This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.
Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.
OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR
GENERAL
MANAGEMENT INFORMATION IN EDUCATION: FOLLOW UP SEPTEMBER 2020
R.98/2020
Contents
Summary .................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 2 Key findings ............................................................................................................ 5 Conclusions ............................................................................................................ 6 Objectives and scope of the review ............................................................................ 7 Detailed findings ......................................................................................................... 8 How well have management information requirements been specified? ................ 8 How good are arrangements for securing data quality? ....................................... 14 How effectively is management information being used? ..................................... 18
Appendix One .......................................................................................................... 24 Audit Approach.................................................................................................. 24 Appendix Two .......................................................................................................... 26
Management Information in Education: Follow up 2020 Page | 1
- Access to high quality and relevant management information is essential to enable organisations to make effective and efficient strategic and operational decisions. This is the case at corporate, departmental and team level for both business as usual' and change initiatives. A commitment at all levels to effective specification, preparation and use of management information is a key component of a culture that drives improvement.
- In 2016 the Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG) undertook a review of the availability and use of management information in the States of Jersey's then Education Department (the Department). The review focussed on the extent to which the Department:
• had access to, and actively used, high quality and relevant information for day to day performance management; and
• had a robust information base from which to make decisions for the longer-term.
- The 2016 review used three tracer workstreams to evaluate management information:
• pupil and school attainment;
• the Jersey Premium; and
• the Education Business Partnership.
- The 2016 review focussed on four inter-related questions as shown in Exhibit 1.
Exhibit 1: Inter-related questions
Question 1:
How well have Question 2: management How good are
information arrangements for requirements been securing data quality? specified?
Question 3: Question 4:
How effectively is How effectively is management management working
information being to secure used? improvements in management
information?
- The 2016 C&AG Report (the 2016 Report), whilst recognising the progress made in developing and using information, highlighted the areas that remained for the Department to improve upon. In particular, the 2016 Report recommended that further work was required to ensure that management information, including financial information, is aligned with the Department's strategic and operational objectives.
- The Department accepted all the recommendations made and developed an action plan in response.
- In 2018, as part of the States' implementation of a new Target Operating Model, the education function moved to the Department for Children, Young People, Education and Skills (CYPES) which is organised around four
functional areas: children's services; young people, further education, skills and learning; education; and integrated services and commissioning. Currently CYPES supports around 15,370 pupils in education from nursery through to university.
- In addition, since 2016 there have been some key relevant developments, including:
• publication of the Council of Ministers' Common Strategic Policy which sets as its first priority:
We will put children first
• publication of a Children and Young People's Plan (2019 – 2023) with a vision that:
All children should have an equal opportunity to be safe, flourish and fulfil their potential
and, as one of the four intended outcomes, that:
All children in Jersey learn and achieve.
• the development of the Jersey Performance Framework, published for the first time in January 2020.
• the development of a draft Corporate Governance Framework that includes a principle on Information Governance. The draft Governance Statement that Accountable Officers will be required to sign for 2020 includes confirmation as to whether their area has sufficient data to be able to inform its planning and performance management. It also requires confirmation from Accountable Officers as to whether arrangements are in place in their area to ensure data used complies with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics.
- The key findings from my review are as follows:
• Some progress has been made towards implementing the recommendations contained in the 2016 Report. For example, the CYPES Insight Team has developed reporting dashboards' used by the CYPES leadership team. However, none of the twelve recommendations have been implemented fully.
• The introduction of the Government Plan approved in December 2019 and the Jersey Performance Framework published in January 2020 have been catalysts for the Government of Jersey taking a strategic approach to management information. For example, the Jersey Performance Framework specifies a cross-Government range of Indicators' to quantify Jersey's progress towards a desired outcome.
• The roll out of the corporate performance management agenda has been delayed due to COVID-19. A number of objectives included in the CYPES 2020 business plan to promote the development and use of management information within the education function have not yet been implemented.
