---

Defence Evaluation and Research Agency

Mr. Menzies Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list (a) those targets of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency for 1998-99 which (i) were and (ii) were not achieved, giving the factors affecting the outcome in each case and (b) action taken by the agency to improve target achievement performance in 1999-2000; and if he will make a statement. [111726]

Dr. Moonie: This is a matter for the Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency. I have asked the Chief Executive to write to the right hon. and learned Member.

8 Mar 2000 : Column: 692W

Letter from John Chisholm to Mr. Menzies Campbell, dated 6 March 2000:

I have been asked to reply to your parliamentary question about the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency's (DERA) targets for 1998/99.

A list of the key targets for 1998/99 and details of which ones were and were not achieved, together with an explanation of the factors affecting the outcome in each case, is given in Annual Report for 1998/99, a copy of which is available in the House of Commons Library.

You also asked for details of the action taken by the Agency to improve target achievements performance in 1999/00. The targets for 1999/00 were published in Hansard on 27 July 1999. Again, a copy is attached for ease of reference. As you will see, with the exception of target 7, "To establish at least six Defence Diversification Offices across the UK", they are essentially the same

8 Mar 2000 : Column: 693W

as those for the previous year. The many trading problems caused by continuing declines in some of our core defence business have meant that the first half of 1999/2000 has been extremely challenging. We are, therefore, having to control costs carefully at the traditional technology end of our business in order to optimise our financial performance. Also of vital importance are our non- financial targets because these reflect the scientific achievements on which our reputation and hence future income stream will be based. Last year, we experienced difficulties in setting the baselines for one or two of these, but we have taken managerial steps to ensure that our true achievements are recorded this year. It is, nevertheless, too early to predict the outcome of these measures.

Overall, however, our ability to meet the targets will very much depend on a timely resolution of the debate over the future of DERA and the question of a public-private partnership announced in the Strategic Defence Review in July 1998. Naturally, such strategic uncertainty affects DERA staff and customers alike and, whilst our central direction remains unchanged, we need to establish a firm position from which to address the difficulties of our current trading environment.

Key Targets for 1999/2000

In Year Targets

consistent with Treasury requirements, to achieve at least a 6% Return on Capital Employed.

to set manpower chargeout rates for 2000/01 which reflect a reduction in DERA overheads compared with 1999/2000 budgeted levels.

to increase new business income (from customers other than the MOD) to £140 million in 1999/2000.

to increase the number of staff elected as Fellows of professional bodies by 10%.

to achieve on time 90% of the agreed milestones on work for MOD customers.

to increase the level of customer satisfaction, as measured by customer surveys.

to establish at least 6 Defence Diversification Offices across the UK.

Three Year Targets

over a period of 3 years, to achieve a 20% increase in peer reviewed publications per professional.

over a period of three years to increase by 50% the number of scientific teams assessed as 'world-class' in the technical assessment exercise.

Army Training and Recruiting Agency

Mr. Menzies Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list (a) those targets of the Army Recruitment and Training Agency for 1998-99 which (i) were and (ii) were not achieved, giving the factors affecting the outcome in each case and (b) action taken by the agency to improve target achievement performance in 1999-2000; and if he will make a statement. [111729]

Dr. Moonie: This is a matter for the Chief Executive of the Army Training and Recruiting Training Agency. I have asked the Chief Executive to write to the right hon. and learned Member.

Letter from M. A. Piper to Mr. Menzies Campbell, dated 6 March 2000:

I am replying to your questions to the Secretary of State for Defence about the Key Targets for the Army Training and Recruiting Agency (ATRA) and the Defence Animal Centre (DAC) for the year 1998/1999, as this matter falls within my area of responsibility as Deputy Chief Executive of the Agency.

You should be aware that although the DAC was an Agency in its own right in 1998/1999, on 1 April 1999 it became part of the ATRA. For the year 1998/1999 therefore, there were two sets of Key Targets, one for each agency. For 1999/2000 and subsequent

8 Mar 2000 : Column: 694W

years, the DAC targets are subsumed within those of the ATRA and are not separately identified. Neither Agency has yet published their Annual Report and Accounts for 1998/1999, but expect to shortly.

