Part 4: Our proposed work programme

Appendix 3 provides a summary of the work we plan to complete in 2020/21 in the context of a multiyear overview of our work. Our work is organised into the following four broad topics, which are aligned to our strategy:

• How well is the public sector improving the lives of New Zealanders?
  In our last annual plan, we began a new theme: “improving the lives of New Zealanders”. That theme has evolved into a significant emphasis for our work during the next year and beyond. We intend to carry out work in areas where New Zealanders will want confidence that the government is improving the lives of New Zealanders. This includes family violence, housing, health, education, and improving outcomes for Māori.
• How well is the system working as a whole?
  Our work programme maintains a focus on the fundamentals, such as the integrity of public sector organisations, that organisations manage procurement well, and that they plan for the future effectively. We will also continue with our work at a system level: implementing the well-being agenda, contributing to the sustainable development goals, and keeping working to influence the direction of public sector reform to strengthen accountability to Parliament and the public.
• Keeping New Zealanders informed about public sector performance and accountability
  Our regular reporting is the main way we keep New Zealanders informed about how the public sector is performing, but during the next few years we are also planning some specific work to understand the issues that are important to communities so we can make relevant information more readily available to communities.
• Sharing insights about what good looks like
  We are continuing to update our suite of good practice guides, but we are also looking at other ways we can encourage public organisations to share their experience with each other and thinking about how we support independent audit and risk committees in their role to influence improved performance and accountability.

The work we plan to carry out under each of these topics is described in more detail in this section.

Work carried forward from 2019/20

Although we expect to complete most of our work planned for 2019/20, some work may be published after 30 June 2020. The response to Covid-19 is affecting the delivery of some of our work that was due for completion in 2019/20. Some work planned for 2019/20 has been either cancelled or carried forward into 2020/21 for other reasons. Appendix 2 provides more details.

Providing assurance to Parliament and the public following the Covid-19 pandemic

We are developing a specific programme of work designed to understand the impacts of, and how our public sector is responding to, Covid-19.

An unprecedented amount of public money will be spent during the coming months as the Government responds to the challenges of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Parliament has also given the Government a rare and considerable degree of flexibility to fund its response to the Covid-19 crisis. Incurring such a large amount of spending, along with the pace of the Government’s emergency response and the extraordinary conditions under which the public sector is operating, mean that sound financial management, governance, and accountability are critical.

The amount and speed of the additional spending will also have implications for the Government’s debt levels and ability to borrow globally. The quality of reporting in the Financial Statements of Government, supported by high-quality audit work, are vital to trust and confidence, and the Government’s access to capital and how much that access costs. Similarly, the quality of reporting will be important for the local government sector’s access to capital and how much that access costs.

Parliament and the public will be looking for significant assurance that this funding is properly accounted for and that the extraordinary legislative powers the Government has accessed to support its response are being used appropriately.

In the short term, we will be looking at the Government’s systems and controls for authorising, tracking, and reporting on the additional spending in response to Covid-19. This work will examine whether good systems are in place for the Government to give an account to the public and Parliament on that spending. We will report publicly on this work regularly, as well as more formally later in the year as part of our annual audit work.

Our auditors will take particular care to examine areas of spending associated with the Covid-19 response and the control environment around that spending. They will work with public organisations to understand the specific challenges they now face in the current environment. We have, for example, recently issued advice to our auditors to remind the organisations they deal with about the importance of ensuring that appropriate financial controls remain in place.

We will remain alert to opportunities to provide Parliament and the public with greater assurance about aspects of how the response is being managed – for example, on the way personal protective equipment is managed and distributed to health care workers.

During the next few months, we will put together an indicative programme of the work we could carry out during the next few years to identify lessons from aspects of this response that will help the public sector, the Government, and Parliament plan for future events. We will be interested in understanding what can be learned from:

• the overall level of preparedness of the public sector for events like these;
• how well co-ordinated and governed the response effort was;
• how extraordinary legislative powers have been used and to what effect;
• where additional funding was spent and the effectiveness of that spending; and
• how the public sector is understanding and planning for the long-term recovery from the pandemic.

The work programme in this draft annual plan already includes some work that is relevant to the extraordinary events that New Zealand has seen in the past few months. For example, we had already planned work to look at the resilience of the public sector and how it plans for significant events or “shocks”, including completing our work on the review of Auckland Council’s disaster resilience and preparedness, and work on preparedness for response and planning for recovery in central and local government.

We are in the final stages of our procurement theme, and we consider that this work may now usefully draw on the experience of organisations in managing the impacts of Covid-19 by looking at practices in emergency situations.

Through our annual audits and advice to select committees, we intend to maintain a focus on the financial sustainability of the health sector. In this draft annual plan, we have included more substantive work to examine aspects of the performance and sustainability of the health sector. In light of the significant impact of current events, we intend to defer this work for 12 months as the health sector recovers. We will reassess the focus and timing of this work later this year.

How well is the public sector improving the lives of New Zealanders?

The work we will carry out in 2020/21 (and the following two years) that is aimed at better understanding how well the public sector is improving the lives of New Zealanders is focused on five priority areas:

1. achieving reductions in family violence;
2. improving housing outcomes;
3. improving health outcomes;
4. improving education outcomes; and
5. improving outcomes for Māori.

The pages that follow set out details of the work we will carry out from 2020/21 to 2022/23 under each of these five priority areas.

1. Achieving reductions in family violence

We seek: views about the coverage and value of the proposed second-year programme of family violence work in 2020/21; and views about the topics proposed for 2021/22 and 2022/23, and about priorities for our future family violence work.

Objective: To examine public organisation performance in achieving reductions in family violence in New Zealand.

Background

The Government has identified preventing and eliminating family violence as a priority in the wider government effort to improve the well-being of New Zealanders. Until recently, efforts to effectively address family violence through an all-of-government response have relied on voluntary co-ordination.

In 2018, a cross-government joint venture was set up to work in new ways to reduce “family violence, sexual violence and violence within whānau”. The role of the joint venture is to help co-ordinate efforts and to lead a whole-of-government, integrated response to family violence (and sexual violence in the context of family violence).

In 2019/20, we started a multi-year programme of work aimed at examining public organisations’ performance in achieving reductions in family violence. During the next three years, our aim is to examine how well the joint venture has been set up to deliver reductions in family violence. We will also continue to increase our understanding of the overall problem, its costs to society, and whether the system responds effectively in ways that will lead to significant and sustained reductions in family violence. We plan to continue to report at different stages of our work.

Proposed work in 2020/21
Joint venture governance and building our understanding of the family violence system	In 2020/21, we plan to carry out a performance audit to examine how well the joint venture has been set up to deliver reductions in family violence. This provides us with an opportunity to engage early to support improvements in this work and on a new approach to delivering improved outcomes in complex problem areas. The Public Service Bill proposes changes to current state service arrangements that will make joint ventures a more common feature of how government operates. There may be useful insights from this joint venture that future joint ventures could learn from. In 2020/21, we will also continue to increase our understanding of the overall family violence problem, its costs to society, and how effectively the system responds. This will include looking at the roles of organisations involved in the family violence system, looking at the data and measures used to report outcomes, and increasing our understanding of the effectiveness of interventions for those who interact with the system. Proposed agencies: The State Services Commission, the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, the Ministry of Justice, the Department of Corrections, Te Puni Kōkiri, New Zealand Police, Oranga Tamariki, the Ministry of Social Development, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Education, Accident Compensation Corporation.
Proposed work in 2021/22 (indicative)
Joint venture: how well are agencies working together on policy and intervention design?	In 2021/22, we will continue our multi-year programme of work, with a view to examining how well the 10 joint venture organisations are working together to design interventions aimed at reducing family violence and sexual violence in New Zealand. Although we will not comment on policy design, we will examine how agencies are working together and, in particular, how lines of accountability for the whole-of-government response are considered and managed. We also expect to look at how public organisations are partnering with Māori when developing work and how the organisations are developing their capability to engage with Māori and understand Māori perspectives in their work. We envisage that this work will include looking at the effectiveness of intervention design from the perspective of population groups that find accessing family violence and sexual violence services difficult (for example, people with disabilities, Māori, Pasifika). We expect to use a combination of approaches in carrying out this work. This will likely involve a mix of performance audit, data analysis and research. Proposed agencies: TBC.
Proposed work in 2022/23 (indicative)
Joint venture: How well are interventions being implemented, and what is the performance of service delivery more generally	In 2022/23, we will continue our multi-year programme of work that will likely include examining the delivery of family violence and sexual violence services to communities. We expect to look at how effective the joint venture has been in ensuring that interventions and programmes are delivered in an integrated way and that they are achieving outcomes. We also expect to examine the effectiveness of monitoring and public reporting on family violence and sexual violence reduction outcomes in the context of the joint venture framework. As in previous years, we expect to use a combination of approaches in carrying out this work. This will likely involve a mix of performance audit, data analysis and research. Proposed agencies: TBC.

2. Improving housing outcomes

We seek: views about the coverage and value of the proposed first-year programme of housing work in 2020/21; and views about the topics proposed for 2021/22 and 2022/23, and about priorities for our future housing work.

Objective: To examine public organisations’ performance in improving housing outcomes for New Zealanders.

Background

Adequate and affordable housing is crucial for social and economic well-being. The Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (MHUD) has assumed the new role of system leader for housing. It has also embarked on a new “place-based” approach of targeting interventions more closely to regional and local needs. For this to work in practice, central and local government will need to co-operate closely.

Through our work, we want to gain assurance that MHUD is overseeing the housing system effectively. This will involve looking at how it uses data and analysis for decision-making and planning. We will also look at how central and local government agencies are working together to ensure that planning, funding, and implementation of housing and infrastructure projects are well aligned and well placed to deliver positive housing and community outcomes, including for groups at greater risk of poor outcomes.

For 2020/21 (extending into 2021/22), our focus will be on:

• an initial piece of work outlining how the housing system operates and the main questions and challenges it faces. This may include a survey of members of the community, to understand the challenges they experience with housing and how that matches the approach by government agencies;
• performance audit work to consider system-level oversight, and the planning and implementation of specific housing and urban development projects – these will focus on MHUD and Kāinga Ora – Homes and Communities, as well as other local and central government agencies involved in planning or funding core and social infrastructure; and
• extended annual audit work on KiwiBuild.

In 2021/22 and 2022/23, we expect to explore issues with homelessness and healthy homes. This will include looking at how well the Aotearoa New Zealand Homelessness Action Plan (2020-2023) is being implemented in practice and examining how well the Government is implementing its healthy homes standards.

Given the housing disparities that Māori experience, we will consider how the housing system is working for Māori in each topic of this programme of work.

Proposed work in 2020/21 – extending into 2021/22
Housing system oversight and planning	We will carry out research on the housing system, examining how MHUD is managing the system and ensuring that planning by government agencies is well informed, integrated, and focused on addressing housing supply challenges and improving housing outcomes, including for Māori. We expect to examine existing data and consider whether MHUD is making the most of existing data to make decisions. This will include looking at data and trend information for different groups at risk of poor outcomes – in particular, Māori, Pasifika, and families with children. We also expect to examine governance arrangements to find out whether roles and responsibilities are clear, whether the right mechanisms are in place for co-ordination, and whether they are used effectively to support planning and implementation. As part of this, we will examine how, and how well, is MHUD working with important partners (including iwi and other Māori organisations), and central government and councils working together. We also expect to look at MHUD’s approach to planning to ascertain how well it links, and gets commitment from, the various components of the housing system and how well it aligns funding and long term plans. For this work, we want to get a community perspective (including the perspective of particular population groups, such as Māori) and may survey members of the community to gain an understanding of their housing concerns. This will allow us to determine whether there are concerns that the Government is not aware of. To carry out this work, we expect to use an approach that combines research, a performance audit on housing system planning, and a public survey. Proposed agencies: MHUD.
Proposed work in 2020/21
Planning of significant housing and urban development projects	We will carry out a performance audit, looking at how Kāinga Ora works with other organisations to plan and implement significant housing and urban development projects. We are particularly interested in how effectively central and local government interact on infrastructure planning and implementation, and whether consenting processes adequately facilitate the progress of projects. Another area of interest is whether local iwi and other Māori organisations are appropriately involved in the planning process. To complement our proposed work on the housing system, we will look at a specific example (for example, the Mt Roskill development in Auckland that is aiming to build 4000 houses) to examine whether building and infrastructure development is co-ordinated to support the objective of having thriving communities. An important component of our proposed work will be looking at whether funding is planned for, and made available, in an integrated way. Proposed agencies: Kāinga Ora.
Extended annual audit work on KiwiBuild	The KiwiBuild initiative has been a matter of significant public interest. We want to give the public confidence that the processes being followed and valuations underpinning the sales of properties are reasonable. We intend to carry out extended annual audit work, looking at the processes for selling KiwiBuild homes. Our aim is to gain assurance that sales and underlying valuations of KiwiBuild homes rely on a reasonable process and preserve value for the Crown and that their accounting treatment is appropriate and transparent.
Proposed work in 2021/22 (indicative)
Homelessness	We expect to examine, through a performance audit and supporting data and analytics work, how effectively organisations identify people at risk, prevent homelessness, and integrate housing and other social services to achieve better outcomes for homeless New Zealanders. To do this, we will examine the Aotearoa New Zealand Homelessness Action Plan (2020-2023) that was developed to prevent and reduce homelessness. An important aspect of this work will be on responsiveness to Māori needs and how effectively agencies provide support. Proposed agencies: Ministry of Social Development.
Proposed work in 2022/23 (indicative)
Healthy homes	We plan to examine whether the Government is effectively implementing its healthy homes standards. This will likely involve looking at what information is used, how outcomes are measured, and whether actions taken to enforce healthy homes standards are effective. This work would help establish any disparities in outcomes – for example, for Māori. Proposed agencies: TBC.

3. Improving health outcomes

We seek: views about the coverage and value of the proposed first-year programme of our work on health in 2020/21; and views about the topics proposed for 2020/21, 2021/22, and 2022/23, and priorities for our work on health.

Objective: To examine public organisations’ performance in improving health outcomes for New Zealanders.

Background

Health is the second-largest government expenditure (after Vote Social Development) and the largest in terms of service delivery. All New Zealanders interact with the health system at multiple points in their lives. The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the health sector places immense pressure on a sector already challenged by significant financial pressures (in particular, DHBs), inequalities in access and outcomes for particular populations, and significant reform.

We had planned to examine aspects of the performance and sustainability of the health sector in 2020/21. Given the significant effect of the Covid-19 pandemic on the sector, we intend to defer this work for 12 months as the health sector recovers. We will reassess the focus and timing of this work later this year.

Recommended changes to New Zealand’s health sector will be outlined in The New Zealand Health and Disability System Review report when it is published.

This is the most broad-ranging review of the health and disability system in New Zealand in a generation. It is likely to recommend significant changes to how health and disability services are funded, co-ordinated, governed, and managed.

We audit all public entities in the health and disability system, from the Ministry of Health to every DHB and health Crown entity, and report independently on what we find. This gives us a unique perspective to comment on any proposed changes to the system and to inform those making final decisions on changes to the system about benefits and risks, and how those risks can be managed. If new legislation is proposed to implement changes, we may make a submission to Parliament on the draft legislation.

Given that the extent of the implications of Covid-19 on the health sector are still unclear, we may decide to change some of our planned work if new information or risks come to light.

Proposed work in 2020/21
Health sector reform	We will respond as appropriate when the New Zealand Health and Disability System Review report is released. If new legislation is needed to implement the changes, we may make a submission to Parliament on the draft legislation. This may provide an opportunity for us to comment on proposals and their potential impact on: accountability and transparency; governance effectiveness; and the sustainability of the system. We will also be interested in: how changes will be managed and governed; risks and mitigations; and the implications for audits.
Proposed work in 2021/22 (indicative)
Access to health services	Equitable access to health services is of considerable interest to New Zealanders, but the challenges and barriers to achieving this are not well understood. We intend to carry out research to understand the socio-economic factors that affect equity of access to specialist health services and procedures. We also want to know what is being done to address these inequities and improve access to health services. Once we complete our research, we will report on our findings. Proposed agencies: TBC.
Information and communications technology (ICT) systems and services	Providing healthcare to New Zealanders will continue to change and evolve. It is important that the technology the health sector uses keeps pace and is aligned with the direction and planned future state of care provision. Planning for the technology needed to support that change will need to be focused on the future, agile, and innovative. Information and communications technology (ICT) is an area where better collaboration could bring considerable savings and efficiencies. We intend to review how well the Ministry of Health and DHBs understand their future ICT needs and/or are procuring ICT to ensure that it is fit for purpose. Proposed agencies: Ministry of Health and DHBs.
Health system sustainability	In recent years, DHBs have been under increasing pressure to deliver services and results, and their financial results have deteriorated sharply. Our ageing population means that these pressures will increase. DHBs will need to find different ways of ensuring that people receive the health services they need and that health outcomes improve. We are interested in how well the Ministry of Health supports DHBs to deal with these challenges and, in particular, how the Ministry and the Treasury are working together to support the financial sustainability of the overall system. Proposed agencies: Ministry of Health and the Treasury.
Proposed work in 2022/23 (indicative)
Monitoring and managing the delivery of health services	How well DHBs and the Ministry of Health are monitoring and managing service delivery is of significant interest to service users. In 2022/23, we will examine how well DHBs and the Ministry of Health are monitoring and managing the delivery of health services. Our work may focus on examining the delivery and outcomes achieved by one (or more) of the national screening programmes and/or pre-school checks. We intend to examine how well services are delivered and whether the aims for those services are achieved. We also intend to examine access to the services, including what is being done about reducing barriers to access. Proposed agencies: TBC.

4. Improving education outcomes

We seek: views about the value of the proposed work on education in 2020/21; and views about the indicative topics proposed for 2021/22 and 2022/23, and about priorities for our work on education

Objectives: To examine public organisations’ performance in improving education outcomes for New Zealanders, including the tertiary education system, relative to other jurisdictions.

Background

New Zealand needs its education system to deliver, among other outcomes, workers with skills needed by employers, researchers who bring innovation, and people who contribute to a diverse artistic and cultural society. To be successful, New Zealand needs a stable and strong education system that keeps all children engaged in education.

Many government-funded strategies, projects, and initiatives aim to address barriers to access. Despite this effort, the level of education reached by 25-35 year olds in New Zealand is only at the average for OECD countries. Other data shows that some educational outcomes are comparatively worse than similar countries.

We propose to look at two aspects of public sector performance in improving education outcomes for New Zealanders.

Helping children at risk of disadvantage or disengagement to succeed in their education

Some young people do not, or cannot, engage with education. This has an effect on their adult lives and on New Zealand overall. The reasons for this are complicated, and the solutions are not just in the hands of the education agencies.

Beginning in 2021/22, we plan to look at the effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving educational outcomes. School attendance rates are declining, and there are long waits for learning support, particularly early intervention.

Some outcomes for Māori and Pasifika learners are worse. For example, more Māori young men are excluded from school than other demographics. In tertiary education, there is a significant gap between the participation and completion patterns of Māori and Pasifika learners and that of non- Māori and non-Pasifika learners.

In 2020/21, we will prioritise the interventions we will look at, based on New Zealand’s performance compared with similar countries. We may publish this prioritisation work if we consider that it has value in its own right.

Tertiary education system performance

Our initial focus will be on the underlying financial sustainability of New Zealand’s tertiary education institutions (TEIs). New Zealand’s TEIs were financially vulnerable to changes in participation rates by international students, even before Covid-19. We have previously raised concerns about the financial risks created by the dependency of TEIs on international students.

Until 2019, changes in participation by overseas students mostly affected the institutes of technology and polytechnics. However, Covid-19 has had a sudden and significant effect on all public organisations with international students.

Given the likely adverse effects of COVD-19 on international education participation in New Zealand, we are interested in understanding how the sector is planning to reduce its risks and exposure. In 2020/21, alongside our regular audit work, we plan to increase our scrutiny of the tertiary system’s leadership response. We expect that this work may continue into subsequent years and may become more specific as we learn more.

We recognise that the Tertiary Education Commission, which would be the lead agency for this work, is heavily involved in responding to Covid-19. Consequently, we will keep the timing of this work under review. In any event, we do not plan to start substantive work until 2021/22.

Proposed work in 2020/21
Helping children at risk of disadvantage or disengagement to succeed in their education	We propose to defer our planned work in the education sector until2021/22. This recognises that there may be significant operational challenges in managing the continuing implications of Covid-19. We will instead prepare for that work where we can do so without placing undue demands on the sector. This will include preparing a data-led sector scan that will guide our prioritisation for 2021/22 and 2022/23. For that work, we plan to draw on OECD data and other respected comparative sources such as PISA. We will use this work to specifically focus on identifying where educational outcomes are significantly worse for children in New Zealand when compared internationally, as well as where there is disparity of outcome between groups of New Zealand children. We currently expect to publish the results of that work. Proposed agencies: TBC.
Tertiary education system performance – underlying financial sustainability of tertiary education institutions and international comparisons	Some tertiary education institutions have become more dependent on the revenue that they earn from providing education to international students on a full-fee basis. The sector has also recognised that most of that dependency was on students from two major markets – China and India. We have previously raised concerns about the financial risks this dependency creates in some institutions. Until 2019, changes in participation by overseas students affected TEIs unequally, with downturns mostly affecting the institutes of technology and polytechnics. However, Covid-19 has had a sudden and significant effect on all public organisations with international students. Given that COVD-19 is likely to reduce international education participation in New Zealand, we are interested in understanding how the sector is planning to rebuild while reducing its risks and exposure. In 2020/21, alongside our regular audit work, we plan to increase our scrutiny of the tertiary system leadership’s response to rebuilding financial resilience. In 2020/21, we also want to investigate activity and financial data available at lower levels of aggregation than the institutional level and to look at international comparators. We expect that this work will continue into 2021/22. We also expect that it will develop a specific focus as we learn more. Proposed agencies: TBC.
Proposed work in 2021/22 (indicative)
Helping children at risk of disadvantage or disengagement to succeed in their education	Based on the findings from our data analysis and feedback on the annual plan, we will review one or two sector interventions or initiatives that aim to improve outcomes for a group of children. We will review the value for money of that initiative – that is, is the investment leading to the anticipated improvement in outcomes? From what we already know about performance, we anticipate that we may review: initiatives aimed at closing the attainment gap between Māori and Pasifika learners and learners generally; and initiatives aimed at encouraging and securing improved attendance at school.
Tertiary education system performance	The work we do in 2021/22 will be informed by our data analysis in 2020/21 and feedback on the draft annual plan.
Proposed work in 2022/23 (indicative)
Helping children at risk of disadvantage or disengagement to succeed in their education	In 2022/23, we expect to select a further one or two interventions or initiatives for review, based on our preparatory work in 2020/21. Indicatively, this may include reviewing: services for children who need learning support or specifically help with reading; and support for children, whānau, teachers, and schools in managing problem behaviour. We will adapt the coverage and length of this programme as necessary to fit within available resources (that is, by selecting fewer topics in each year but extending the programme over more years).
Tertiary education system performance	The work we do in 2022/23 (if any) will be informed by our data analysis in 2020/21 and feedback on the draft annual plan.

5. Improving outcomes for Māori

We seek: views about the first-year programme of work looking at Whānau Ora; views about the value in developing our understanding of Māori perspectives on accountability in the public sector; and views about the topics proposed for 2021/22 and 2022/23 on accountability in the public sector and Treaty commitments to Māori.

Objective: To understand whether the public sector is achieving better outcomes for Māori and honouring the commitments made by the Crown under the Treaty of Waitangi.

Background

The public sector has an important role to play in building a successful and effective relationship between Māori and the Crown, and for improving outcomes for Māori. The Public Service Bill, if passed as proposed, will establish new requirements for agencies in the public service to strengthen capability to engage and work in partnership with Māori.

The following three-year programme of work focuses on the public sector’s effectiveness in improving outcomes for Māori. In 2021, we will begin a performance audit that will examine how effectively Whānau Ora is supporting whānau to improve their lives. This performance audit will build on our 2015 report about Whānau Ora. We will also carry out research to find out what effective public accountability looks like for Māori.

In 2021/22 and 2022/23, we will focus on how effectively public sector organisations are delivering the commitments agreed to in Treaty settlements. Since the Treaty settlement process began in the 1990s, the Crown has agreed to more than 7000 different commitments to different iwi and hapū. These commitments are enshrined in legislation, and delivering on them will be fundamental to improving outcomes for Māori and for developing a positive and enduring relationship between the Crown and Māori.

Our first piece of work will be a performance audit of how public organisations are planning and delivering commitments that they deliver on behalf of the Crown. In 2022/23, we will examine how the public service is building its capacity and capability to engage and work in partnership with Māori. This will include looking at the role of agencies such as Te Arawhiti, the State Services Commission, and Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori (the Māori Language Commission) in supporting the public sector to build relevant capability and capacity.

Proposed work in 2020/21
Whānau Ora	We plan to build on our 2015 performance audit of Whānau Ora. We will examine how effectively commissioning and delivery organisations are using the Whānau Ora approach to help whānau achieve positive changes to their lives. We will take a whānau perspective to understand how people are using Whānau Ora approaches to improve their lives. Proposed agencies: Te Puni Kōkiri, whānau who are service users, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Social Development, service providers, Ministry of Education.
Māori perspectives on accountability	We propose further research that builds on what we have learned from our previous research into public accountability. We will explore some perspectives from Māori about what effective public accountability looks like. This will potentially include comparing and contrasting Māori perspectives with other perspectives. Proposed agencies: TBC.
Proposed work in 2021/22 (indicative)
Are public organisations effectively planning and delivering the Treaty settlement commitments they are responsible for?	In 2021/22, we will carry out a research report or performance audit of how well local authorities are planning and delivering Crown settlement commitments that they are responsible for. More than 7000 commitments are enshrined in Treaty settlement Acts. A wide range of public organisations are responsible for delivering these commitments. Notably, local authorities have an important role to plan in delivering the Crown’s obligations. We will need to consider the best way to do this piece of work. One option could be to break down the work by looking at different sectors, such as local government. Local authorities are an important agent for delivering the Crown’s commitments, and we are aware that some are struggling with the demands of Treaty settlement commitments. Other areas of focus could be the conservation sector, and the heritage and culture sector. As a starting point, we expect to: interview and survey iwi and hapū to get their perspective on what is or is not being delivered; analyse planning documents to see what plans are in place for delivering Treaty settlement commitments; and interview officials from a sample of public organisations to get a view about what they know about the commitments they are responsible for and what they are doing to deliver them. We would also consider interviewing other government agencies that are involved in Treaty settlements (such as the Department of Conservation), because they are likely to have useful perspectives on local government’s role in Treaty settlements. Proposed agencies: TBC.
Proposed work in 2022/23 (indicative)
To what extent is the public sector developing and maintaining its capability to engage with Māori and understand Māori perspectives?	In 2022/23, we will conduct research into how public organisations are delivering on their obligations to support the Crown’s relationship with Māori, as set out in Part 3 of the Public Service Bill. We expect to: interview Māori stakeholders involved in engagement processes for their perspective on the effectiveness of processes and approaches; collect and analyse information on what public organisations are doing, to form a baseline of knowledge; identify and then interview a sample of central government leadership teams to identify challenges and good practice as well as gather more detailed information; and analyse annual reports to identify how organisations are choosing to measure and report on performance. Proposed agencies: TBC.

How well is the system working as a whole?

The work we will carry out in 2020/21 (and the following two years) on how well the system is working as a whole is focused on the following five priority areas:

1. implementing a well-being focus;
2. resilience and climate change;
3. integrity in public organisations;
4. procurement; and
5. investment in infrastructure.

The following pages set out details of the work we will carry out from 2020/21 to 2022/23 under each of these five priority areas.

1. Implementing a well-being focus

We seek: views about the coverage and value of the proposed first-year programme of well-being work in 2020/21; and views about the topics proposed for 2021/22 and 2022/23, and about priorities for our well-being work.

Objective: To understand how well public organisations are performing in delivering on the Government’s well-being aspirations for New Zealanders and on our international commitments to the United Nations’ sustainable development goals.

Background

The notion of well-being is gaining increased emphasis throughout the public sector. New public sector reforms are being proposed that seek to support the management of a wider set of well-being outcomes.

Among other requirements, these reforms will require the government to set well-being objectives and require the Treasury to report on the state of well-being at least every four years.

Recent amendments to the Local Government Act 2002 reinstate the purpose of local authorities to promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of communities in the present and for the future.

We intend to start a multi-year programme of work aimed at providing Parliament and the public with assurance about how well the public sector is planning to achieve its well-being objectives. Our work will assess how effectively central and local government are incorporating well-being objectives into their planning processes and frameworks. In 2022, we intend to examine the Treasury’s reporting on the achievement of those well-being objectives.

