55

“Cut to the Bone” Budget Cutting and Reallocation

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

“Cut to the Bone” Budget Cutting and Reallocation. Andrew Graham School of Policy Studies Queen’s University SPS 827 2014. Structure of this Session. The N ew R eality. Swing into deficit era – all Canadian governments affected - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 2: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 3: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 4: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation

What are the current challenges you face as a public sector manager?

Survey in UK of public sector managers by the Institute on Leadership and Management, 2010

Page 5: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 6: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 7: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 8: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 9: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation

• All direct program spending reviewed - 25% each year

• Treasury Board and its Secretariat set terms of reference:

Comprehensiveness – assessment of mandate, departmental objectives, program effectiveness, efficiency and alignment to government priorities

Reallocation proposals – options for program reductions or eliminations to reallocate to government priorities and support overall spending control

Reinvestment proposals – options to better support government priorities

• Departments review the relevance and performance of their spending, identify lowest performing/priority 5% of programs, seek outside expert advice and report to the Treasury Board

• Privy Council Office identifies review departments every year and assesses, with Treasury Board and the Department of Finance, the departmental proposals

Strategic Review Process – Centrally Driven

9

Page 10: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation

Strategic Reviews – Scope and Key Elements

Departmental Strategic Reviews to answer specific questions in key areas:

Government Priority, Federal Role, Relevance (i.e. continued program need)

Performance (effectiveness, efficiency, value for money)

Management Performance

Departmental Strategic Reviews to be conducted using the following key elements

Analytical Framework: The department’s Program Activity Architecture

Information Sources: Evaluations, Audits, Management Accountability Framework assessments, Auditor General Reports, and other reports

Reporting Requirements: Outlined in the Terms of Reference

Steering Committee: A departmental steering committee to be established with ex officio membership from TBS

External Advice: Expert outside advice to be involved on each Review to ensure neutrality and credibility

Page 11: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation

Strategic Reviews –Conditions for Success

Sufficient time for deliberative process

Ministerial engagement throughout the Review process

Clear and strategic alignment of programs and results (value of a strong Program Activity Architecture)

Comprehensive assessment of all programs (100%)-not focussing only on 5%

Early involvement of senior management team – policy, communications, and corporate services

Multiple lines of evidence – evaluations, audits, benchmarking, international comparisons

Overview portion of the Strategic Review should tell a compelling departmental story

Arm’s length expert advice as effective challenge to proposals and alternatives

Page 12: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation

• In 2009, the third year of the Strategic Review Process, 20 federal organizations (including departments, agencies and Crown corporations) undertook strategic reviews of 100 percent of their direct program spending.

• In total, almost $26 billion, or approximately 23 percent, of all government program spending was examined.

• Savings of $287 million were redirected to Budget 2010 priorities

• Savings were redirected to fund new initiatives, both within departments and to broader spending priorities in Budget 2009

• Moving from ¼ of all departments to whole of government • Now, savings will be directed to deficit reduction• Targetting total of $11 billion by 2016

The first reviews generated savings but also demonstrated a need to improve the quality of results information …

12

Page 13: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation

13

Page 14: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation

14

Page 15: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation

15

Page 16: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation

16

Page 17: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation

Managers must approach budget cutting with care, so as not to

harm the organization's capacity to achieve its purposes. The

toughest question they face is how to reduce the budget without compromising the organization's

mission.

Page 18: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 19: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 20: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 21: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 22: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 23: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 24: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 25: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 26: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 27: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 28: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation

In an organization with low trust levels, complex

programming and relatively poor information, the best

approach may be across-the-board cuts.

Page 29: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 30: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 31: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 32: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 33: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 34: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 35: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 36: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 37: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 38: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation

From Treasury Board of Canada Guide on Costing http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?section=text&id=12251

Page 39: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 40: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 41: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 42: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 43: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 44: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 45: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 46: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 47: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 48: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 49: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 50: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 51: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 52: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 53: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 54: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation
Page 55: “Cut to  the Bone”  Budget Cutting and Reallocation