9
Accepted
We also asked about the decision-making process around awards for the Community Match Challenge scheme,...
Recommendation
We also asked about the decision-making process around awards for the Community Match Challenge scheme, where the Department match funded the amounts raised by philanthropic groups, foundations and grant-making organisations. Ministers selected twenty organisations to receive funding, including seven out of the ten highest scoring applications. All four of the proposals that were assessed as having the lowest score by the Department’s officials, however, also went on to receive funding, including three instances where officials were unsure if they were eligible.30 The Department said that after initial bids were scored it presented initial ideas to Ministers about how the funding could be distributed, and there was a “set of discussions with Ministers about their views and preferences” which led to further information being sought from bidders. This subsequently confirmed that those organisations were eligible for funding and resulted in funding being approved for those proposals. The Department asserted that the processes followed were appropriate, with advice being iterated as new information became available.31 It was, however, unable to elaborate further on what new information came to light that led to the lowest scoring applications receiving funding.32
Government Response Summary
The government agrees on the importance of appropriate record-keeping and asserts that proper processes were followed, confirming relevant information is recorded and staff are regularly reminded of their duties regarding record-keeping.
Government Response
Accepted
Government Response
Accepted
HM Government
Accepted
2.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented 2.2 DCMS agrees that appropriate records of decisions, especially in relation to funding, should always be kept. In this instance, as the DCMS Permanent Secretary confirmed in a letter dated 14 May 2021 to the Committee, she was satisfied that civil servants and special advisers at all times followed the Civil Service Code and Code of Conduct for Special Advisers in the distribution of the COVID-19 Charities Funding and that the decisions on funding were made by ministers in the proper way based on appropriately recorded written submissions from civil servants to junior ministers and the Secretary of State. All such submissions and the responses from ministers are recorded in the DCMS IT system. 2.3 The same letter set out the detailed processes involved confirming the distinction between impartial advice from civil servants and the political advice offered by special advisers. The process was that, while special advisers were present at a meeting where proposed allocations were being discussed, those meetings were chaired by a civil servant at Director General level and that the bids being considered by officials for recommendation to ministers at the time of the meeting were all eventually recommended to ministers. These were the only bids recommended. No bids were added to or removed from the list of recommendations as a result of the meeting or after that for any other reason. For a small number of bids, the monetary value of the award being recommended was adjusted between the meeting and the official submissions to ministers. The decision to do so was made by DCMS civil servants who were satisfied that the recommendations were all evidence-based and value for money. 2.4 As the Committee acknowledges, the department was working at pace in exceptional circumstances and continues to reflect on all lessons learned. While DCMS is confident that proper processes and procedures were followed in this case, the department continues to remind civil servants about their duties under the Civil Service Code and Code of Conduct for Special Advisers as well as the importance of appropriate record keeping both as part of the induction programme for new staff and in regular briefings cascaded to staff across the department.
Source
Committee
Public Accounts Committee
Report
Fifth Report - COVID-19: Government Support for Charities
09 Jun 2021
HC 250
Addressee Bodies
HM Treasury
Timeline
Recommendation age
5.1 yrs
Report published
09 Jun 2021