4. Using performance information
Conclusion
It is difficult for the government, Parliament and the community to use the results departments publish in BP3 and their annual reports to understand performance. This is due to:
3. Measuring output performance
Conclusion
Across all departments and service delivery areas, there are many output performance measures that provide little genuine insight into departmental performance. This is despite the Framework describing output performance measures as the 'building blocks of the accountability system' and the 'basis for the certification of departmental revenue'. This is a significant failure by departments in the application of the state's key performance and accountability framework. Contributing issues include:
2. Measuring outcomes
Conclusion
Departments have not consistently developed or reported on objective indicators that show their achievement against their stated objectives. This means departments are not meeting the Framework's mandatory requirements. More importantly, it weakens departments' accountability and transparency by preventing the government, Parliament and the community from accessing vital information about their performance. Without information on departments' outcome achievement, the government lacks a sound basis for future investment and policy decisions.
1. Audit context
Departments measure and report on their service performance to show what they have delivered with public money. This information helps the government to allocate funding, and Parliament and the community to understand if departments are delivering efficient and effective services.
DTF sets performance reporting requirements for departments. Each year, departments provide details of their objectives and associated performance measures, targets and results in the state's Budget papers. Departments also publicly report on their performance in their annual reports.
Government Advertising
In 2019–20, the Victorian government spent $73 million on campaign advertising. Every year, government departments must report on any campaigns they have run, for which they spent over $100,000 on purchasing media placements.
Our dashboard brings together this information for all government departments and the five government agencies that spent the most on campaign advertising for 2017–18, 2018–19, 2019–20 and 2020–21. It allows you to compare spending across departments and agencies, and conduct your own analysis.
Appendix I. Oversight during implementation
FIGURE I1: Oversight committees during implementation (2015–18)
| Committee | Purpose and meeting frequency | Membership |
|---|---|---|
|
ARMC 2015 to current |
Appendix H. Gateway reviews
As the government classified the Reform Program as HVHR, DTF (in consultation with DPC) arranged six Gateway reviews of SV. Figure H1 provides more information about these reviews.
FIGURE H1: Gateway reviews of SV
Appendix G. Benefits by transaction type
Figure G1 shows SV’s reported avoided costs and re-use benefits by transaction type for 2018–19 and 2019–20.
FIGURE G1: SV’s reported benefits by transaction type for 2018–19 and 2019–20
Appendix F. Summary of SV's performance against its KPIs
FIGURE F1: Summary of SV's performance against its KPIs
Appendix E. Reform Program business case transactions
SV did not deliver all original transactions outlined in the Reform Program business case. Figure E1 outlines the changes to the transactions over time and whether these have been delivered.
FIGURE E1: SV's transactional delivery