Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 24
24
Deferred
Government company interventions are not consistently or robustly evaluated, hindering learning and accountability.
Recommendation
Evaluation is a systematic assessment of the design, implementation, and outcomes of an intervention.69 It is important for learning what works and why, and to demonstrate accountability for the use of public money.70 Our work on the use of evaluation in government found that much of government activity is not evaluated robustly or at all, and the government does not know what works to improve outcomes in those areas.71 In 59 Committee of Public Accounts, Competition in public procurement, Sixth Report of Session 2023–24, HC 385, 13 December 2023, Conclusions and recommendations, para 5 60 Committee of Public Accounts, Government preparedness for the COVID-19 Pandemic: Lessons for government on risk, Forty-Sixth Report of Session 2021–22, HC 952, 23 March 2022, Summary 61 Q15 62 C&AG’s Report, para 3.6 63 Q16 64 Qq17, 83 65 Q21 66 Q53 67 Q30 68 Q69 69 Committee of Public Accounts, Use of evaluation and financial modelling in Government, Fourth Report of Session 2022–23, HC 254, 27 May 2022, para 2 70 C&AG’s Report, para 3.9 71 Committee of Public Accounts, Use of evaluation and financial modelling in Government, Fourth Report of Session 2022–23, HC 254, 27 May 2022, Conclusions and recommendations, para 1 Monitoring and responding to companies in distress 17 the case of government interventions in companies, the NAO found no indication that they are any more likely than other government spending to be formally and transparently evaluated.72
Government Response Summary
The government agrees with the recommendation on the importance of evaluation and sets a target date of July 2024. It acknowledges that evaluation of company cases has not been formalized and will work with Cabinet Office and UKGI to consider future changes and how to strengthen departmental evaluation requirements.
Government Response
Deferred
HM Government
Deferred
6.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: July 2024 6.2 The government agrees with the Committee on the importance of evaluation. To ensure best practice and learning is applied when considering interventions in different sectors, the centre of government, including UKGI, HM Treasury’s Special Situations team and Cabinet Office, acts as a source of expertise to support departments drawing on experiences of previous company distress cases. 6.3 To date, evaluation of company cases has not been formalised. This is an area of potential improvement. HM Treasury will therefore work with the Cabinet Office and UKGI to consider future changes, potentially including placing conditions on departments to report back to the centre. 6.4 It is the responsibility of LGDs to evaluate their interventions, as they are best placed to understand sectors they are responsible for, their departmental objectives and legal obligations. HM Treasury and Cabinet Office will consider how to capture and share cross-cutting issues and whether requirements for departmental evaluation can be further strengthened. 6.5 In addition, government interventions are often scrutinised by Parliament, such as the inquiries on Carillion, Silicon Valley Bank (UK) and Bulb Energy. Departmental Select Committees may also hold hearings or exchange correspondence with departments on bespoke interventions, such as CF Fertilisers and Celsa Steel. This provides further rigorous evaluation. 6.6 As highlighted by their report, the National Audit Office provide further evaluation by regularly scrutinising government’s response to company distress cases, from Northern Rock to Bulb Energy. As outlined in response to recommendation 4, HM Treasury will circulate the NAO’s recent report and good practice guide to departments.