| Departmental Action
| | NAO recommendations
|
1. | Establish a Coalfields Programme Board to ensure effective oversight of the entire programme and drive forward co-ordination across the National Coalfields Programme, Coalfields Regeneration Trust and Coalfields Enterprise Fund.
Chaired by a CLG Director, the Board would comprise senior staff from the HCA, the Trust and Enterprise Fund, the RDAs and the Industrial Communities Alliance.
The Board will review the strands of work undertaken by other groups within the governance structure.
The Board will also ensure delivery of the programme is aligned with wider Government policy eg in relation to skills, enterprise, health etc.
It will have responsibility for assuring that effective local co-ordination mechanisms and engagement with stakeholders is in place.
The establishment of the Board will assist in working with the Coalfields Regeneration Trust to ensure resources are targeted on employment and training opportunities and linked to priority areas for action on all coalfield sites.
The Board will also take receipt of the report on the review of the coalfields programme, before considering the options and putting recommendations to Ministers.
| Board to be established and initial meeting to take place in May 2010.
| Establish a Coalfields Delivery Board to exercise control over the separate coalfield initiatives wherever there are separate but related projects to maximise benefits from their alignment or integration.
To get better value for money from the £120 million of coalfield funds still to be committed to projects and the substantial benefits still to be achieved over the next decade, the Department should take immediate steps to:
Better lead and coordinate Coalfield regeneration:
— Articulate a clear overarching aim for coalfield areas that puts people as well as coalfield sites at its heart.
— Develop an overarching strategy which addresses the need to:
— reduce the number of coalfield areas categorised as severely deprived;
— achieve better consistency of support between the coalfield areas and focus uncommitted investment onto the most deprived areas;
— support local people to access job opportunities for all sites; and
— provide stewardship of the outcomes expected for coalfield communities up to 2020.
Improve performance measurement and monitoring:
— Review the continuing relevance of the targets in light of the changing economic climate and fortunes of coalfield communities.
— Reprofile the targets to better reflect the increased spending and scope of the Programme. In particular the target for Private Sector Investment should be increased in proportion to the increase in gross public sector spend. The target for housing should be increased so it remains stretching compared to forecasts.
— Allow for optimism bias in forecasts when setting targets.
— Set annual milestones to monitor progress towards targets and challenge variances, taking action to maintain delivery where necessary.
— Define clear objectives for the Fund including the rate of return required to stimulate interest from other investors.
|
| 2. | Establish a Senior Strategic Whitehall Group to ensure appropriate linkages are being made between the coalfields programmes and policy development more widely. This Group would be chaired by CLG, with membership from other Government Departments.
Colleagues from Government Offices, Regional Development Agencies and the HCA may also be invited to join the Board or invited to specific meetings.
This group would feed ideas/ thoughts/ recommendations into the Coalfields Programme Board.
| Group already established—initial meeting took place on 19 January.
The next meeting is scheduled for 19 April 2010.
| Turn the Coalfields Forum into an effective Whitehall Delivery Board with clear terms of reference. Membership should be Whitehall only and the Department should engage directly with individual departments to resolve specific issues.
To improve design and control of future programmes where there are multiple initiatives with overlapping aims, the Department for Communities and Local Government should:
— Establish mechanisms to bring together common interests and exploit synergies between them.
— Achieve better integration by incentivising separate agencies to work together through common goals.
— Articulate a clear overarching aim for coalfield areas that puts people as well as coalfield sites at its heart.
— Develop an overarching strategy which addresses the need to:
— reduce the number of coalfield areas categorised as severely deprived;
— achieve better consistency of support between the coalfield areas and focus uncommitted investment onto the most deprived areas;
— support local people to access job opportunities for all sites; and
— provide stewardship of the outcomes expected for coalfield communities up to 2020.
|
| 3. | Strengthen the existing Coalfields Programme Delivery Board to ensure it is driving progress against key targets for the NCP and that effective arrangements are in place to ensure the vfm of each project and the NCP as a whole. The Delivery Board would be chaired by HCA with CLG membership and draw on experience from the Housing Fiscal Stimulus Board.
