The report, published by the National Audit Office, drew on evidence from its previous reports and those of other organisations, in order to identify areas where the government could improve shared services. It criticised departments for working in silos, and said that they must work together to plan areas that could benefit from integration.
It also said that organisations need a "strong rationale" for the cost-effectiveness of integration projects, and that this could be improved by provision of a better evidence base and clear benchmarks for success.
Margaret Hodge, chair of the Public Accounts Committee, said: "The government does not have an evidence base that allows it to identify integration opportunities or properly assess the costs and benefits of integration. It is, in effect, fumbling in the dark."
Past NAO reports found that NHS hospital trusts could save at least £500m per year by collaboratively purchasing medical supplies, while central governments' property costs could be reduced by £650m per year by 2020 through more efficient use of office space.
The report was accompanied by a case study into the four community budget pilots in London, West Cheshire, Essex and Greater Manchester, which found that the co-production approach between local and central bodies was a "promising model" for future policy design. It also stressed the importance of gathering good-quality evidence on their impacts; something which it said was lacking in previous integration initiatives.
The report said that Greater Manchester could make a net saving of £270m over five years, while West Cheshire estimated a saving of £56m over the same period.
Head of the NAO Amyas Morse compared the community budget pilot to Total Place, which also aimed to promote the flexible use of funding to meet local needs, but said that "this time the government is trialling this method properly", and encouraged them to continue doing so.
Last week, the government launched the What Works initiative, which aims to promote evidence-based policy making.
---
Autor(en)/Author(s): Helen Crane
Quelle/Source: The Guardian, 13.03.2013
Bitte besuchen Sie/Please visit:
