Research and analysis

Greater Manchester Combined Authority Readiness Check: Summary

Published 8 April 2025

Applies to England

Summary of findings

The readiness check finds that^{[footnote 1]}, across the four thematic readiness criteria, GMCA are meeting or, in some cases, exceeding core expectations:

• Strategy, planning and governance – core expectations for Integrated Settlement readiness are comfortably being met, with elements of advanced practice. GMCA has a deeply-embedded long-term strategic direction and is moving towards a group governance model, reflecting the maturity of existing arrangements and high ambitions in this area. There is good practice in risk management and assurance and a focus on improving further.
• People and capability – core expectations for Integrated Settlement readiness are being met and, more generally, there is a strong commitment to developing capability through a number of “home grown” initiatives. While roles and responsibilities for the Integrated Settlement are not formally defined or documented, established cross-team working and strong relationships enable a “one team” approach to prepare for the Settlement. Enabling services are increasingly acting as a strategic partner to the business, although programme management is a priority for further development. GMCA plan to further develop annual business planning to incorporate a strategic approach to workforce planning.
• Financial and performance management – core expectations for Integrated Settlement readiness are being met. Processes, including for budgeting, business cases and grant management are well-developed and robust, although GMCA recognises there is variance in practice in some areas. There is limited multi-year forecasting outside some transport programmes; this should be a priority for GMCA to support readiness for the second year of the Integrated Settlement and beyond.
• Reporting and evaluation – core expectations for Integrated Settlement readiness are being met. There is a robust approach to reporting both internally and to funders. GMCA recognise the opportunity and challenge of moving from an approach largely focused on managing outputs, to one that prioritises cross-cutting outcomes. There are existing examples to build upon, and GMCA has high ambitions in this area.

While the Integrated Settlement represents a relatively small proportion of GMCA’s total budget, GMCA have recognised the step change required in some areas to prepare for the settlement and to support GMCA’s longer-term ambitions. In many cases, there is a clearly articulated ambition to develop further, with the Integrated Settlement providing a catalyst for existing improvement initiatives. Beyond the specific recommendations, successful implementation of the Integrated Settlement for GMCA centres on three key themes:

• Driving consistency in practice: the programme-bound nature of GMCA’s current funding and historical structures mean that, while GMCA has well-defined corporate processes, practice varies between teams in certain areas (for example, in application of risk management practices). GMCA recognises this and the “Our Next Phase” programme provides a platform to drive greater consistency, while maintaining flexibility and proportionality.
• Further developing capacity and capability: GMCA has a strong existing commitment to developing capability, which is being strengthened further through the group model. While the Integrated Settlement should provide further funding flexibility to prioritise capability development, GMCA will need to make the case for this internally and externally.
• Planning and prioritisation: GMCA starts from strong foundations, however there is a recognition of the need to align business planning even more closely to the Greater Manchester Strategy and to embed business planning and associated workforce planning as an ongoing process to effectively prioritise resources against strategic outcomes.

Recommendations

Strategy, planning and governance

• Recommendation 1: to move to ‘advanced’, as GMCA continues to develop under “Our Next Phase” and assume greater powers and autonomy, business planning should evolve to become an active, ongoing process rather an annual “moment”, with appropriate in-year review and adjustment to account for changes in context, ensuring continuous alignment of activity/resources with strategic priorities. (Stretch opportunity)

• Recommendation 2: terms of reference for GMCA governance forum should be made available online in the main committee section of GMCA’s website to further support transparency and scrutiny. (Stretch opportunity)

• Recommendation 3: GMCA should commence formal tracking of and reporting on progress against previous decisions made in governance forums, to strengthen accountability for follow up. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 4: to progress to ‘advanced’, GMCA should develop more nuanced risk appetite statements that specifically address the unique challenges and opportunities presented by the Integrated Settlement, e.g. those related to funding flexibilities, and define the process for how these statements will be applied to the management of risks. (Stretch opportunity)

• Recommendation 5: risk reporting commentary should be developed to draw out the “so what” and decisions required for the Audit Committee and other forums. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 6: to move to ‘advanced’, GMCA should consider adopting an integrated assurance plan, drawing on TfGM’s example, including further detail on the underpinning activities and responsible owners for each line to support identification and mitigation of any weaknesses/gaps. (Stretch opportunity)

• Recommendation 7: in line with existing plans, GMCA should finalise and launch the updated assurance framework (see also Recommendation 29, below). MHCLG approval should be provided ahead of launching the framework (expected May/June 2025) - (Urgent)

People and capability

• Recommendation 8: further detail should be documented and communicated on the approach to testing and monitoring compliance with controls to ensure this is embedded consistently and continuously. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 9: roles and responsibilities should be documented for key roles in relation to the Integrated Settlement. Recognising these are part of established day-to-day roles, it is expected that documentation will be within existing role descriptions. These should be reviewed on a regular basis and updated for key milestones e.g. new joiners/leavers. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 10: GMCA should document a defined process for central finance’s role in monitoring and overseeing performance against grant conditions/outcomes and reporting back to funders. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 11: GMCA should add tracking of grant conditions to the grants received register. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 12: GMCA should define and embed a proportionate portfolio-focused programme management structure, leveraging existing programme management capability that sits at programme level. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 13: in line with existing plans and the move to medium-term funding, annual business planning should continue to develop to incorporate a strategic approach to workforce planning to align available and planned resource to strategic priorities. (Urgent)

• Recommendation 14: GMCA should document current contingent resourcing processes. Expanding on the current approach, GMCA should consider mechanisms to prioritise resource between teams where required. (Year 1 priority)

Financial and performance management

• Recommendation 15: to progress to ‘advanced’, and as the group structure becomes embedded, GMCA should explore moving towards largely-systems based budgets that represent a ‘single version of the truth’ and minimise the need for manual inputs. (Stretch opportunity)

• Recommendation 16: GMCA should document a   process to developing forecasts and maintaining a clear audit trail of inputs. This should include guidance on assumptions and internal/external data used to underpin forecasts. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 17: to support readiness for the multi-year Integrated Settlement, GMCA should adopt multi-year / whole-life forecasting, starting with capital programmes. This should build on learning from TfGM’s tiered approach to forecasting over a short term (current year plus one), medium term (one to five years) and long term (beyond five years). (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 18: monthly financial monitoring should be documented with summary management information prepared for key individuals. Additionally, SLT finance reporting should include forecasting information to allow for a more complete review of financial performance. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 19: in-year finance information should be developed further to include further insight on risks/opportunities to the forecast position. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 20: GMCA should develop guidance and supporting training for programme managers / budget holders to ensure a consistent approach to the development of business cases. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 21: in line with existing plans, GMCA should set an approved threshold for business cases to follow HM Treasury Green Book practice. A clear process should be defined for business cases below the set threshold. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 22: to ensure outcomes are clearly defined in each grant agreement / contract, GMCA should strengthen existing guidance and support e.g. peer review of existing and new agreements / contracts. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 23: grant performance metrics should be reported against explicit targets to show any under or overperformance e.g. using RAG ratings. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 24: grant and contract change control guidance should be strengthened to define a ‘substantial’ modification, and to explicitly address a scenario where the value of the grant/contract is reduced. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 25: to enable proper and controlled use of the funding flexibilities, GMCA should define and agree the process to manage these. This should clearly define roles and responsibilities for decision making and associated governance. Regular review (e.g. quarterly) of how flexibilities are being deployed will be required while these become embedded, including to manage the risk of the flexibilities being under-utilised to the detriment of delivery performance. (Urgent)

Reporting and evaluation

• Recommendation 26: to support effective scrutiny and decision making, GMCA should review reporting to different organisational levels, with a particular focus on: reducing the length of reporting and number of different reports; using RAG statuses consistently; and empowering the central secretariat team to act as a “gatekeeper” to leadership and governance forums. This could be part of the wider governance review underway. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 27: a comprehensive approach to outcomes and benefits tracking should be developed. This should build on work in progress and is likely to include some or all of the following:

  1. Defining a high-level process to monitor and track outcomes ahead of April 2025.

  2. Preparing tools and templates for tracking benefits from the outset of delivery.

  3. Leveraging existing logic models, data sets, and stakeholder input to build a more integrated benefits and outcomes model over time.

  4. Developing proportionate tools and templates aligned with the anticipated MHCLG framework to ensure a smoother transition and reporting consistency. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 28: GMCA should build a proportionate internal benefits capability that will: define target measurements and assigned owners for benefits across all Integrated Settlement programmes and foster a culture that values evidence-based impact measurement through training, data-driven decision-making, and celebrating successes. (Year 1 priority)

• Recommendation 29: prior to the new assurance framework being signed-off (see Recommendation 7 above), the approach to evaluation should be defined, including the planning process at the outset of each programme and associated roles and responsibilities. Delivering on the ambition for robust evaluation will also require active leadership sponsorship (e.g. through communication and championing best-practice) to embed a consistent approach across all levels. (Urgent)

• Recommendation 30: to ensure core expectations are met consistently, GMCA should through its digital and data workstream develop its data quality control processes to centralise and standardise data to the extent possible, or to put controls in place to reconcile data where required, building on examples in finance. The data quality control policy should also be updated to include group considerations. (Year 1 priority).

*[MHCLG] Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government *[GMCA]: Greater Manchester Combined Authority

1. This summary of findings has been extracted from the readiness check report prepared by Deloitte LLP for MHCLG and GMCA (together the “Recipients”).  Deloitte LLP has no responsibility to anyone except for the Recipients relating to the report.  The full report was prepared for the use of the Recipients on the terms of Deloitte LLP’s contract with MHCLG. ↩