• Although the 2020 CYPES business plan objectives clearly flow from the Government Plan, it is difficult to see how these objectives flow through to team and personal objectives and the outcome-based Indicators.
• There remains some way to go to ensure management information requirements are specified effectively throughout the education function, not just at senior management level. The next steps are to ensure that co-ordinated actions are taken to enable middle managers and all other relevant staff groups to identify and assess the management information needed to drive organisational improvement.
• Action has been taken to strengthen management information in relation to pupil and school attainment and the Jersey Premium. The Education Business Partnership activities have been incorporated into Skills Jersey, which has yet to develop outcome-based measures.
• There is limited corporate oversight currently of the status of data quality within the Government. A new Code of Practice for Statistics was published in October 2018 which applies to all statistics produced by public authorities. A corporate data strategy and data quality standards are yet to be developed.
- There has been some progress made towards implementing the recommendations from the 2016 Report. The progress that has been made however has been ad-hoc and reactive rather than executed as part of any overall co-ordinated plan, driven by the CYPES Leadership Team, to improve management information in the education function.
- The Government Plan recognises that a new performance management framework is required, to provide strategic performance management and insight, to benchmark Government impact and to support senior and departmental teams to continuously improve public services. It set a target date to achieve this by 2023.
- To improve management information, clear co-ordination and leadership of the management information agenda is needed. To be effective this will require an adequately resourced training and development programme, benchmarking against those identified as best in class and the fostering of an environment where learning and development are rewarded.
Objectives and scope of the review
- The review has evaluated:
• the progress made in implementing agreed recommendations;
• the extent to which the recommendations as implemented have addressed the improvement areas identified in the report; and
• the adequacy of plans for the implementation of any outstanding recommendations.
- The review considered the implementation of recommendations in so far as they relate to the education function within CYPES and included consideration of how CYPES is developing management information to support the Jersey Performance Framework. This framework focusses on long-term progress rather than short-term intervention, and measures:
• community wellbeing – the quality of people's lives;
• environmental wellbeing – the quality of the natural world around us; and
• economic wellbeing – how well the economy is performing.
- The review has not considered non-education related management information within CYPES or the management information used by CYPES during the Covid-19 pandemic. It has instead focussed on business as usual' arrangements in place.
How well have management information requirements been specified?
- Useful information needs to relate to the objectives of the organisation. Failure to collect and report information that relates to organisational objectives impedes the ability to determine whether those objectives are being achieved and increases the risk of poor value for money.
- The 2016 Report identified the need for the Department to:
• establish criteria for routine and by exception' reporting;
• identify and formalise the mechanisms for reporting more widely, including to the Corporate Management Board; and
• demonstrate that information on current performance is the basis not only for remedial action but also for future planning and prioritising.
- The first five recommendations in the 2016 Report related to these improvement areas. Since the 2016 Report, there has been some progress in implementing these recommendations as shown in Exhibit 2.