Proposed work in 2020/21
Progress towards implementing the United Nations’ sustainable development goals	In 2015, all United Nations members adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its 17 sustainable development goals. The sustainable development goals are an important indicator of progress that countries have made towards significantly improving the well-being of their people. The areas the goals cover include poverty reduction, education, employment, and the environment. In July 2019, the Government published its first report on progress towards implementing the 17 sustainable development goals. We will continue our work on auditing how effectively agencies have co-ordinated activities towards implementing the 17 sustainable development goals by 2030. We expect our findings to promote: improvements in how government agencies are measuring and reporting outcomes; improved collaboration between government agencies in working towards implementation of the sustainable development goals; and improved engagement with private organisations, academic institutions, non-government organisations, and communities in working towards implementation of the sustainable development goals.
Proposed work in 2021/22 (indicative)
Embedding well-being into public sector planning Part 1: Central government	We plan to carry out a performance audit to assess how well public organisations in central government are planning to achieve their well-being objectives. Our work will examine how well central government organisations have: identified their well-being objectives; developed measures of achieving those objectives for planning and reporting purposes; and linked the well-being objectives to the services they deliver and to the objectives Proposed agencies: May include government agencies that belong to a certain sector (for example, social, justice, education) or that are aligned with a particular well-being outcome.
Monitoring progress of public sector planning for Well-being Part 2: Local government	In 2021/22, we will continue our work to assess how well public organisations are planning to achieve their well-being objectives, with a focus on local government organisations. We intend to examine the information in local authorities’ LTPs, including how well local authorities have: identified their well-being objectives; developed measures of those objectives for planning and reporting purposes; and aligned their well-being objectives and well-being indicators with the Government’s well-being priority areas. Proposed agencies: A sample of councils, including territorial authorities and regional councils.
Proposed work in 2022/23 (indicative)
Treasury well-being report and investment statement	We anticipate the Treasury’s first well-being report and its next investment statement will be published some time in 2022/23 (timing to be confirmed). Once these reports are published, we intend to review both reports in terms of their objectives, the approach that the Treasury takes, and the links between the two reports and the Treasury’s long-term fiscal statement. We want to support the Treasury in its work and assure Parliament and the public that these three important strategic perspectives meet their objectives and are aligned. Proposed agencies: The Treasury.

2. Resilience and climate change

We seek: views about the coverage and value of our proposed resilience and climate change work programme; and views about the topics proposed for 2020/21 and about future priorities for our resilience and climate change work.

Objective: To provide assurance to the New Zealand public about the effectiveness of the Government’s risk and resilience planning, with a particular focus on preparedness for, and response to, emergencies and addressing the impacts of a changing climate.

Background

We are experiencing many effects of climate change throughout New Zealand and the world, including the threat of rising sea levels and extreme weather events. In recent years, New Zealanders have also experienced successive and sometimes concurrent national risk events, such as the current Covid-19 pandemic. We have also had to recover from the Christchurch earthquakes, Christchurch mosque attacks, and to a more limited extent in the primary sector from Mycoplasma bovis.

Resilience is an important requirement for success within the context of a complex and uncertain future environment. It is the ability to anticipate and resist disruptive events, minimise adverse impacts, respond effectively, maintain or recover functionality, and adapt in a way that allows for learning and thriving. It’s about the ability to remain effective in a range of future conditions.

We can readily identify many of the risks we face now and in the future. However, it is often difficult to assess levels of likelihood and potential consequences, such as those from natural disasters and climate change. Other risks, such as Covid-19 and the Christchurch mosque attacks, are also challenging to assess.

Both central and local government have a role to play in strengthening New Zealand’s resilience to a range of risks and potential adverse events. Significant public money is spent on managing risk and strengthening New Zealand’s resilience, whether that be responding to adverse events or recovering from them.

During the next three years, we will look at aspects of how well public organisations are planning for the long term and managing risk to strengthen New Zealand’s resilience to a range of potential adverse events. Through our work on resilience, we seek to provide assurance:

1. to the public about the effectiveness of the Government’s risk and resilience planning, with a particular focus on preparedness for, and response to, emergencies and addressing the effects of a changing climate; and
2. that public money is being spent prudently and effectively, and support Parliament to hold public organisations to account for their delivery of this.

In 2020/21, a decade on from the Canterbury earthquakes, we intend to carry out a discrete piece of work examining what lessons have been learned from the public sector’s response to the Canterbury earthquakes.

Proposed work in 2020/21
Resilience to climate change: Local government – Long-term plans	As part of our audit of council 2021-31 LTPs, we will consider what actions councils are planning for climate change (both adaptation and mitigation), including those councils that have declared climate change emergencies. Proposed agencies: Local authorities.
Local government risk management: Stocktake of approach and reporting results	We will conclude our work examining the risk management practices of a sample of councils. We are interested in identifying examples of good practice to share with councils. We also want to identify what would support councils to improve their management of risk, including how to strengthen the operation of audit and risk committees where required. Proposed agencies: Selected local authorities
Canterbury earthquakes: 10 years on, lessons learned	The Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 killed 185 people, injured about 5800 people, damaged more than 100,000 homes, destroyed much of Christchurch’s central business district, and badly damaged infrastructure. A decade on, we intend to review what lessons have been learned from the public sector’s response to the earthquakes. This will help New Zealand prepare for future disasters. We intend to draw on the seven reports on the Canterbury earthquake recovery we have published, as well as the work of others. Proposed agencies: TBC
Proposed work in 2021/22 (indicative)
Resilience to climate change: Local government – Long-term plans	Building on our work from 2020/21, we will analyse the 2021-31 LTPs (or a sample of them) to establish how well councils are factoring resilience to climate change risks and vulnerabilities into their long-term planning, the climate-related actions they plan to take, and any funding pressures or information gaps they have identified. We expect to report our findings to Parliament. Proposed agencies: Local authorities.
Preparedness for response and planning for recovery: Central and local government	We will look at how councils are strengthening resilience and preparing for a major emergency event of any kind. In particular, we will focus on whether councils are adequately prepared for, and able to respond to, an emergency and taking action to minimise its impact. We will also examine how well central and local government are prepared for recovery from an emergency event. In particular, we will look at Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) groups, which have a specific responsibility to prepare for recovery. We will also look at how CDEM groups work with the National Emergency Management Agency and other central government agencies that might also have a recovery role. This work will include considering how well central and local government have worked together in the recovery from recent emergency events such as the Covid-19 pandemic and the Christchurch mosque shootings in 2019. Proposed agencies: Selected local authorities and CDEM groups, National Emergency Management Agency.
Proposed work in 2022/23 (indicative)
Resilience to climate change: National leadership – Zero Carbon Act	We are interested in better understanding the Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act and what role we could take in assessing the public sector’s performance in meeting the requirements set out in the Act. We expect to include a comparison to overseas examples, such as lessons learned from the review of the United Kingdom’s Climate Change Act. Proposed agencies: Climate Change Commission and Ministry for the Environment.
Risk and resilience planning: Central government	We will evaluate the effectiveness of the performance and accountability framework prepared to support the National Disaster Resilience Strategy, including how well that strategy is integrated with the wider National Security System. We will also evaluate the National Emergency Management Agency’s progress in implementing the strategy. Proposed agencies: National Emergency Management Agency.

3. Integrity in our public sector

We seek: views about the coverage and value of the proposed three-year programme of work on integrity in the public sector.

Objective: To support the leadership in the public sector on integrity and ethics issues.

