Select committee inquiry
Cross-government working
Closed
What the inquiry looked at
“Central government is organised into departments that plan and deliver their own objectives. Sometimes these objectives can be met perfectly well by departments acting alone, but in some instances Government priorities cut across departmental boundaries and require them to work together. There are several different types of cross-government working, from sharing best practice between departments to delivering complex programmes that cut across different departments. Priorities like net zero, adult social care, rough sleeping and vulnerable families all require this second type of cross-government working. Cross-government working can allow the government to deliver outcomes more effectively and deliver better value for money, but it requires a clear concerted effort. Based on a National Audit Office investigation into effective cross-government working , the Committee will question senior officials including from the Cabinet Office and the Treasury. The inquiry will explore what effective cross-government looks like, good practice examples, and what are some of the barriers to cross-government working. If you have evidence on this issue, please submit it here by 23:59 on Friday 24 November 2023. Please look at the requirements for written evidence submissions and note that the Committee cannot accept material as evidence that is published elsewhere.”
The committee's words, from the inquiry page on parliament.uk ↗.
What it found
In the committee's words, from the summary of Twelfth Report - Cross-government working ↗
Cross-government working is fundamental to the successful delivery of many government policies and programmes. There are a range of different models for how government departments work together, ranging from two departments working jointly on a specific policy, such as adult social care, to government priorities delivered by multiple departments, such as net zero. We have recently reported on another example, where the Joint Combatting Drugs Unit brings together several departments to try and tackle the complex problems caused by illegal drugs in a joined-up, holistic way.
We regularly see important programmes being hindered because of the difficulties such as data sharing and lack of cross-departmental buy-in. While departments take the lead in delivering their policies and programmes, both HM Treasury and the Cabinet Office have a role in supporting cross-government priorities, and they need a firm grip on facilitating and improving cross-government working so that it is not considered a ‘nice to have’ but instead becomes an integral part of how government works. HM Treasury and the Cabinet Office have worked to identify the barriers that prevent good working across government. They now need to learn from these so they can advise departments on the most effective approach, support this with appropriate funding arrangements, and do more to ensure that government consistently reports on its cross-cutting outcomes.
What the government said
The government responded on 3 May 2024.
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response.
The government states that it agrees with most of the Committee's recommendations on cross-government working, describing several as already implemented, and gives target dates for others.
- On analysing models of cross-government working, the government agrees, and HM Treasury "will continue to monitor and analyse" their use, with progress to be updated "by March 2025".
- On data, the government agrees and describes the recommendation as implemented, but says the Evaluation Task Force "does not routinely identify data for every cross-government project", which it calls "not practicable within existing resources".
- On guidance ahead of the next Spending Review, the government agrees, with a target implementation date of "August 2024, or earlier, if circumstances dictate".
- On publishing departments' Outcome Delivery Plans, the response notes that departments would only produce internal plans for 2023-24, and says HM Treasury and the Cabinet Office "will write to the committee with an update by end of May".
Read the government's response ↗ Read the report ↗ Report an error
How the inquiry ran
Each dot is a dated item listed on this page, from the inquiry's opening on 20 September 2023 to its close on 3 May 2024.
- Oral evidence 11 Dec 2023
- Report 13 Feb 2024
- Government response 3 May 2024
- Correspondence 11 Jan 2024
What it recommended 6 recommendations · 17 conclusions
2Identify key data and build analytical capability for effective cross-government project delivery and evaluation.
Concluded (the committee's words)
Many cross-government projects that come before this Committee are hindered by missing or inadequate data. The government has historically had an issue with poor quality and inconsistent data and with ineffective data sharing arrangements. Whilst there have been some positive improvements, such as establishing data standards across government, difficulty with data sharing was the most commonly identified barrier in a recent HM Treasury survey about cross-government working. In addition, insufficient data capacity and capability across government means the skills needed to interpret data are not always available, which can hinder projects, and make it difficult to evaluate effectively what works. Recommendation 2: HM Treasury and the Cabinet Office should work with the Evaluation Taskforce and the Analysis function to: • identify the key data needed to deliver, monitor and evaluate cross- government projects; and • help departments to collect the data and have the analytical capability to interpret it.