Exhibit 2: Progress in specifying management information requirements
Recommendation | Current position | Evaluation |
R1 Include within the Education Department's Business Plan, for each Departmental objective: • Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) linked to the objective (including strategic objectives set by the Council of Ministers); • KPIs linking outputs and, where feasible, outcomes to resources used; and • quantified targets /tolerances. | The 2017-19 business plan update highlighted the intention to develop KPIs over the following 3-5 years. In the interim it identified 7 objectives, although these were not clearly related to strategic goals and were not linked to financial information showing how the budget will be used in achieving the objectives. The 2020 business plan supports the strategic goals for CYPES as set out with the Government Plan. It identifies the departmental priorities under each of the Government Plan objectives and measurable outcomes under each Government Plan priority. Outcome-based Indicators have also been developed as part of the Children and Young People's Plan 2019-23. These measures align with both the Government Plan and the CYPES business plan. | Partially implemented Whilst some progress has been made, the Government Plan identifies that business planning and performance management need to be improved and highlights the key aims in these areas to be achieved by 2023. The planning process is top down and there is little evidence to demonstrate how individual teams support the business planning process. |
R2 Develop reporting arrangements for management information to include: • hard data against KPIs; • financial | Dashboards are reported to the CYPES Departmental Leadership Team (DLT) although management acknowledge that they need to be refined and embedded. Team dashboards have yet to be developed. CYPES financial reports are produced and considered at DLT meetings. Key financial indicators | Partially implemented Whilst some steps have been made to improve management information reporting to schools and to the senior management team, management information dashboards have yet to be developed and monitored at a |
Recommendation | Current position | Evaluation |
information, for example budget position; and critical achievement of activities for the next time period. | are under development as part of the finance transformation project. Project management guidance is in place which requires projects to identify KPIs from the outset. Since 2016 a new School Information Management System (SIMS) has been installed in schools. Standard data packs are produced for each school reporting on, for example, pupil characteristics, exclusions and pupil attainment. Data reports for schools were designed using Tableau' software. However, a limited number of licences is held by CYPES, and its use has been reliant on a few individuals. Until recently, reports have been produced for school reviews only on an annual or termly basis. CYPES plan to move data analysis and reporting onto Power BI which management consider to be a more flexible reporting system able to provide daily information updates. | departmental team level. Outcome-based metrics linked to the Government Plan are being monitored. It remains unclear however as to: • what information is being measured at an operational level; • how this information influences outcome- based measures; • how the information is being used to highlight where management intervention is required; and • how management actions and investments are prioritised. |
R3 Establish criteria for routine and exception reporting, including the mechanism for reporting to the Corporate Management Board as appropriate. | Project reporting requirements are specified when each project is initiated, including the frequency of and the audience for reporting, agreed escalation criteria for projects and links to the CYPES risk register. The central Corporate Programme Management Office has developed a process to enable the routine | Partially implemented Without established criteria for exception reporting, there is a risk that managers will apply inconsistent judgements in determining which issues to escalate. Without developing, |
Recommendation | Current position | Evaluation |
| reporting of Government and Departmental programmes and projects to the Executive Leadership Team (ELT). CYPES intend to implement a system of Project Officer briefings to the Programme Manager and the Director General prior to the ELT meeting when the particular CYPES project will be discussed. Criteria for exception reporting for use more generally in CYPES have not been established. The Director General's judgement is used as to whether exception reporting issues are escalated. | reporting and monitoring team indicators and targets, it is not possible to ensure that key information from routine operations at a team level is assessed and evaluated adequately. |
R4 Take steps to demonstrate that information on current performance is the basis not only for remedial action but also for future planning and prioritising | The DLT receives performance monitoring reports on the Government Plan and CYPES business plan indicators, projects, departmental finances and human resources. These reports are vehicles that enable DLT to take remedial action where necessary. An example of remedial action taken, together with planning and prioritising, is action taken as a result of the first Teachers Survey held in 2015. This resulted in the production of Guidance on Marking and Planning, which teachers were able to comment on in the 2019 survey. The following are in development: • identification of short, medium and longer-term planning and business priorities; and • dashboards for the DLT and | Partially implemented Short, medium, and long-term business priorities are yet to be to be established fully and dashboards for departmental functions and teams are yet to be developed. The lack of departmental and team function dashboards creates a management reporting gap between departmental outcome- based Indicators driven by both the Government Plan and the CYPES business plans and the day to day operational functions carried out by departmental teams. Whilst some customer focussed data is collated, |
Recommendation | Current position | Evaluation |
| then teams created by the Insight Team to facilitate the monitoring of performance and progress. | for example the Teachers Survey, other efficiency and effectiveness metrics to drive improved outcomes are yet to be developed. |
R5 For changes in policy and practice together with individual initiatives or workstreams, ensure that prior to roll out: • KPIs are developed, linked to objectives; • KPIs are developed, linking outputs or outcomes to resources used; and • quantified targets/ tolerances for KPIs are set. | The Children and Young People's Plan 2019-2023 sets out a number of strategic aims. Under each aim, the priorities and outcome-based Indicators are specified. A Programme Management Office guide setting out project requirements has been issued. The guide sets out requirements for project outputs and reporting. | Partially implemented Whilst some action has been taken, short, medium and long-term business priorities are yet to be established fully for CYPES. Dashboards for departmental functions and teams have not yet been developed. |
- The introduction of the Government Plan, approved in December 2019, has been a catalyst for the Government's more strategic approach to management information, including the Jersey Performance Framework (published in January 2020). The specification of outcome-based Indicators has been integral to the development of the Government Plan and the Jersey Performance Framework. Within CYPES, steps have been taken to develop Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Timely (SMART) Indicators for education at a strategic, school, project and senior management level.
