Corporate report

Civil Service Commission annual report and accounts 2022/23 (HTML)

Published 20 November 2023

Part 1: Annual Report 2022/23

First Civil Service Commissioner’s foreword

Our purpose

The Civil Service Commission, as statutory regulator, has a unique vantage point of Civil Service recruitment across the United Kingdom. Our function is to oversee entry into the Civil Service, to ensure that the Civil Service is effective and impartial, and has the skills and capability to deliver the agenda of the government of the day.

We are also an important constitutional safeguard; the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (CRaG) sets out that appointment of civil servants in England, Scotland and Wales must be made on merit, after a fair and open competition. The Commission grants limited exceptions to meet the business needs of the Civil Service and where people are appointed as special advisers. We also act as the final appeal body for civil servants making a complaint under the Civil Service Code.

2022-23 context

This annual report covers a period of remarkable change and turbulence in the UK. Three Prime Ministers, the lying in state of Her Late Majesty Elizabeth II followed by the coronation of King Charles III, economic volatility and cost of living struggles in addition to war in Ukraine mean that the Civil Service has to rise to huge challenges.

Having civil servants in place with the skills and experience necessary to meet these challenges is vital – and where the Commission plays a pivotal role.

I am proud of the way the Commission has responded to the changes over the last year, due to the diligence and professionalism of the Commissioners and our small secretariat team.

There are challenges ahead as the country deals with continued uncertain economic times and the ongoing war in Europe.

The Civil Service will play a critical part in the UK’s ability to respond to these and future issues.

Recruitment

Many of the roles on offer in the Civil Service are incredible; they may not always pay the most, but they offer unrivalled opportunities to play a part in solving complex national issues and to serve the public.

In today’s highly competitive labour market, departments need to do more to sell and explain roles to potential candidates and better support external recruits if they are serious about bringing in people with new experiences and skills to share.

And while there will always need to be some flexibility in the system to meet urgent or short term business needs, the Commission is keen that departments reduce their reliance on short term solutions and interim appointments and return to more stable workforce planning and recruitment.

By auditing the recruitment practice of departments and personally chairing 229 recruitment exercises for Senior Civil Service appointments this year, the Commission has witnessed the innovation and effort within departments – as well as the delays that can lead to losing talented candidates and wider frustration with the system.

Innovation

As a regulator, the Commission wants to encourage and share innovation in recruitment practice. After piloting the Commissioners’ Mark of Excellence last year, we have incorporated entry for this award into our revised audit arrangements, assessing excellence and innovation within the department’s overall recruitment practice. The award showcases campaigns that have used innovative practices. You can read more about the award in this report.

Opening up the Civil Service

The Commission has long supported open recruitment and we believe that the Civil Service has nothing to fear from ‘external by default’. Bringing in people with different skills and abilities – on merit after fair and open competition – strengthens the Civil Service. For example, those working in local government at senior levels have skills and experience highly relevant to central government and levelling up. In the same vein, existing civil servants should be encouraged and supported to spend part of their career in other sectors – the NHS, the private sector, local government and the devolved administrations – to cross-fertilise skills and bring experiences back to the Civil Service, building stronger pipelines of the talent required to serve the country.

This year the Commission began to adapt its working model to provide assurance across a greater number of Civil Service roles opened up by the government’s ‘external by default’ reforms. Our aim is to focus regulatory effort and support on departments with poor practice, allowing departments to earn greater autonomy where practice and understanding of the Commission’s recruitment principles is strong.

Civil Service values

The Commission received 85 appeals under the Civil Service Code from civil servants this year. Complaints must first be considered by the employing department, so we expect departments to play their part in ensuring staff understand the ethical expectations of civil servants.

The Code’s underlying values of honesty, integrity, objectivity and impartiality support good government and help the Civil Service to gain and retain the respect of ministers, Parliament and the public. We will continue to promote the Code and play our part, working with other regulators of ethics, to support high public standards.

Looking ahead

We want our regulatory approach to drive greater innovation and improvement in departmental practice, while ensuring the important principle of recruitment on merit, after a fair and open competition remains the cornerstone of an effective and impartial Civil Service.

I would like to thank my fellow Commissioners for their commitment and dedication and the secretariat team for their support.

Baroness (Gisela) Stuart of Edgbaston

First Civil Service Commissioner

Chief Executive’s introduction

The Commission has continued to discharge its regulatory functions over the past year, notwithstanding resourcing pressures in the secretariat staff which serves the Commission, the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (ACOBA) and Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments (OCPA).

Additionally, each of these bodies has experienced an increase in the volume and profile of cases over the course of the reporting year.

We welcomed six new Commissioners in the last reporting year. They are now fully inducted and providing valuable contributions across a wide range of competitions. A recruitment round is currently underway to recruit up to four more Commissioners; we anticipate this concluding later on this year.

This represents another opportunity to add valuable skills from across the United Kingdom from the voluntary, private and public sectors.

Our small secretariat team has experienced periods of high vacancies in the past year. The team has withstood the additional pressures these have caused and maintained service standards but nonetheless the return to more normal staffing levels at the time of writing is very welcome and will enable us to focus on the new compliance process.

90,251 people were appointed to roles in the Civil Service in the period of this Annual Report, compared to 98,815 in 2021/22; down 9%. 80,889 were recruited through fair and open competition, compared to 83,520 in 2021/22; down 3%. 9,362 people were appointed by Exception, compared to 15,295 in 2021/22; down 39%.

There were 82 breaches of the Recruitment Principles (176 in 2021/22). 167 Recruitment Principles complaints were received, of which 37 were referred back to departments for investigation and initial decision.

85 Civil Service Code appeals were received, of which 16 were referred back to departments for investigation and initial decision.

In this reporting year, 229 competitions were chaired by Commissioners (246 in 2021/22) with 8,649 applicants. Where declared, women made up 30% of applicants. They were more successful in later stages, making up 42% of shortlists and 40% of appointable candidates.

Where declared, candidates from ethnic minority groups made up 25% of total applicants. They made up 15% of shortlists and 7% of appointable candidates. Where declared 8% of applicants reported having a disability; they made up 7% of shortlists and 3% of appointable candidates. Further information can be found on pages 32 - 36.

Looking ahead to next year we look forward to welcoming our new Commissioners and the insights and contributions they will bring. We hope to see increasing innovation from Departments in their recruitment processes and continued progress in external by default. As ever, none of the Commission’s work would be possible without the commitment and contribution of the Commissioners and the secretariat.

I would like to thank them for all they do. My thanks also to the Departments with which we work for their constructive engagement with the Commission as their regulator over the course of the year.

Kate Owen

Interim Chief Executive Civil Service Commission

9 November 2023

Key facts

Civil Service-wide

• 90,251 people appointed to roles in the Civil Service, compared to 98,815 in 2021/22; down 9%
• 80,889 people recruited through fair and open competition, compared to 83,520 in 2021/22; down 3%
• 9,362 people appointed by exception, compared to 15,295 in 2021/22; down 39%
• 82 breaches of the Recruitment Principles
• 167 Recruitment Principles complaints received, of which 37 were referred back to departments for investigation and initial decision
• 85 Civil Service Code appeals received, of which 16 were referred back to departments for investigation and initial decision

Commissioner-chaired competitions

• 229 competitions chaired by commissioners (246 in 2021/2022) with 8,649 applicants
• Where declared, women made up 30% of applicants. They were more successful in later stages, making up 42% of shortlists and 40% of appointable candidates
• Where declared, candidates from ethnic minority backgrounds made up 25% of total applicants. They made 15% of shortlists and of appointable candidates
• Where declared, candidates who reported having a disability made up 8% of applicants, 7% of shortlists and 3% of appointable candidates
• 82% of appointed candidates were civil servants (82% in 2021/22)
• 52% of recommended candidates were rated outstanding or very good
• 131 competitions produced more than one appointable candidate (57%). 12 competitions produced no appointable candidate (5%)

Recruitment below Senior Civil Service (SCS) pay band 2

• 90,079 people appointed to positions below SCS pay band 2
• 80,732 people recruited through fair and open competition (9,347 by exception)
• Where declared, 56% of people recruited were female and 44% were male. 0.2% preferred to self describe
• Where declared, 21% of people recruited were from an ethnic minority background, down from 22% in 2021/22
• Where declared, candidates from an ethnic minority background were most successful at grades, AO (35% of AO recruits) and EO (26% of EO recruits)
• 10% of people recruited declared a disability, up from 8% in 2021/22

Highlights of 2022/23

• Visit to Deputy First Minister and Permanent Secretary in Scotland by Baroness Gisela Stuart, followed by visit to First Minister and Permanent Secretary in Wales in May 2022.
• Baroness Gisela Stuart gave a keynote speech at FDA Annual Conference in May 2022.
• Two new Commissioners appointed in June 2022.
• First winner of the Commissioners’ Mark of Excellence announced in July 2022.
• Another four new Commissioners appointed in October 2022.
• 21/22 Annual Report & Accounts published in October 2022.
• Baroness Gisela Stuart spoke at the Joint Association of Chief Executives and Public Chairs Forum Annual Conference on ‘Creativity, Change, Culture and the Public Body Leader’ in February 2023.
• Baroness Gisela Stuart gave evidence to the Senior Salaries Review Body in February 2023.
• Baroness Gisela Stuart joined the panel at an event held by the Institute for Government on ‘Opening up the Civil Service’ and spoke about external by default in March 2023.
• Online training sessions on the Recruitment Principles and exceptions led by the Policy and Operations team reached over 2000 participants.

What we do

Promotion and visibility

The Commission’s secretariat receives significant volumes of queries from regulated organisations, primarily concerning the Recruitment Principles and the use of exceptions. Providing training sessions to upskill HR professionals from across the Civil Service in the application of the Recruitment Principles allows secretariat team members to share their expertise directly with those responsible for maintaining compliance within their respective organisations.

In 2022-23, the Commission facilitated 17 training sessions, holding sessions targeted to specific organisations and wider events open to all. Each session was well attended, with a cumulative attendance of over 2000 delegates across all sessions; receiving consistently positive feedback from attendees.

In October 2022 the Commission held an online event to showcase the practices of the departments and organisations that had received Highly Commended awards in the 2022 Commissioners’ Mark of Excellence.

Life chances

The Going Forward into Employment (GFiE) Team continues to contribute to the delivery of the Government’s commitments to recruitment of Prison Leavers and veterans into the Civil Service as described in the Beating Crime Plan and the Office for Veterans Affairs strategic action plan.

Progress to April 2023 in respect of the prison leaver target remained challenging and behind the ambition set by the Government. Progress against the veteran target was stronger, where we achieved over 95%. The GFiE team continues to run a scheme for care experienced people and has set up a new scheme for carers whose ability to engage with work, education and training has been impacted by their caring role. Alongside the promotion of GFiE schemes to colleagues across the Civil Service, the team supports a network of GFiE schemes across the Civil Service which are successfully providing a range of entry level opportunities to people who face barriers to employment.

The Going Forward into Employment (GFiE) Team formally moved from the Commission at the end of March 2023 to join the Government People Group in the Cabinet Office. Under a new pilot arrangement the GFiE team now has delegated authority from CSC to accredit new schemes for an agreed list of cohorts, streamlining the accreditation process and ensuring new schemes are informed by the learning from GFiE successes to date.

Compliance regime

The Commission has been considering how its compliance audit can become more risk-based and effective in driving departmental change and good practice in recruitment.

Following the conclusion of departmental audits and outcomes in July 2022, the team took a deeper dive into the themes and trends within the Commission’s compliance data. This work clearly demonstrated that some departments consistently performed well, while others would benefit from closer working with the Commission to improve long term poor performance. This has developed into a new approach to compliance.

“Best practice in regulation is about focusing resources on the areas of highest risk to drive change. At the Commission, we want our audit process to drive compliance in departments with consistently poor recruitment practice without stifling the innovation necessary to attract new talent by doing things differently across government.”

Lea Paterson

Civil Service Commissioner

To bring in this new programme, the audit was limited to nine departments rated as poor, with a pilot of the proposed new audit methodology with five departments.

All other compliance activity continued as usual including recording breaches of the recruitment principles, considering complaints made under the Civil Service Code and collecting quarterly data from departments regulated by the Civil Service Commission. The new audit methodology is described in more detail below:

Increased emphasis on SCS recruitment and strategy

The Civil Service Commission’s audit ratings will tie a department’s compliance with the government’s ‘external by default’ mandate and Senior Civil Service (SCS) strategy more broadly. A new section of the audit questionnaire has been created which will specifically ask about SCS recruitment. This will be supplemented by an increase in the number of questions regarding SCS recruitment in our quarterly surveys.