3Share Shared Outcomes Fund lessons and produce guidance for departments on cross-government working.
Concluded (the committee's words)
Effective cross-government working is fundamental to delivering government’s priorities but there is a lot of work to do to make it more than just a ‘nice to have’. Efforts have been made to incentivise cross-government working through reward and recognition but HM Treasury acknowledges there is a lot of work still to do. In 2019, the Shared Outcomes Fund was set up to fund pilot projects that test innovative ways of working across the public sector, with an emphasis on thorough plans for evaluation and whether these small-scale projects can be scaled-up. More recently, HM Treasury has developed guidance to encourage joint-bids at spending rounds. But HM Treasury concedes that it is disappointing there were only 28 joint bids at the last Spending Review. It recognises that it is going to have to do more in the next Spending Review to encourage joint bids from departments and to make more top-down requests for joint bids. 6 Cross-government working Recommendation 3: HM Treasury and the Cabinet Office should: • share lessons learned from the Shared Outcomes Fund; • produce guidance for Departments setting expectations on cross- government working ahead of the next Spending Review.
4Improve cross-government working by only approving business cases with clear links to cross-cutting aims.
Concluded (the committee's words)
HM Treasury has taken initial steps to evaluate what works but now needs to fully embed this to improve cross-government working. In 2021, the Government set up a joint Evaluation Task Force to support evaluation of policies and programmes across government. HM Treasury made greater use of its powers, requiring departments to include plans for evaluations for it to approve funding at the 2020 Spending Review. More recently, the Task Force has set up an evaluation registry which shows what government has already done in a policy area and what others are planning so that examples of good practice can be better shared. Review of this will become mandatory prior to business case approval from next year. All business cases should include plans for monitoring and evaluation. However, departmental approvals processes vary in terms how much they take these plans into account as part of their approval decision. Recommendation 4: HM Treasury should use its influence to improve cross- government working, for example by only approving business cases that clearly demonstrate a link to the relevant cross-cutting aim they support, appropriate plans for evaluation, and detail on what cross-government outcomes and outputs should be delivered.
5Publish departments' Outcome Delivery Plans and progress against cross-cutting outcomes to improve transparency.
Recommended (the committee's words)
Government does not consistently report on cross-cutting outcomes. The Cabinet Office and HM Treasury are responsible for supporting and monitoring the delivery of departmental objectives and 20 cross-cutting outcomes set-out in Outcome Delivery Plans (ODPs). Departments published their first ODPs in July 2021 but cross-cutting outcomes were not always consistently reported. For 2023–24 departments will only be required to produce internal ODPs. HM Treasury expects Departments to set out their performance against their ODPs in their 2023–24 annual reports and accounts. Recommendation 5: Cabinet Office should publish departments’ ODPs to improve transparency, along with plans to deliver them. The Cabinet Office should also more clearly publish cross-cutting outcomes and progress made against them. Cross-government working 7 1 Setting-up and delivering cross- government working
1Committee heard evidence from officials and practitioners on cross-government working challenges and opportunities.
Concluded (the committee's words)
On the basis of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence from Sir Alex Chisholm, Permanent Secretary at the Cabinet Office, and from Cat Little, Second Permanent Secretary at HM Treasury, about cross-government working.1 We also took evidence from four practitioners to understand more about the key challenges and opportunities they have experienced from cross-government working. They were: Catherine Hutchinson, Head of the Evaluation Task Force; Will Garton, Director General for Levelling Up, Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC); Chris Thompson, Director for Net Zero Strategy, Department for Energy, Security and Net Zero; and, Nathan Moores, Director for Shared Services at the Cabinet Office.
6Shared vision, coordinated management, and compatible data are vital for successful cross-government working.
Concluded (the committee's words)
Both our reports and those undertaken by the National Audit Office (NAO) regularly demonstrate the importance of a shared vision and objectives, coordinated programme and risk management, and compatible data and technology to ensure successful cross- government working.8
7HM Treasury has established six joint delivery models for cross-government working.
