Introduction
PSAs are at the centre of the Government's performance
measurement system. They are usually three year agreements, set
during the spending review process and negotiated between
departments and the Treasury. They set objectives for the priority
areas of government's work.
This PSA is led by the Department for Business, Innovation and
Skills. The Department was formed on 5 June 2009 following the
merger of the Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory
Reform (BERR) and the Department for Innovation, Universities and
Skills (DIUS). This PSA was previously led by BERR.
Data for the measurement of this PSA is provided by the Office
of National Statistics (ONS) and the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD). Each PSA has a Senior
Responsible Officer (SRO) who is responsible for maintaining a
sound system of control across Departmental boundaries that
supports the achievement of the PSA. The underlying data systems
are an important element in this framework of control.
At the time of our review, the most recent public statement
provided by the Department on progress against this PSA was in the
Annual Report published in July 2009. Since our review, BIS has
published the 2009 Autumn Performance Report.
The purpose and scope of this review
The Government invited the Comptroller and Auditor General to
validate the data systems used by government to monitor and report
its performance. During the period September 2009 to January 2010,
the National Audit Office (NAO) carried out an examination of the
data systems for all the indicators used to report performance
against this PSA. This involved a detailed review of the processes
and controls governing:
- The match between the indicators selected to measure
performance and the PSA. The indicators should address all key
elements of performance referred to in the PSA;
- The match between indicators and their data systems. The data
system should produce data that allow the Department to accurately
measure the relevant element of performance;
- For each indicator, the selection, collection, processing and
analysis of data. Control procedures should mitigate all known
significant risks to data reliability. In addition, system
processes and controls should be adequately documented to support
consistent application over time; and
- The reporting of results. Outturn data should be presented
fairly for all key aspects of performance referred to in the
target. Any significant limitations should be disclosed and the
implications for interpreting progress explained.
Our conclusions are summarised in the form of traffic lights.
The ratings are based on the extent to which departments have:
- put in place and operated internal controls over the data
systems that are effective and proportionate to the risks involved;
and
- explained clearly any limitations in the quality of its data
systems to Parliament and the public.
The remaining sections of this report provide an overview of the
results of our assessment, followed by a brief description of the
findings and conclusions for each individual data system. Our
assessment does not provide a conclusion on the accuracy of the
outturn figures included in the Department's public performance
statements. This is because the existence of sound data systems
reduces but does not eliminate the possibility of error in reported
data.