For those departments with little or no SCS recruitment within a year, the audit approach and moderation framework will flex to focus on other areas.

A three year audit cycle

The audit cycle will move from annual to triennial, which means that every department within the Commission’s regulatory remit will be audited at least once every three years. Those with lower ratings (e.g. ‘requires regulatory intervention’) will be audited annually until their score becomes ‘fair’ or ‘good’. This approach ensures that the Commission’s resources are continually focused on where we can have the most impact.

An in-year moderation cycle

The Commission previously held moderation sessions over two days at the end of every financial year. As a result audit ratings were, on occasion, awarded up to 9-10 months after the audit. As part of the revised approach, moderation sessions will be held regularly throughout the year, which will mean ratings are awarded no more than four months after the audit has taken place.

A more qualitative approach to the audit

The new approach to departmental audits will be more qualitative to ensure that the Commission collects as much insight as possible from its audit activity. Each audit will result in a set of recommendations intended to drive wider improvements and innovation across government.

Four audit ratings

The Commission will move from its current 9 ratings to 4, bringing it in line with other regulators. These will be: Good; Fair; Requires Improvement and Requires Regulatory Intervention. This means that the previous ‘trajectory’ rating will no longer be issued.

The new audit questionnaire

The audit questionnaire has been revised in order to drive best practice process and behaviours within departments and to ask more open ended, qualitative questions, grouped into four pillars:

Pillar 1: Recruitment management and oversight

This section will gather information on how the department operates and the level of support and training given to vacancy holders before they chair a panel. It will also record how complaints are handled within the department.

Pillar 2: Attraction, diversity and inclusion

This section is largely unchanged, and seeks to establish which schemes departments are taking advantage of (e.g. apprenticeships; summer diversity programme etc.)

Pillar 3: SCS recruitment and External by Default

This is a new section which will explicitly ask departments about their talent management approach to SCS and the extent to which they are embedding external by default within the department. This information will be bolstered by an increased number of questions regarding SCS recruitment in the quarterly survey.

Pillar 4: Compliance and complaints

This section asks compliance questions to underscore what we are measuring in our audits.

The breach index

Under the previous model, the total number of breaches were identified, without sufficient emphasis on how severe they were or the impact they had on the integrity of recruitment to the Civil Service. In recognition of the differing actions that can cause a breach to be issued the type and severity of the breaches have now been codified. The Commission will now identify and issue three breaches:

Technical

Where there has been a minor breach of the recruitment principles which has no, or minimal, impact on the legal requirements that recruitment into the Civil Service is fair, open and based on merit.

Consequence:

The breach will be recorded and considered the next time the department is audited, and the Commission may follow up to ask that those responsible attend training.

If a department is receiving significant numbers of technical breaches this may trigger an audit and/or a bespoke training session.

Examples of a Technical Breach:

Omitting the complaints process from the advert; minor deviation to the advertised process or requirements; unclear or ambiguous terms and conditions in the advert.

Serious (a substantive error that is more likely to impact on a department’s audit rating)

Where a department has breached the Recruitment Principles in a way that has a material impact on the legal requirement that recruitment into the Civil Service is fair, open and based on merit.

Consequence:

This is the broadest of the categories, and depending on the severity of the breach, this could lead to a letter being issued by the CEO of the Commission to the HR Director of the department. The Serious Breach will be recorded and may, again depending on severity, trigger an audit. It is likely to have a material consequence on the department’s next audit rating.

Examples of a Serious Breach:

Employing individuals on a non-fair, non-open basis without the appropriate Exception approval; assessing candidates on criteria not set out in the advert; not advertising the role openly (i.e. on a website available to all).

Fundamental (a major error which will trigger an immediate audit)

Where there has been egregious or wilful non compliance with the Recruitment Principles or the Civil Service Commission. It is anticipated that they will be issued very rarely.

Consequence:

A Fundamental Breach will result in an immediate audit and a letter from the First Commissioner to the department’s Lead Non Executive Director / Permanent Secretary / CEO setting out the reasons for the breach.

Examples of a Fundamental Breach:

Appointing out of merit order; failure to acknowledge or report a significant conflict of interest; involving Special Advisors in the recruitment of Civil Servants; disregarding a direction from the Civil Service Commission; failure to report an identified breach of the Recruitment Principles or reversing a panel decision regarding the appointability of a candidate.

Complexity Score

The departments regulated by the Commission vary hugely in terms of size, profile and remit. The Commission will consider the operating environment of each department it audits, described as a ‘Complexity Score’, and this will be factored into the final rating.

The Complexity Score is in no way a reflection of the ‘importance’ or complexity of the work of the department; it reflects the operating environment with regard to recruitment only.

In determining the Complexity Score of a department the Commission will consider:

1. Size of the department / number of employees
2. Annual average recruitment volumes
3. The remit of the department / number of portfolios managed by the department
4. Profile of the department
5. Recent Machinery of Government change

Most Complex (‘5’), Average Complexity (‘3’), Least Complex (‘1’).

Ahead of each audit the Commission will discuss the proposed ‘Complexity Score’ with the department. Departments will have the opportunity to challenge and discuss their score but the final determination is made by the Commission.

Piloting the new audit process showed that the volume and type of information from departments took longer to collate than previously. This helped reset the timelines and the way in which we request information for audit purposes. Under the new approach, a request for information will be sent in advance of the audit. Basic information required by the Commission can be provided by the department, with the wider information dealt with in the background as the audit process takes place, rather than after completion.

As a consequence of the pilot to reform the compliance process, alongside the Commission’s significant resourcing issues in 2022-23, it was decided that no ratings would be given to departments.

A full programme of audits will be undertaken over the course of the 2023/24 compliance year, with in-year ratings being provided at a point much closer to the audit taking place.

Recruitment

The Commission derives its regulatory powers from CRaG which requires the Civil Service to appoint staff on merit, after fair and open competition. It also provides the Commission with a duty to publish the Recruitment Principles which are the Commission’s interpretation of CRaG and by which government departments must abide in order to recruit into the Civil Service.

The Commission is a regulator, independent of government and the Civil Service, and provides assurance that the requirements of CRaG are being met, largely through our compliance and complaints functions. As an organisation, the Commission also aims to be open, collaborative and enabling. Departments are encouraged to maintain regular and early contact with the recruitment policy team to seek advice and design recruitment campaigns that are compliant with the Recruitment Principles. We offer a responsive email service by which staff in departments and members of the public can seek immediate advice.

Ministerial involvement

The role of Ministers in Civil Service appointments is set out in the Commission’s Recruitment Principles.

The Commission continues to support ministers and departments to select the best candidates through open competition. The Recruitment Principles facilitate conversations between ministers and shortlisted candidates, with a member of the Commission there to take feedback, and ensure that the meetings are conducted in an appropriate and compliant way. These stakeholder meetings can happen at any grade, but are more common at senior grades, in competitions which the Civil Service Commissioners chair. Commissioners will check at the planning stage that ministers have been fully consulted on a role, have had the opportunity to review the candidate pack, and are updated by the vacancy holder on the progress of a competition. When attending ministerial meetings the Commissioner or member of the Commission’s secretariat will discuss any areas which the minister feels should be further explored with candidates at interview. This is an integral part of the process for some roles; obtaining constructive feedback from ministers provides the panel with additional insights on a candidate, and it also provides an opportunity for the candidates to gain greater insight into the nature of the vacancy.

Exceptions

The Commission recognises that, at times, fair and open recruitment may not be possible and therefore sets out a limited number of exceptions to the legal requirement within the Recruitment Principles. These provide departments with legitimate methods of appointment without full competition, when business need dictates. There are currently 10 exceptions set out in the Recruitment Principles designed by the Commission to meet the needs of the Civil Service.

The Commission has been keen to reduce departments’ reliance on exceptions, following a necessary period of high-volume, time-limited appointments during the pandemic. This year saw a reduction of 39% compared to 2021/22, which had seen a decrease of 49%.

Typically, decisions at lower levels are delegated to departments, but appointments made by exception to roles at director level and above require prior approval from the Commission.

Appointments at lower grades which extend beyond the period allowed by the Recruitment Principles and any appointment of an individual previously appointed by exception within the preceding 12 months also require the Commission’s prior approval.

This year, 407 exception business cases were considered by the Commission, which compares with last year’s total of 541.

Whilst remaining above the pre-pandemic 2019/20 total of 256 cases, this year’s figure reflects the wider reduction in appointments by exception noted above.

Of these cases, 85 were for SCS pay band 1, pay band 2 and pay band 3 grades; representing a decrease of 44% when compared to the previous year. Such appointments are subject to the approval of the First Civil Service Commissioner or the Chief Executive. A list of the most senior appointments by exception is published and updated regularly on the Commission’s website.

This year the Commission approved 30 appointments by exception at pay band 2 and 9 at pay band 3. These appointments are generally time limited to allow for open recruitment to take place; ensuring appointments are made on merit, through fair and open competition.

The Commission also has the ability to grant ‘class approvals’, which facilitate a number of staff to be temporarily appointed to the Civil Service to fulfill a certain need.

Chairing senior competitions

The Commission has the unique position of working across all departments, and agencies, and has privileged sight of the variety of roles that the Civil Service undertakes. As mandated by the Recruitment Principles, Civil Service Commissioners chair recruitment competitions for all SCS2 graded roles (Director or equivalent) advertised externally and for all roles graded SCS3 (Director General or equivalent) and SCS4 (Permanent Secretary or equivalent), irrespective of whether the competition is advertised publicly or across the Civil Service only. SCS4 campaigns are typically chaired by the First Civil Service Commissioner.

Chairing senior competitions is an essential lever that the Commission has as a regulator. Commissioners are involved from the planning phase of a competition, through to the interview stage. They guide the panel through the consideration of a range of assessments undertaken by candidates. Typically, additional assessments include a leadership assessment and a staff engagement exercise, and reports are made available to the panel prior to interview.

For appointments at Director General and Permanent Secretary level, Commissioners work closely with the Director General Workforce Team based in the Cabinet Office.

The number of Commissioner chaired competitions reduced slightly this year, from 246 in 2021/22 to 229, composed of a single SCS1 competition, 185 competitions at SCS2, 36 at SCS3 and 7 competitions for SCS4 graded roles.

Civil Service Commissioners this year chaired competitions to appoint to SCS4 roles within:

• Department for International Trade
• Home Office
• HM Treasury
• Department for Transport
• Cabinet Office, and
• Office for National Statistics

The Commissioners and the secretariat work closely with the SCS team in the Government Recruitment Service, which provides a valuable service to many departments, from advertising and logistics, to the management of recruitment data.

“Our role is about helping to ensure we have an effective Civil Service; making sure we have the best available person for a role – appointed on merit – which is why the Commission has long supported open competition.

Advertising all roles externally by default also requires a change in culture. We have been pleased to see the active response by some departments but we know there is more to do to make this change the norm.”

Paul Kernaghan

Civil Service Commissioner

Non-departmental public body (NDPB) accreditation

The Commission manages an accreditation process for non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs) that are sponsored by government departments. At the request of NDPBs seeking accreditation, the Commission will assess each organisation’s recruitment policies for adherence to the Recruitment Principles. If accredited, NDPBs are able to access the Civil Service Jobs website, extending their ability to advertise. In turn, the staff of accredited NDPBs are able to apply for roles that have been advertised across the Civil Service only, recognising the broadly compliant recruitment policies in place at that organisation. This allows a greater interchange of valuable skills in the public sector. An accreditation lasts for three years and a list of accredited bodies can be found on the Commission’s website1.

Recruitment complaints

From April 2022 to March 2023, the Civil Service Commission received 167 Recruitment Principles complaints. As at 31 March 2023, seven of these complaints were still ongoing and as such, are not reported here^{[footnote 1]}.

37 of these complaints were referred back to the department in the first instance as during our initial assessment, it was identified that the complainant had not received an adequate final adjudication from the relevant department as required prior to an investigation by the Commission.

93 of the complaints received by the Commission did not fall within the legal remit of the Recruitment Principles and were closed with no further investigation undertaken. The most common basis for these complaints regarded the quality of feedback received from the department following the sift or interview stage, scores awarded and the security vetting process.

