides outputs with greater certainty than would be available without it. -
Statement by Chief Minister Re Meeting with HM Treasury
STATEMENTS ON A MATTER OF OFFICIAL RESPONSIBILITY The Bailiff: Very well, we now come to statements. The first statement of which I have notice is a statement to be made by the Chief Minister regarding a meeting with Her Majesty’s Treasury on 27th November. 6. Statement by Chief Minister regarding a meeting with H.M. Treasury on 27th November 2008. 6.1 Senator F.H. Walker (The Chief Minister): Members will be aware that in his pre-budget report delivered last week the U.K. Chancellor of the Exchequer announced a review of the long term opportunities and challenges facing the Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories as financial centres which have been brought into focus by recent financial and economic events. We in Jersey have, of course, been here before with the Edwards Review in 1998. However, to some extent this time it is different. We are now experienced in the review process. We have already been fully reviewed by the I.M.F. in 2003 and at that time were found to be almost fully compliant with the then international standards of regulation. More recently we have engaged with a review of the Treasury Select Committee in their work on offshore centres. Even more recently we have just concluded a further review by I.M.F. teams looking into our compliance firstly with international standards of anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism; and secondly with prudential regulation under an I.M.F. review which includes matters of financial stability. We await their reports in due course. -
EFFICIENCY by DESIGN STORIES of BEST PRACTICE in PUBLIC BODIES Efficiency by Design: Stories of Best Practice in Public Bodies
EFFICIENCY BY DESIGN STORIES OF BEST PRACTICE IN PUBLIC BODIES Efficiency by design: stories of best practice in public bodies Acknowledgements We would like to extend a special thank you to members of the Public Chairs’ Forum (PCF) and the Association of Chief Executives (ACE), who have contributed the case studies for this report and our website (a full list of which can be found at the end of this report); and to the Institute for Government, who have provided invaluable oversight and scrutiny over the course of this work. A special thanks is also extended to Amy Noonan and Lorna Sutton from the Public Chairs’ Forum and the Cabinet Office Public Public Bodies Reform team who have helped to put this report together. Foreword Chris Banks CBE, Chair of the Public Chairs’ Forum The Public Chairs’ Forum (PCF) is delighted to be working with Cabinet Office on this report designed to showcase examples of best practice efficiency in public bodies. Since the reform of public bodies was announced by the Coalition Government in October 2010, leaders of public bodies have been determined to respond positively to the Government’s challenge to deliver better public services at lower cost. Whilst there has been much visibility surrounding the savings made as a result of the reforms, less focus has been given to how these savings have been achieved while keeping to a minimum any negative impact on the delivery of public services and seeking to achieve improvements wherever possible. This publication seeks to shine light on the creative and imaginative measures that people working in public bodies have used to improve the efficiency of their organisations’ operations. -
England Tree Strategy Erattum
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs England Tree Strategy Consultation - Technical Annex June 2020 Erattum 17th August 2020: The estimate of vacant land on page 11 has been updated to replace an error and explain the source of the estimate on page 12 of the consultation document. Contents Erattum ................................................................................................................................ 1 General background, ............................................................................................................ 1 Expanding and connecting our woods ................................................................................. 3 Ambition ........................................................................................................................... 4 Creating space for nature ................................................................................................. 5 Planting trees for water .................................................................................................... 6 Helping landowners create woodlands ............................................................................. 8 Working together to create landscape scale change ...................................................... 10 Restoring degraded land ................................................................................................ 11 Funding future woodland creation – markets for ecosystem services such as carbon ... 12 Supplying the trees we need to plant and -
Central Government and Frontline Performance Improvement
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT AND FRONTLINE PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT: THE CASE OF “TARGETS” IN THE UNITED KINGDOM Steven Kelman, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government For over a decade, there has been a dramatic expansion in use of non-financial performance measures for government organizations. (Talbot 2005) Often, governments have limited themselves to what may be called “performance measurement” -- choosing measures and reporting performance against them. This has frequently, though not always, been the case in the United States, when performance measures have been developed at federal, state, and local levels; it is, for example, all the Government Performance and Results Act of l993 requires. In this situation, the words typically associated with the effort are “accountability” and “transparency.” Agency overseers, and the public, are made aware of whether performance is good or bad, and may then react accordingly (for instance, as with the Performance Assessment Review Team activities of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, by increasing or decreasing agency budgets). Other times, government organizations have gone beyond performance measurement to “performance management” – using measures as a tool to improve performance along dimensions measured, not just record performance levels assumed to be unchanging.1 The ability of performance management actually to improve performance is important for anyone interested in government working better. A particularly ambitious example of public-sector performance management has been the United Kingdom under the Labour government since l997, and especially after Labour’s first re- election in 200l. Starting in l998, departments negotiated “public service agreements” with the Treasury (the budget ministry) in conjunction with budget settlements.