1 Delivering the roll-out project
1. In March 2000, the Prime Minister announced plans
for combining the Employment Service and the Benefits Agency into
a new Agency, Jobcentre Plus. In autumn 2001, the Department for
Work and Pensions (the Department) launched 56 pathfinder projects
to test the feasibility of combining benefits and employment services
within one organisation, and in April 2002, the merger of the
two bodies took place. Subsequently, the Treasury approved a business
case to roll out an integrated network of offices across Great
Britain over four years, at a cost of £2.2 billion.[2]
2. The first 225 offices were delivered using
the contractual arrangements in place for the Benefits Agency
and Employment Service estates. Following a new tendering process,
14 contractors were subsequently appointed to deliver the remainder
of the programme to fit out offices using an innovative partnering
approach. In the light of the announcement in 2004 of a Government-wide
programme of efficiency improvements, Jobcentre Plus staffing
was reduced by 15,000, and benefits processing was transferred
from Jobcentre Plus offices to 79 centralised processing centres.
These developments and revised plans resulting from tighter internal
management, led to a reduction in the planned number of offices
to 860 from the original estimate of 1,000.[3]
3. By April 2008, the new network had been largely
rolled out across the country. Two offices—in Portsmouth
and in Laurieston—remain to be completed. In two further
cases, developments will be funded from outside the roll-out programme
which is now closed; one existing office in Cumnock, which will
be refurbished, and one in Glasgow Pollok where suitable premises
have not yet been found. Some of the offices were completed later
than the original four-year time frame mainly because of changes
to the scope and design, particularly the need for some re-planning
following the changes in scale arising from the efficiency programme.
Overall, however, the total cost of the roll-out of £1.9
billion was £314 million less than budgeted.[4]
4. The initial budget and the planned number
of offices were based on development assumptions before the network
was finalised. Improvements to the anticipated service levels
were made as the project progressed and the team's understanding
of what was needed changed. Alternative service channels were
developed and benefits processing within Jobcentre Plus was centralised.
The revised approach required fewer staff, and hence fewer offices
in the network.[5]
5. The governance of the programme exemplified
good practice. There was support from the senior management of
the Agency, a clarity of purpose and vision of the customer service
improvements sought through the programme, a consistent senior
management team throughout the programme, and a gateway process
to control the implementation at each office. Importantly, the
team also learned as the project progressed. The project came
in under budget partly because the team was prepared to modify
the plans in response to internal pressures and developments external
to the project.[6]
6. A major feature of the senior leadership team
was the decades of experience in the Agency's activities which
they brought to the project. This experience was combined with
their understanding of front-line issues acquired through working
their way up through the organisation from relatively junior positions.
They applied this experience in consulting staff on the ground,
and in building plans with the support of staff and other local
stakeholders.[7]
7. Other government bodies planning procurement
and service transformation projects of this kind could learn much
from the successful implementation project. The DVLA, the Driving
Standards Agency and the Courts Service have sought advice from
the Agency and, as a member of the permanent secretaries' management
group and the head of profession for operational delivery, the
Chief Executive of the Agency is well placed to disseminate the
lessons more widely. Projects to centralise benefits processing
and to introduce the Employment and Support Allowance have benefited
from the lessons learned in the office roll-out project.[8]
8. Alongside refurbishing offices, the business
change programme introduced new ways of working for staff to transform
the service for customers. Listening to people at the front-line
and engaging them in the project are critical success factors,
and the Agency provided a small amount of funding to allow local
staff to work out how best to deliver services in the new environment.
Equipping staff with the right skills to meet the higher standards
of service is also important. The Agency acknowledged that not
all staff were comfortable with the new way of working, but hoped
that, with greater experience of the changes, staff would become
more content with the changes.[9]
9. The project team recognised the importance
of local ownership of the programme and initially allowed local
discretion over some aspects of implementation. As the project
proceeded, however, they identified that this approach reduced
efficiency and led to more space being used in the early offices,
with a likely impact that the project would exceed its budget
by some £100 million. The team recognised the need to tighten
financial management, even at a risk to local staff morale, which
they mitigated by explaining the reasons for the change in approach
to local staff. A further £17.4 million might
have been saved had these disciplines been in place from the start.
Forty-seven of the offices rolled out had been closed subsequently.
£20 million had been spent in refurbishing these sites and
a further ten offices that Jobcentre Plus intends to close, but
closing them had saved £13.5 million a year in running costs.
[10]
2 C&AG's Report, paras 1.2-1.5 Back
3
Q 64; C&AG's Report, para 1.10 Back
4
Qq 86-90; C&AG's Report, para 2.10 Back
5
Qq 8, 25-26, 28-32, 44, 58-59 Back
6
Qq 2-3, 11, 13 Back
7
Qq 37-43, 97 Back
8
Qq 11-17, 108 Back
9
Qq 91-92, 97 Back
10
Qq 9,18-24, 33-34, 45-47, 54-56 Back
|