Three complaints were withdrawn before documentation was provided to assist with further investigation, and eight complaints were closed due to a lack of response from the complainant.

Of the 18 complaints that were fully investigated by the Civil Service Commission to the point of issuing a final adjudication, breaches of the Recruitment Principles were identified in four competitions.

A further breach was self-reported by a department shortly after a complaint was brought to the Commission.

There were no breaches of the Recruitment Principles found in the remaining 14 complaints. However, it was determined that in one of these instances, there were elements of poor practice in the departmental handling of the subsequent complaint.

The Commission continues to work closely alongside departments, delivering training on the Recruitment Principles and providing guidance and training on best practice in general handling of recruitment based complaints.

Complaints where breaches of the Recruitment Principles were found are listed below:

Department	Summary of breach
Department for Work and Pensions	Inconsistent interview process
Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities	Candidates provided with insufficient remuneration information
Home Office	Conflict of interests record not kept
Cabinet Office	Error within numerical assessment
Cabinet Office	Incorrect criteria assessed

Civil Service Code

Promoting the values

The Civil Service People Survey 2022 included three questions relating to the Civil Service Code. Each question reported comparatively similar results to the 2021 survey.

Whilst awareness of the Code is embedded across the Civil Service, the results for how to raise a concern and confidence that a concern would be investigated properly are of concern and will continue to be monitored by the Commission.

Table 1: Awareness of the Civil Service Code

Question text (from the People Survey)	2020	2021	2022
Are you aware of the Civil Service Code? (percentage answering yes)	91%	N/A	N/A
I understand the Civil Service Code and what it means for my conduct (percentage answering agree or strongly agree)	N/A	89%[footnote 2]	88%
Are you aware of how to raise a concern under the Civil Service Code? (percentage answering yes)	69%	68%	69%
Are you confident that if you raise a concern under the Civil Service Code (in the organisation) it would be investigated properly? (percentage answering yes)	72%	72%	71%

Code appeals and investigations 2022/23

From April 2022 to March 2023, the Civil Service Commission received 85 complaints under the Civil Service Code. As at 31 March 2023, three of these complaints were still ongoing and as such, are not reported here.

Three complaints were closed with no further action taken due to a lack of response from the complainant.

16 were referred back to the department for an investigation to take place in the first instance and 63 were assessed and determined to fall outside of the legal remit of the Civil Service Code.

Notably, many of these cases reported HR, management and policy issues or instances of bullying, harassment and discrimination, which are matters for the department. There were also a number of complaints received from members of the public. These complaints are out of scope as the Commission’s role relates only to concerns raised under the Civil Service Code by civil servants.

No cases brought to the Commission in 2022/23 required progression to a Commissioner panel investigation.

The Commissioners’ Mark of Excellence

The Commissioners’ Mark of Excellence which was piloted in 2022 will this year be awarded to the department/s or organisation/s that have demonstrated consistent excellent practice in promoting a career in the Civil Service and widening opportunities to external candidates.

The success of BEIS and the other ‘highly commended’ departments and agencies in 2022 reaffirms the importance of forward-thinking strategies in the quest for top-tier talent. The Commissioners’ Mark of Excellence is a testament to those who pioneer creative and thoughtful initiatives in recruitment, elevating the entire Civil Service to greater heights.

“To thrive in the ever-changing landscape of talent acquisition, organisations must learn from these shining examples. Embrace innovation, break barriers, and unleash the full potential of innovative recruitment strategies to build a stronger, more inclusive workforce. Only then can they proudly display the Commissioners’ Mark of Excellence and shape the future of recruitment in the Civil Service.”

Atul Devani

Civil Service Commissioner and Panel judge for this year’s award.

This year we are looking for ground-breaking, innovative approaches in attracting diverse talent into the

Civil Service covering:

• External by default and accessibility: The department has started new initiatives/or additional efforts to bring in exceptional talent from outside the current pool of the Civil Service, by:
  • Advertising vacancies externally by default and supporting candidates to make strong applications and prepare for Civil Service interviews
  • Tailoring induction processes for external candidates
  • Making efforts to retain excellent external candidates
  • Creating an advertising strategy to encourage external applications and other initiatives, improving wording of job descriptions, or new outreach programmes

and/or

• Encourage porosity and upskilling members of the Civil Service by encouraging external secondments with a subsequent return to the Civil Service. Particular recognition will be given to efforts made to:
  • Transfer talent between national and local positions in the Civil Service
  • Transfer talent between the four nations of the United Kingdom.

The Panel

This year the judging panel will be:

• Baroness Stuart, First Civil Service Commissioner
• Fiona Ryland, Chief People Officer
• Atul Devani, Civil Service Commissioner

Management information

The following tables and graphs provide the numbers and make up of applicants for Civil Service appointments during 2022/23.

Commissioner-chaired competitions

Table 2: Number of commissioner chaired competitions and appointments made

Grade	Posts advertised	Appointments made
SCS 1 (Deputy Director)	1	1
SCS 2 (Director)	185	161
SCS 3 (Director General)	36	31
SCS 4 (Permanent Secretary)	7	6
Total	229	199

Figure 1: Ethnicity breakdown of key stages of senior competitions

Stage	Ethnic minority candidates (where declared)
Application	25%
Interview	15%
Appointable candidates	7%

Figure 2: Gender breakdown of key stages of senior competitions

Stage	Female candidates
Application	30%
Interview	42%
Appointable candidates	40%

Figure 3: Disability breakdown of key stages of senior competitions

Stage	Candidates declaring disability
Application	8%
Interview	7%
Appointable candidates	3%

Recruitment below SCS pay band 2

Figure 4: Recruitment below SCS pay band 2

Year	Open and fair	Exceptions
2020/21	60,344	30,083
2021/22	83,367	15,277
2022/23	80,732	9,347

Figure 5: Ethnicity diversity of successful candidates by grade

Grade	White	Ethnic minority	Did not disclose/unknown
SCS 1	501	54	133
Grade 6	1,303	222	225
Grade 7	4,058	954	656
SEO	6,914	1,603	867
HEO	9,626	2,753	1,233
EO	14,801	4,050	1,541
AO	18,610	5,565	1,508
AA	2,955	513	86

Figure 6: Gender diversity of successful candidates by grade

Grade	Male	Female	Did not disclose/unknown	Prefer to self-describe
SCS 1	323	331	33	1
Grade 6	839	844	65	2
Grade 7	2,605	2,812	246	5
SEO	3,920	5,107	33	24
HEO	5,734	7,345	503	34
EO	8,222	11,670	469	31
AO	11,023	14,298	312	49
AA	1,559	1,968	23	3

Figure 7: Disability breakdown of successful candidates by grade

Grade	2020-21	2021-22	2022-23
SCS 1	5%	6%	7%
Grade 6	8%	6%	9%
Grade 7	8%	954	8%
SEO	8%	8%	11%
HEO	10%	11%	13%
EO	8%	8%	10%
AO	6%	6%	8%
AA	4%	5%	8%

Who we are

The Commission

The Commissioners collectively form the Civil Service Commission and its board. They were appointed by Her Late Majesty the Queen for a single five-year term of office. They bring a range of expertise from the private, public and voluntary sectors, as well as an independent perspective.

In May 2022 we said goodbye to four of our Commissioners whose five year terms had come to an end, Natalie Campbell, Rosie Glazebrook, June Milligan and Joe Montgomery, and two more Commissioners in September, Jane Burgess and Margaret Edwards.

We welcomed six new Commissioners; Joanna Abeyie and Lea Paterson in June 2022 and Stephen Cohen, Atul Devani, Christopher Pilgrim and Elizabeth Walmsley in October 2022.

The Commission meets regularly, along with the Chief Executive and members of the secretariat, to consider business and strategic matters and take informed decisions in pursuit of its regulatory functions.

The commissioners

Gisela Stuart

Baroness Stuart served as a Labour Member of Parliament from 1997 until 2017. During her twenty years in Parliament, she worked as a government minister in 1999-2001, sat on the Security and Intelligence Committee and chaired Vote Leave in 2016.

From 2017, Baroness Stuart has contributed to public life with non-partisan roles and is currently Chair of the Royal Mint Advisory Committee and Chair of Wilton Park. She is also an Honorary Captain in the Royal Naval Reserves.

Baroness Stuart now sits as a Crossbench Peer where she operates independently, outside of a party-political framework.

Gisela was appointed as First Civil Commissioner on 3 March 2022.

Joanna Abeyie

Dr. Joanna Abeyie MBE is the Founder and Director of multi-award winning Equality, Diversity, Inclusion and Accessibility consultancy business Blue Moon & Partners, City of London Common Councillor and co-secretariat of the Creative Diversity APPG.

Joanna is also the author of ‘Inclusion Needs You’, with Pearson Publishing.

She sits on the New Scotland Yard Counter Terrorism Expert Advisory Board, and is a Trustee for the Innocence Project London. Joanna was awarded an MBE in the 2020 New Year’s Honours list for her services to diversity and inclusion in the creative and media industries.

She was appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner on 13 June 2022.

Jane Burgess

The majority of Jane’s career has been in the private sector; and she was formerly Partners’ Counsellor and a main board director at John Lewis Partnership. She is currently a lay member of the House of Commons Committee on Standards and an ordinary member of the Competition Appeal Tribunal.

She has extensive experience of senior executive recruitment and enabling people to have their voice heard.

Jane was appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner on 1 October 2017; her term ended on 30 September 2022.

Natalie Campbell

Natalie Campbell is Chief Executive Officer of Belu Water and an award-winning business woman.

In 2011 she co-founded A Very Good Company (AVGC), a global social innovation agency that works with brands to drive social change. Natalie is also a board member of the Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation (OPDC).

Natalie was appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner on 1 June 2017; her term ended on 31 May 2022.

Stephen Cohen

Stephen has over 40 years’ experience in asset management, in Asia, Europe and the USA. He has worked as a portfolio manager, in business development, operations and in IT. Stephen is a Commissioner at the Gambling Commission and Chair of Audit for the Advanced Research Invention Agency, the JPMorgan Japan Investment Trust plc and the Schroders Capital Global Innovations Trust plc.

Stephen brings a global business perspective, deep experience of finance, corporate strategy and corporate governance.

Stephen was appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner on 3 October 2022.

Atul Devani

Atul is an entrepreneur who has founded several successful software technology ventures operating in various sectors including finance, mobile, telecoms, telemedicine and pharmacy. He was also the founder and chief executive officer of United Clearing plc. Atul went on to become CEO of the wireless division and led the sale of the company to a Nasdaq listed buyer in 2008 at a valuation of $290m.

Atul is currently NED/Chairman of a Venture Capital Trust and an investor in a number of private companies. He is also a mentor of entrepreneurs at the Company of Information Technologists in the City of London. Atul has a First-Class Honours Degree in Electronic Engineering from Bangor University where he is also an independent member of the University Council. Atul also serves on the board of M-Sparc, a science park created by the University to help to inspire people and provide support for innovations.

Atul was appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner on 3 October 2022.

Margaret Edwards

Margaret has held senior roles in the public sector, including chief executive roles in the NHS, and as a director general in the Department of Health. She then had a successful career with Mckesson International. Currently Margaret is Chair of the Civil Service Pension Board. Previous Non-Executive roles included Chair of the National Oversight Group for the High Secure Hospitals, member and interim Chair of the Senior Salaries Pay Review Board and an non-executive director role with the Government Internal Audit Agency.

She has a track record of designing and delivering public sector reform and delivering national targets. She is particularly interested in aligning individual and corporate objectives and the design of total reward packages.

Margaret was appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner on 1 October 2017; her term ended on 30 September 2022.

Rosie Glazebrook

Rosie chairs the Copyright Licensing Agency and its associated company Publishers’ Licensing Services. She is also a council member of the General Optical Council, chairs an NHS Research Ethics Committee and is a member of BSI’s Standards Policy and Strategy Committee. Her previous board/ and non-executive director positions include the Food Standards Agency and in NHS, regulatory and commissioning bodies.

Rosie has held commercial positions in the private sector in media, publishing and health data organisations.

Rosie was appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner on 1 June 2017; her term ended on 31 May 2022.

Paul Gray

Paul Gray currently holds a portfolio of advisory and academic positions, including Non-Executive Director at the Care Inspectorate (Scotland); Visiting Professor at the University of Glasgow School of Medicine, Veterinary and Life Sciences, and Consulting Partner at Charlotte Street Partners. He previously had an extensive career in the Scottish Civil Service and rose to Chief Executive of NHS Scotland and Director General of Health and Social Care (2013 to 2019).

Paul was appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner on 1 October 2021.

Paul Kernaghan

Paul Kernaghan CBE, QPM is retired from an extensive career in the police, which culminated in a nine-year tenure as Chief Constable of Hampshire Constabulary (1999 to 2008). Following his retirement in 2008, he served throughout 2009 as the Head of Mission for the European Union Coordinating Office for Palestinian Police Support. He was appointed as the first ever House of Lords Commissioner for Standards in June 2010, a role which he held until 2016. He was the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman (2016 to 2021).

Paul was appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner on 1 October 2021.

June Milligan

June has extensive experience as a senior civil servant. Her last role was Director General of Local Government and Communities and a board member in the Welsh Government. She has also held roles as a diplomat and as head of department at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

She is currently a member of the Court of the University of Glasgow and was, until May 2019, an Equality and Human Rights Commissioner.

June’s areas of interest and expertise are people-centered: in leadership, diversity, governance and ethics.

June was appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner on 1 June 2017; her term ended on 31 May 2022.

Joe Montgomery

Joe has held senior executive roles in the private sector, focusing on property and regeneration, as well as an executive career in both central and local government including as Director General at the Department of Communities and Local Government, and Director General at the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

Joe was appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner on 1 June 2017; his term ended on 31 May 2022.

Lea Paterson

Lea’s career has spanned public policy, regulation, HR and financial journalism. She has held a number of senior roles at the Bank of England, including serving as the Bank’s Executive Director of People & Culture, and as the organisation’s first Director of Independent Evaluation. As a financial journalist, Lea worked at The Independent and at The Times, where she was Economics Editor. Lea is currently a Board Member at the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA), an independent member of Warwick University’s Remuneration Committee and holds a number of voluntary and community roles.

Lea was awarded a CBE for services to the economy in the 2023 New Years Honours List.

Lea was appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner on 13 June 2022.

Christopher Pilgrim

Formerly Chief HR Officer and Board member of the energy supplier Npower, Chris began his career with British Steel before joining ExxonMobil and an Exxon Joint Venture with Shell, filling a number of senior positions in the UK and internationally. This was followed by HR Director roles at Royal Numico and Uniq plc, before joining Npower in 2009. Chris has been a member of the Police and National Crime Agency Remuneration Review Body and is now Chair of the Doctors and Dentist Pay Review Body, Board Member of the Civil Nuclear Police Authority, and Governor of Cardiff Metropolitan University.

Chris was appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner on 3 October 2022.

Sarah Pittam

Sarah Pittam is an Independent non-executive director specialising in the education sector. She is a Non-Executive Director of Bourne Education Trust and was appointed to the Department for Education’s Register of External Experts in 2019. She previously served as a Conservative local authority councillor in the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham between 2006 and 2010.

Sarah was appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner on 1 October 2021.

Martin Spencer

Martin has a background in economics, technology consulting, business transformation and business leadership. Most recently Martin was Senior Vice-President at NTT DATA, a global IT services business that delivers some of the world’s largest digital infrastructure and transformation projects.

Previously, Martin has held UK and European leadership roles with Capgemini and KPMG Consulting. Martin was also a director at Detica, the international business and technology consulting firm specialising in data analytics and information intelligence.

Martin is Non-Executive Director at the NHS Counter Fraud Authority, Companies House, Ofsted and the Serious Fraud Office.

Martin was appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner on 1 October 2021.

Elizabeth Walmsley

A scientist by training, Liz Walmsley had a diverse career in global manufacturing, venture capital and international consultancy. She has held senior executive roles at chemicals firm ICI, private-equity and venture-capital business 3i, and was a founding partner of executive-coaching firm Praesta Partners. She has been a Governor at Sheffield University. She currently divides her time between consultancy work and various charity roles, which include being a trustee of the Woodsmith Foundation which benefits organisations across the North Yorkshire Moors and its coastal area.

Liz was appointed as a Civil Service Commissioner on 3 October 2022.

The secretariat

The secretariat supports the individual Commissioners, as well as the collective Commission. The Chief Executive and four team leaders make up the senior leadership team and on 31 March 2023 there were 21 members of staff employed in the Commission secretariat, which also serves the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (ACOBA) and the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments (OCPA) (19.45 full time equivalent); this includes staff of the Going Forward in Employment team (5 members of staff; 4.25 full time equivalent). The secretariat is staffed entirely by civil servants on secondment from the Cabinet Office, and new recruits are employed by the Cabinet Office prior to being seconded to the Commission.

In 2022/23 a total of 13 members of staff left the Commission, with some taking up new roles in other government departments and others moving into different sectors. Nine new members of staff were appointed.

The People Survey was sent out in October 2022 with high level results shared with Departments in December.

Results across the Civil Service dipped in 2022. This pattern has been replicated at the Commission, with most results dipping below the Civil Service wide benchmark.

Within the Commission’s People Survey results, whilst there are some areas that may have dipped, there are others that we should celebrate and look to build upon. More recent Pulse Surveys have indicated very positive improvements.

Figure 8: People Survey results

Category	CSC 2021	CSC 2022	Cabinet Office 2022	Civil Service 2022
Engagement Index	70%	51%	61%	54%
My work	79%	72%	75%	73%
Organisation’s objectives and purpose	83%	66%	81%	62%
My manager	75%	71%	76%	74%
My team	83%	89%	82%	83%
Learning and development	51%	38%	56%	46%
Inclusion and fair treatment	85%	61%	79%	74%
Resources and workload	87%	68%	72%	69%
Pay and benefits	53%	46%	29%	25%
Leadership and managing change	62%	43%	49%	38%

Corporate management

Transparency and outreach

Open event

The Commission is required by its Memorandum of Understanding with the Cabinet Office to hold an annual open meeting. In October, we held an online event to celebrate the departments and organisations which had received awards of ‘Highly Commended’ in the Commissioners’ Mark of Excellence.

Information requests

The Commission publishes a large amount of information about its work. In addition to reflecting our commitment to openness and transparency, this is one way in which we meet our statutory responsibilities under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

The Freedom of Information Act requires public authorities to adopt publication schemes setting out the types of information they will make available routinely. We have adopted the model publication scheme approved by the Information Commissioner’s Office, and the information on our website reflects this.

In 2022/23 we received 28 requests under the Freedom of Information Act (42 in 2021/22), and 100% of these were responded to within the statutory deadline (2021/22: 100%) We also received 4 requests under the Data Protection Act 1998 (3 in 2021/22) 100% of which were responded to within the statutory deadline (2021/22: 100%).

Statutory disclosures

Risk

The main risks to the Commission’s operations during 2022/23 related to delays in recruitment of and failure to appoint Commissioners, which prevented/ severely hampered the Commission from delivering its core business. Once in post there was a risk that Commissioners had insufficient expertise, capability or capacity to carry out functions of the role due to other commitments, lack of training and being new in post (see pages 57-59).

Accounts preparation and going concern basis

The accounts attached to this report have been prepared in accordance with the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.

The Commission’s accounts have been prepared on the assumption that the Civil Service Commission is a going concern on the grounds that where the Commission has outstanding current liabilities at the end of the year these will be funded in the next year by annual grant-in-aid. Budget and expenditure plans for 2023/24 have been agreed by the Cabinet Office. In common with government departments, the future financing of the Commission’s liabilities is accordingly to be met by future grants of supply to the Cabinet Office and the application of future income, both to be approved by Parliament. The 2023/24 main supply has been approved and there is no reason to believe that future approvals will not be forthcoming.

Future developments

In the coming year the Commission will focus on rebuilding staffing levels to full strength and recruiting new Commissioners. Effective onboarding and induction processes for these new joiners will be critical to enabling the Commission to achieve its strategic priorities.

Sustainability, environmental, social and community initiatives

The Commission has adopted the Cabinet Office’s policy on volunteering, which aims to encourage staff to participate in volunteering activity in the community and to enable them to build their skills through practical experience. Staff are eligible for up to five days’ paid leave per year for volunteering activity as part of their personal development.

Our staff are involved in mentoring, both for civil servants and a UK based charity, and the Samaritans as a listening volunteer and part of the Prison Outreach Team, training prisoners to become listeners and provide emotional support.

“Volunteering with Samaritans has encouraged me to become more of an active listener in all walks of my life, and this can be especially helpful at work when working through a complex problem or dealing with stakeholders with seemingly conflicting priorities.

Conducting training with the Samaritans in a prison environment has helped me to better understand the diverse needs of people and our fellow citizens, which can be invaluable when dealing with the broad spectrum of Departments – each with their respective stakeholders and end-users – as we do here at the Commission.”

Oscar Clarke

Civil Service Commission Secretariat.

We are committed to improving the work/ life balance of our staff and we value diversity. We try to accommodate different working patterns and encourage our staff to join the diversity networks of the Cabinet Office or their parent department.

We have codes of practice for both Commissioners and staff that require them to observe the highest standards of integrity, honesty, objectivity and impartiality, and to offer the highest standards of service to the public.

The Commission supports the Sustainability and Climate Change Adaptation Strategy of its sponsoring department, the Cabinet Office. Details of the initiatives to reduce energy consumption in the Cabinet Office can be found in its annual report and on the government’s website.

Kate Owen

Accounting Officer, Civil Service Commission

9 November 2023

Accountability report

Corporate governance report

Director’s report

Commissioners

Commissioners serve for a five-year non-renewable term of appointment (please see pages 38-46 for full list of Commissioners).

Register of Commissioners’ interests

Commissioners record any interests such as company directorships and other significant interests in the Register of Interests, published on our website.^{[footnote 3]}

Data protection and incidents involving personal data

The General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) came into force on 25 May 2018, supplemented by the Data Protection Act 2018, which requires the Commission, as an organisation that handles personal data, to process that information in accordance with the data protection principles and to register with the Information Commissioner’s Office.

For a small organisation, the Commission manages a large amount of personal data. Most of this relates to Civil Service recruitment and complaint handling and is held so that the Commission can discharge its role of providing assurance that civil servants are selected on merit on the basis of fair and open competition. The Commission also holds data for the purpose of investigating complaints under the Civil Service Code and, for administrative purposes, holds data relating to its staff, contractors and commissioners. The Commission also provided secretariat services throughout 2022/23 to the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments and the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments, and manages further large amounts of personal data for them.

There were no personal data incidents in 2022/23 (three in 2021/22). Article 15 of the General Data Protection Regulations creates a right, commonly referred to as subject access, which is most often used by individuals who want to see a copy of the information an organisation holds about them (see page 48).

Statement of the Commissioners’ and accounting officer’s responsibilities.

Under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, the Civil Service Commission is required to prepare for each financial year a statement of accounts. The accounts are prepared on an accruals basis and must give a true and fair view of the state of affairs of the Civil Service Commission and its income and expenditure, statement of financial position and cash flows for the financial year. In preparing the accounts, the Commissioners and the Accounting Officer are required to comply with the requirements of the Government Financial Reporting Manual (FReM) and, in particular, to:

• observe the relevant accounting and disclosure requirements, and apply suitable accounting policies on a consistent basis;
• make judgements and estimates on a reasonable basis;
• state whether applicable accounting standards as set out in the Government Financial Reporting Manual have been followed, and disclose and explain any material departures in the accounts;
• prepare the accounts on a going concern basis; and
• confirm that the annual report and accounts as a whole is fair, balanced and understandable and take personal responsibility for the annual report and accounts and the judgements required for determining that it is fair, balanced and understandable.

The responsibilities of an Accounting Officer, including responsibility for the propriety and regularity of the public finances for which the accounting officer is answerable, for keeping proper records and for safeguarding the Civil Service Commission’s assets, are set out in Managing Public Money published by the HM Treasury.

As the Accounting Officer of the Civil Service Commission, I have taken all the steps that I ought to have taken to make myself aware of any relevant audit information and to establish that the Civil Service Commission’s auditors are aware of that information. So far as I am aware, there is no relevant audit information of which the auditors are unaware. I also confirm that the annual report and accounts as a whole are fair, balanced and understandable.

Governance statement

The Civil Service Commission is independent of government and the Civil Service. It is an executive non-departmental public body (NDPB), sponsored by the Cabinet Office, which was created in its current form on 11 November 2010 by the commencement of part 1 of the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.

As Accounting Officer of the Civil Service Commission, I have responsibility for maintaining effective systems of corporate governance controls – both structural and procedural – to support the achievement of the Civil Service Commission’s policies, aims and objectives while safeguarding the public funds and assets for which I am responsible, in accordance with the responsibilities assigned to me in Managing Public Money.

The Principal Accounting Officer of the Cabinet Office appointed Peter J Lawrence OBE the Chief Executive and Accounting Officer of the Civil Service Commission in November 2016; Accounting Officer responsibilities were retained by Peter Lawrence by agreement until 31 October 2022 for the purpose of signing off 2021/22 accounts. K. Walia was appointed as Chief Executive of the Civil Service Commission on 1 August 2022, and discharged the duties of Accounting Officer of the Commission from 1 November 2022, although formal responsibility remained with Alex Chisholm (as Principal Accounting Officer for the Cabinet Office) since no formal appointment letter was issued. Following the departure of K. Walia, Kate Owen was appointed as Interim Chief Executive on 15 May 2023 and Accounting Officer on 7 June 2023. Kate Owen has received assurance from both Peter Lawrence and K. Walia that the system of internal controls was robust throughout the whole of 2022/23 and up to the point of signing the accounts.

Governance framework

The Commission is made up of the Commissioners and holds monthly meetings chaired by the First Civil Service Commissioner. These meetings are supported by the secretariat, headed by the Commission’s Chief Executive. Together, the Commissioners and the secretariat constitute the Civil Service Commission.

The Commissioners review information on the Commission’s core work at each meeting and the board periodically reviews its own performance to ensure that it and its standing committees are acting effectively.

The Commission’s budget is set by the Cabinet Office and expenditure against it is reviewed quarterly by the Audit and Risk Committee (ARC). Expenditure is reviewed on a monthly basis by the Chief Executive and on a day-to-day basis by the Commission’s finance team.

During 2022/23 the Commission had one standing committee to advise the Commissioners on specific areas or to exercise functions on behalf of the Commissioners. This was the Audit and Risk Committee, established to support the board in its responsibilities for issues of risk control and governance.

There were no other working groups established in 2022/23.

Except as set out below, the Commission complies with the Corporate Governance in Central Government Departments: Code of Good Practice 2017 Compliance Checklist, which is regarded as best practice. The exceptions are:

• The Accounting Officer is responsible for writing the governance statement, rather than the board. The statement is reviewed by the Audit and Risk Committee and cleared by a meeting of the Commissioners before publication.
• Our memorandum of understanding with the Cabinet Office is not automatically re-negotiated when key personnel leave (including when there is a change of government). We have meetings with the sponsor team in the Cabinet Office and an agreement that the memorandum of understanding will be reviewed every three years. The review due in 2013/14 was delayed, at the Cabinet Office’s request, pending the Triennial Review of the Commission. The Commission is committed to working closely with the Cabinet Office to have a revised memorandum in place for 2023/24.

In the majority of areas, the Commission follows Cabinet Office guidelines and procedures for internal control. Where the Commission’s policy differs from the Cabinet Office’s policy, this is set out in standing orders which are published on our website.^{[footnote 4]} Day-to-day working practices of the Commission are decided by the commissioners and these are known as standing orders. The key standing orders are the code of practice for Commissioners and staff, financial and operational delegations, responsibilities from the Commission to the Chief Executive and the Audit and Risk Committee terms of reference.

The Commission is registered on the Information Commissioner’s register of data controllers.^{[footnote 5]} We have reviewed our procedures for information security against those used by the Cabinet Office and our policy on data retention in light of the new GDPR which came into force in May 2018.

Commissioner meeting and committee performance

The board of Commissioners and standing committees complied with the published best practice requirements as set out in Managing Public Money.

The commissioners met monthly during 2022/23 (except August and January).

The Audit and Risk Committee met during 2022/23, in June, September, January and March. The committee reviewed the Commission’s finances, and strategic risks around insufficient number of Commissioners and inconsistency of chairing (where more experienced Commissioners have now left the Commission), which were escalated to the board, along with updates from external and internal auditors.

Table 4: Board and Audit and Risk Committee attendance

Figures denote meetings attended (of meetings available to attend) between 1 April 2022 and 31 March 2023.

The board met ten times in the year with non-attendance agreed in advance on an exceptional basis.

Commissioners’ attendance for the business year ending 31 March 2023	Commission Board	Audit and Risk Committee
Joanna Abeyie (appointed 13 June 2022)	7/9	N/A
Jane Burgess (term ended 30 September 2022)	4/5	2/2
Natalie Campbell (term ended 31 May 2022)	1/2	N/A
Stephen Cohen (appointed 3 October 2022)	5/5	N/A
Atul Devani (appointed 3 October 2022)	5/5	1/1
Margaret Edwards (term ended 30 September 2022)	4/5	2/2
Rosie Glazebrook (term ended 31 May 2022)	2/2	N/A
June Milligan (term ended 31 May 2022)	2/2	N/A

Commissioners’ attendance for the business year ending 31 March 2023	Commission Board	Audit and Risk Committee
Joe Montgomery (term ended 31 May 2022)	2/2	N/A
Paul Gray	10/10	N/A
Paul Kernaghan	10/10	N/A
Lea Paterson (appointed 13 June 2022)	9/9	N/A
Christopher Pilgrim (appointed 3 October 2022)	3/5	N/A
Sarah Pittam	9/10	4/4
Martin Spencer	8/10	0/1
Gisela Stuart	10/10	N/A
Elizabeth Walmsley (appointed 3 October 2022)	5/5	N/A

The Audit and Risk Committee meeting held in December 2022 was not quorate (Audit and Risk Committee requires 3 Commissioner members with at least 2 in attendance at each meeting). It was agreed that any decision made at the December meeting would be treated as a recommendation for approval at the next quorate meeting.

Audit and Risk Committee

• Margaret Edwards (Chair until 30 September 2022)
• Jane Burgess (until 30 September 2022) Sarah Pittam (Chair from October 2022) Atul Devani (from March 2023)
• Martin Spencer (from March 2023)

The Audit and Risk Committee (ARC) is also attended by the Chief Executive, relevant members of the secretariat and members of both the internal audit team from the Government Internal Audit Agency and the National Audit Office.

Data quality

The Commissioners have a number of data sources available to them to enable them to carry out their work.

In providing assurance that selection for appointment to the Civil Service is on merit, following a fair and open competition, the Commission obtains a significant amount of data through compliance monitoring audits of departmental recruitment and regular data gathering exercises.

These processes combined enable oversight of recruitment across the Civil Service and the ability to further scrutinise areas of concern with specific organisations, potentially in addition to scheduled compliance audits, in accordance with the risk-based approach to compliance monitoring set out in pages 18 to 22 of this report.

For the most senior appointments, the Commission obtains its data to provide assurance about compliance with the requirement by directly chairing competitions. Data is collated on the Commission’s casework database drawn from the Commissioner’s panel report and the diversity monitoring return.

This information is then analysed by the secretariat and presented at the Commissioner meeting and to the Audit and Risk Committee. The database also records data about appointments by exception (see page 24) dealt with by the Commission.

The data used by the Commissioners to oversee the Commission’s expenditure comes from a combination of the secretariat’s finance spreadsheet and data supplied by the Cabinet Office’s finance team, which provides transactional finance services to the Commission. To date, the level of control has remained acceptable.

Civil Service Commission code of practice for staff

The Commission publishes its own code of practice for staff, which mirrors the Civil Service Code. It sets out standards of behaviour expected of Commission employees, and the process for employees to raise complaints under the code.

Management of risk

The Commission’s corporate governance controls are designed to manage risk to a reasonable level rather than to eliminate all risk of failure to achieve compliance with policies, aims and objectives. They can therefore only provide reasonable, not absolute, assurance of effectiveness. The Commission maintains a risk register which is regularly reviewed by both the Audit and Risk Committee and at Commission meetings.

Risks are managed on an ongoing basis, in a process that is designed to identify and prioritise the risks to the fulfilment of the Commission’s statutory role and to the achievement of its policies, aims and objectives. The process also evaluates the likelihood of those risks being realised and the impact should they be realised and identifies what actions are in place, or need to be taken, to mitigate their impact effectively, efficiently and economically.

Cabinet Office guidelines and procedures have been observed during 2022/23 and this annual report and accounts accords with HM Treasury guidance.

The Audit and Risk Committee meets quarterly and reports to the Commissioners at the following Commissioner meeting. The committee supports the Commission by reviewing whether proportionate assurances for meeting the Commission’s and accounting officer’s responsibilities are available and by testing the reliability and integrity of those assurances. This includes responsibility for the effective operation and impact of the memorandum of understanding with the Cabinet Office, the Commissioners’ code of practice, the staff code of practice, and the Commission’s business planning process.

The Commission has risk registers in place that have been assessed and considered at senior management level and at Commissioner level. The strategic risk register is regularly scrutinised, discussed, updated and ratified at both Audit and Risk Committee and Commission meetings. It is considered at each ARC meeting with an in-depth discussion on particular risks and formally reviewed at the Commission meetings twice a year, or more frequently as required. It is maintained by the secretariat and is available to all staff and Commissioners.

The operational risk register is reviewed at the fortnightly meetings of the senior management team.

The Commission’s main strategic risks in 2022/23 related to insufficient numbers of Commissioners, due to delayed recruitment. This is against a backdrop of rising numbers of competitions, a trend which is only likely to accelerate, particularly with the government’s external by default policy.

Connected to this is the risk of inconsistent chairing of competitions, again the delay in recruitment has meant that the more experienced Commissioners will all leave at the end of their terms in the same year.

We have sought to mitigate these risks by accelerating the induction programme for new Commissioners and with buddying and shadowing arrangements.

Moving below the strategic level, the Commission’s main operational risk during 2022/23 was similar to the strategic risk of loss of experienced Commissioners and is connected to loss of secretariat staff and the delay in recruitment due to the recruitment freeze.

We have sought to mitigate this risk by agreeing with the Cabinet Office that as an independent Arm’s Length Body the Commission should be exempt from the recruitment approvals process. However, delays caused by security vetting remain and the loss of corporate knowledge when experienced members of the secretariat leave the organisation remains a risk.

Audit

The Commission’s internal audit service is provided by the Government Internal Audit Agency (GIAA) (formerly HM Treasury Internal Audit). The internal audit team advise the Chief Executive, who is also the Accounting Officer, and the Audit and Risk Committee.

The head of internal audit annually provides an independent opinion on the adequacy and effectiveness of the Commission’s governance, risk and control arrangements. The internal audit reviews contribute to that opinion. The Internal audit review opinion for 2022/23 is ‘moderate’ with some improvements required to enhance the adequacy and effectiveness of the framework of governance, risk management and control. Of the three areas audited in 2022/23, one received a ‘moderate’ opinion and two received a ‘substantial’ opinion on management of risk.

Results of internal audit work, including action taken by management to address issues, including in audit reports (where appropriate), have been regularly reported to management and the Commission’s Audit and Risk Committee.

The external audit of the Commission’s accounts is undertaken by the Comptroller and Auditor General, as required by the 2010 Act.

Review of effectiveness

As Accounting Officer of the Civil Service Commission, I have responsibility for reviewing the effectiveness of the Commission’s governance procedures and controls. During my review, I have consulted the Commissioners and the Audit and Risk Committee and have systems in place to ensure improvements are implemented as required.

I have engaged an internal audit team (the Government Internal Audit Agency) and have consulted them and the National Audit Office regularly on matters of internal control. Both sets of auditors attend all Audit and Risk Committee meetings.

I consider that the processes, checks and controls provided by the Commission meetings, the Audit and Risk Committee and the secretariat team have been effective.

No significant governance control issues have been identified this year.

A new Chief Executive, K. Walia, was appointed and took up the role on 1 August 2022, however, the previous Chief Executive, Peter J Lawrence OBE, retained the Accounting Officer responsibilities for the purposes of signing off the 2021/22 accounts. K. Walia left the role of Chief Executive on 14 May 2023 and Kate Owen was appointed as Interim Chief Executive on 15 May, and Accounting Officer on 7 June 2023.

Both Peter Lawrence and K. Walia have confirmed to the current Chief Executive and Accounting Officer that the system of internal controls remained robust up to the date of their respective departures.

Remuneration and staff report

The information below labelled subject to audit is covered by the Comptroller and Auditor General’s audit opinion.

Remuneration report

Remuneration policy

All staff at the Commission are currently employed on secondment from the Cabinet Office and their salaries are set by the Cabinet Office.

Remuneration (including salary) and pension entitlements

The following sections provide details of the remuneration and pension interests of the Commissioners and senior management of the Commission.

Commissioners [SUBJECT TO AUDIT]

The First Civil Service Commissioner is a part time office holder; Commissioners are all part time, fee-paid office holders.

Their remuneration is shown in Table 5 below.

Table 5: Fees paid to commissioners (and ex-commissioners)

Commissioners	Period 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023 Pay band (£000)	Period 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023 Pay band (£000)
Gisela Stuart First Civil Service Commissioner from 7 March 2022	85-90	5-10 (full year equivalent 85-90)
Joanna Abeyie Appointed 13 June 2022	Board fees 0-5	N/A
Joanna Abeyie Appointed 13 June 2022	Competition fees 0-5	N/A
Jane Burgess Commissioner until 30 September 2022	Board fees 0-5	Board fees 0-5
Jane Burgess Commissioner until 30 September 2022	Competition fees 55-60*	Competition fees 70-75
Natalie Campbell Commissioner until 31 May 2022	Board fees 0-5	Board fees 5-10
Natalie Campbell Commissioner until 31 May 2022	Competition fees 10-15	Competition fees 40-45
Stephen Cohen Appointed 3 October 2022	Board fees 0-5	N/A
Stephen Cohen Appointed 3 October 2022	Competition fees 0-5	N/A
Atul Devani Appointed 3 October 2022	Board fees 0-5	N/A
Atul Devani Appointed 3 October 2022	Competition fees 0-5	N/A
Margaret Edwards Commissioner until 30 September 2022	Board fees 0-5	Board fees 0-5
Margaret Edwards Commissioner until 30 September 2022	Competition fees 10-15	Competition fees 35-40
Rosie Glazebrook Commissioner until 31 May 2022	Board fees 0-5	Board fees 15-20
Rosie Glazebrook Commissioner until 31 May 2022	Competition fees 10-15	Competition fees 65-70
Paul Gray	Board fees 0-5	Board fees 0-5
Paul Gray	Competition fees 45-50	Competition fees 0-5
Paul Kernaghan	Board fees 0-5	Board fees 0-5
	Competition fees 35-40	Competition fees 0-5
June Milligan Commissioner until 31 May 2022	Board fees 0-5	Board fees 5-10
June Milligan Commissioner until 31 May 2022	Competition fees 35-40*	Competition fees 45-50
Joe Montgomery Commissioner until 31 May 2022	Board fees 0-5	Board fees 0-5
Joe Montgomery Commissioner until 31 May 2022	Competition fees 15-20	Competition fees 20-25
Lea Paterson Appointed 13 June 2022	Board fees 0-5	N/A
Lea Paterson Appointed 13 June 2022	Competition fees 5-10	N/A
Christopher Pilgrim Appointed 3 October 2022	Board fees 0-5	N/A
Christopher Pilgrim Appointed 3 October 2022	Competition fees 0-5	N/A
Sarah Pittam	Board fees 0-5	Board fees 0-5
Sarah Pittam	Competition fees 35-40	Competition fees 0-5
Martin Spencer	Board fees 0-5	Board fees 0-5
Martin Spencer	Competition fees 65-70	Competition fees 0-5
Elizabeth Walmsley Appointed 1 October 2022	Board fees 0-5	N/A
Elizabeth Walmsley Appointed 1 October 2022	Competition fees 0-5	N/A

Notes to Table 5

Board fees include attendance at Commissioner meetings, working groups, time spent considering complaints and all other non-competition work.

All fees given are actual figures and fees are calculated based on work completed.

*Includes some fees paid to Commissioners continuing to undertake work on behalf of the Civil Service Commission after their terms ended.

Senior management [SUBJECT TO AUDIT]

The Commission has determined that the Chief Executive meets the definition of senior management. The current Chief Executive is a senior civil servant on secondment to the Commission.

The remuneration of senior civil servants is set by the Prime Minister following independent advice from the Review Body on Senior Salaries.

A new Chief Executive, K. Walia, was appointed in August 2022 and left the organisation in May 2023 when an Interim Chief Executive, Kate Owen, was appointed.

Table 6: Senior staff remuneration (salary, benefits in kind and pensions)

Name	Salary (£000) 2022/23	Salary (£000) 2021/22	Bonus payments (£000) 2022/23	Bonus payments (£000) 2021/22	Benefits in kind (to the nearest £100) 2022/23	Benefits in kind (to the nearest £100) 2021/22	Pension benefits (to the nearest £1000) 2022/23	Pension benefits (to the nearest £1000) 2021/22	Total (£000) 2022/23	Total (£000) 2021/22
Peter J Lawrence OBE (Chief Executive until 31 July 2022)	15-20 100-105 FYE	55-60 110-115 FTE	0	0	0	0	-18	-23	(0-5)	30-35
K. Walia (Chief Executive from 1 August 2022)	55-60 85-90 FYE	-	0	-	0	-	-14	-	40-45	-

The value of pension benefits accrued during the year is calculated as (the real increase in pension multiplied by 20) plus (the real increase in any lump sum) less (the contributions made by the individual). The real increase excludes increases due to inflation or any increase or decreases due to a transfer of pension rights.

Taking account of inflation, pension benefits accrued for the year have decreased in real terms.

Peter Lawrence worked part time (0.55 FTE) for the period reported; the table above indicates his actual remuneration, alongside full-time, full year equivalent.

Salary

‘Salary’ includes gross salary, overtime, reserved rights to London weighting or London allowances, recruitment and retention allowances, and any other allowance to the extent that it is subject to UK taxation. There were no benefits in kind.

Bonuses

Bonuses are based on performance levels attained and are made as part of the appraisal process. Bonuses relate to the performance in the year prior to which they become payable to the individual.

Any bonuses reported in 2022/23 relate to performance in 2021/22 and comparative bonuses reported for 2021/22 relate to the performance in 2020/21.

Pay multiples [SUBJECT TO AUDIT]

Reporting bodies are required to disclose the relationship between the full year equivalent (FYE) remuneration (to the nearest £5,000 band) of the highest-paid director in their organisation and the median remuneration of the organisation’s workforce.

As shown in Table 7, the banded full year equivalent of the highest-paid director in the Commission in 2022/23 was £85-90k (2021/22: £110-115k); this equates to a 22.2% change from 2021/22.

The midpoint (£87,500) was 2.15 times the median remuneration of the workforce (2021/22: 3.21 times), which was £40,617 (2021/22: £35,050). The salary and allowances element of this amount totalled £39,970 (2021/22: £34,550) and performance pay and bonuses equalled £1,293 (2021/22: £500).

The 25th percentile remuneration figure was £28,366 (2021/22: £27,500) and the 75th percentile remuneration figure was £67,434 (2021/22: £52,200).

In 2022/23 1 employee (2021/22: 0) received remuneration in excess of the highest-paid director. This was due to there being two senior civil servants in the secretariat for part of the year. For the purposes of this report, the highest paid director is considered to be the Chief Executive, as the person responsible for the organisation’s strategy. The FYE remuneration of Commission staff ranged from £25,696 to £100-105k (2021/22: £24,491 to £66,292 FYE).

Total remuneration includes salary, non-consolidated performance related pay and benefits-in-kind. It does not include severance payments, employer pension contributions and the cash equivalent transfer value of pensions.

Table 7: Hutton fair pay disclosure ratio

Band of highest paid director’s FYE remuneration (to nearest £5,000 band)	Period 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023 £85-90k	Period 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023 -	Period 1 April 2021 to 31 March 2022 £110-115K	Period 1 April 2021 to 31 March 2022
25th percentile pay ratio	£28,366	3.08	£27,500	4.09
Of which: salary component	£28,366	3.08	£27,500	4.09
Median pay ratio	£40,617	2.15	£35,050	3.21
Of which: salary component	£39,970	2.19	£34,550	3.26
75th percentile pay ratio	£67,434	1.30	£52,200	2.16
Of which: salary component	£65,790	1.33	£52,200	2.16

Note to Table 7

The reduction in pay ratio is attributable to there being two SCS employees of the Commission in 2022/23, along with changes to the operating model including staff at higher grades.

Reporting bodies are required to disclose the percentage change from the previous financial year in respect of the highest paid director and the average percentage change from the previous financial year for employees of the entity taken as a whole.

Table 8: Fair pay disclosure percentage changes

-	-	2022/23	2021/22	% Change
Band of highest-paid	Salary & allowances	£85-90k	£110-115k	-22.2
director (FTE)	Performance pay and bonuses payable	£0	£0	0
All employees*	Salary & allowances	£47,205	£39,871	18.4
	Performance pay and bonuses payable	£1,286	£500	157.2

*These figures include all employees except the highest-paid director, reported separately above

Table 9: Gender pay gap [not subject to audit]

Category	Percentage (%)
Mean gender pay gap – ordinary pay	-22.14
Median gender pay gap – ordinary pay	-67.72
Mean gender pay gap – bonus pay (in the 12 months ending 31 March)	-100
Median gender pay gap – bonus pay (in the 12 months ending 31 March)	-100
Proportion of male and female employees paid a bonus (in the 12 months ending 31 March) - Male	0
Proportion of male and female employees paid a bonus (in the 12 months ending 31 March) - Female	53.85

Proportion of male and female employees in each quartile:

Quartile	Female (%)	Male (%)
First (upper)	80	20
Second	80	20
Third	40	60
Fourth (lower)	50	50

Note to Table 9

The change in gender pay gap reporting figures can be attributed to the fact that the new chief executive (as at the reporting date of 31 March 2023) was female, along with more female employees in senior roles, attracting a higher rate of pay.

Pensions [SUBJECT TO AUDIT]

Commissioner appointments, including that of the First Civil Service Commissioner, are not pensionable.

The Commission does not operate its own pension scheme. All staff are on secondment from the Civil Service and are therefore members of Civil Service pension schemes (for further details, see the staff report on pages 71-74). Further details about the Civil Service pension arrangements can be found at the Civil Service Pension Scheme website.

The chief executive’s pension, as shown in Table 10, has accrued in their role as a civil servant. Peter J Lawrence OBE took partial retirement from 1st February 2021, taking all accrued pension benefits at that time.

Table 10: Chief executive’s pension

Accrued pension at pension age and related lump sum (£000)

Name	At start of reporting period	At end of reporting period	Real increase in value during reporting period
Peter J Lawrence OBE (1 April 2022 - 31 July 2022)	50-55 (plus lump sum 160-165)	55-60 (plus lump sum 165-170)	0 (plus lump sum 0)
K. Walia (1 August 2022 - 31 March 2023)	-	45-50 (plus lump sum 95-100)	0 (plus lump sum 0)

Cash Equivalent Transfer Value (CETV) (£000)

Name	At start of reporting period	At end of reporting period	Real increase in value during reporting period
Peter J Lawrence OBE (1 April 2022 - 31 July 2022)	1257	1280	-19
K. Walia (1 August 2022 - 31 March 2023)	916	972	-22

Notes to table 10

A new pension scheme, alpha, was introduced on 1 April 2015. The majority of Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme members will have transitioned to alpha.

However, those who were members of a public service pension scheme on 31 March 2012, and 10 years or less away from normal pension age, would continue to build up benefits in their existing pension scheme. Benefits for Peter Lawrence were previously accrued under the ‘classic’ pension scheme, and under the ‘alpha’ scheme for this reporting period.

Benefits for K. Walia were previously accrued under the ‘classic’ pension scheme and under the ‘alpha’ scheme for the reporting period.

CETV figures are calculated using the guidance on discount rates for calculating unfunded public service pension contribution rates that was extant at 31 March 2023. HM Treasury published updated guidance on 27 April 2023; this guidance will be used in the calculation of 2023 to 24 CETV figures.

Taking account of inflation, the CETV funded by the employer has decreased in real terms.

Compensation for loss of office [SUBJECT TO AUDIT]

No members of staff left under voluntary exit terms during 2022/23 (2021/22: 0).

No staff left under compulsory early retirement terms during 2022/23 (2021/22: 0)

Staff report

Numbers and costs [SUBJECT TO AUDIT]

Staff and commissioner costs and numbers are set out in Tables 11 and 12. These figures include the commissioners and senior managers whose remuneration is detailed in the remuneration report (pages 61-64) and the office holders in the other independent institutions (Advisory Committee on Business Appointments and Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments), which are supported by the joint secretariat.

In 2022/23 Peter J Lawrence OBE was the chief executive of the Commission until 31 July 2022; he remained Accounting Officer until 31 October 2022 (for the purpose of signing off 2021/22 accounts) and a member of the secretariat as the Director of Going Forward into Employment. A new chief executive was appointed from 1 August 2022. Both are senior civil servants.

Table 11: Staff and commissioner costs

Category	2022/23	-	-	-	2021/22
-	Total (£000)	Staff (£000)	Commissioners[footnote 6] (£000)	Office holders[footnote 7] (£000)	Total (£000)
Wages and salaries	1,621	1,011	570	40	1,446
Social security costs	156	108	48	0	143
Other pension costs	252	252	0	0	224
Total	2,029	1,371	618	40	1,813

Note to Table 11

The Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme (PCSPS) is an unfunded multi-employer defined benefit scheme. For 2022/23 employer’s pension contributions of £252k (2021/22: £224k) were payable to the PSCPS at one of four rates in the range 26.6% to 30.3% (2021/22: 26.6% to 30.3%) of pensionable pay based on salary bands.

Table 12: Average staff (FTE) and commissioner numbers

Category	2022/23	-	-	-	2021/22
-	Total	Staff	Commissioners	Office holders	Total
Directly employed	There are no directly employed members of staff, commissioners or office holders	There are no directly employed members of staff, commissioners or office holders	There are no directly employed members of staff, commissioners or office holders	There are no directly employed members of staff, commissioners or office holders	There are no directly employed members of staff, commissioners or office holders
Inward secondments	22.4	22.4	0	0	22.3
Office holders	20.1	0	11.3	8.8	20.6
Total	42.5	22.4	11.3	8.8	42.9

Note to Table 12

The numbers of staff, commissioners, ex-commissioners and office holders reflect the monthly average throughout 2022/23. The numbers in post on 31 March 2023 were 19.45 FTE staff, 12 commissioners, and 8 office holders. Staff numbers include 4.25 FTE (in post on 31 March 2023) working on the Going Forward into Employment (GFiE) scheme, which has operated separately from the Civil Service Commission secretariat since 1 August 2022, despite remaining administratively linked.

Staff composition

The table below provides a breakdown, by gender, of all the staff who have worked for the Commission during the period 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023.

Table 13: Analysis of staff by gender

Category	Men	Women	Total
Senior civil servants	50%	50%	100%
All staff	35%	65%	100%

Attendance information

The level of sickness absence within the secretariat in 2022/23 was 5 average working days lost per staff year (11.1 days in 2021/22), which is below the last reported Civil Service average of 7.9 days per staff year.^{[footnote 8]} The average number of days per person was 3.1 (7.7 days in 2021/22). One member of staff took long-term sick leave, which has had an impact on the average within a small team.

Staff policies applied during the financial year

The Civil Service Commission is committed to equality and diversity. In all our activities we aim to treat colleagues and customers fairly and with respect.

The Civil Service Commission applies its own Recruitment Principles, appointing candidates based on merit through fair and open competition. The Commission takes part in the Disability Confident Scheme (replacing the Guaranteed Interview Scheme), which encourages candidates with a disability to apply for the jobs it advertises. If a candidate declares a disability and meets the minimum standards required for a job, they will be invited to interview.

Expenditure on consultancy

The Commission employed no consultants during 2022/23 (2021/22: none).

Off-payroll engagements

The Commission employed no staff off-payroll during 2022/23 (2021/22: none).

Contractual relationships

The Commission has a contract with

Pay Check Ltd. to calculate commissioners’ payments, a contract with DF Press Ltd., to provide press officer support, and a contract with the Government Legal Department to provide legal advice.

In addition, the Commission’s memorandum of understanding with the Cabinet Office enables us to use many of the Cabinet Office’s suppliers. We are charged by the Cabinet Office for use of these services.

Pensions

The Commission does not operate its own pension scheme. All staff are on secondment from the Civil Service.

All pension arrangements for staff are dealt with by the department in the Civil Service from which they are seconded to the Commission (the Cabinet Office).

All pension contributions are charged in the income and expenditure account as they become payable in accordance with the rules of the arrangements.

Pension benefits are provided through the Civil Service pension arrangements. From 1 April 2015 a new pension scheme for civil servants was introduced – the Civil Servants and Others Pension Scheme or alpha, which provides benefits on a career average basis with a normal pension age equal to the member’s State Pension Age (or 65 if higher).

From that date all newly appointed civil servants and the majority of those already in service joined alpha. Prior to that date, civil servants participated in the Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme (PCSPS).

The PCSPS has four sections: 3 providing benefits on a final salary basis (classic, premium or classic plus) with a normal pension age of 60; and one providing benefits on a whole career basis (nuvos) with a normal pension age of 65.

These statutory arrangements are unfunded with the cost of benefits met by monies voted by Parliament each year. Pensions payable under classic, premium, classic plus, nuvos and alpha are increased annually in line with Pensions Increase legislation. Existing members of the PCSPS who were within 10 years of their normal pension age on 1 April 2012 remained in the PCSPS after 1 April 2015. Those who were between 10 years and 13 years and 5 months from their normal pension age on 1 April 2012 switch into alpha sometime between 1 June 2015 and 1 February 2022. Because the Government plans to remove discrimination identified by the courts in the way that the 2015 pension reforms were introduced for some members, eligible members with relevant service between 1 April 2015 and 31 March 2022 may be entitled to different pension benefits in relation to that period (and this may affect the Cash Equivalent Transfer Values shown in this report – see below). All members who switch to alpha have their PCSPS benefits ‘banked’, with those with earlier benefits in one of the final salary sections of the PCSPS having those benefits based on their final salary when they leave alpha. (The pension figures quoted for officials show pension earned in PCSPS or alpha – as appropriate. Where the official has benefits in both the PCSPS and alpha the figure quoted is the combined value of their benefits in the two schemes.) Members joining from October 2002 may opt for either the appropriate defined benefit arrangement or a defined contribution (money purchase) pension with an employer contribution (partnership pension account).

Employee contributions are salary-related and range between 4.6% and 8.05% for members of classic, premium, classic plus, nuvos and alpha. Benefits in classic accrue at the rate of 1/80th of final pensionable earnings for each year of service. In addition, a lump sum equivalent to three years initial pension is payable on retirement. For premium, benefits accrue at the rate of 1/60th of final pensionable earnings for each year of service. Unlike classic, there is no automatic lump sum. classic plus is essentially a hybrid with benefits for service before 1 October 2002 calculated broadly as per classic and benefits for service from October 2002 worked out as in premium. In nuvos a member builds up a pension based on his pensionable earnings during their period of scheme membership. At the end of the scheme year (31 March) the member’s earned pension account is credited with 2.3% of their pensionable earnings in that scheme year and the accrued pension is uprated in line with Pensions Increase legislation. Benefits in alpha build up in a similar way to nuvos, except that the accrual rate in 2.32%. In all cases members may opt to give up (commute) pension for a lump sum up to the limits set by the Finance Act 2004.

The partnership pension account is an occupational defined contribution pension arrangement which is part of the Legal & General Mastertrust. The employer makes a basic contribution of between 8% and 14.75% (depending on the age of the member). The employee does not have to contribute, but where they do make contributions, the employer will match these up to a limit of 3% of pensionable salary (in addition to the employer’s basic contribution). Employers also contribute a further 0.5% of pensionable salary to cover the cost of centrally-provided risk benefit cover (death in service and ill health retirement).

The accrued pension quoted is the pension the member is entitled to receive when they reach pension age, or immediately on ceasing to be an active member of the scheme if they are already at or over pension age. Pension age is 60 for members of classic, premium and classic plus, 65 for members of nuvos, and the higher of 65 or State Pension Age for members of alpha. (The pension figures quoted for officials show pension earned in PCSPS or alpha – as appropriate.

Where the official has benefits in both the PCSPS and alpha the figure quoted is the combined value of their benefits in the two schemes, but note that part of that pension may be payable from different ages.)

Further details about the Civil Service pension arrangements can be found at the Civil Service pension scheme website

Cash equivalent transfer values

A cash equivalent transfer value (CETV) is the actuarially assessed capitalised value of the pension scheme benefits accrued by a member at a particular point in time. The benefits valued are the member’s accrued benefits and any contingent spouse’s pension payable from the scheme. A CETV is a payment made by a pension scheme or arrangement to secure pension benefits in another pension scheme or arrangement when the member leaves a scheme and chooses to transfer the benefits accrued in their former scheme. The pension figures shown relate to the benefits that the individual has accrued as a consequence of their total membership of the pension scheme, not just their service in a senior capacity to which disclosure applies.

The figures include the value of any pension benefit in another scheme or arrangement which the member has transferred to the Civil Service pension arrangements. They also include any additional pension benefit accrued to the member as a result of their buying additional pension benefits at their own cost. CETVs are worked out in accordance with the Occupational Pension Schemes (Transfer Values) (Amendment) Regulations 2008 and do not take account of any actual or potential reduction to benefits resulting from lifetime allowance tax which may be due when pension benefits are taken.

Real increase in CETV

This reflects the increase in CETV that is funded by the employer. It does not include the increase in accrued pension due to inflation or contributions paid by the employee (including the value of any benefits transferred from another pension scheme or arrangement) and uses common market valuation factors for the start and end of the period.

Parliamentary accountability and audit report

Finance summary

The Commission’s accounts for 2022/23 are presented at part 2.

The Commission provides secretariat support for two other independent offices.^{[footnote 9]} As of September 2019, the Commission has also supported the Going Forward into Employment programme, as part of its strategic priority to improve the life chances of those from disadvantaged backgrounds.

The budgets and expenditure of those organisations are incorporated within the Commission’s overall budget and expenditure for the purposes of our accounts and this summary.

The breakdown of expenditure (to the nearest £000) between the different institutions supported by the Civil Service Commission Secretariat is shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9: Expenditure by institution 2022/23

• Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments: £286,000
• Advisory Committee on Business Appointments: £302,000
• Civil Service Commission (including Going Forward into Employment): £1,839,000

Including the Commission’s work for the other independent offices the Commission had a budget of £2.77m (£2.39m in 2021/22); this included additional funding for staffing the Going Forward into Employment (GFiE) team. The Commission’s net expenditure was £2.43m (£2.18m in 2021/22), an underspend of approximately £349k against the budget (£210k underspend in 2021/22).

The primary reason for this underspend was due to vacancies within the secretariat. Additionally, overheads (comprising estates and corporate recharges) were lower than anticipated.

Our main items of expenditure during 2022/23 were:

• secretariat staff costs: £1.4m, compared with £1.15m in 2021/22
• competition fees: £362k, compared with £423k in 2021/22 – this is one of the largest and most unpredictable areas of spending for the Commission, and although the Commission’s budget is based on an estimate of the number of recruitment competitions that might be held, the Commission does not have control over when, or how often, departments will recruit.

Of the total spend £306k related to accrued costs (£212k in 2021/22); almost half of this comprised accruals related to competition fees.

Compliance with HM Treasury and other guidance

The Commission has complied with the cost allocation and charging requirements set out in HM Treasury and Office of Public Sector Information guidance.

Losses and special payments [SUBJECT TO AUDIT]

There have been no losses or special payments this year.

Kate Owen

Accounting Officer

Civil Service Commission

9 November 2023

The certificate and report of the Comptroller and Auditor General to the Houses of Parliament

Opinion on financial statements

I certify that I have audited the financial statements of the Civil Service Commission for the year ended 31 March 2023 under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.

The financial statements comprise the Civil Service Commission’s:

• Statement of Financial Position as at 31 March 2023;
• Statement of Comprehensive Net Expenditure, Statement of Cash Flows and Statement of Changes in Taxpayers’ Equity for the year then ended; and
• the related notes including the significant accounting policies.

The financial reporting framework that has been applied in the preparation of the financial statements is applicable law and UK adopted international accounting standards.

In my opinion, the financial statements:

• give a true and fair view of the state of the Civil Service Commission’s affairs as at 31 March 2023 and its net expenditure for the year then ended; and
• have been properly prepared in accordance with the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.

Opinion on regularity

In my opinion, in all material respects, the income and expenditure recorded in the financial statements have been applied to the purposes intended by Parliament and the financial transactions recorded in the financial statements conform to the authorities which govern them.

Basis for opinions

I conducted my audit in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (UK) (ISAs UK), applicable law and Practice Note 10 Audit of Financial Statements and Regularity of Public Sector Bodies in the United Kingdom (2022). My responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements section of my certificate.

