Monitoring & Evaluation

Growth Deals

Tom Griffiths, Head of Local Growth Analysis, BIS

04/09/14 1

Robust M&E central to the success of Growth Deals

• Ensuring effective implementation

• Finding out ‘what works’ and where

• Maintaining the momentum around decentralisation

• Supporting future bids

• Providing accountability and transparency

04/09/14 2

M&E are distinct activities on a single continuum

• Monitoring

– Is delivery proceeding as planned?

– Emphasis on inputs and outputs

• Evaluation

– Has the intervention achieved it’s desired goals?

– Emphasis on outcomes and impacts

04/09/14 3

The emerging M&E model

• Monitoring – Core metrics for all LEPs and interventions

– Additional supplementary metrics where these add value

– Wide coverage of interventions

– Inputs/outputs to be reported quarterly, outcomes annually

• Evaluation – Aim for high quality, focused on a subset of interventions

– LEP-owned evaluation plans

– Complemented by additional ‘demonstrator’ evaluations and a national evaluation

04/09/14 4

M&E goes beyond the aggregate LEP level to look at specific interventions

LEP Growth Deal

Programme A

Project A Project B Project C

LEP monitoring

and evaluation at

the intervention

level

Plan or LEP level

data provided by

HMG

04/09/14 5

Reflects the need to establish impact, attribution

Challenges & opportunities

• Numerous challenges

– Growth Deals are big and complex

– Consistency

• within Growth Deals: common definitions, approaches

• between interventions: ESIF, GPF, City Deals

– Resource constraints

• But…

– LEPs have local knowledge and understanding

– There are ample opportunities to work together and co-design

04/09/14 6

Emerging timeline

• Today – seeking your initial views

• Co-working with LEP sub-groups – Aug/Sept 2014

• Revised ME proposal shared with LEPs – Sept 2014

• Dialogue between HMG and LEPs – Oct/Nov 2014

• Local evaluation plans agreed and signed off – March 2015

• First monthly progress discussion – May 2015

• First quarterly monitoring return – June 2015

04/09/14 7

The monitoring framework

• Key principles… – Proportionate – Robust and

Consistent – Co-designed

• Frequency & format… – Hierarchy of

reporting – Standard reporting

system

04/09/14 8

Implementation milestones (Monthly)

Inputs & Outputs

(Quarterly)

Outcomes (Annual or

Other)

Scheme level – LEPs to HMG

04/09/14 9

LEP level – HMG to LEPs

04/09/14 10

Key messages

• M&E an integral part of Growth Deals - for both LEPs and HMG

• Focus efforts at the intervention-level

• Monitoring based around a set of core metrics to ensure consistency

• Flexibility built in – e.g. supplementary metrics, hierarchy of reporting

• We want to work together to define the detail

04/09/14 11

Panel Q&A • Tom Griffiths, Head of Local Growth Analysis, BIS

• Mark Chandler, Economic Appraisal and Evaluation of Local Growth, BIS

• Fiammetta Gordon, Head of Local and Roads Economics Division, DfT

• Urvashi Parashar, Economic Advisor, Skills Policy Analysis, BIS

04/09/14 12

Seeking your views - monitoring

• What should LEPs report on?

– # of metrics

– Which metrics, definitions

– Ensuring consistency with other monitoring requirements

– Handling additionality and attribution

• How should LEPs report?

– Frequency, timing

– Reporting and data collection tools

– Consistency checking returns

– Consolidating smaller projects for reporting purposes

04/09/14 13