ANNEX B

RDA OUTPUTS

Introduction

1.1      The attached note of RDA Core Outputs will allow tracking of progress in delivery of key aspects of a project or programme in support of the Regional Economic Strategy (RES) for the region and the Public Service Agreement (PSA) Targets covered by the Tasking Framework.  Possible components of the Core Outputs are described in Annex A of the Guidance on Corporate Plans issued by DTI.

Key Principles

• Output indicators should be used in conjunction with strategic added value to help understand the possible influence of a project, programme or activity on regional outcomes - the indicators should be used as a tool to help drive activities to achieve RES priorities and contribute to the delivery of the PSA Targets covered by the Tasking Framework.

• Output measures should as far as possible be defined and used consistently between RDAs so that data derived from them can be used for evidence-based policy making.  Action is in hand to ensure consistency.  Since RDA activities will change over time, and good practice in use of the indicators will evolve, the Core Outputs may need to be reviewed in due course.

• A significant challenge to be addressed in the short term is to ensure that RDA systems and practices take account of the requirements for managing new responsibilities from the 2004 Spending Review, notably Business Link, and for managing activities for 2005-08 that will be developed through the Corporate Planning process, to December 2004.

• Since an RDA’s project or programme can contribute to numerous PSAs, RDA outputs cannot be meaningfully divided between central government departments or PSAs.

1.2       On the basis of the above principles, the Tasking Framework requires RDAs to set out in their Corporate Plans what they will deliver with respect to the Tasking Framework in order to further the RES for their region and to contribute to delivery of the PSA Targets covered by the Framework, setting a specific target for each of the Core Outputs and for the required components of these (as set out in the Tasking Framework), and for any additional outputs added by individual RDAs if they feel that a significant area of their activity could not be meaningfully captured under any of the Core Outputs.

1.3       RDAs should set output target ranges (indicating the best and worst case scenarios).

1.4      Forecasting during the half year should be encouraged as good working practice rather than dogmatically pursuing a target established at the outset of the three year period.

1.5      Progress against the targets that the RDAs set for the Core Outputs will be put in the public domain by DTI every six months.

1.6     A task-and-finish group has been set up to agree a new RDA Performance Monitoring Framework by April 2005.  This will consider how best to achieve in-year and end-year reporting to RDA Boards and Departments of progress in the delivery of the Corporate Plan, including progress against the targets set for all Core Outputs and their required components and also against the Agency’s efficiency targets, while minimizing the burden on the RDAs.

1.7     The RDAs and Departments, working through DTI, will establish the definitions of the Core Outputs and the required components of these identified in the table, as well as a common basis for monitoring and reporting on these, under the project management of the Office of Project Appraisal Training and jointly steered by the Performance Management and Appraisal Practitioners Groups.  These definitions will be set out in a Technical Note, to be added to the Tasking Framework in due course.  The definitions will need to minimize the risk of doublecounting and the burden of data collection.  The definitions of the Core Outputs will be reviewed in due course to facilitate continuing improvement of the reporting process. 

1.8      There are various transitional issues.  The differences between the Core Outputs and the Targets embodied in the original target framework are likely to result in a data collection time-lag while the new arrangements bed in with the RDAs and external partners, for example the terms of new funding contracts will have to be amended to cover the collection of outputs under the new definitions.  There are also transitional issues in relation to programme management information systems, the treatment of existing, pipeline and new project contracts, changes in project application and appraisal, delivery/monitoring and evaluation guidance and associated forms/checklists etc., and training and guidance for RDA and partner staff.  RDA Corporate Plans may flag any transitional data collection issues. 

1.9      All output indicators should be used to assess how well RDA action is benefiting all the region’s residents, though RDAs will wish to identify priority groups based on the characteristics of the region.  In assessing distributional impacts, ie the distribution of the costs or benefits of interventions across different groups in society, RDAs may wish to consider the impact on individuals by income, gender, ethnic group, age, geographical location, or disability (Treasury Green Book Annex 5).  Rural proofing requires that all regions, except London, should assess any differential impacts of programmes on rural residents – the action flowing from this assessment will vary for example: if the output applies equally to rural residents and is delivering no special action is required; if the output applies equally to rural residents but monitoring shows that it is not delivering, special action may be needed and/or a different output for rural residents developed.