- Dashboards for projects, Government and business plan Indicators are being reported to the DLT. The DLT also reviews finance reporting on budget variances and Human Resources (HR) indicators.
- There remains, however, some way to go to ensure that management information requirements are specified effectively throughout CYPES, not just at senior management level.
- A shift-change in how management information is identified and used is required by managers, both within CYPES and within the Government as a whole. This requires attention and consistency in leadership expectations, cultural change and support for appropriate skills development.
Recommendations
R1 Ensure that co-ordinated actions are taken to enable middle managers and all
other relevant staff groups to identify and assess the management information needed to drive organisational improvement.
R2 Establish short, medium and long-term business priorities for departmental
functions and teams.
R3 Develop, report and monitor outcome-based performance indicators and
targets at function and team levels within CYPES.
R4 Develop reporting dashboards at function and team levels to record progress
against the identified business priorities.
R5 Establish triggers and controls within the education function for exception
reporting that managers at all levels should use to determine whether to escalate issues as part of the risk management process.
How good are arrangements for securing data quality?
- Information for decision making is most useful when derived from high quality data. The 2016 Report identified that formal guidance to support data quality for business as usual' or project-level management information had not been issued by the Department.
- At the time of the 2016 Report a States-wide approach to managing data quality was being developed as part of the eGovernment initiative. This Data Governance Council (DGC) initiative was focussed on the design and use of new data sets and data elements within eGovernment projects. Since 2016 however, the eGovernment programme and the DGC have been disbanded. The work has been taken over by the Corporate Data Management team (CDM), within the Information Management and Security function of the Chief Operating Office.
- In addition, Statistics Jersey was established by the Statistics and Census (Jersey) Law 2018. Its responsibilities include advising and assisting States departments on survey design and analysis; and providing a statistical service to the public, politicians, States departments and businesses. The work of Statistics Jersey is overseen by the Statistics User Group.
- The 2016 Report contained three recommendations in respect of data quality, one of which was a corporate recommendation. Whilst some progress has been made in improving data quality at departmental level, there has been limited progress at a corporate level, as shown in Exhibit 3.
Exhibit 3: Progress in improving data quality arrangements
Recommendation | Current position | Evaluation |
R6 Consider extending corporate standards on data | The CDM team has recently created a new role of Data Quality Manager. The primary objectives for this role include: | Partially implemented Whilst action to implement the |
Recommendation | Current position | Evaluation |
quality to all data rather than just that covered by eGovernment projects. | • developing corporate standards for all core and commonly processed data attributes; • developing a corporate methodology for data quality assessment; and • providing support, guidance and training for data quality management. Prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, the Modernisation and Digital Team had planned to produce a Data Strategy by November 2020. This is likely to be delayed. A new Code of Practice for Statistics was published by Statistics Jersey in October 2018. It applies to all statistics produced by public authorities. A Corporate Governance Framework has been drafted that includes a principle on Information Governance. The draft Governance Statement that Accountable Officers will be required to sign for 2020 includes confirmation as to whether their area has sufficient data to be able to inform its planning and performance management. It also requires confirmation from Accountable Officers as to whether arrangements are in place in their area to ensure data used complies with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics | recommendation has commenced, a data strategy and corporate standards for all data are yet to be developed. |
R7 In the absence of corporate standards for data quality, provide guidance and | Guidance has been developed and issued to schools in respect of school data collection, school self-assessment, Special Educational Needs (SEN) data, | Partially implemented Whilst some guidance has been issued, there are still gaps and more is |
Recommendation | Current position | Evaluation |
monitor its implementation within the Department. | exclusion data, and effective identification and management of bullying situations. Guidance has also been developed and issued within CYPES on project management and on dealing with Freedom of Information requests. All schools now publish school results and characteristics on their websites in accordance with CYPES guidelines. Data guidelines for the Effective Use of Data in Schools has been drafted. A new system (MyConcern), containing standardised recording codes, is being introduced into schools to provide a picture of safeguarding information in schools. | planned. Procedures to monitor compliance with CYPES guidance are yet to be developed. |
R8 Undertake an assessment of data quality for individual workstreams as a benchmark to drive improvement. | From 2019, visits to schools by the School Information Management System (SIMS) Manager began, working with schools to better understand how SIMS works and to improve data quality. Insight Team members attend meetings with the Jersey Premium Board regularly to report back on the performance of students who qualify under the Jersey Premium, ensuring that all indicators allow for the interrogation of data relating to the performance of Jersey Premium students. In 2020, the Insight Team intends to develop further regular reporting of data quality issues known to the Team to drive improvement of data quality. | Partially implemented There is no evidence that assessments of data quality for individual workstreams have been carried out systematically and used as a benchmark to drive improvement. Data quality assessments in schools have been undertaken on an ad-hoc basis as demand arose. Although some data checks have been carried out, for example on termly census data and through sharing of |
Recommendation | Current position | Evaluation |
|
| data, the approach to data quality has been restricted by the absence a baseline assessment of data quality within the education function and the lack of a data quality improvement plan. |
- Some action has taken place directed at setting data quality standards. Action on data quality has however been limited by the lack of prioritisation and the lack of a strategic approach to data quality assessment and improvement.
- There remains a need to develop corporate and departmental standards alongside a wider data quality strategy. Once standards and guidelines are confirmed, further work is required to implement a coherent and systematic programme of data quality monitoring.
Recommendations
R6 Develop and implement a Government-wide strategy for data quality to
include:
• corporate data quality standards;
• departmental specific standards; and
• a data quality management and monitoring programme.
R7 Finalise and issue data guidelines for effective use of data by schools.
R8 Implement a coherent and systematic programme to monitor compliance with
data quality guidelines across the education function.
How effectively is management information being used?
- Good quality data is most valuable when it is compiled, reported and used appropriately to provide management information to support evidence based decision making. At the time of the 2016 Report a Department-wide review of management information was being piloted. The 2016 Report therefore focussed on the use of management information in the three tracer workstreams – pupil and school attainment, Jersey Premium and the Education Business Partnership. Since 2016 the Education Business Partnership has been incorporated into Skills Jersey.
- The 2016 Report found areas for improvement in the use of management information for all three workstreams. Two recommendations were made. Whilst improvements have been made in respect of the tracer workstreams, more work is required to embed the effective use of management information within CYPES, as shown in Exhibit 4.
