Assurance Reviews specifically address: the development and maintenance of a robust Business Case with milestones and deliverables clearly articulated; implementation planning and risk management challenges associated with competing priorities and resources and capability; the complexities and attendant risks, including those attached to cross-jurisdictional responsibilities; regulatory environments that may expose a program to failure if not properly identified and managed; governance, accountability and reporting requirements to ensure appropriate support and oversight during implementation and delivery of outcomes and benefits; and appropriate risk management analysis and the development of mitigation strategies. Core principles Fundamental to the ongoing success of the Assurance Reviews Process are its core principles. The focus is on: providing independent assurance on how best to ensure that programs/projects are successful; alignment of benefits to agency and government strategic objectives with clear measurable targets, timelines and owners; building capability through access to highly credentialed reviewers who provide mentoring and coaching; and promulgating the lessons learned. The key characteristics are: short duration – generally no more than 5 days; are based on non-attributable interviews; flexibility as to scope – to reflect the stage of policy development; flexibility as to timing – the main constraint is the Budget process and the time for an agency to be prepared; tailored – the “areas of enquiry” focus on the issues most pertinent at the earlier stages of policy development (including development of implementation plans); and value-added – the specialist pool of senior reviewers have skills and experience relevant to the policy delivery environment. Variance between Gateway and the Implementation Readiness Assessment (IRA) There are important differences in the objectives of the different reviews, the key differences are:
Assurance Reviews specifically address: the development and maintenance of a robust Business Case with milestones and deliverables clearly articulated; implementation planning and risk management challenges associated with competing priorities and resources and capability; the complexities and attendant risks, including those attached to cross-jurisdictional responsibilities; regulatory environments that may expose a program to failure if not properly identified and managed; governance, accountability and reporting requirements to ensure appropriate support and oversight during implementation and delivery of outcomes and benefits; and appropriate risk management analysis and the development of mitigation strategies. Core principles Fundamental to the ongoing success of the Assurance Reviews Process are its core principles. The focus is on: providing independent assurance on how best to ensure that programs/projects are successful; alignment of benefits to agency and government strategic objectives with clear measurable targets, timelines and owners; building capability through access to highly credentialed reviewers who provide mentoring and coaching; and promulgating the lessons learned. The key characteristics are: short duration – generally no more than 5 days; are based on non-attributable interviews; flexibility as to scope – to reflect the stage of policy development; flexibility as to timing – the main constraint is the Budget process and the time for an agency to be prepared; tailored – the “areas of enquiry” focus on the issues most pertinent at the earlier stages of policy development (including development of implementation plans); and value-added – the specialist pool of senior reviewers have skills and experience relevant to the policy delivery environment. Variance between Gateway and the Implementation Readiness Assessment (IRA) There are important differences in the objectives of the different reviews, the key differences are:
Guidance_on_the_Assurance_Reviews_Process_FMG_20.docx