Fourth Report - Use of evaluation and modelling in government
Select Committee
Public Accounts Committee
HC 254
27 May 2022
Government Response (AI assessment · 19 of 19 classified)
Accepted
12
Recommendations
2 results
2
Not Addressed
HM Treasury is not making full use of the spending levers it has at its...
Recommendation
HM Treasury is not making full use of the spending levers it has at its disposal to deliver a step change in the use of evaluation across government. We welcome the creation of the Evaluation Task Force and the increased …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The response does not address the recommendation of setting up a formal process for tracking spending review settlement conditions relating to evaluation, and instead discusses internal performance measures and consultations with the sector.
HM Treasury
View Details
16
Not Addressed
Transparency of the models that departments use is poor: only 9 out of 17 departments...
Recommendation
Transparency of the models that departments use is poor: only 9 out of 17 departments have published their list of business-critical models since 2013, and only four of those have updated this since 2017.54 HM Treasury has not published its …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The response discusses publishing an evaluation registry and reviewing quality assurance procedures, which doesn't directly address the need to publish lists of business-critical models or improve guidance on model transparency.
HM Treasury
View Details
Conclusions (1) Observations and findings — click to expand
9
Conclusion
Not Addressed
Within departments, ultimate responsibility for upholding standards and securing improvements lies with that department’s accounting officer.24 Managing Public Money states that financial modelling and evaluation are an important part of the accounting officer’s role, and that they should comply with the Functional Standards.25 However, there continues to be important weaknesses …
Government Response Summary
The response restates the conclusion.