Background

For public organisations to operate effectively and achieve outcomes for New Zealanders, it is essential that they have the public’s trust and confidence. Unethical behaviour, dishonesty, or corruption can quickly erode that trust and confidence, undermine the ability of the public sector to provide effective and equitable services, and adversely affect New Zealand’s international reputation.

Parliament and the public are increasingly looking for confidence that the risks of fraud and misconduct, cybersecurity, data privacy, and environmental responsibility are being managed. Many of these risks have increased significantly as organisations focus on responding to Covid-19. The Auditor-General has a unique view of all public organisations and can help provide that confidence.

It is clear that a focus on integrity at a leadership or governance level, combined with having the right systems and processes, can reduce the risk of wrongdoing and promote ethical standards in public organisations. A strong ethical culture is not an end in itself – it can improve the quality of decision-making, increase efficiency and effectiveness, and positively affect staff engagement and turnover.

Building on some work begun in 2019/20 to prepare an integrity framework, we will carry out a programme of integrity audits in the public sector during the next three years. We will also continue to develop tools (in part from the findings of those audits) and resources to help public organisations ensure that they and their staff are operating with integrity.

We anticipate that our work will involve greater collaboration with other integrity agencies where appropriate – for example, the State Services Commission, the Office of the Ombudsman, and the Serious Fraud Office. We will also engage with a wide range of individual organisations throughout the public sector to create further discussion and encourage good practice in this area.

Proposed work in 2020/21
Performance audit work on integrity	We will carry out targeted performance audits in the local government sector. We will select several local government organisations and look at how they are performing with integrity matters (such as managing conflicts of interest).
Developing integrity tools and supporting resources	We intend to develop integrity tools and supporting resources for internal and external use. We propose two streams of work. The first will be developing a self-assessment tool (or survey) to help public organisations assess how well they are performing on matters of integrity. The second will be internally focused and will involve developing internal resources (and training) for our auditors and sector managers to use to help guide their discussions with chief executives, governors, and audit and risk committees on matters of integrity.
Creating discussion and promoting good practice	This workstream is connected to the other workstream “Sharing good practice” (see page 55), which aims to promote good practice in the public sector by sharing good practice examples, guidance, resources, and follow-up reports. During the next three years, we intend to use a range of channels and approaches to communicate the importance of integrity and encourage discussion throughout the public sector while also promoting good practice. Possible approaches include: a series of discussions/workshops with agencies that influence ethics and integrity in the public sector – to discuss, understand, and seek to influence their respective interests and priorities; a dedicated section on the Auditor-General’s website; bi-monthly blogs; using existing forums and offering to speak (for example, at Transparency International New Zealand and audit seminars); and carrying out and publishing case studies of organisations that are working on their integrity processes.
Proposed work in 2021/22 (indicative)
Performance audit work on integrity	In 2021/22, we plan to continue our multi-year performance audit work programme on integrity. We propose to carry out a performance audit of a central government agency to examine how well it is performing with integrity matters. We also propose to carry out a performance audit to look at how integrity agencies in the public sector are working together to provide leadership.
Developing integrity tools and supporting resources	In 2021/22, we will continue our multi-year work developing integrity tools and supporting resources. However, we will shift our focus to supporting and encouraging the public sector to adopt the integrity tools and resources we have developed. This will include providing training and guidance in the use of those tools. We also expect to carry out proactive inquiries or other review work to test or evaluate how organisations are applying the integrity framework. We will also look at building a wider range of integrity checks into standard audits.
Creating discussion and promoting good practice	In 2021/22, we will continue our multi-year programme of work to share good practice on integrity throughout the public sector.
Proposed work in 2022/23 (indicative)
Performance audit work on integrity	In 2022/23, we will continue our multi-year performance audit work programme on integrity. We propose conducting a performance audit focusing on central government and government-funded organisations.
Developing integrity tools and supporting resources	In 2022/23, we will continue our multi-year work developing integrity tools and supporting resources. We intend to continue our work supporting and encouraging the public sector to adopt the integrity tools and resources we have developed.
Creating discussion and promoting good practice	In 2022/23, we will continue our programme of work to share good practice on integrity throughout the public sector.

4. Procurement

We seek: your views about the value of the proposed concluding programme of procurement work in 2020/21 and 2021/22.

Objectives: To promote good practice procurement of goods and services in the public sector, with a focus on achieving value for money for New Zealanders.

Background

In 2018/19, we began a three-year programme of work on procurement. Our 2018 report Introducing our work on procurement described our three-year focus on procurement and summarised what we saw as the main issues and opportunities for improving procurement practice in the public sector. As we outlined in our Annual plan 2019/20, procurement is particularly important in developing effective public services. However, as the public sector has moved increasingly towards contracting for outcomes, procurement has become more challenging.

In 2020/21 and 2021/22, we expect to conclude our procurement-related work programme with topics that focus on:

• partnerships with the private sector to deliver public sector outcomes;
• governance and delivery of the Auckland city rail link project;
• strategic suppliers of services to New Zealanders;
• innovative approaches to emergency procurement during the response to Covid-19; and
• a review of New Zealand Defence Force processes and capability for managing significant services contracts.

Proposed work in 2020/21
Partnerships with the private sector to deliver public sector outcomes	A range of collaborative procurement methods are used in New Zealand to deliver important infrastructure and other large-scale projects. One such method is public–private partnerships, which the transport, education, and justice sectors have used in recent years. We propose to investigate how public–private partnerships are being used, including their benefits and risks.
Auckland city rail link project: Project governance and Link Alliance	City Rail Link Limited is a Crown entity jointly funded and owned by Auckland Council and the Government to deliver the city rail link project. The project consists of a 3.45km twin-tunnel underground rail link up to 42m below the city centre, changing the downtown Britomart Transport Centre into a two-way through station that better connects the Auckland rail network. It also includes building two new stations, redeveloping Mt Eden station, and various other work to maximise the benefits of the project and the efficiency of the rail network. The project is expected to be completed in 2024 at a cost of about $4.4 billion. The expected benefits from completing the project include reduced travelling time and congestion, improved reliability, and wider economic benefits. Problems with procurement often stem from poor governance arrangements. We propose to focus on how well the project’s governance arrangements are supporting its effective and efficient delivery. We are interested in City Rail Link Limited as an example of a collaboration between local and central government to deliver major infrastructure. We want to identify any lessons learned that could benefit similar projects in the future. In our 2019/20 annual plan, we signalled our intention to examine City Rail Link Limited’s use of an alliance (called the Link Alliance) to deliver a major part of the project. An alliance is a specific form of contract. In 2020/21, we will also carry out work to examine how well the Link Alliance is working.
Understanding and managing the risk of service disruption from the failure of strategic suppliers9	Public organisations often rely on strategic suppliers to deliver services to New Zealanders. Sometimes, strategic suppliers provide services directly to the public. At other times, they provide behind-the-scenes support to public organisations that deliver services. In either case, continuity of service delivery is important. We want to find out how well public organisations, including central agencies, understand the risks of strategic suppliers failing and whether they have plans in place to respond.
Review of New Zealand Defence Force processes and capability for managing significant services contracts	The New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) is responsible for managing $3.9 billion of significant services contracts (these contracts are significant because, if they were to fail or not be delivered properly, it would have a major impact on the NZDF’s ability to deliver services). These services cover a wide range of activities such as naval or air fleet maintenance and support, general maintenance and support services, fuel supply, and telecommunications. The Commercial Services Branch has stewardship of the commercial management system. It aims to achieve good value for money from what the NZDF spends on third-party services. We want to understand how well the NZDF is procuring and managing significant services contracts. We plan to carry out a performance audit focusing on the systems, processes, and expertise that the Commercial Services Branch uses to procure and manage significant services contracts and what governance arrangements are in place for these activities.
Proposed work in 2021/22 (indicative)
Procurement of assets to support effective healthcare	There are several asset-related issues in the health sector, and we want to influence improvements in this important area. DHBs currently own more than $6 billion worth of assets, such as hospitals, clinical equipment, and information technology. The Ministry of Health estimates that these have a replacement value of about $16 billion. New Zealand's healthcare system can be effective only with the right assets to support effective healthcare. Some DHB facilities (including hospitals) will be unable to meet future service demand in some areas, and much of the current building portfolio will need updating or replacing in the near to medium term. The significant investment in assets that is needed increases risk. This must be managed through effective strategy, planning, governance, procurement, contract management, project management, and relationship management. We will examine how well the health sector plans to procure essential assets to support effective healthcare. We will identify what improvements are needed for procurement to better support effective healthcare. We recognise recent developments in the health sector. These include including the National Asset Management Plan (NAMP) for the health sector and the setting up of the New Zealand Infrastructure Commission (Te Waihanga) and a health infrastructure unit in the Ministry of Health. We will watch how these developments influence investment and procurement in the health sector. Because of these developments and the Covid-19 pandemic, we will keep the focus, timing, and scope of our proposed audit work under review.
Approaches to emergency procurement in response to Covid-19	Many public organisations have had to respond rapidly to increased demand for goods and services to prevent the spread of Covid-19, prepare to treat people with Covid-19, and respond to the consequences of Alert Levels 3 and 4 – such as increased unemployment. Sometimes, it can be easier to innovate during an emergency because there is a high level of engagement and a higher tolerance for risk. However, public organisations still need to appropriately document emergency procurement procedures, including the justification for using emergency procurement procedures and authorisation by an appropriate delegated financial authority. Value for public money remains important – although speed and security of delivery may be more important aspects of value than at other times. We propose to look at approaches to emergency procurement to identify good practices. We will include procurement arising from the Government’s response and recovery package.
Reflections on our procurement work	We expect to complete our multi-year work programme on procurement by reporting back to Parliament and the wider public what we have learned since we began our procurement work in 2018/19.

5. Investment in infrastructure

We seek: your views about the value of a future dedicated programme of work on infrastructure investment and on topics proposed for 2021/22; and your views about future priorities for our infrastructure investment work.

Objectives: To examine the systems and processes underpinning government decisions on major infrastructure investment and to assess how well these significant programmes of work are being delivered.

Background

The quality of infrastructure investments in New Zealand is an area of ongoing interest for us.

We have incorporated work we intend to carry out in 2020/21 on planning and delivering infrastructure and on asset management into other parts of this draft annual plan (see page 24 (Housing), pages 27-29 (Health), and pages 44-47 (Procurement)).

Beginning in 2021/22, we intend to start a programme of work that focuses on government investment in major infrastructure projects.

Proposed work in 2021/22 (indicative)

Systems and processes underpinning government decisions on major infrastructure investment

In late 2019, the Government announced its $12 billion New Zealand Upgrade Programme. More recently, the Government announced its intentions to also fund large infrastructure projects that will be ready to start as soon as the construction industry returns to normal after the Covid-19 lockdown. In 2021/22, we expect to carry out work examining the effectiveness of the systems and processes that support government decisions about major infrastructure investment.

Keeping New Zealanders informed about public sector performance and accountability

The work we will carry out in 2020/21 (and the following two years) on “Keeping New Zealanders informed about public sector performance and accountability” focuses on the following two priority areas:

1. public sector accountability to communities; and
2. our regular reporting.

The pages that follow set out details of the work we will carry out from 2020/21 to 2022/23 on these two priority areas.

1. Public sector accountability to communities

We seek: views about the coverage and value of our proposed accountability to communities work; and views about the topics proposed for 2020/21 and about future priorities for our accountability to communities work.

Objectives:

• To examine how well the public sector delivers services to where New Zealanders live and work.
• To examine how well government agencies are building the skills needed for economic well-being and development in the regions.

Background

In 2020/21, we intend to begin a multi-year programme of work focused on public sector accountability to communities for delivering services to where New Zealanders live and work.

We are interested in whether information that enables New Zealanders to understand the performance of public services and, where necessary, hold those services to account is readily available.

Our recent report Public accountability: A matter of trust and confidence observed that, although public officials and their agencies are primarily accountable to their Ministers and through them to Parliament, they must also maintain the trust and confidence of the public they serve. The report asked whether current public accountability processes are enough to meet the expectations of the public today and in the future.

Our initial focus will be to determine a methodology and a process for gathering and analysing data that will enable us to assess in future years how well the public sector is delivering essential services (such as housing, education, and health) from the perspective of the users of those services. In the first year of our work, we will also refine our definition of community – for example, a place-based community, a community of interest, or a particular demographic.

Our other main area of focus will be on how well government agencies are building the skills needed for economic well-being and development in the regions.

In 2020/21, we will assess the benefits achieved by the Provincial Growth Fund (the Fund) that was launched in March 2018. The objectives of the Fund are to enhance regional development, create jobs, increase social inclusion and participation, enable Māori to realise their economic aspirations, improve resilience, and encourage environmental sustainability.

Effectively managing benefits is about giving investments the greatest possibility of realising and optimising the promised benefits, while maintaining controls to avoid the loss of value. Some of the Fund’s benefits will take years to be fully achieved. It is essential that there are plans from an early stage to collect the data needed to assess progress towards benefits.

We propose to look at how the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE), the Ministry of Transport, and the Ministry for Primary Industries plan to assess progress towards achieving the Fund’s objectives and how they plan to report on progress.

In future years, we intend to examine the progress and effectiveness of the MBIE-led Regional Skills Leadership Groups in building the skills needed for economic well-being and development in the regions. Under this new regional approach to skills planning, workforce, education, and immigration systems work together to better meet the differing skills needed throughout the country.

