The BBC's White City 2 property development in West London comprises three new buildings, which were built next to an existing BBC building known as White City 1. White City 2 was financed by Land Securities Trillium under a 30 year partnership deal with the BBC, which also covered property services at 48 other BBC locations. The cost of construction for White City 2 was £210 million, along with £60.9 million for furniture and technical fit-out of the buildings. The development was completed on time, but the Committee of Public Accounts found several aspects of the project constituting risks to value for money. The cost of the development also exceeded the amount originally approved by the BBC Governors, along with significant variations to the scheme as the project progressed. The Committee set out a number of conclusions and recommendations: that the whole life costs of projects should be assessed and made available to the BBC Governors; the BBC should better integrate design and construction, so reducing the risk of design changes after contracts have begun; the license fee money should not be used to subsidise the BBC's commercial subsidiaries, and that rent charged for the sublet of buildings should meet the BBC's costs; that the BBC should not hold on to property which it does not need or which it cannot use cost-effectively; the BBC in future should follow public sector good practice, in particular in estimating whole life costs of projects, monitoring returns to the private sector, obtaining refinancing benefits, and integrating design and construction.

This Committee of Public Accounts report on "The BBC's management of risk", sets out a number of recommendations on dealing with risk, and what the BBC's Executive Board should implement. Risk comes in different forms, from the risk of damaging the Corporation's reputation as a public service broadcaster to personal risk staff can experience when reporting from dangerous parts of the world. This report follows on from a National Audit Office report of the same title, and is available from the NAO website: http://www.bbcgovernorsarchive.co.uk/docs/reviews/nao_riskmanagement.pdf. Among the recommendations are: that BBC guidance needs a clearer delineation of responsibilities for risk management; that the main themes of risk management are not aligned with corporate objectives; that the BBC should update its assessments of the risks of working in hostile environments, as the abduction of journalist Alan Johnson showed; by failing to comply with its own Broadcasting Code, the BBC was fined by Ofcom over the a live phone-in competition on Blue Peter, and illustrates that some programme makers are ignoring the BBC's own editorial guidelines, exposing the corporation to reputational risk; the BBC has not related its risk to corporate objectives or assigned all risks to named owners; that BBC managers at all levels are not sufficiently engaged in the management of risk; there is still no fully satisfactory regime under which the BBC is accountable to Parliament for the value for money with which it spends licence fee payers money.

Incorporating HC 359-i and 494-i of session 2009-10, this report draws on the work of the Committee and the National Audit Office since 2003 in examining the BBC's approach to financial matters.

The prison population in England and Wales has been increasing since the 1990s and by November 2005 it reached a record level of 77,800, resulting in increased levels of overcrowding and stretched resources. Following on from a NAO report (HC 458, session 2005-06 (ISBN 0102935696) published in October 2005, the Committee's report examines how the Home Office, the Prison Service and the National Offender Management Service (which has responsibility for managing and accommodating prisoners) are dealing with the challenges involved in accommodating this record number of prisoners, the construction and use of temporary accommodation and the impact on the delivery of education and other training for prisoners. The Committee makes a number of conclusions and recommendations including in relation to: the deportation of foreign nationals, the use of alternatives to remand such as electronic tagging, contingency planning to ensure greater flexibility in accommodation plans including pilot testing new accommodation to identify possible problems early on, the application of best practice in anti-suicide monitoring measures, and the impact of moving prisoners around the prison estate on their training needs.

An examination of the future of our workspaces and how the pandemic will continue to shape how and where we work. In the era of WFH, hybrid working and flexible hours, going to the office is no longer what it used to be. Many businesses and organizations, as well as the entire commercial real estate sector, are struggling to address their new workplace dilemmas in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. With the rise of diverse working practices and new technological innovations, the traditional office space no longer serves the needs of the workforce. And with increasing numbers of staff now comfortable with a degree of working from home, how can companies assess their longer-term workspace needs? This new follow-up edition of Where Is My Office?, fully revised and updated to reflect the true impact of the pandemic on the workplace, highlights some of the bold new frameworks and practical considerations for business leaders, workplace practitioners and those involved in commercial real estate as they navigate the complex post-pandemic working landscape. Authors Chris Kane and Eugenia Anastassiou draw upon their extensive knowledge and experience to investigate the new-found significance of innovative corporate real estate thinking in modern workplaces. Where is My Office?: The Post-Pandemic Edition is a must-read for any business leader or senior manager looking to revitalize their workplace in a post-pandemic environment, and to develop a greater understanding of the beneficial impacts that creative workplace strategies that harness the relationship between people, place, technology, and the environment can have upon their organization's success.

The Environment Agency spent £114 million in 2003-04 on water resources management in England and Wales, in order to ensure sufficient water is available to meet the needs of people and the environment. It recovers the costs through abstraction charges levied on its licence holders, and efficiency improvements helps to reduce the licence fee and, ultimately, could result in lower costs to consumers. Following on from a NAO report (HC 73, session 2005-06; ISBN 012932972) published in June 2005, the Committee's report examines the performance of the Agency in managing water resources across England and the scope for minimising the charges levied on abstractors. The report finds that the Agency has kept the annual increase in the licence fee below the rate of inflation each year, but improvements in efficiency depend upon better cost management data. Although this problem was identified by the Agency in 2001, progress has been slow, and full activity-based costing data are unlikely to be available until 2007-08. The weaknesses in management information have meant that between £650,000 and £1.7 million has been incorrectly allocated between water resource and flood management activities.

Provides activity sheets that are written at different levels to suit a wider range of abilities. Contains chapter tests complete with details of assessment. Provides a variety of decision making activities, IT tasks and enquiry-based exercises. Close links to exercises in the book.

Everyday the NHS successfully treats over 1 million people. However there are risks and treatments can go wrong. A report by the Chief Medical Officer in 2000, ('An organisation with a memory', ISBN 0113224419) estimated that one in ten patients admitted to hospital were unintentionally harmed and that a blame culture and lack of a national system for sharing experience were key barriers to reducing the number of patient safety incidents. In Government's response included plans, timetables and targets to promote patient safety and the establishment of the National Patient Safety Agency. This report finds that insufficient progress has been made. In particular there is a question mark over the National Patient Safety Agency because of cost over-runs and delays in its National Reporting and Learning System and the limited feedback it has so far provided to trusts.