Concluded (the committee's words)
In May 2023, HM Treasury set out six joint delivery models for cross-government working in Managing Public Money, including details on responsibilities and accountabilities for each model. At one end of the spectrum covered by these models, joint delivery can involve simple collaboration, where departments may collaborate in the development of policy they have an interest in. At the other end, a machinery of government change would be required, with responsibility and funding transfer from one department to another by order of the Prime Minister.9
8HM Treasury has not analysed the use of its cross-government working models.
Concluded (the committee's words)
It is important to understand how these models are being used across government and identify which model of joint working is most appropriate in different circumstances. HM Treasury explained that it had not yet analysed what proportion of cross-government working was undertaken through each of the different models but said this would certainly be something they could consider taking forward.10
9Effective cross-government working requires a shared vision, common goals, and departmental buy-in.
Concluded (the committee's words)
Departmental witnesses told us how effective cross-government working begins with a shared vision.11 Cabinet Office told us that a vision does not always arrive ready- made and it is important for the departments involved to understand and appreciate the ‘common goal’.12 We also heard that getting buy-in from departments is key.13 This is often easier when the policy area has a high level of political support, for example climate change; and where there is senior political agreement on priorities.14
10Clear outcomes, defined responsibilities, and a supportive culture are essential for cross-government success.
Concluded (the committee's words)
As well as a shared vision, clear outcomes need to be established and shared between departments to measure success.15 Clearly defined responsibilities and accountability structures are also important.16 Cabinet Office told us that alongside encouraging cross- government working by explaining the financial benefits to those involved, it is also important to ensure a culture exists which recognises and appreciates cross-government efforts.17
11Identified barriers to cross-government working include bureaucracy, unclear priorities, and poor data sharing.
Concluded (the committee's words)
HM Treasury and Cabinet Office have identified a range of barriers to effective cross-government working. The most commonly identified barriers included: structures 7 Q 44; C&AG’s Report para 5 8 Q 1; C&AG’s Report para 6 9 C&AG’s Report para 1.4, Figure 2 10 Q 49; C&AG’s Report para 1.4 11 Qq 2, 38, 45 -46 12 Qq 45, 46 13 Q 2 14 Qq 46, 82 15 Q 38 16 Q 48; C&AG’s Report para 11 17 Q 47 Cross-government working 9 and bureaucracy hindering planning and delivery; ministerial priorities not being well understood; inconsistent join-up in spending decisions and allocations; a lack of routine data sharing between Departments; and poor arrangements for sharing best practice and learning.18
12Difficulties sharing lessons and best practice persist due to lack of central government information.
Concluded (the committee's words)
Departmental witnesses told us that the extent of these problems can depend on the policy area, but highlighted that sharing lessons across government can be difficult because there is not a single place to find information.19 Cabinet Office told us that it tries to disseminate good practice through the work of the functions and the Evaluation Task Force.20 However, HM Treasury accepted that more needs to be done to share best practice and tell people about the benefits of cross-government working to encourage departments to work together.21 Missing or inadequate data
13Poor quality data and incompatible IT systems are major barriers to cross-government working.
Concluded (the committee's words)
Many of the projects and programmes brought before the Committee suffer from a lack of good quality data or are adversely affected by government IT systems not ‘talking’ to each other.22 Issues with data was identified as the main barrier to cross-government working in HM Treasury’s and the Cabinet Office’s survey of 229 departmental practitioners in 2022. 63% of respondents felt that technical issues made it difficult to share data effectively across government and 62% saw departmental unwillingness to share data across government as a major barrier to effective cross-government working.23
14Extreme complexity and inconsistency of government IT systems hinder effective data sharing.
Concluded (the committee's words)
We have reported time and time again on the impact of poor IT, and are aware of the extreme complexity and inconsistency of data systems across government, for example within the criminal justice system.24 The Cabinet Office told us that across government there are around 205 core systems that run HR, finance and payroll and, to compound this problem, there are a further 655 systems that support these.25 We heard how departments are beginning to improve data consistency by establishing standards, and enabling data- sharing across government, although issues remain, including accessing data from the private sector.26
15Challenges persist in extracting value from data and developing data interpretation skills government-wide.
