DFID Management Board
Minutes of the Management Board Meeting - April 2004
In working towards the delivery of the Public Service Agreement and Service Delivery Agreement, the Management Board will aim to:
A. communicate the vision, role, direction and priorities of DFID to staff and other stakeholders;
B. ensure DFID's financial resources and staff are allocated and managed effectively;
C. monitor and improve DFID's performance;
D. protect and enhance DFID’s reputation as a highly effective international development organisation.
Topic |
Attending |
Purpose |
MB Objective |
|---|---|---|---|
Annual reports for the Board and Committees |
DFID India, seven further observers in person, including from HMT and DWP Board Secretariats |
To consider the Board and Committees' progress against 03-04 objectives, and objectives and work plans for 04-05. |
C and D |
Quarterly Management Report |
Owen Barder Dave Fish Richard Calvert Sarah Dunn Gail Marzetti |
To assess progressin DFID's programme expenditure, IT, HR and risk assessment |
A, B, C and D |
Annual Review of the Risk Register |
Richard Calvert Sarah Dun |
To consider the key risks to delivery of DFID's targets, and how to mitigate these |
B, C and D |
Observing |
|---|
Financing and Audit: Richard Calvert Mel Charles HR: Dave Fish Sonia Black Development Sharon White Gail Marzetti Security Dave Fish Owen Barder Gary James |
Board and Committees' annual reports
1. The Board and Committee Chairs in turn introduced their self-assessments for 2003-04 and objectives and work-plans for 2004-05 for the Board's approval. The Board agreed the following cross-cutting conclusions:
a) Directors and Senior Civil Servants who were members of Committees should increase their attendance of Committee meetings to ensure the achievement that the 'contribution to corporate governance' objective in their annual objectives;
b) the relationship between a Committee and the line management chain was such that whilst the Committee approved and consulted, delivery was carried out in the line;
c) Board Secretaries should meet with the Information Director to improve the communications of all the Committees;
d) the Committees should report orally to the Board as a mid-year review, on what had been achieved, and whether their forward workplans needed changing.
2. Having discussed this extensively at its last meeting, the Board approved its own revised self-assessment for 2003-04 and objectives and work-plan for 2004-05, with the following conditions:
a) the QMR should also report on progress on communicating the vision, role, direction and priorities of DFID to staff and other stakeholders, and protecting and enhancing DFID's reputation as a highly effective international development organisation. These issues were also reflected as the Board's objectives 'a' and 'd', and the Board would maintain an oversight of these;
b) at the end of each meeting the Board should preview future agenda items to look at how best to use the discussion.
3. The Board approved the Human Resources Committee (HRC) self-assessment for 2003-04 and objectives and work-plan for 2004-05, with the following comments:
a) the HRC was being used effectively as a vehicle to set and maintain high HR management standards. HRC should lead on the scaling up of the professional development function, for both advisers and administrators - and an item should come to the HRC to that effect in the summer;
b) it was good that staff forecasting was being taken seriously by Directors, with the result that data was much more useful. All staff needed to understand that the years of rapid growth in DFID were over;
c) the Board acknowledged the role of the HRD in achieving IIP reaccredidation.
4. The Board approved the Development Committee (DC) self-assessment for 2003-04 despite it being felt slightly too rosy, and objectives for 2004-05, with the following conditions:
a) rather than simply reviewing current policy, the DC should be more active and directive earlier in the policy development cycle. This would help prepare major policy recommendations for Ministers, ensuring policy consistency and that the operational implications of these recommendations were appropriately taken into account. The DC remit was not restricted to Policy Division issues, but included any appropriate cross-Departmental policy. The DC objectives should be revised accordingly;
b) the Board required the Development Committee to bring back a modified workplan which included a couple of comparative country issues which would feed into central policy. The suggested session with Evaluation Department should be included in the MB's DDP discussions, rather than on the DC agenda.
5. The Board approved the Finance and Audit Committee (FAC) self-assessment for 2003-04 and objectives and workplan for 2004-05, with the following comments:
a) the 'Finance' element could be dropped from the FAC title to reflect the actual nature of the Committee's work. But this did not mean that Finance issues were taken any less seriously in DFID;
b) the committee played its constitutional role well in ensuring compliance with external requirements. But FAC needed to ensure that it added value beyond that level, perhaps primarily by challenging the organisation. The Efficiency and Admin Costs Reviews would be areas where FAC would add value, in preparation for final decisions at Board level;
c) the timing of Directors' statements needed to be brought in line with the reporting year.
6. The Board approved the Security Committee (SC) terms of reference for 2004-05 (the SC had only recently been created and so had no self-assessment) with the following conditions:
a) the Board agreed to a restricted mandate (to ensure management of a heightened threat to DFID), and a limited lifetime (to one year);
b) the bringing together of physical and personal security issues would be carried out in the line.