Proposed work in 2020/21
Community accountability	After consulting with communities, we plan to develop information at a “community level” on the spending and performance of national and local public services. We intend to publish this information online. It is likely that this work will combine a performance audit, research, data-driven analysis, and a new approach to community engagement for us. Proposed agencies: TBC.
Provincial Growth Fund: Realising benefits	The Fund is an umbrella term used to refer to the many projects it supports. Some of the projects’ benefits will take years to be fully achieved. MBIE, the Ministry of Transport, and the Ministry for Primary Industries are the main administrators of the Fund. We are currently doing work to report on the soundness of the three agencies’ systems and processes for managing the Fund. We expect our report to indicate further work on the Fund’s effectiveness in achieving its objectives (especially by region) and the ongoing management of longer-term investments and re-investments. We propose to look at how the three agencies are planning to: assess progress towards achieving the Fund’s objectives; and report on progress to the public and other stakeholders at a project, regional, and/or national level. We expect to complete a performance audit on this in 2020/21, resulting in a report to Parliament. We are also scheduling enhanced annual audit work. Proposed agencies: MBIE, Ministry of Transport, and Ministry for Primary Industries.
Proposed work in 2021/22 (indicative)
Community accountability pilots	Subject to the work we will carry out in 2020/21 on its feasibility, we expect to test our community accountability approach in several pilot areas. This will include engaging with communities on the content of online accountability information for communities. Proposed agencies: TBC.
Regional economic development – Examination of MBIE’s progress with Regional Skills Leadership Groups	In 2021/22, we expect to examine the progress and effectiveness of the MBIE-led Regional Skills Leadership Groups in building the skills needed for economic well-being and development in the regions. Proposed agencies: MBIE, Te Puni Kōkiri, Tertiary Education Commission.
Regional service delivery – Examination of a service/initiative in the Auckland region (TBC)	In 2021/22, we will do work to better understand the specific challenges faced by people living in the Auckland region. This will form the basis for future work. We will also scope potential for a study on the progress and effectiveness of an initiative or service delivered in the Auckland region. We are yet to confirm the subject of this study. Proposed agencies: TBC.
Proposed work in 2022/23 (indicative)
Community accountability portal development	Based on our work in the previous two years, and subject to funding availability, we expect to have settled on an approach to community accountability in 2022/23. We will start adding more community accountability content online. We will most likely start with large and reliable data sets, especially those that can be disaggregated. Proposed agencies: TBC.
Regional economic development/regional service delivery	Building on our earlier work, we expect to examine how effective the public sector’s regional economic development planning is in supporting communities to reach their economic potential. Proposed agencies: TBC.

2. Our regular reporting

We seek: views on future regular reports that we could consider.

Background

Each year, we consolidate the results of our annual audits in central and local government and other sectors. We publish the main findings in our regular suite of sector reports. We use these reports to advise select committees, to help keep New Zealanders informed, and to help plan our work programme. We also report on the results of our annual audit of the Financial Statements of the Government.

Along with our annual audits of government departments, we carry out appropriation audits. These are designed to ensure that government spending is within the authority of Parliament. We prepare six-monthly reports on our Controller work.

Other reports that we regularly publish include our follow-up reporting on public organisations’ implementation of the recommendations from previous performance audits, our work on the review of service performance of the Auckland Council, and our commentary on the Treasury’s statement on New Zealand’s long-term fiscal position.

Proposed work on regular reports in 2020/21
Sector-based reports	In 2020/21, we plan to prepare the following sector reports: Results of the 2019/20 port company audits; Central government: Results of the 2019/20 audits; Summary of results of the 2019/20 central government audits for chief executives; Results of the 2019 school audits; Results of the 2019 audits of tertiary education institutions; Results of the 2019/20 district health board audits; and Local government: Results of the 2019/20 audits.
All of government reporting	We plan to report on the results of our annual audit of the Financial Statements of the Government.
Controller updates	Our Controller function is a core part of our role as “public watchdog”. It provides assurance to Parliament and New Zealanders that the Government has spent money in line with Parliament’s authority. In 2020/21, we intend to continue our regular Controller updates. Our updates will include our monitoring of Covid-19 spending and how the Government is accounting for, and reporting on, that spending.
Follow-up reporting on public entities’ implementation of the Auditor-General’s recommendations	As we discussed in earlier sections, we propose two areas of follow-up work for 2020/21: We will report on the progress of public organisations in implementing the Auditor-General’s recommendations from our previous Whānau ora report. We will review progress of the public sector in helping Canterbury recover. We will revisit recommendations from our earlier work to see whether these were implemented.
Auckland Council review of service performance	Under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, we must review the service performance of the Council and each of its council-controlled organisations from time to time. As part of this, we are currently completing a review of Auckland Council’s disaster resilience and preparedness. We expect to finalise this work in 2020/21. We are not planning to start a specific review in 2020/21. We expect the Council’s focus to be on its response to, and recovery from, the Covid-19 pandemic. The Council will complete its 2021-31 LTP, which we audit, in 2020/21. This LTP will provide important information about how the Council will support its communities’ recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic.
Commentary on the Treasury’s statement on New Zealand’s long-term fiscal position	The Treasury was due to publish its report of New Zealand’s longterm fiscal position in March 2020. Because of the Covid-19 pandemic, the Treasury’s work has been postponed. When the report is published, we will publish our commentary.

Sharing insights about what good looks like

The pages that follow set out details of the work we will carry out from 2020/21 to 2022/23 on this priority area.

We seek: views about the coverage and value of the proposed programme of work on sharing insights about what good looks like; and views about the future topics for sharing insights about what good looks like.

Objective: To promote good practice in the public sector through sharing insights about what “good” looks like.

Background

To improve their performance, public organisations need to understand what is expected of them. They also need good practice guidance that is relevant to the New Zealand context. As the auditor of every public organisation, we are well positioned to guide public organisations on what “good” looks like. Improving the performance of individual public organisations will improve the performance of the entire public sector.

We actively consider opportunities to share good practice in all our work. However, we intend to use this programme of work to take a more pro-active and deliberate leadership role in sharing good practice throughout the public sector.

Building on our previous work, we intend to identify and develop more good practice resources on topics of interest to the public sector to supplement our existing good practice guidance. We plan to work more with other organisations who prepare good practice on similar topics to maximise our influence and help organisations improve. We also have an important and influential role as an information broker, pointing public organisations to comparable organisations that do similar activities well.

We plan to implement a range of approaches to share good practice more. For example, our work on public sector integrity and ethics may include bi-monthly blogs and a series of integrity discussions or workshops. We intend to use existing forums and other events to share our good practice and examples of activities being done well that others can learn from.

Proposed work in 2020/21
Review of good practice guidance	We will review our good practice guidance: Procurement guidance for public entities; and Public sector purchases, grants, and gifts: Managing funding arrangements with external parties.
Supporting audit and risk committees	In 2020/21, we intend to review and update our good practice guidance for audit committees. We will enhance the focus on the risk management functions of audit and risk committees in particular. We intend to expand our new Audit and Risk Committee Chair forums to include local government committee chairpersons. We will also consider how to better target these sessions. This may include separate workshops for sub-sectors – for example, Crown entities and DHBs – as well as government departments and territorial authorities. Our sector managers and appointed auditors will engage with audit and risk committee chairpersons more systematically and purposefully to share lessons learned from our inquiries and performance audits or provide other main messages.
Understanding performance and supporting the role of monitoring agencies	A wide range of monitoring agencies play an important role in ensuring that public sector organisations are fulfilling their obligations and are managed effectively. There is an opportunity to build a stronger community of practice between these agencies, and we consider that we could play a role in this. In 2020/21, we intend to examine the role and practices of monitoring agencies throughout the government. We will assess whether developing a good practice guide or facilitating other ways to share good practice among monitoring entities is appropriate.
Proposed work in 2021/22 (Indicative)
Good practice guidance and supplementary resources	In 2021/22, we will continue our ongoing programme of work to supplement our existing good practice guidance material by developing other good practice resources on topics of interest to the public sector.
Supporting audit and risk committees	In 2021/22, building on our work to update our good practice guidance for audit committees, we will consider developing a broader induction package for new audit and risk committee chairpersons. We will also look at ways we can help expand the pool of suitable people to participate in audit and risk committees.
Proposed work in 2022/23 (Indicative)
Good practice guidance and supplementary resources	In 2022/23, we will continue our ongoing programme of work to supplement our good practice guidance material by developing other good practice resources on topics of interest to the public sector.

---

9: Referred to in our Annual plan 2019/20 as “Contracts for significant services”.