SZW Balance Model Ben van den Brande Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment (SZW) EUPAN Helsinki, 11 april 2008.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Dutch Advisory Board on Administrative Burden (Actal) The Hague March 5, 2008.
Advertisements

HLG Meeting, 19 September Meeting of the High Level Group on Administrative Burdens 2013 NKR Annual Report Dr. Johannes Ludewig Chairman of the.
Training leave in Estonia. What to learn from it? Kalle Toom Ministry of Education and Research of Estonia.
REGULATORY POLICY AND GOVERNANCE FOR STRENGTHENING COMPETITIVENESS 15 December 2014 University of Economics, Prague Daniel Trnka Regulatory Policy Division,
Measuring & Reducing administrative burdens in NL process and outcome Jeroen Nijland Warsaw March 31st, 2008.
Speaking Notes 10 November 2014 Professor Jacques Ziller EP JURI Committee information on ReNEUAL Model Rules on EU Administrative Procedures Jacques Ziller.
BARRIERS AT LABOR MARKET AND PROPOSALS OF PRIVATE SECTOR FOR THEIR ELIMINATION Slaviša Delić Montenegro Business Alliance Solun, May 27, 2005.
1 Roundtable Meeting of Quality Assurance Agencies of the Organisation of Islamic Conference Member Countries Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia November 2009.
ESTUDIOS MONETARIOS Y FINANCIEROS THE IMPACT OF FINANCIAL VARIABLES ON FIRMS’ REAL DECISIONS: EVIDENCE FROM SPANISH FIRM-LEVEL DATA Ignacio Hernando Carmen.
1 Regulatory Impact Assessment: Methodology and Best Practices David Shortall INMETRO International Workshop on Conformity Assessment Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Better regulation in Denmark Presentation by Flemming N. Olsen Senior Advisor, Division for Better Regulation Ministry of Finance, Denmark Conference on.
Integration of Regulatory Impact Assessment into the decision making process in the Czech Republic Aleš Pecka Department of Regulatory Reform and Public.
Integrating e-government in simplification strategy the Dutch case Milan Jansen 20 June 2007.
Smart Regulation Responding to the needs of SMEs Commission Communication COM(2013) final of
Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research EAER State Secretariat for Economic Affairs SECO Labour market and unemployment insurance.
Territorial Impact Assessment of Governance of Territorial and Urban Policies in ESPON Space ESPON PROJECT 2.3.2: GOVERNANCE OF TERRITORIAL AND URBAN POLICIES.
1 DG Enterprise & Industry European Commission Administrative Burden Reduction and Impact Assessment Presentation by Cavan O’Connor Close European Commission.
The Main Audit Results of Ukraine’s System of Public Debt Management Accounting Chamber of Ukraine INTOSAI Public Debt Committee Meeting Lisbon, Portugal,
Info Day: “2015 European Capital of Culture” Detailed insight.
1 UNDECLARED WORK IN CROATIA Executive Capacity of Governance and Underground Economy: The Case of Croatia Zagrebl, September 1, 2015.
Module 6: Quantifying gaps and measuring coverage ILO, 2013.
©SHRM State Legislative Director’s Meeting Michael P. Aitken March 17, 2010.
Federal Department of Economic Affairs FDEA State Secretariat for Economic Affairs SECO The Regulatory Checkup Estimating the cost of regulation and identifying.
Revising priorities in the statistical programme Management Group on Statistical Cooperation * 24 & 25 March 2011 * Carina Fransen.
Focused on the Future: Innovations for Administration Innovation within the Public Service.
Efficiency, effectiveness and service in public administration IPAM the Dutch Informal Pro-Active Approach Model Lynn van der Velden Ministry of the Interior.
Introducing Regulatory Impact Analysis into the Turkish Legal Framework “Training the Trainers” November 2008 Session 8 Standard Cost Model and RIAs.
© OECD A joint initiative of the OECD and the European Union, principally financed by the EU Measuring & Reducing administrative burdens Experience from.
Legal developments in the Polish Power Sector Arkadiusz Krasnodębski.
Position Paper of the 4 independent watchdogs Dr. Philipp Birkenmaier Secretariat of Nationaler Normenkontrollrat Nicosia, 2 April 2012.
Reducing regulatory burdens in the Netherlands - using the SCM- Jeroen Nijland / Jerusalem, June 28th, 2011.
INTRODUCTION TO PUBLIC FINANCE MANAGEMENT (PFM) Module 1.1 Definitions, objectives of PFM and its context.
1 Administrative simplification in the Netherlands - Main findings by the OECD and World Bank Group “Challenges of cutting red tape” Rotterdam, 1 March.
PSYCHOSOCIAL ISSUES ON YOUNG PEOPLE ADAPTATION TO WORK psih. Raluca Iordache SR, Ergonomics Department National Research & Development Institute for Labour.
V Konferencja Ewaluacyjna Warszawa, Peter van der Knaap Ewaluacja w procesie budżetowania zadaniowego – doświadczenia holenderskie.
Ministry of Economic Affairs | 11 April 2013 The Mark of Good Public Services A Uniform Framework for Measuring and Improving Public Services for Businesses.
Ministry of Economic Affairs | 11 April 2013 Stefan Koreneef and Dimitri Verhoeven Ministry of Economic Affairs Directorate-General for Enterprise and.
© OECD A joint initiative of the OECD and the European Union, principally financed by the EU Seminar on Administrative Simplification Seminar on Administrative.
PRESENTATION TO THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATION Evaluation of the Batho Pele Principle of Value for Money in the Public Service.
Simplification of administrative procedures: the Administrative Effort Index (AEI - IEB) MINISTRY OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATIONS SPAIN 1 María Ángeles Martínez,
EN Regional Policy EUROPEAN COMMISSION Third progress report on cohesion 17 May 2005 Towards a new partnership for growth, jobs and cohesion.
1 ENTERPRISE POLICY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT BULGARIA.
NGA Center for Best Practices January 10, 2001 Charleston, South Carolina National Environmental Information Exchange Network Kim Nelson Pennsylvania Department.
Monitoring and evaluation Objectives of the Session  To Define Monitoring, impact assessment and Evaluation. (commonly know as M&E)  To know why Monitoring.
1 SCM and quality: Better service for citizens Preliminary concept for an adaptation of the SCM for citizens in Austria Oslo, May 15th 2009 Gerald Reindl,
1 Ministry of Labour, Invalids and Social Affairs.
C.H. Montin, Tbilisi 11 Tbilisi, 12 November 2014 Developing Regulatory Impact Assessment In Georgia Overview of the RIA process & methodology Charles-Henri.
M O N T E N E G R O Negotiating Team for the Accession of Montenegro to the European Union Working Group for Chapter 19 – Social Policy and Employment.
American and Texas Government: Policy and Politics, 10/e By Neal Tannahill 2010, 2008, 2006 Pearson Education, Inc.
Position Paper of the 4 independent watchdogs Dr
Ministry of Finance Contribution of the Operational Programmes to the implementation of the NSRF objectives Boriana Pencheva Director Management.
Measuring the “red tape” on citizens
Czech Republic Petr Fejtek Administrative Advisor Ministry of Interior.
Theresia Niedermüller
Innovative Public Services Group (IPSG) – 2nd Meeting
Changed Data Collection Strategies
Federalism Definition:
Germany Thomas Nehring Better regulation unit Federal Chancellery.
Malta Marisa Scerri Associate Consultant
Project ‘Reduction of Administrative Burden for Professionals’
Ilze Danga Chief Economist of the Budget Division
Administrative Burdens for Citizens
Second Meeting of the EUPAN Troika Secretariat
Learning Team Administrative Burden Reduction for citizens
Administrative Burden Citizens - Project experiences SIRA Consulting -
Learning Team Administrative Burden reduction for citizens
Better regulation working group
Austria Theresia Niedermüller Michael Kallinger Policy Advisor
ESF monitoring and evaluation in Draft guidance
Matija KODRA Ministry of Public Administration
Presentation transcript:

SZW Balance Model Ben van den Brande Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment (SZW) EUPAN Helsinki, 11 april 2008

Content Introduction Historical context How does the model work? Questions

Administrative Burdens Reduction in the Netherlands Political issue since late nineties Official program since 2003 Businesses (2003) and citizens (2004) Target: 25% reduction in 2007 Baseline 2002 Standard Cost Model (SCM)

Standard Cost Models Standard Cost Model Businesses Administrative burdens: costs (euro) Baseline 2002 SZW: 2,5 billion euro Standard Cost Model Citizens AB: time (hours) & out-of-pockets costs (euro) Baseline 2002 SZW: 13,5 million (hours) and 6,3 million (euro)

Results : dissolvement of the Cabinet End-date program: February 2007 Businesses: 20% (SZW: 26%) Citizens: ? (SZW > 25%)

Program New Cabinet since March 2007 New 25% target businesses Continuation 25% target citizens Broadening of the scope From administrative burdens to ‘reduction of regulatory pressure’ = ‘reduction of bureaucracy / better regulation’

New elements Compliance costs Quality of public services Attention for perceptions Stress on noticeable and visible results Citizens and entrepreneurs central Quantitative AND qualitative approach

Why a Balance Model? Feedback from citizens on the SZW-program 1.Total burdens Not only AB but also compliance burdens 2. Relation between burdens and benefits Performance and quality of public services 3. Perceptions do matter Need for a qualitative approach

Balance Model I en II Spring 2007: Balance Model I Prototype not empirically tested Spring 2008: Balance Model II Stable model Successfully applied to the Unemployment Insurance Act Adoption in addition to the SCM?

Balance Model : definition The Balance Model measures in certain areas of public service delivery the (un)balance between the expectations of the citizen on the one hand and the factual situation on the other hand. Possible solutions to restore situations of unbalance as formulated by the target group themselves, constitute potential input for the policy process.

Four dimensions The expected and factual situation are measured by four dimensions: 1.Administrative burdens (information obligations) 2.Compliance burdens (compliance obligations 3.Quality of service 4.Public performance

Balansmodel II Balans? Information obligations Compliance obligations Quality of Service Performance indicators Information obligations Compliance obligations Quality of Service Performance indicators Factual situation Expected situation Balance ?

Five stages 1. Measuring the factual situation 2. Selection of facets (key-aspects) 3. Measuring the expected situation 4. Visualising the (un)balance 5. Assessing solutions and priorities

1. Measuring the factual situation Measuring: 1. Administrative burdens 2. Compliance burdens 3. Quality of services 4. Performance of public services SCM Panels (target group!) Using existing data and standards

2. Selection of key-aspects Step 1 :abundance of information Selection of key-aspects for step 3 By separate panels (others than step 1) Formulation of questions for each key- aspect (limited amount) Formulation adjusted to the target group

3. Measuring the expected situation Panels (others than step 1 and 2) Answering of the questions Maximum questions: 10 Maximum participants: 15 Minimal number of panels: 5

4. Visualising the balance Answers processed by the computer Average results for each question (key- aspect) Results step 4 compared with results of step 1 (expected versus factual) Situations of unbalance are assessed

5. Assessing solutions and priorities Causes of unbalance assessed Possible solutions assessed Solutions are ranked in order of urgency All by the members of the panel (target group)!

Input for the policy process Solutions are potential input for the policy process Two types of policy solutions: 1.Improving performance (reduction of AB etc.) 2.Improving management of expectations

The Balance Model in use Model is successful applied to the Unemployment Insurance Law Results 1.Problems related to the quality of public service most important 2.Problems related to (administrative) burdens least important 3.New identified problems and solutions

The Balance Model is: Dynamic Flexible Modulair Additional to the SCM Applicable to businesses as well

The Balance Model QUESTIONS?