Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 2
2
Accepted
Require IPA to share good practice embedding for upfront planning and assurance regime use
Conclusion
Resets could have been avoided with more realistic upfront planning and scoping, including to better reflect the backdrop against which government programmes operate. This is a critically important part of the inception of any project. We heard that there has been a tendency across Government to re-baseline major projects1, particularly in the Ministry of Defence. The baseline should be agreed at Full Business Case and any scope change should be negotiated with the Treasury. We continually see poor planning as a deep-rooted problem across programmes, which can lead to resets. We would hope to see fewer programmes needing to be reset in the future as the IPA strengthens its assurance regime and its focus on setting up programmes for success. Although some resets are avoidable, for example through investing in up-front planning, other resets will be harder to avoid given the long delivery horizon and complex nature of major programmes. Resets may be a natural consequence for long-term programmes because of macro changes in the economy, technology sector or across society. Political factors, such as changes in ministers or the government composition, may also impact programmes. We heard how Universal Credit had been overseen by around nine secretaries of state since the current Senior Responsible Owner started his role in 2014. 1 Q140 6 Resetting government programmes Recommendation 2: a) Alongside the Treasury Minute response to this report, the IPA should share with us how it is embedding its good practice guidance on upfront planning and scoping, and the changes (with timeframes) it expects to see as a result. This should include providing the Committee with confirmation on how it is using its assurance regime to ensure that programmes do not pass major milestones without having followed planning good practice. The Senior Responsible Owner should produce a reconciliation statement comparing the milestones to what has actually happened on the project. b) By June 2024
Government Response Summary
The government agrees and commits that by June 2024, the IPA and HM Treasury will review existing guidance on upfront planning to identify gaps and update it, also bringing all relevant guidance together.
Government Response
Accepted
HM Government
Accepted
The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. approach for developing cost estimates, ensuring that those estimates properly account for the risk and uncertainty inherent in a project. HM Treasury also has long-standing guidance on accounting for optimism bias in projects and programmes. This ultimately aims to ensure risk and uncertainty are properly reflected in business cases for government initiatives from their inception and that this is properly managed throughout the programme or project’s lifecycle. By June 2024 the IPA and HM Treasury will review this existing guidance to determine what gaps there are, if any, and make plans to update it as required to ensure it remains fit for purpose. As part of the IPA’s Body of Knowledge, the IPA will also bring all existing guidance together to ensure project and programme leaders can easily access the IPA’s suite of tools, guidance and best practice to set projects and programmes up for success.