Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 6
6
Not Addressed
DfE has high expectations for its new Unit for Future Skills, but the Unit does...
Recommendation
DfE has high expectations for its new Unit for Future Skills, but the Unit does not yet have all the skilled staff it needs to meet these expectations. In February 2022, DfE announced the creation of a Unit for Future Skills. This is a division within DfE but is intended to work across government, examining the interaction between the jobs and skills markets. DfE also plans that the Unit will engage with businesses and training providers to establish what additional analysis they would find helpful. The Unit currently has 18 staff, which is below complement as it has struggled to recruit the highly skilled analysts it needs. DfE recognises that it needs Developing workforce skills for a strong economy 7 to be data- and evidence-driven in what it does, and that the key to ensuring that the Unit achieves the necessary profile is to produce outputs that stakeholders find easy to use and helpful. Recommendation: DfE should write to us, alongside its Treasury Minute response, with an update on: • the staffing position of the Unit for Future Skills, and how any shortfall in resourcing is affecting the delivery of its programme of work; and • how it plans to assess and monitor the impact of the Unit’s work. 8 Developing workforce skills for a strong economy 1 Government skills programmes
Government Response Summary
This response addresses recommendations from a different Public Accounts Committee report, not the Foreign Affairs Committee report. Therefore, it does not engage with the substance of the recommendation.
Government Response
Not Addressed
HM Government
Not Addressed
1. PAC conclusion: The Cabinet Office does not have the data or IT system necessary to oversee and manage the government estate. 1. PAC recommendation: The Cabinet Office should get its new property database up and running as soon as possible. It should: • ensure that it uses the right expertise to advise on the procurement; • explore off-the-shelf digital options; and • set clear deadlines. In its Treasury Minute response to this report, the Cabinet Office should also confirm the new target launch date for inSite. 1.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: Spring 2024 1.2 The Cabinet Office (the department) continues to ensure the legacy system that InSite replaces (e-PIMS) remains fully operational. Data continues to be collected through departments providing the necessary information in e-PIMS. Other workstreams as part of the data transformation journey are continuing to be delivered. The department has now published on GOV.UK a bespoke property data standard, to enable better data collection for all of the government estate. Alongside this, the department is taking forward the procurement of the new property database, which is due to take place throughout the course of 2023 with the expectation that the new system will be in place no later than Spring 2024. The current system will remain live and operational throughout this time. 2. PAC conclusion: The Cabinet Office’s efforts to update its property database have been subject to a series of unnecessary delays and setbacks. 2. PAC recommendation: The Cabinet Office should analyse why the inSite programme has failed to meet its goals and set out what it has done since to ensure that these mistakes are not repeated in future procurement exercises. 2.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented 2.2 An analysis has been conducted and actions have been taken forward to the current procurement. As a result, the delivery will be supported with in-house technology expertise and will be in a phased manner. 2.3 The technology expertise for this will come from Cabinet Office Digital. The programme board composition has also been revised to be a focussed decision-making authority with enhanced technical capability. 3. PAC conclusion: The land and science property portfolios do not have clear leads, which frustrates decision making and creates a lack of accountability for their management. 3. PAC recommendation: In its Treasury Minute response to this report, the Cabinet Office should name lead departments for the science and land portfolios. If it is not able to at that point, then we expect to receive separate correspondence alongside the Treasury Minute providing the reasons for this delay, including a timeline for when a decision will be made. 3.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented 3.2 The land and science property portfolios are currently led within multiple departments with accountability for their management resting with separate accounting officers and with decision-making undertaken on an individual department basis. The Cabinet Office agrees there would be benefit from greater oversight and coordination of these portfolios by naming a lead department. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) has agreed to be the portfolio lead for the land portfolio; this has also been agreed with the other departments in scope of the portfolio. On the science portfolio, the lead is likely to be the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT). This will be finalised following the conclusion of the machinery of government changes that are necessary for the creation of the new department. A further update will be provided to the committee before summer recess. 4a. PAC conclusion: We are sceptical that the Government Hubs programme still represents good value for money in the current climate. 4a. PAC recommendation: In its Treasury Minute response to this report, the Cabinet Office should set out in detail the benefits and costs, including valuation drops compared to previous prices to date of the Government Hubs programme and how it will be adapted in-light of the new estimates for post pandemic office usage. 4.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommen