1 Progress in improving the management
and quality of government websites
1. For many millions of people, the internet has
become the preferred way of conducting many every-day transactions,
from banking to booking a holiday. It is often faster, easier
to use and more convenient, with services available 24 hours a
day, seven days a week. The internet has also become an important
way of improving the delivery of public services. The Government
spends an estimated £208 million a year on delivering services
and related information online, such as the filing of tax returns,
the matching of applicants to jobs, and the renewal of vehicle
excise duty.[3]
2. The number of government websites has grown rapidly,
driven by a Prime Ministerial target set in 1997 to provide access
to all relevant services in electronic form by 2005, and the trend
in the wider economy to provide services and information over
the internet. There has been over ten years of uncoordinated growth
in websites and the Government does not know how many government
websites exist. The National Audit Office estimates there may
be as many as 2,500 sites.[4]
The number of websites in existence has contributed to making
information and services hard for users to find.[5]
3. In 2002 our predecessors identified a need for
improved knowledge on the costs of website provision.[6]
However, in 2007 nearly a quarter of departments and agencies
were still unable to supply the National Audit Office with this
data, and even where they could, over two fifths gave only estimates
(Figure 1).[7] The
Cabinet Office has tried to improve knowledge on the costs of
websites in departments and agencies, but it has proved difficult
because websites are funded and accounted for differently across
government. Some organisations fund websites through communications
budgets, some through IT budgets, and others from policy budgets.
In some cases, website provision is included with other IT services
in a larger contract, making it harder to disaggregate website
from other IT service-related costs. The Cabinet Office plans
to issue guidance in early 2008.[8]
4. The Committee's previous report recommended that
departments should monitor the usage of government websites.[9]
There are some examples of good practice in tracking use in the
public sector. For example, Transport for London analyses data
on how people use its site to help change the design of its website
in the light of patterns of usage over time.[10]
Direct.gov.uk combines user data with information from regular
customer satisfaction surveys.[11]
However, one in six government organisations still gather no such
data and many of those that do, do not use it to improve their
sites (Figure 1).[12]
Figure 1: Quality of information on usage of main corporate websites and the cost of website provision and support returned by departments and agencies
All figures are percentages
Data on costs of website provision
| Data on number of unique visitors to the website
| TOTAL
(%)
|
| | No data
| Partial data
| Full data
| |
| | All
| Depts
| All
| Depts
| All
| Depts
| All
| Depts
|
| No data
| 7
| 3
| 11
| 11
| 9
| 11
| 27
| 24
|
| Partial data
| 6
| 16
| 20
| 17
| 18
| 13
| 44
| 46
|
| Full data
| 3
| 3
| 7
| 8
| 19
| 19
| 29
| 30
|
| TOTAL (%)
| 16
| 22
| 39
| 35
| 45
| 43
| 100
| 100
|
The column "All" includes the dataset for the whole population of organisations responding to the survey (N = 129). The column "Depts" includes only Ministerial departments and non-ministerial departments (N = 37).
Technical note: The NAO asked organisations to provide annual cost figures for the most recent year and previous five years. Each response was assessed using the following criteria. Full data - organisations could provide at least 4 out of 5 years including the most recent and could provide full data for the breakdown for the current year. Organisations less than five years old were required to provide full data for each year of existence. Partial data - organisations could provide 1 to 3 years of data and at least a total for the current year. None or negligible - no data provided or figures that seemed grossly unrealistic. A judgement was made on borderline cases between Full and Partial in favour of Full (i.e. benefit of the doubt).
|
Source: NAO survey of departments and agencies
5. The public are generally satisfied with government
websites, although overall the quality has improved only slightly
since 2001 and one in six sites has become significantly worse
(Figure 2).[13]
The public also compare government websites unfavourably with
commercial sites, particularly those of banks and travel companies.[14]
The Government's own service transformation strategy requires
services to be designed around the needs of the customer or citizen,
rather than the service provider.[15]
Figure 2: There were slightly more higher scoring websites in 2006 than in 2001
Source: NAO Census of government organisations'
websites
6. Research in 2006 found that a third of government
websites fail to meet the government's own accessibility standards.[16]
These include making it possible to adjust the size of text, providing
text alternatives for non-text content and making all content
readable and understandable. Direct.gov.uk and businesslink.gov.uk
meet these standards and the Central Office for Information is
consulting with representative groups about ways in which other
government websites can be made more accessible. This will be
a priority for the Central Office for Information in 2008.
7. Search engines to help users find services and
information are generally poor on government websites. The Direct.gov.uk
search engine, for example, only searches within the site itself,
whereas the US Government search engine covers the whole of the
US government (from Federal to state to local and tribal levelsover
22,000 sites).[17] The
Cabinet Office is working with Google to develop a stronger search
function as part of the wider strategy of reducing the number
and complexity of government websites.[18]
8. Government websites should offer facilities to
enable users to provide feedback about public services and information
made available online.[19]
The National Audit Office found that many government websites
have yet to adopt approaches now commonplace among leading private
sector websites. These include allowing users to post content
onto websites and to provide comments about the services and information
provided. Fewer than 4% of government sites inform users of the
most popular sections of their site or of the most commonly downloaded
documents.[20] Some government
sites are piloting such facilities, and some are well established
including the online petitions facility on the 10 Downing Street
website and the Department of Health's feedback and testimonials
site for NHS patients.[21]
3 C&AG's Report, para 14 Back
4
Qq 2, 96-97 Back
5
Q 96 Back
6
Committee of Public Accounts, Progress in Achieving Government
on the Web Back
7
Q 28; C&AG's Report, para 2.47 Back
8
Q 30 Back
9
Committee of Public Accounts, Progress in Achieving Government
on the Web Back
10
Q 14 Back
11
Q 12 Back
12
Qq 12-14 Back
13
Q 17 Back
14
Qq 14, 17,41-42; C&AG's Report, para 4 Back
15
Q 17 Back
16
Q 18; Adam Field, Southampton University, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4853000.stm
Back
17
Q 16 Back
18
Q 56 Back
19
Qq 48-49 Back
20
C&AG's Report, para 1.17 Back
21
C&AG's Report, para 1.17 Back
|