Concluded (the committee's words)
The Cabinet Office told us that one of the bigger challenges across government is extracting the value out of the data to drive insights and decisions in a timely way.27 Without good data it is difficult to evaluate effectively what works.28 In addition, insufficient data capacity and capability across government means skills needed to interpret data are not available. The Cabinet Office told us it launched the ‘One Big Thing’ initiative to deliver data training and claimed that 40% of civil servants have signed-up so far.29 18 Q 12; C&AG’s Report, paras 15 and 1.14 19 Qq 12–14 20 Q 44 21 Q 67 22 Q 20 23 Q 29; C&AG’s Report, para 1.14 & Figure 4 24 Qq 20, 28 25 Q 22 26 Qq 72, 21, 28, 55 27 Q 22 28 C&AG’s Report, para 2.7 29 Q 55 10 Cross-government working 2 Improving the delivery of cross- government working Incentivising cross-government working
16Shared Outcomes Fund provides financial incentives for innovative cross-government pilot projects.
Concluded (the committee's words)
Additional funding is an incentive used to encourage cross-government working, with the Shared Outcomes Fund being the most recent initiative.30 It was set up in 2019 by HM Treasury to fund pilot projects that test innovative ways of working across the public sector, with an emphasis on thorough plans for evaluation.31 Total funding made available through the scheme was £600 million, and HM Treasury claimed over 60 projects have now received this support. It told us the idea of the Shared Outcomes Fund is to test and scale up pilot projects where evaluation has shown they work.32
17Departments lack sufficient incentives for investing in cross-government benefit-delivering programmes.
Concluded (the committee's words)
However, there is little incentive for departments to invest in programmes that deliver benefits elsewhere in government.33 We challenged HM Treasury on whether Permanent Secretaries received sufficient recognition for delivering outcomes across multiple departments. HM Treasury acknowledged the importance of rewarding and recognising those who invest time in cross-government delivery and that HM Treasury needed to use every lever available to try to increase the use of cross-government working. HM Treasury told us that politicians in government played an important role in incentivising senior officials to deliver cross-government working by setting cross-cutting priority outcomes.34
18Joint bids at Spending Reviews remain underused, requiring more support and promotion.
Recommended (the committee's words)
HM Treasury told us that joint bids at Spending Reviews was another way it had tried to encourage departments to pool resources and work together to generate benefits. It told us that at Spending Review 2021 it had identified departments that were most involved in cross-cutting shared outcomes and made clear it was expecting a joint-bid from them. It was disappointed that only 28 joint-bids were submitted in the last Spending Review despite its issuing guidance and training over 1,000 finance and policy officials on developing joint-bids. The joint-bids included the beating crime plan and the illegal drug strategy. HM Treasury recognised that more needs to be done to support and encourage joint-bids in the next Spending Review. It told us that Managing Public Money now sets out the benefits of submitting joint-bids, but acknowledged it needed to do more to communicate these benefits and support departments in submitting joint-bids.35 Evaluating cross-government working
19Most government major projects lack robust evaluation plans, limiting evidence of effectiveness.
Recommended (the committee's words)
In 2021, the Government set up a joint Evaluation Task Force to support evaluation of policies and programmes across government.36 The Head of the Evaluation Task Force told us that only 8% of all government major projects and plans have a robust evaluation plan in place and as a result there is still limited evidence about what works. HM Treasury claimed it has assessed approximately 300 evaluation plans covering around £140 billion of 30 C&AG’s Report, para 19 31 C&AG’s Report, paras 19, 3.4 32 Q 67; C&AG’s Report, para 3.4 33 C&AG’s Report, para 19 34 Q 81 35 Qq 67, 68 36 C&AG’s Report, paras 16 and 3.8 Cross-government working 11 spend.37 It told us how it made greater use of its powers, requiring departments to include plans for evaluations as part of the 2020 Spending Review. However, it recognises that more needs to be done to see fundamental change and successfully embed the importance of robust evaluation across government.38 The Head of the Evaluation Task Force told us that plans are in place to “keep pushing” by developing more toolkits, and making things “more practical” by continuing to demonstrate what departments have already done.39
20The evaluation registry will mandate and publicly share government evaluation plans and reports.