Exhibit 4: Progress in the effective use of management information
Recommendation | Current position | Evaluation |
R9 Promote targeted improvement in the routine use of management information to inform decision making by relevant staff, including through the use of appropriate objectives in individual performance appraisals. | Since 2016 the Insight Team has been working towards the improvement of data to enable better use of management information. For example, the Team has been aiding the introduction of SIMS, developing DLT dashboards, improving school transition data and developing some draft and some final guidance to improve data quality. The DLT now uses performance dashboards, HR KPIs and finance monitoring reports. The roll out of performance dashboards to departmental teams has however yet to be achieved. CYPES' outcome-based performance indicators are not yet systematically aligned to departmental team and staff personal objectives. | Partially implemented The 2020 CYPES business plan objectives clearly flow from the Government Plan. However, there is no evident 'golden thread' flowing from the business plan to both team and personal objectives and outcome- based performance indicators. As a result, there is an increased risk of a lack of clarity for teams and individuals as to how their work contributes to and drives CYPES' desired outcomes. |
R10 Develop action plans to address the weaknesses in use of management information identified for the tracer workstreams. | Effective action has been taken to strengthen management information in relation to pupil and school attainment and in relation to the Jersey Premium. The Education Business Partnership activities have been incorporated into Skills Jersey. Outcome-based Indicators are measured for attainment in schools and for the Jersey Premium. However, only input measures are collected for the Skills Jersey service. | Partially implemented Skills Jersey has not yet developed Indicators that measure the impact and outcome of the services it delivers. |
- Some actions have been taken to improve the effective use of management information both at departmental level and in respect of the specific tracer workstreams. The pace of change in ensuring appropriate management information is identified and utilised consistently throughout the education function to drive effective service delivery has been slow since the 2016 Report. The picture of how management information is utilised, other than for the DLT, is unclear and further work is required to link team and individual objectives to departmental outcome-based performance indicators.
Recommendations
R9 Ensure that there is a clear link between CYPES, team and individual
objectives and outcome-based performance indicators.
R10 Develop, report and monitor outcome-based Indicators for Skills Jersey.
How effectively is management working to secure improvements in management information?
- High-performing organisations recognise that information needs, information technology and the capacity to use information change continuously – and that they must respond to make the best use of information. The 2016 Report found that the Department's awareness of data and information issues had improved and that it had recognised the need to develop the capacity and capability of its existing information systems.
- Two recommendations were made, aimed at fostering a culture of continuous improvement in management information within the Department. Whilst some positive action has been taken, more needs to be done to achieve improved management information and to promote and embed its effective use, as shown in Exhibit 5.
Exhibit 5: Progress in securing improvements in management information
Recommendation | Current position | Evaluation |
R11 Consider the relevance of findings and recommendations of Comptroller and Auditor General reports relating to information to the Education Department and identify appropriate action. | In October 2019 the Government introduced a process to track the implementation of C&AG recommendations. The C&AG recommendations tracker includes a flag to indicate where a recommendation relating to an individual department is one that should be applied across the organisation. In addition, a central forum now brings together representatives from each department to consider recommendations, from the C&AG and others, and the States' responses. The tracker process was paused during 2020 due to a focus on the Covid-19 pandemic. It is due to next report on progress towards the end of August. | Partially implemented It is a positive step that a centralised and co-ordinated approach is being taken to track C&AG and other recommendations and that the tracker is reviewed by the ELT. The tracker process is still relatively new and use of the tracker has not yet developed in a structured and consistent way across departments. |
Recommendation | Current position | Evaluation |
R12 Foster a culture of continuous improvement in management information: • driven throughout the Department, schools and colleges; • working with other States departments, to secure benefits across the States; • by promoting adoption of good practice through the mechanism of the Corporate Management Board; and • by reporting back to teachers the impact that the data they have input has had on decision making. | Some actions have been taken to develop a culture of continuous improvement in management information in education. For example: • the first all Island Teachers Survey resulted in the production of Guidance on Marking and Planning. In addition, comments from the Survey have led to an ongoing project looking at effective use of data in schools with guidance issued to schools on data collection; and • a project has been launched to improve the use of management information in schools. This project is focussed on reducing workload and removing unnecessary practice, particularly by teaching staff, when collecting and reporting on data across schools. The aim is to adopt best practice from across the Island and from other jurisdictions and to foster a culture of continuous improvement in relation to management information. | Partially implemented Whilst some action has been taken, more should have been done to foster a culture of improvement and learning from schools complaints. No central records are kept of complaints dealt with by schools. Consequently there is no evidence-based alert for CYPES that something may be causing concern either within a school or across a number of schools. Information sharing between schools and CYPES on the number, type and outcomes of complaints can inform quality assurance processes as well as serve as an early warning system. My 2020 Report Handling and Learning from Complaints contained a number of recommendations for the Government based on best practice. |
- Some positive actions have been taken to improve management information and promote continuous learning. However, the education function recognises that more needs to be done to improve management information and to promote and embed its effective use.
