Alan Barker

Ten questions to ask if you're writing a scrutiny report: what makes for an effective scrutiny report?

'What makes for an effective scrutiny report?'

Ask this question of any experienced scrutiny officer and the key features of an effective report will emerge with remarkable consistency.

Our reports should reflect the four key principles of effective scrutiny, as defined by the Centre for Public Scrutiny. They should:

■   provide a ‘critical friend’ challenge to executive policy-makers and decision-makers;

■   enable the voice and concerns of the public and its communities;

■   show evidence of clear thinking by ‘independent-minded governors’ who lead and own the scrutiny process; and

■   drive improvement in public services.

A fuller list might include these key characteristics.

An effective scrutiny report:

is interesting

aids policy development

addresses a clearly defined problem

reflects public concern

meets the aims of the scope

answers questions clearly

has clear recommendations

is based on sound conclusions, themselves based on robust evidence and sound arguments

is well structured

identifies who’s been involved

That's the green list.  They're all qualities that we achieve by planning well.

An effective scrutiny report also  

engages its reader

is clear and readable

is written on behalf of the public

should contain material that can be used to publicise the scrutiny (soundbites, stories, striking turns of phrase)

That's the red list.  We achieve all those qualities by effective editing.

 Planning skills are the skills we use to answer the question: “What do we want to say in our report?”  Editing skills answer the question:  “How can we say what we want to say, more clearly?”

An effective scrutiny report aids policy development.  It looks forward, not back.  It focuses on action.   

 

Hot tip

A scrutiny report shouldn’t be an account of the scrutiny process!

Long, tedious, blow-by-blow descriptions of committee meetings, with every move and counter-move meticulously recorded, are not what our readers want to read.  Transcripts of such meetings can be usefully consigned to an appendix if necessary.

The report itself should focus on powerful recommendations, supported with robust evidence and compelling argument.

In the next posting, I'll answer the first of our ten questions:

What is the scope of the report?

If you like what you see here, you might like to contact me to discuss working with you.  I am currently working with one of the scrutiny team of a major local assembly in the UK.  I run training courses, and coach individual writers.  I can even give you some feedback on the reports your team is producing, if you want nothing more.  Go to my website to take a look at a sample training programme.

Ten questions to ask if you're writing a scrutiny report: introduction

This is the first in a series of postings dedicated to the work of scrutiny officers throughout the UK.  These postings are devoted specifically to the task of writing scrutiny reports - rather than to the wider work of scrutiny.

If you are reading this, you are probably a scrutiny officer yourself, so you won't need me to explain what scrutiny is.  If you do need more information about the scrutiny function and its place in government, the best place to go is the Centre for Public Scrutiny.

CfPS promotes the value of scrutiny in modern and effective government, not only to hold executives to account but also to create a constructive dialogue between the public and its elected representatives to improve the quality of public services.

Scrutiny is developing fast.  And producing effective reports is at the heart of the process.  Reports are the evidence that you have done a good job; and they contain the evidence that supports your recommendations for change.  But there is still very little advice to help officers write the report itself.

The report, after all, is the output of our work; it makes sense to do the job as well as possible. 

A recent survey suggests that:

•  over 60% of members lack experience in report writing;

• 70% of members have no or limited knowledge of the skills necessary to write good reports;  and that

• 80% need training (30% of them urgently).

The fact is that the quality of scrutiny reports is alarmingly variable.  Too many reports are unfriendly on the eye, difficult to navigate or written in impenetrable prose.  Recommendations can be hard to find; some are inadequately supported with evidence or clear reasoning.  All too many reports still lack such basic apparatus as a summary or an introduction.

It’s not simply a matter of flashy graphics or expensive resources; we can produce very presentable reports can be produced on Word or other wordprocessing packages.  The technology is available; all it takes is the application of some skill.

We can do better.  It’s not hard to do.  And working to improve the quality of the report can actually improve the quality of the scrutiny itself.

The next posting in this series looks at what makes for an effective scrutiny report.  I'll follow that with a sequence of postings that will take you through the process of producing a report, from start to finish.  Each posting will address one of ten questions.

1        What is the scope of the report?

          A clear understanding of what you are doing will help you produce a clear report.

 2        What questions did we ask?

          Ask the right questions and you’ll find the powerful ideas.

 3        What are our recommendations?

          Clear recommendations are essential to a clear report.

 4        What’s the evidence?

          Powerful evidence supports your recommendations and brings your report to life.

 5        How do we structure the report?

          For ease of use, adopt a top-down approach.

 6        How do we argue and explain?

          You’ll need to do so in the report, so you’ll need to learn the skills.

 7        How do we build paragraphs?

          They are the core units of meaning in your report; get them right.

 8        How do we bring our sentences under control?

          Long sentences are probably the biggest problem in scrutiny reports. 

          Tame them!

 9        Are we using reader-friendly language?

          It’s not just about banning jargon.

 10      How does the report look?

          Some simple formatting rules can make your report look fantastic.

I'll post these, in sequence, over the next couple of weeks. But first, we need to ask:

What makes for an effective scrutiny report?

And in the next posting, I'll answer that question.

If you like what you see here, you might like to contact me to discuss working with you.  I am currently working with one of the scrutiny team of a major local assembly in the UK.  I run training courses, and coach individual writers.  I can even give you some feedback on the reports your team is producing, if you want nothing more.  Go to my website to take a look at a sample training programme.