From 07f3d25a649cd8ca1df6900a6560935876061012 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Alex Coleman Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2024 21:50:25 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Add english devolution digital post --- .../2024-12-19-english-devo-digital-moment.md | 77 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 77 insertions(+) create mode 100644 content/blog/2024-12-19-english-devo-digital-moment.md diff --git a/content/blog/2024-12-19-english-devo-digital-moment.md b/content/blog/2024-12-19-english-devo-digital-moment.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..e44cb94 --- /dev/null +++ b/content/blog/2024-12-19-english-devo-digital-moment.md @@ -0,0 +1,77 @@ +Title: Is the English Devolution White Paper a digital change moment? + + +This Monday the UK Government presented its [English Devolution White Paper](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-devolution-white-paper-power-and-partnership-foundations-for-growth/english-devolution-white-paper) +which sets out the Government's plans for the future of local government in England. The White Paper outlines the future +funding model for local government, which is in need of reform. In broad brush strokes it commits to a simplified +funding landscape for Strategic Authorities with consolidated funding that authorities have more control over[^1]. This model +moves away from the old system of government departments and agencies offering lots of different funding pots for different +purposes that required local authorities to spend time writing competitive bids and providing regular reporting. + +I'm not interested in debating the merits or demerits of this move, but am interested in the digital response to these +changes. By digital response I mean how central government would implement these proposals through a service for local government, +part of that service would be digital and that is what I want to get into. In a world of multiple funding pots there was +also a plethora of different bid submission and reporting processes that local authorities had to navigate. These could often be split +across different government departments using different interfaces and processes that potentially require local authorities +to report the same data in multiple places. While there have been efforts to centralise the digital experience with services +such as the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government (MHCLG) [Funding Service](https://mhclgdigital.blog.gov.uk/2021/07/01/transforming-the-way-mhclg-delivers-funding/) +, the landscape still appears very fragmented to local authorities. + +The changes proposed in the White Paper clearly aim to address this fractured funding and reporting landscape and this +presents a unique digital opportunity for central government to simplify the digital interactions with local government. +A first step would be a single digital service for local authorities that would centralise reporting on how they're spending +the new consolidated funding from central government. The White Paper alludes, at a high level, to something like this when +it explains the proposed accountability and outcomes framework: + +> The outcomes framework will: + - Provide a single, streamlined approach to accountability and reporting to central government. + +A single digital service for reporting to central government would certainly be welcome and help ensure a more consistent +experience for local government. However, it also poses new challenges for central government. In the old world of multiple +funding pots, government departments and fund-offering agencies could stipulate that local authorities would need to provide +reporting as part of the funding agreements. This allowed them to dictate what data they wanted from local authorities, +which they could use to monitor the delivery progress of funded schemes. But if MHCLG operated a single, unified digital service for local +government reporting how do we ensure it captures all the data (and at the right granularity) that other departments and agencies +need to operate? And how do we ensure we don't just create a single, incredibly onerous, reporting service for local authorities? + +Defining a single reporting framework that encompasses all the data requirements of departments and agencies with a stake +in how local government spends their money will be hard. But it is the sort of challenging problem central government should be tackling +in a way that properly cuts across departments and asks searching questions about what data is actually needed to measure how spending +meets government objectives. + +What if instead of thinking about creating a service where local government reports to central government the service +offered was one that actually added value for local government users. This requires casting the problem as not how +central government can monitor local government progress, but rather how central government could provide a platform that makes +it easier for local government users to track their project delivery, spend and outputs. If central government offered a +platform for local government project delivery that acted as a local authority's single source of truth it would help local authorities manage +their projects more effectively as well as provide data directly back to central government. This platform model is similar to +other internet services we interact with as consumers like Strava as a way to monitor our physical activity. We simply put +in our activity data and Strava solves the problem of viewing your routes on a map, keeping track of your activities, +managing your workout load. All the while Strava is able to collect all of that data and offer the aggregated data as the [Strava Metro](https://metro.strava.com/) +service for urban planners. Central government could provide a platform that local authorities can use to create, track and +complete projects funded through the consolidated funding agreements. This could improve the project management experience +for local authorities as well as aggregate the data for departments to monitor if funded projects are delivering. + +Such a platform would be an ambitious task for a department such as MHCLG but could radically redefine how local government +interacts with central government. Centralising data about local government projects would give central government the ability +to monitor projects more consistently, with everyone using the same platform and reporting on a common data standard. It would +help prevent the duplication of reporting that likely occurs in the old system and improve visibility of projects between +local and central government. Having a central platform for reporting that is managed by a single department would also free +up the work of other departments and agencies to provide more specific services that could be recommended for local government +projects which meet certain criteria within the platform, i.e. when a project reaches a certain delivery milestone there could be a +recommendation to book a review with another government agency that is required for project sign off. + +Overall, the English Devolution White Paper proposes significant changes to local government in England. These changes offer +a unique opportunity to develop a single, unified digital service from central government to local government. This digital +service has a chance to operate more broadly than merely as a consolidated reporting service with local government and could offer serious +value to local government as a platform that supports project delivery. This would help drive a common data standard for projects +in local government and allow central government to monitor progress milestones and costs as a consequence of adoption of the platform. Standardising +how data flows into central government would not only reduce duplication and the burden of reporting but will also enable +supporting departments and agencies to add more value by focusing on providing bespoke services. The English Devolution White Paper +should be seen not only as an opportunity to modernise local government but is also an opportunity for central government +to modernize its own approach and help facilitate and monitor local government delivery rather than simply marking their homework. + +P.S. The crux of the idea here is inspired by many of the things covered in Richard Pope's excellent book [Platformland](https://londonpublishingpartnership.co.uk/books/platformland-an-anatomy-of-next-generation-public-services/). + +[^1]: Strategic Authorities is a term introduced by the White Paper to cover different forms of [combined authorities](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_authorities_and_combined_county_authorities) +with the ambition of the White Paper being to improve the coverage of Strategic Authorities across England via more devolution deals.