Transcript Strategic management in the civil service and evaluation

Is evaluation of public policy in
Ireland dying?
And if it is should we care?
Dr. Richard Boyle
Head of Research
Institute of Public Administration
Dublin
Presentation to Irish Evaluation Network 20 November
2009
Overview
The good times? 1980s and 1990s
 Where are we now?
 Problems but green shoots?
 What should happen?

The good times
Well developed evaluation system
based around EU requirements for
evaluation of structural funds
 Public service modernisation –
Strategic Management Initiative and
Expenditure Review Initiative (later
Value for Money and Policy Review
initiative)

Where are we now?


EU pressure no longer a key driver
National Development Plan evaluation:
– NDP evaluation unit focused on capital
expenditure appraisal
– Last evaluation report was 2005

Value for Money and Policy Review
– Patchy and slow
– Resourcing reviews a big challenge
– Little evidence of impact

The problem is more of demand than of
supply
Does the Oireachtas engage with
evaluation reports?

2002-2004 round of Value for Money and
Policy Reviews:
– 43 reports produced
– Survey evidence from Select Committees about
37 of these reports
– Select Committees has received only 2 of these
reports, and one noted by the Committee but not
discussed
(Source McMahon, 2007)

Now getting reports to Committees but
engagement still an issue
What do VFMPR reports
recommend?

13 reports produced by Department of Agriculture and Food (one
of the leaders) reviewed:
–
–
–
–

99 conclusions and recommendations
No direct recommendations for programme termination
14 supported the status quo
Remainder largely focus on minor programme alterations or changes
in management processes
‘It is quite obvious that these reviews look at areas of efficiency
and effectiveness that must be addressed within the programmes
themselves rather than a more fundamental process of evaluation
that points to the need for a continuation of the scheme or
programme or the need to radically redistribute resources
between various programmes’
(Source: Smyth, 2007)
An Bord Snip Nua
‘…the Group noted a general deficiency of
information regarding the public service
impacts associated with particular items
of expenditure. The management focus
across departments generally still seems
to be on securing and retaining the
maximum volume of expenditure for
particular areas, and on accounting for
departmental activities in financial terms;
details on outputs and actual performance
seem secondary.’
An Bord Snip Nua
‘The Value for Money and Policy Reviews, in
which various expenditure programmes
are critically reviewed by the responsible
department, have up to now had limited
success in redirecting scarce resources
away from lower-priority, lower performing
areas to areas where they can be put to
more productive use (although recent
reforms are designed to address these
shortcomings)’
Green shoots?
Philanthropies requirements for
evaluation acting as an alternative
external driver to the EU?
 Changes to VFMPR: more focused
and targeting areas of significant
spending

Kinds of evaluation information
coming from different anchors
Operational issues
Impact issues
Continued relevance
issues
Programme
manager

?

Corporate group in
organisation

?
?
Corporate
government group
?

?
Legislative audit
office


?
Legislative bodies



Outside government



Source: Mayne, Divorski and Lemaire, 1999
Issues and what should happen now?
Evaluation model/approach – mix between
developing internal culture and external
scrutiny?
 Political demand – a lost cause?
 Periodic scrutiny of the evaluation system
 Structured publication of evaluation
results and links with expenditure
decisions
