Conclusions and recommendations
1. The Department has made a number of improvements
to help it manage its estate more effectively, including the appointment
of an estates specialist and the development of a new strategy
for its estate. In making
recommendations on the areas of weakness we found in the Department's
management of its estate, we nonetheless recognise this work and
the difficulties that the Department faces.
2. The Department is developing a new estate
strategy but has limited resources for its implementation.
The Department should draw up a realistic and affordable plan
of implementation, showing clearly what it will cost to deliver.
The plan should also include milestones for the delivery of real
improvement and should prioritise its actions to match the funds
available.
3. Staff overseas who will implement the strategy
are not estates specialists. The appointment of a qualified chartered
surveyor as Estates Director is an encouraging step in improving
the professionalism with which it manages its estate.
For the strategy to be implemented effectively, the Department
must provide professional support to its staff overseas so they
can drive through the changes required. It should identify what
support they need and how the relevant skills can best be provided.
4. The Department collates some management
information on its estate, but does so inconsistently. Its new
Estates Director currently does not have the information he needs
to do his job. The Department must improve
the quality of data on its estate by enforcing the accurate and
prompt input of data on all properties into its Pyramid estate
database.
5. The Department has unused space in many
of its buildings but does not collect basic information on space
and cost per person. The Department needs
to collect and analyse data on all its properties along the lines
of that required by the Office of Government Commerce for UK based
government properties. It should seek to increase the efficiency
with which it uses its offices by setting local targets for use
of space, taking into account the particular business needs of
the Department in each location and the nature of the building
occupied.
6. The Department is not taking sufficient
account of particular difficulties when undertaking construction
projects overseas. It is not making enough allowance for fluctuating
exchange rates, security requirements and the challenging nature
of certain locations when planning projects.
Two-thirds of projects examined by the National Audit Office were
late and the Department continues to make expensive mistakes,
such as on the new Embassy in Damascus, Syria. The Department
should implement rigorous risk assessment when planning such projects
so that it sets more realistic timetables and budgets. It should
also make more systematic use of post project reviews to learn
lessons for the future.
7. It is a poor use of public money when the
Department has unused space in many of its offices while other
UK government organisations overseas are paying for office space
in the same city. The Department should
actively promote the use of spare space in its offices to other
UK government organisations. The Treasury should require other
government organisations that are considering opening new offices
overseas to submit a business case showing the costs and benefits
to the taxpayer of locating elsewhere compared with the costs
and benefits of sharing with the Department.
8. Reflecting Treasury requirements, the Department
charges other users of its estate full costs even when space would
otherwise remain empty. This deters other potential users, some
of whom find it prohibitively expensive to use the Department's
office accommodation. Through its Shared
Services Group, the Treasury should develop a method of charging
that passes on to other UK government organisations a fairer reflection
of the actual cost to the Department of accommodating them, while
protecting as far as possible the contribution that they make
to the Department's fixed costs.
| 
