Value For Money Assessment Research Articles

Contextual Issues in Assessing Value for Money in Early Years Education

Early years education has been attributed as having benefits for the public good, avoiding social stratification and acquiring human capital. Although these outcomes appear social, the focus on value for money highlights their economic undertones. However, an assessment of value for money in early years education has a number of tensions, not only in relation to how and for whom value is assessed, but also with regard to the marginalisation of the economic position of early years education providers and emerging evidence of both hidden and masked costs within the sector. Drawing on interviews with a range of stakeholders, it will be demonstrated, therefore, that there is a need to acknowledge wider contextual issues when making an assessment of value for money in early years education.

Lessons from the private finance initiative in the UK

PurposeThis paper summarises the main research findings from a detailed, qualitative set of structured interviews and case studies of private finance initiative (PFI) schemes in the UK, which involve the construction of built facilities. The research, which was funded by the Foundation for the Built Environment, examines the emergence of PFI in the UK. Benefits and problems in the PFI process are investigated. Best practice, the key critical factors for success, and lessons for the future are also analysed.Design/methodology/approachThe research is based around 11 semi‐structured interviews conducted with stakeholders in key PFI projects in the UK.FindingsThe research demonstrates that value for money and risk transfer are key success criteria. High procurement and transaction costs are a feature of PFI projects, and the large‐scale nature of PFI projects frequently acts as barrier to entry.Research limitations/implicationsThe research is based on a limited number of in‐depth case study interviews. The paper also shows that further research is needed to find better ways to measure these concepts empirically.Practical implicationsThe paper is important in highlighting four main areas of practical improvement in the PFI process: value for money assessment; establishing end‐user needs; developing competitive markets and developing appropriate skills in the public sector.Originality/valueThe paper examines the drivers, barriers and critical success factors for PFI in the UK for the first time in detail and will be of value to property investors, financiers, and others involved in the PFI process.

Value for money tests and accounting treatment in PFI schemes

In Private Finance Initiative (PFI) projects, value for money (VFM) tests and accounting treatment are distinct but related issues. VFM analysis should be concerned with total risk, not just with the sharing of risk, which dominates the accounting treatment decision. A framework is developed for logical thinking about what is meant by “best VFM” in the context of PFI projects. This involves consideration of the full set of alternatives, not an artificially diminished subset. The credibility of analytical techniques can be tarnished if they are misused to legitimate a predetermined decision. A reduction in construction risk may be a powerful source of VFM gains under PFI, but, under UK accounting regulation, this should not influence the accounting treatment decision. New complications about how VFM should be interpreted arise directly from the process of public sector fragmentation: affordability to the client is not necessarily the same as VFM for the public sector as a whole. Only public auditors, such as the National Audit Office, can gain access to PFI documentation on the conditions necessary for a comprehensive assessment of both accounting treatment and VFM. However, such studies require the kind of theoretical underpinning provided in this article, as otherwise the findings are likely to be ambiguous and hence vulnerable to rebuttal. In particular, VFM judgements must make explicit the basis of comparison on which they rest.

The technical requirements of the Home Energy Conservation Act

Reports on the work undertaken by the University of Salford on behalf of Warrington Borough Council to satisfy the technical requirements of the Home Energy Conservation Act (HECA)[1] which obtained Royal Assent in June 1995 and came into force on 1 April 1996. Also examines the information contained in the Guidance Notes[2] and the procedures that local authorities can adopt to carry out a sample stock profile and hence determine an energy rating distribution. Further information can also be obtained from full energy audits based on a sample of stock, from which targets can then be determined and measures applied to the whole stock as and when funds allow. The performance of energy efficiency improvements can be measured against improved Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP), National Home Energy Rating (NHER) and reduced CO2 emissions by the use of software tools. A value for money assessment can then be made using the benefits to tenants in theoretical cost saving for standard level of comfort achieved resulting in the calculation of payback times.

Groundwork – a case study in landscape and amenity management

Abstract The Groundwork trusts have now been in operation for well over a decade and have implemented a wide range of projects across England and Wales. The origins and purposes of Groundwork are traced, and an overview of the types of project undertaken is presented. The relationship of the trusts to public and private sector funding, and the kinds of partnership involved, are examined. Many successes have been achieved in landscape renewal, although there have been some frictions with local authorities, and it is still difficult to make objective assessments of value for money or performance across a wide range of criteria. Nevertheless, the network of Groundwork trusts looks set to continue to offer a broad and flexible approach to environmental management.

Value for Money

The primary objective of this assessment is to determine the value for money (VfM) of IUCN's contribution to Guatemala’s forest landscape restoration (FLR) policy formulation processes during the period 2012-2016. The process and findings described in this VfM assessment are intended to stimulate discussion within IUCN and beyond on how to systematically reflect on experiences and capture lessons about what works in delivering value, and share that learning about value delivery to influence policy, investment, decisions and actions.