- To improve management information, clear co-ordination and leadership of the management information agenda is needed, together with an adequately resourced training and development programme and benchmarking against those identified as best in class. This will help to foster an environment where learning and development are rewarded.
Recommendations
R11 Embed the use of the C&AG recommendation tracker across the States as a
mechanism to drive improvement.
R12 Develop mechanisms within CYPES for systematic monitoring of and shared
learning from schools complaints.
R13 Ensure that there is clear co-ordination and leadership of the management
information agenda both at corporate and departmental level.
The review included the following key elements:
• review of relevant documentation provided by the States; and
• interviews with key officers within the States.
The documentation review encompassed more than 70 documents which included:
• Children and Young People's Plan, 2019-23
• The Government Plan 2020-23
• Jersey Performance Framework
• The CYPES Business Plan 2020
• Chief Operating Office 2020 Business Plan
• Documents relating to CYPES structure and governance arrangements
• Examples of CYPES departmental management reports, financial reports, KPI dashboards, risk registers and meeting agenda and minutes
• Jersey school review framework
• Teachers Survey reports
• Annual Teacher assessment report 2018-2019
• Guidance issued to schools
• Examples of school data reports
• Examples of Jersey Premium meeting agenda, minutes and reports
• Examples of Skills Jersey meeting minutes and reports
• Recommendation trackers and reports
The following officers were interviewed:
• Director General, CYPES
• Director of Policy and Planning, CYPES
• Director of Corporate Planning and Performance, Strategic Policy, Planning and Performance (SPPP)
• Assistant Director, Performance, SPPP
• Head of Education Insight, CYPES
• Head of Facilities Management, CYPES
• Senior Advisor, Jersey Premium
• Head of Skill Development, Skills Jersey
• Operations Manager, Skills Jersey
I would like to thank all officers who have contributed to this report.
The fieldwork was carried out by an affiliate working for the Comptroller and Auditor General.
R1 Ensure that co-ordinated actions are taken to enable middle managers and all
other relevant staff groups to identify and assess the management information needed to drive organisational improvement.
R2 Establish short, medium and long-term business priorities for departmental
functions and teams.
R3 Develop, report and monitor outcome-based performance indicators and
targets at function and team levels within CYPES.
R4 Develop reporting dashboards at function and team levels to record progress
against the identified business priorities.
R5 Establish triggers and controls within the education function for exception
reporting that managers at all levels should use to determine whether to escalate issues as part of the risk management process.
R6 Develop and implement a Government-wide strategy for data quality to
include:
• corporate data quality standards;
• departmental specific standards; and
• a data quality management and monitoring programme.
R7 Finalise and issue data guidelines for effective use of data by schools.
R8 Implement a coherent and systematic programme to monitor compliance with
data quality guidelines across the education function.
R9 Ensure that there is a clear link between CYPES, team and individual
objectives and outcome-based performance indicators.
R10 Develop, report and monitor outcome-based performance indicators for Skills
Jersey.
R11 Embed the use of the C&AG recommendation tracker across the States as a
mechanism to drive improvement.
R12 Develop mechanisms within CYPES for systematic monitoring of and shared
learning from schools complaints.
R13 Ensure that there is clear co-ordination and leadership of the management
information agenda both at corporate and departmental level.
LYNN PAMMENT
COMPTROLLER and AUDITOR GENERAL
JERSEY AUDIT OFFICE. DE CARTERET HOUSE, 7 CASTLE STREET, ST HELIER, JERSEY JE2 3BT T: 00 44 1534 716800 E: enquiries@jerseyauditoffice.je W: www.jerseyauditoffice.je