Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 2
2
Not Addressed
Develop a plan to incentivise departments to conduct high-quality, independent major project evaluations.
Recommendation
Government departments still have few incentives to commission and carry out high-quality evaluations of major projects. High quality evaluation is an important means of providing evidence about what works, transparency about what value a project has produced, and making the case (or not) for further investment. As we pointed out in our May 2022 report on the use of evaluation and modelling in government, in 2019, only 8% of £432 billion of spend on major projects had robust impact evaluation plans in place, and 64% of spend had no evaluation arrangements at all. The Evaluation Task Force is currently updating the 2019 analysis of how much evaluation of major projects now takes place and there is still room for improvement. In our May 2022 report we also pointed out that the same barriers such as a lack of political engagement and a lack of incentives for departments to produce evaluations had persisted since 2013. HM Treasury says it still has more to do to address these barriers, but that the time that it can take for value and benefits to be realised and the time it takes to carry out an evaluation can be barriers. HM Treasury does not, however, consider the cost of evaluation to be a barrier. Recommendation 2: HM Treasury and the evaluation task force should develop a plan that addresses the root causes of why evaluations are not routinely carried out and how to incentivise departments to carry our more high-quality and independent evaluations.
Government Response Summary
The government agrees with the recommendation to develop a plan for incentivising evaluations, but its response discusses supplier and market engagement with SMEs and TechUK, which is irrelevant to the committee's specific request for an evaluation plan.
Government Response
Not Addressed
HM Government
Not Addressed
The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. (OC) scheme claims were transferred across to be administered under the Department- delivered Horizon Convictions Redress Scheme, and the OC scheme closed. The department confirms that the Horizon Convictions Redress Scheme will apply the same principles as the previous OC scheme, ensuring no OC claimant is disadvantaged by the transfer to HCRS. HCRS aims to identify delays and move cases forward, similar to the OC scheme, with case management processes and an independent panel. Case management involves resolving disputes with an independent party when bilateral agreement is not reached. Dentons (law firm) and Sir Gary Hickinbottom (retired Court of Appeal judge) will manage cases as needed. Sir Gary will cover both pecuniary and non-pecuniary aspects of claims. Before case management, the department will engage with claimants' legal representatives to resolve claims early. In addition to the above which answers the Committee’s recommendation, there is a further recommendation from Sir Wyn Williams for a public announcement clarifying any differences in the financial redress process between HCRS and OC, we will publish further guidance on the roles of Dentons and Sir Gary Hickinbottom, as well as on the Alternative Dispute Resolution process, by the end of Summer 2025. The department is engaging with OC claimants' legal representatives, hoping Sir Wyn Williams' recent Inquiry report will encourage them to submit their claims for consideration by the department and the independent panel.