The Programme Board would consider reports / recommendations from the Delivery Board.
| Ongoing—work with HCA on taking this forward.
Any new arrangements to be in place before the end of 2010.
| To maintain the relevance of targets for future programmes the Department should:
— Review targets at regular intervals so they remain stretching, relevant and appropriate to measurement of performance against the objectives of the programme.
— Formally review targets where emerging information, such as changes to environmental regulations, affects the potential of a programme.
— Increase targets in proportion to increases in the scope or scale of a programme.
|
| 4. | Review on the future of the Coalfields programmes looking at the National Coalfields Programme, the Coalfields Regeneration Trust and Coalfields Enterprise Funds.
Consideration will also to be given to whether there should be an element of external / arms length input to the review.
To ensure targets remain relevant and up-to date, particularly in the light of recent radically changed market conditions, the proposal (subject to Ministerial agreement) is to review achievement against targets to date and future output and funding trajectories. As well as whether / what further work is needed to establish additionality / occupancy rates etc.
The review would also consider how the programme fits in the context of wider regeneration policies which are currently the subject of the Public Value Programme review, and future funding challenges.
Carry out an independent evaluation of the Coalfields Enterprise Funds to assess its effectiveness in attracting venture capital to date and make recommendations on the future of the Fund.
The Coalfields Programme Board would consider the report and outcomes from the review. Any changes to targets / structure or objectives would be subject to Ministerial agreement.
| It is intended that the review will be carried out and report to the Coalfields Programme Board before the Summer 2010 recess
| To improve accountability, transparency and reporting Departments should:
— Agree and apportion benefits between bodies where more than one public agency claims the benefits of the same public expenditure.
— Disclose more clearly the public contribution to jobs primarily created by private partners.
Improve performance measurement and monitoring:
— Review the continuing relevance of the targets in light of the changing economic climate and fortunes of coalfield communities.
— Reprofile the targets to better reflect the increased spending and scope of the Programme. In particular the target for Private Sector Investment should be increased in proportion to the increase in gross public sector spend. The target for housing should be increased so it remains stretching compared to forecasts.
— Allow for optimism bias in forecasts when setting targets.
— Set annual milestones to monitor progress towards targets and challenge variances, taking action to maintain delivery where necessary.
— Define clear objectives for the Fund including the rate of return required to stimulate interest from other investors.
— Evaluate whether the Fund is addressing the particular equity needs of businesses within the coalfields.
Improve information to support decision-making:
— Evaluate the additionality of the programme based on a representative survey of programme beneficiaries to inform appraisals for new projects.
— Monitor occupancy rates on sites to identify whether sufficient jobs are created, and identify whether nearby site developments are needed.
— Use value for money benchmarks for all coalfield projects.
Improve information to support decision-making:
— Evaluate the additionality of the programme based on a representative survey of programme beneficiaries to inform appraisals for new projects.
— Monitor occupancy rates on sites to identify whether sufficient jobs are created, and identify whether nearby site developments are needed.
— Use value for money benchmarks for all coalfield projects.
Evaluate whether the Fund is addressing the particular equity needs of businesses within the coalfields.
Develop more sophisticated housing and employment benchmarks based on directly attributable costs so estimates are not skewed by unavoidable costs to treat contaminated land.
|
| 5. | Local co-ordination mechanisms should be determined locally building on recent initiatives such as the Total Place programme and the HCA's Single Conversation, to improve co-ordination according to the circumstances of the area and whether the LA, the HCA or RDA is leading. LAs would play a key role in ensuring effective co-ordination and effectiveness
The Industrial Communities Alliance will play a key role in ensuring effective learning and sharing of best practice on coalfields regeneration across local authorities and agencies.