Quarterly Management Report
7. Richard Calvert introduced the Quarterly Management Report (QMR) for the First Quarter 2004. Headline messages had been drawn from the data to assist the Management Board in considering implications of performance in one area of business for delivery in another, and management responses proposed. Work was progressing on developing a "balanced scorecard" QMR which would contribute even more in each of these respects.
Delivery
8. In discussion the following points were made:
a) there were few changes since last quarter in the status of DFID's PSA indicators - the same 4 out of 28 indicators were off-track. One indicator had improved (No.10 from amber to green) and one deteriorated (No.11 from green to amber). But there was a lot of good news - 13 of the 28 indicators were on track;
b) whilst two of the eight indicators for target 1 (Africa) were off track, three were well on track. Despite generally reasonable indicators for target 2 (Asia), the deterioration in the indicator for the proportion of births assisted by skilled birth attendants was worrying news;
c) we needed to pay attention to the EU-related indicator under Target 3 (the International system) - it was worrying that we were not likely to achieve a greater impact of EC external programmes on poverty reduction;
d) similarly, it was extremely worrying that we were off track on progress to secure agreement by 2005 to a significant reduction in trade barriers. But there was not a lot we could do to influence that outcome. Reflecting that, FCO was likely to drop this target from its PSA;
e) all divisions should use this information every quarter. Directors General were focussing especially on the off-track PSA targets with their Divisions, and the Board would keep these in view when discussing future items.
Finance
9. In conclusion the Board agreed the following:
a) with overall PRISM scoring at its highest ever level (99% compliance for Regional Divisions, and 96% for Policy and International Divisions) Divisions were to be congratulated and encouraged to extend this to the completion of PCRs; b) PRISM compliance for Project Completion Reports (PCRs) was poor, with over 350 PCRs outstanding or deferred to a later date. It was important for Regional Divisions to take PCRs seriously. To help them to do so, the timing of PCRs had been brought forward to the final stages of a project (rather than after the project had ended). The next QMR would contain this data disaggregated to department level to allow repeat offenders to be identified; c) the decrease in VFM scores by value for high and medium risk projects was concerning. A strategy for improving portfolio performance was being designed by Finance and Corporate Performance Division and would be implemented in June or July; d) it was good news that the suspense balance had fallen by 35% since December. Finance Division would continue monitoring country-level data on a monthly basis, and should work with the DGs to exert pressure to keep reducing suspense balances, particularly those over 12 months old; e) procurement data should be annual rather than quarterly, and the data on approved projects by commitment range should be further disaggregated to Divisional level.
Human Resources
10. In conclusion the Board agreed the following:
a) it was a corporate priority to reduce the number of staffing gaps, using inward secondments and reducing the rate of creation of new posts. Staffing levels continued to rise with 72 more staff since November 2003. The QMR should contain data on the number of newly created posts disaggregated to Divisional level, and Richard Calvert should give a considered view on whether the Administration Cost budgets for 2004/05 needed to be tightened in order to encourage Directors to create fewer new posts. Instead, Directors needed to prioritise work more effectively, in the knowledge that they had the full support of the Management Board in so doing. At the same time, in considering outward secondments, managers needed to ensure that that represented the best use of that person at that time;
b) as it was unlikely that DFID would meet the disability or female SCS targets we needed to make a more conscious effort to encourage under-represented categories of people to apply for posts;
c) regular checks by Directors on training plans and inductions in their Divisions were very important;
d) it was excellent that nearly all DFID offices have Business Continuity Plans or were covered by those of FCO.
Risk Register Annual Review
11. Sarah Dunn introduced the annual review of DFID's risk register. There was continued interest across Whitehall in effective risk management and DFID had been judged the Department with the best risk-handling mechanism. But it remained for the organisation to bed-in risk mitigation actions. The balanced scorecard approach to the QMR (to be circulated in June) would link risk management more closely to performance against delivery targets at the corporate level (this is already the case elsewhere in the organisation e.g. in DDPs and CAPs). The Board should also consider making the risk owner explicitly responsible for:
a. defining the risk;
b. championing the risk in the organisation (assessment and management);
c. formulating the corrective actions to manage the risk;
d. obtaining agreement with the Management Board about what the appetite for the particular risk should be.
12. In conclusion the Board agreed that:
a) the current risk register and changes made to this over the last quarter were fine as far as they went. The Board should engage in a subsequent facilitated discussion to consider what other risks might need to be added to the register;
b) given concerns about the transaction costs of a more comprehensive role for risk owners at Board level, the Permanent Secretary would pilot this approach for the risk he 'owned': the management of DFID's reputation within Whitehall to ensure buy-in to DFID's mission.