ATRA Key Targets 1998/1999:

Key Target 1:

To meet the Adjutant General's requirement for commissioned officers.

Requirement: 642, Achievement: 591

The continuing shortfall was due to insufficient numbers of potential officers recruited in previous years. The demographic trough continues to have an effect. The Agency has introduced an Officers Marketing Action Plan which aims to improve the level of enquiries and firm applications for commissions.

Potential officers will be targeted in tertiary education as well as the traditional area of secondary education. The Agency has also introduced an improved "nurturing" process to maintain contact with potential officers throughout their education, prior to them joining.

Key Target 2:

To meet the Adjutant General's requirements for officers qualified for service in Field Force units following successful Special to Arm training.

Requirement: 632, Achievement: 580

The shortfall results from the insufficient numbers being recruited in previous years resulting in lower numbers passing through to Special to Arm training. The action being taken to address the shortfall in KT1 will also address this KT.

Key Target 3:

To meet the Adjutant General's requirement for professional development training of officers.

Requirement: 7,500, Achievement: 7,114

Achievement of this target is entirely dependent upon release of officers from the Field Army to undertake such training. Exceptional operational commitments prevented officers being released to take up all the places allocated. More tautly defined training programmes have been introduced which resulted in a considerable improvement in performance over 1997/98, and it is anticipated that this will continue.

Key Target 4:

To meet the Adjutant General's requirements for soldiers qualified for service in Field Force units following successful Special to Arm training.

Requirement: 10,140, Achievement: 8,353

Underachievement in recruiting and higher than anticipated wastage rates in Recruit Training (Phase 1) led to lower numbers entering Special to Arm training and therefore under performance in this KT. The Agency is putting in place mechanisms to improve both the quality of recruits entering the training pipeline and to make the training process more efficient. This is already showing signs of improving performance.

Key Target 5:

To meet the Adjutant General's requirement for soldiers' professional development training.

Requirement: 55,500, Achieved: 52,183

Again, exceptional operational commitments of the Field Army prevented soldiers being released to take up all the places allocated. More tautly defined training programmes have been introduced which resulted in a considerable improvement in performance over 1997/98, and it is anticipated that this will continue.

Key Target 6:

Achieve efficiency savings. During the year develop an Efficiency Index that measures output and associated costs as a baseline to achieve year on year improvements in efficiency.

Target: £34.7M savings, Achievement: £28M savings

8 Mar 2000 : Column: 695W

The shortfall is due primarily to difficulties experienced with accounting for the pay of all Initial Trainees, for which the Agency assumed responsibility during the year. The development of the Efficiency Index has been achieved.

Overall, the Agency continued to operate in a difficult environment, the economy has been buoyant, thus increasing competitive pressure on recruiting in the target age group. The effects of the increased level of operational commitment in the Field Army continued to have an effect, principally by reducing the availability of officers and soldiers for career developments courses. The introduction of more tautly defined training programmes has resulted in an improvement in performance in the current year and this is set to continue.

DAC Targets met in 1998/1999:

Key Target 1:

To meet requirements for Military Personnel (MP) and Military Working Animals (MWA).

Target: 100%, Achievement: 100%

Key Target 2:

To meet agreed customer satisfaction for trained quality output.

Target: 95%, Achievement: 95%

Key Target 4:

To meet agreed customer satisfaction in timeliness of delivery.

Target: 95%, Achievement: 96.3%

Key Target 5:

To achieve training success rates for Course Specific MWA.

Target: 95%, Achievement: 100%

Key Target 6:

To achieve training success rates for MP.

Target: 90%, Achievement: 94.1%

DAC Target not met in 1998/1999:

Key Target 3:

To meet customer satisfaction in numbers of trained output quantity.

Target: MWA--95%, MP--100%, Achievement: MWA--78.9%, MP--100%

The shortfall in Military Working Animals was caused primarily by a shortage of suitable dogs being available and was compounded by staff shortages. This latter was caused by recruiting deficits in the past and although there have been improvements in this area, operational commitments by the Field Army are still causing problems. A number of initiatives have been introduced to overcome the shortfall in dogs, principally revised procurement procedures and veterinary screening procedures.

---