To report to Coalfields Programme Board.
| Ongoing—work with HCA and other stakeholders to ensure mechanisms in place by end 2010.
| Create a National Advisory Group of Agencies, Local Stakeholders, and Interest Groups to inform the forum of local priorities.
|
| |
| |
| * NAO Recommendations set out in full below
| | | |
| *To improve design and control of future programmes where there are multiple initiatives with overlapping aims, the Department for Communities and Local Government should:
| | | |
| — Establish mechanisms to bring together common interests and exploit synergies between them.
| | | |
| — Achieve better integration by incentivising separate agencies to work together through common goals.
| | | |
| *To maintain the relevance of targets for future programmes the Department should:
| | | |
| — Review targets at regular intervals so they remain stretching, relevant and appropriate to measurement of performance against the objectives of the programme.
| | | |
| — Formally review targets where emerging information, such as changes to environmental regulations, affects the potential of a programme.
| | | |
| — Increase targets in proportion to increases in the scope or scale of a programme.
| | | |
| *To improve accountability, transparency and reporting Departments should:
| | | |
| — Agree and apportion benefits between bodies where more than one public agency claims the benefits of the same public expenditure.
| | | |
| — Disclose more clearly the public contribution to jobs primarily created by private partners.
| | | |
| *To get better value for money from the £120 million of coalfield funds still to be committed to projects and the substantial benefits still to be achieved over the next decade, the Department should take immediate steps to:
| | | |
| *Better lead and coordinate Coalfield regeneration:
| | | |
| — Establish a Coalfields Delivery Board to exercise control over the separate coalfield initiatives wherever there are separate but related projects to maximise benefits from their alignment or integration.
| | | |
| — Articulate a clear overarching aim for coalfield areas that puts people as well as coalfield sites at its heart.
| | | |
| — Develop an overarching strategy which addresses the need to:
| | | |
| — reduce the number of coalfield areas categorised as severely deprived;
| | | |
| — achieve better consistency of support between the coalfield areas and focus uncommitted investment onto the most deprived areas;
| | | |
| — support local people to access job opportunities for all sites; and
| | | |
| — provide stewardship of the outcomes expected for coalfield communities up to 2020.
| | | |
| — Turn the Coalfields Forum into an effective Whitehall Delivery Board with clear terms of reference. Membership should be Whitehall only and the Department should engage directly with individual departments to resolve specific issues.
| | | |
| — Create a National Advisory Group of Agencies, Local Stakeholders, and Interest Groups to inform the forum of local priorities.
| | | |
| *Improve performance measurement and monitoring:
| | | |
| — Review the continuing relevance of the targets in light of the changing economic climate and fortunes of coalfield communities.
| | | |
| — Reprofile the targets to better reflect the increased spending and scope of the Programme. In particular the target for Private Sector Investment should be increased in proportion to the increase in gross public sector spend. The target for housing should be increased so it remains stretching compared to forecasts.
| | | |
| — Allow for optimism bias in forecasts when setting targets.
| | | |
| — Set annual milestones to monitor progress towards targets and challenge variances, taking action to maintain delivery where necessary.
| | | |
| — Define clear objectives for the Fund including the rate of return required to stimulate interest from other investors.
| | | |
| — Evaluate whether the Fund is addressing the particular equity needs of businesses within the coalfields.
| | | |
| *Improve information to support decision-making:
| | | |
| — Evaluate the additionality of the programme based on a representative survey of programme beneficiaries to inform appraisals for new projects.
| | | |
| — Monitor occupancy rates on sites to identify whether sufficient jobs are created, and identify whether nearby site developments are needed.
| | | |
| — Use value for money benchmarks for all coalfield projects.
| | | |
| Develop more sophisticated housing and employment benchmarks based on directly attributable costs so estimates are not skewed by unavoidable costs to treat contaminated land.
| | | |
| |
| |
