Abstract
This article presents a case study of an important but relatively neglected aspect of the British policy process ‐ the Value for Money (VIM) studies undertaken by the National Audit Office. It analyses in detail the conduct of one particular study, including the reactions of the audited bodies and the parliamentary activity which followed the publication of the NAO report. The case is then used to illuminate what appear to be some more general characteristics of the NAO's approach. It is concluded that NAO VFM work marks an important step beyond traditional audit for regularity and/or economy, and that it significantly enhances democratic accountability. Yet at the same time this work falls short of a full‐blooded evaluation. Indeed, it appears to take place within quite prominent constraints, some of which were built into the legislation setting up the NAO but others of which could conceivably be eased, even without new statutory authority.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