Recommended (the committee's words)
The Head of the Evaluation Task Force told us it is working to encourage departments to share learning.40 She also told us about the ‘evaluation registry’ which holds information on what evaluation government has already done in the sector and what departments are planning for the future.41 The Head of the Evaluation Task Force is hopeful that the transparency provided by the registry will help drive healthy competition between departments to achieve their best.42 We challenged the Head of the Evaluation Task Force on whether those delivering programmes know about the registry. The Head of the Evaluation Task Force said that it was currently rolling the registry out across departments and that it will become mandatory from next year. The Task Force aims to ensure that evaluations are planned, plans are put on the registry and when the evaluation is complete departments put the final report on the registry, which should be viewable by members of the public in March 2024.43
21Departments inconsistently apply Green Book guidance on evaluation plans in spending proposals.
Recommended (the committee's words)
HM Treasury’s Green Book guidance on business case appraisal makes clear that plans for monitoring and evaluation should be proportionately included in each spending proposal that is submitted.44 Departments approaches vary in how much they choose to take these plans into account as part of their approval decision.45 DLUHC updated its business case template to include a requirement to provide details of any ring-fenced costs for impact evaluation of all investments of more than £100 million, and for smaller investments which are innovative, contentious or untested.46 Reporting on cross-cutting outcomes
22Departments lack clarity and consistent reporting on cross-cutting policy delivery in ODPs.
Recommended (the committee's words)
It is not always clear which departments are involved in delivering policies which cut across departmental boundaries. Departments report on their priority outcomes in Outcome Delivery Plans (ODPs). Departments published their first ODPs in July 2021.47 In October 2023, as part of Spending Review 2021, the government published a list of 76 priority outcomes, 20 of which are cross-cutting outcomes. These cover major policy areas including net zero, health and social care, and levelling up. The Cabinet Office and HM Treasury are responsible for supporting and monitoring the delivery of departmental 37 Q 31 38 Qq 60, 62 39 Q 31 40 Q 35 41 Qq 14,15, 16 42 Q 32 43 Qq 15, 16 44 HM Treasury and Government Finance Function, The Green Book: appraisal and evaluation in central government, para 8.8 45 Q 34 46 C&AG’s Report, Evaluating government spending, Session 2021–22, HC 860, 2 December 2021, para 3.22 47 C&AG’s Report, paras 4, 11, 1.9 12 Cross-government working objectives and cross-cutting outcomes set out in ODPs. Some departments used their ODPs to explain where more informal joint working was involved in delivering other outcomes but this was not reported consistently in the relevant ODPs.48
23Non-publication of Outcome Delivery Plans hinders public tracking of cross-government outcomes.
Concluded (the committee's words)
In 2022, the Government said that it was focusing on producing ODPs for 2023–24 rather than the plans for 2022–23 which it would cover retrospectively in the 2022–23 Annual Reports and Accounts. For 2023–24 departments will not be required to publish their ODPs.49 We challenged HM Treasury and the Cabinet Office on the difficulties for citizens of tracking cross-government outcomes, such as obesity or drugs policies, under these arrangements. The Cabinet Office told us that the decision on whether to publish ODPs was taken by Ministers but that it plans to continue using unpublished ODPs to assess performance internally.50 HM Treasury told us that departments need to be transparent about their performance and it still required reporting in annual report and accounts about the performance of government departments for the current year.51 48 C&AG’s Report, paras 5, 9, 1.9 49 Q80; Letter from HM Treasury and the Cabinet Office to William Wragg MP, Chair of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, 6 July 2023 50 Qq 79, 80 51 Q 75 Cross-government working 13
Evidence
Oral evidence sessions 1
- 11 Dec 2023Cross-government working; Pre-panel: Cross-government working; UK-Rwanda Migration and Economic Development Partnership8 witnesses, listed belowparliament.uk ↗
Who gave evidence 8 witnesses
- Cat LittlePermanent Secretary, Cabinet Office
- Catherine HutchinsonHead of the Evaluation Task Force, HM Treasury and the Cabinet Office
- Chris ThompsonDirector of Clean Growth, Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy
- Daniel HobbsDirector of Asylum, Protection and Enforcement, Home Office
- Nathan MooresShared Services Strategy Director, Cabinet Office
- Sir Alex ChisholmPermanent Secretary, Cabinet Office
- Sir Matthew Rycroft KCMG CBEPermanent Secretary, Home Office
- Will GartonDirector General for Levelling Up, Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities