Departmental Overview: Home Office 2017-18
Published on:This Overview summarises the Department’s responsibilities on how it spends its money and its key developments of work.
This Overview summarises the Department’s responsibilities on how it spends its money and its key developments of work.
This report assesses how prepared government departments are for the changes required at the border after EU exit.
This study examines how the Home Office handled the impact of its immigration policies on the Windrush generation.
This report considers the work that government has been undertaking at the border to prepare for a no-deal EU exit.
This report examines the management of the Cabinet Office-led Get ready for Brexit campaign.
The NAO is publishing a suite of short guides for the new Parliament, one for each government department and a selection of cross-government issues, to assist House of Commons select committees and members of Parliament.
This memorandum focuses on the design, operation and oversight of the Home Office’s contract with G4S to run Brook House.
This briefing describes the Civil Contingencies Secretariat’s contingency preparations for the UK exiting the EU without a deal.
This memorandum supports the Public Accounts Committee’s examination of the government’s preparedness for ‘no deal’
This report provides Parliament with insights on the issues and challenges for government’s management of the border in light of the UK’s planned departure from the European Union.
The new directorates that replaced the former UKBA have made progress in some areas but not across the whole business.
UK Government says it is on track to meet target to resettle 20,000 Syrian refugees by 2020. Local authorities’ ability to secure suitable school places and houses a risk to success. NAO estimate programme will cost £1.12bn by 2020.
The NAO acknowledges the vital role played by inspectorates but identifies inconsistency in the extent to which they are independent of government and in their reporting arrangements, which can limit their impact.
It is important that the services for vulnerable people at the Yarls Wood Immigration Removal Centre are delivered ‘right first time’ and this did not happen here. Steps are now being taken to address the problems but 35% of the recommendations from Her Majesty’s Inspector of Prisons’ 2015 inspection have not yet been implemented.
The Home Office has made slower progress than expected in managing foreign national offenders, despite increased resources and tougher powers.
The Border Force has successfully implemented full passenger checks and cut queuing times but at the cost of maintaining other aspects of border security.
The Home Office spent at least £830 million between 2003 and 2015 on the e-borders programme and its successors, but has failed, so far, to deliver the full vision. We cannot, therefore view e-borders as having delivered value for money.
Both organisations have achieved cost reduction and performance improvement, but poor planning and delayed delivery of projects hampered progress.
This system was implemented by the UK Border Agency with predictable flaws. The Agency has taken little action to prevent and detect students overstaying or working in breach of their visa conditions.
G4S and Serco, two of the new providers awarded Home Office contracts to provide accommodation for asylum seekers in the UK, struggled to get the contracts up and running.