Managing and replacing the Aspire contract
Published on:There are serious risks to HMRC’s business if the programme to replace the Aspire contract fails to meet its objectives by June 2017, when the contract ends.
There are serious risks to HMRC’s business if the programme to replace the Aspire contract fails to meet its objectives by June 2017, when the contract ends.
The new directorates that replaced the former UKBA have made progress in some areas but not across the whole business.
The NAO has today published an investigation of two grants awarded by the Big Lottery Fund and one awarded by the Cabinet Office to three related organisations.
The National Audit Office has today reported on HM Treasury’s 2013-14 Annual Report and Accounts. The report provides an overview of the context in which the Comptroller and Auditor General has carried out his audit of the Treasury’s 2013-14 financial statements; and details of his assessment of audit risk arising from the Treasury’s major financial stability and wider economic support schemes.
The Efficiency and Reform Group (ERG) has achieved significant savings but further work should be done to improve the process of gathering and collating evidence.
Defra’s 2013-14 accounts have not been qualified but the C&AG warns of the likelihood of the European Commission’s imposing significant financial penalties on the department in future.
Long-standing issues in the rail industry and the scale of the procurements led to the DfT’s decision to lead the procurements itself, despite not having led a major rolling stock procurement before.
Despite providing substantially increased funding for PIDG (up to £700 million by 2015), the Department has not exercised enough oversight to ensure value for money has been achieved.
The report covers HMRC’s progress in operating the PAYE service, its implementation of its new Real Time Information service and its performance in tax collection and in reducing error and fraud in personal tax credits.
Government has given less attention to grants than to other policy funding mechanisms, despite grant funding being higher in value, making up 41 per cent (£292 billion) of its total expenditure.
After a poor start, the performance of the Work Programme is at similar levels to previous programmes but is less than original forecast. The Department has struggled to improve outcomes for harder-to-help groups. The Programme has the potential to offer value for money if it can achieve the higher rates of performance the Department now expects.
There are some good examples across government of alternatives to regulation being used to achieve policy objectives. However more needs to done to share these examples to highlight when alternatives are most likely to work and how they should be designed.
For the first time since 2009-10, the Social Fund White Paper account has not been qualified on the grounds of the completeness, existence and valuation of the debt balance.
The Government awarded, without competition, £16.6 billion worth of early contracts to eight renewable generation projects at risk of investment delay.
The Comptroller and Auditor General has qualified his audit opinion owing to the material level of fraud and error in benefit expenditure.
The Department has increased local authorities’ flexibility over their funding, but as a result has less information on how funds are being spent.
The DWP has simplified the way it administers child maintenance and is approaching expected levels of performance. But overall objectives might be at risk if the number of people using family-based arrangements does not increase.
This report draws together insights from our previous reports and those of the PAC on the role of, and recent changes to, the centre of government. The centre of government has responsibility for coordinating and overseeing the work of government, enabling it to achieve its strategic aims and ensuring there is a central view of the effective operation of government as a whole. Most of these strategic functions are performed by the Cabinet Office and the Treasury.
All three projects examined by the NAO have experienced significant delays stemming from a range of problems.
The MOD decision to reduce the size of the regular Army and increase the number of trained Army reserves was taken without appropriate testing of feasibility or evaluation of risk.