Those standards require me and my staff to comply with the Financial Reporting Council’s Revised Ethical Standard 2019. I am independent of the Civil Service Commission in accordance with the ethical requirements that are relevant to my audit of the financial statements in the UK. My staff and I have fulfilled our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with these requirements.

I believe that the audit evidence I have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for my opinion.

Conclusions relating to going concern

In auditing the financial statements, I have concluded that the Civil Service Commission’s use of the going concern basis of accounting in the preparation of the financial statements is appropriate.

Based on the work I have performed, I have not identified any material uncertainties relating to events or conditions that, individually or collectively, may cast significant doubt on the Civil Service Commission’s ability to continue as a going concern for a period of at least twelve months from when the financial statements are authorised for issue.

My responsibilities and the responsibilities of the Accounting Officer with respect to going concern are described in the relevant sections of this certificate.

The going concern basis of accounting for the Civil Service Commission is adopted in consideration of the requirements set out in HM Treasury’s Government Financial Reporting Manual, which require entities to adopt the going concern basis of accounting in the preparation of the financial statements where it is anticipated that the services which they provide will continue into the future.

Other Information

The other information comprises the information included in the Annual Report, but does not include the financial statements nor my auditor’s certificate and report. The Accounting Officer is responsible for the other information.

My opinion on the financial statements does not cover the other information and, except to the extent otherwise explicitly stated in my certificate, I do not express any form of assurance conclusion thereon.

My responsibility is to read the other information and, in doing so, consider whether the other information is materially inconsistent with the financial statements, or my knowledge obtained in the audit, or otherwise appears to be materially misstated.

If I identify such material inconsistencies or apparent material misstatements, I am required to determine whether this gives rise to a material misstatement in the financial statements themselves. If, based on the work I have performed, I conclude that there is a material misstatement of this other information, I am required to report that fact.

I have nothing to report in this regard.

Opinion on other matters

In my opinion the part of the Remuneration and Staff Report to be audited has been properly prepared in accordance with the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.

In my opinion, based on the work undertaken in the course of the audit:

• the parts of the Accountability Report subject to audit have been properly prepared in accordance with the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010; and
• the information given in the Performance and Accountability Reports for the financial year for which the financial statements are prepared is consistent with the financial statements and is in accordance with the applicable legal requirements.

Matters on which I report by exception

In the light of the knowledge and understanding of the Civil Service Commission and its environment obtained in the course of the audit, I have not identified material misstatements in the Performance and Accountability Reports.

I have nothing to report in respect of the following matters which I report to you if, in my opinion:

• Adequate accounting records have not been kept by the Civil Service Commission or returns adequate for my audit have not been received from branches not visited by my staff; or
• I have not received all of the information and explanations I require for my audit; or
• the financial statements and the parts of the Accountability Report subject to audit are not in agreement with the accounting records and returns; or
• certain disclosures of remuneration specified by HM Treasury’s Government Financial Reporting Manual have not been made or parts of the Remuneration and Staff Report to be audited is not in agreement with the accounting records and returns; or
• the Governance Statement does not reflect compliance with HM Treasury’s guidance.

Responsibilities of the Accounting Officer for the financial statements

As explained more fully in the Statement of the Commissioners’ and Accounting Officer’s responsibilities, the

Commissioners and Accounting Officer are responsible for:

• maintaining proper accounting records;
• providing the C&AG with access to all information of which management is aware that is relevant to the preparation of the financial statements such as records, documentation and other matters;
• providing the C&AG with additional information and explanations needed for his audit;
• providing the C&AG with unrestricted access to persons within the Civil Service Commission from whom the auditor determines it necessary to obtain audit evidence;
• ensuring such internal controls are in place as deemed necessary to enable the preparation of financial statement to be free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error;
• ensuring that the financial statements give a true and fair view and are prepared in accordance with the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010;
• ensuring that the annual report, which includes the Remuneration and Staff Report, is prepared in accordance with the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010; and
• assessing the Civil Service Commission’s ability to continue as a going concern, disclosing, as applicable, matters related to going concern and using the going concern basis of accounting unless the Accounting Officer anticipates that the services provided by the Civil Service Commission will not continue to be provided in the future.

Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements

My responsibility is to audit, certify and report on the financial statements in accordance with the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.

My objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue a certificate that includes my opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with ISAs (UK) will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken on the basis of these financial statements.

Extent to which the audit was considered capable of detecting non-compliance with laws and regulations including fraud

I design procedures in line with my responsibilities, outlined above, to detect material misstatements in respect of non-compliance with laws and regulations, including fraud. The extent to which my procedures are capable of detecting non-compliance with laws and regulations, including fraud is detailed below.

Identifying and assessing potential risks related to non-compliance with laws and regulations, including fraud

In identifying and assessing risks of material misstatement in respect of non compliance with laws and regulations, including fraud, I:

• considered the nature of the sector, control environment and operational performance including the design of the Civil Service Commission’s accounting policies;
• inquired of management, the Civil Service Commission’s head of internal audit and those charged with governance, including obtaining and reviewing supporting documentation relating to the Civil Service Commission’s policies and procedures on:
  • identifying, evaluating and complying with laws and regulations;
  • detecting and responding to the risks of fraud; and
  • the internal controls established to mitigate risks related to fraud or non-compliance with laws and regulations including the Civil Service Commission’s controls relating to the Civil Service Commission’s compliance with the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 and Managing Public Money;
• inquired of management, Civil Service Commission’s head of internal audit and those charged with governance whether:
  • they were aware of any instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations;
  • they had knowledge of any actual, suspected, or alleged fraud;
• discussed with the engagement team how and where fraud might occur in the financial statements and any potential indicators of fraud.

As a result of these procedures, I considered the opportunities and incentives that may exist within the Civil Service Commission for fraud and identified the greatest potential for fraud in the following areas: posting of unusual journals, complex transactions, and bias in management estimates. In common with all audits under ISAs (UK), I am also required to perform specific procedures to respond to the risk of management override of controls.

I obtained an understanding of the Civil Service Commission’s framework of authority and other legal and regulatory frameworks in which the Civil Service Commission operates. I focused on those laws and regulations that had a direct effect on material amounts and disclosures in the financial statements or that had a fundamental effect on the operations of the Civil Service Commission. The key laws and regulations I considered in this context included Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, Managing Public Money, employment law and tax legislation.

Audit response to identified risk

To respond to the identified risks resulting from the above procedures:

• I reviewed the financial statement disclosures and testing to supporting documentation to assess compliance with provisions of relevant laws and regulations described above as having direct effect on the financial statements;
• I enquired of management and the Audit and Risk Committee concerning actual and potential litigation and claims;
• I reviewed minutes of meetings of those charged with governance and the Board and internal audit reports; and
• in addressing the risk of fraud through management override of controls, I tested the appropriateness of journal entries and other adjustments; assessed whether the judgements on estimates are indicative of a potential bias; and evaluated the business rationale of any significant transactions that are unusual or outside the normal course of business.

I communicated relevant identified laws and regulations and potential risks of fraud to all engagement team members and remained alert to any indications of fraud or non-compliance with laws and regulations throughout the audit.

A further description of my responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements is located on the Financial Reporting Council’s website. This description forms part of my certificate.

Other auditor’s responsibilities

I am required to obtain evidence sufficient to give reasonable assurance that the expenditure and income recorded in the financial statements have been applied to the purposes intended by Parliament and the financial transactions recorded in the financial statements conform to the authorities which govern them.

I communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit and significant audit findings, including any significant deficiencies in internal control I identify during my audit.

Report

I have no observations to make on these financial statements.

Gareth Davies           

Comptroller and Auditor General

10 November 2023

National Audit Office
157-197 Buckingham Palace Road Victoria
London
SW1W 9SP

Part 2: Annual accounts 2022/23

Expenditure	Note	2022/23 £000	2021/22 £000
Staff and commissioner costs	3	2,029	1,813
Other expenditure	4	398	366
Net expenditure	-	2,427	2,179
Total comprehensive net expenditure for the period ended 31 March	-	2,427	2,179

The notes on pages 90 to 95 form part of these accounts.

Statement of financial position as at 31 March 2023

Category	Note	As at 31 March 2023 £000	As at 31 March 2022 £000
Current assets	-	-	-
Trade and other receivables	-	2	0
Total current assets	-	2	0
Current liabilities	-	-	-
Trade and other payables	5	(306)	(212)
Total current liabilities	-	(306)	(212)
Total assets less current liabilities	-	(304)	(212)
Assets less liabilities	-	(304)	(212)
Taxpayers’ equity	-	-	-
General fund	-	(304)	(212)
Total taxpayers’ equity	-	(304)	(212)

The notes on pages 90 to 95 form part of these accounts.

Kate Owen

Accounting Officer

Civil Service Commission

9 November 2023

Statement of cash flows for the year ended 31 March 2023

Category	Note	2022/23 £000	2021/22 £000
Cash flows from operating activities	-	-	-
Net expenditure	-	(2,427)	(2,179)
(Increase)/decrease in trade receivables	-	(2)	3
Increase/(decrease) in trade and other payables	-	94	69
Net cash outflow from operating activities	-	(2,335)	(2,107)
Cash flows from financing activities	-	-	-
Grants from parent department	-	2,335	2,107
Net financing	-	2,335	2,107
Net increase/(decrease) in cash and cash equivalents in the period	-	-	-
Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the period	-	-	-
Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the period	-	-	-

The notes on pages 90 to 95 form part of these accounts.

Statement of changes in taxpayers’ equity

Category	Note	General Reserve £000	Total Reserves £000
Balance at 1 April 2021	-	(140)	(140)
Grants from parent department	-	2,107	2,107
Comprehensive net expenditure for the year		(2,179)	(2,179)
Balance at 31 March 2022	-	(212)	(212)
Balance at 1 April 2022	-	(212)	(212)
Grants from parent department	-	2,335	2,335
Comprehensive net expenditure for the year	-	(2,427)	(2,427)
Balance at 31 March 2023	-	(304)	(304)

The notes on pages 90 to 95 form part of these accounts.

Notes to the accounts for the year ended 31 March 2023

1. Statement of accounting policies

1.1 Basis of preparation

As an independent executive non-departmental public body (NDPB), the Civil Service Commission’s financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the Government Financial Reporting Manual (FReM) issued by HM Treasury. The accounting policies contained in the FReM apply International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) as adapted or interpreted for the public sector context.

Where the FReM permits a choice of accounting policy, the accounting policy which is judged to be the most appropriate to the particular circumstances of the Commission for the purpose of giving a true and fair view has been selected. The particular policies adopted by the Commission are described below. They have been applied consistently in dealing with items that are considered material to the accounts.

1.2 Going concern

The financial statements have been prepared on the basis that the Commission is a going concern. The Commission is a statutory body created by the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010. The Commission’s budget and business plan for 2023/24 and corporate framework have been agreed by the Cabinet Office as part of their planning process.

1.3 Accounting convention

These accounts have been prepared under the historical cost convention.

The preparation of financial statements requires management to make judgements, estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported for assets and liabilities as at the date of the statement of financial position and amounts reported for income and expenditure during the year. However, the nature of estimation means that actual outcomes could differ from those estimates.

The Commission, with the exception of accruals, has not made any significant estimates in producing these accounts.

1.4 Cash and cash equivalents

The Commission does not hold a bank account or cash. Under the memorandum of understanding with the Cabinet Office, payments are made and receipts collected, on behalf of the Commission by the Cabinet Office, through its central bank account.

1.5 Grant-in-aid

As the Commission is an independent executive non-departmental public body, grant-in-aid is treated as financing from the sponsoring department. This is recognised as a credit into general reserves and is treated on a cash basis in accordance with guidance given in the FReM. Grant-in-aid is received indirectly in the form of payments made by the sponsoring department, the Cabinet Office, to settle the Commission’s liabilities.

1.6 Expenditure

The Civil Service Commission provides a regulatory service to the public and to government departments and agencies, supported by its secretariat.

The expenditure (set out in notes 3 and 4) reflects the total cost of service delivery.

The Cabinet Office provides a number of corporate functions to the entity which include finance, estates and information communication and technology service delivery. The amount of the recharge is an apportionment of costs, calculated as a cost per full time equivalent employee or as a cost per square metre of floor, as appropriate.

1.7 Operating Segments

The Commission provided secretariat support to three separate institutions during 2022/23.^{[footnote 10]} Further details are provided in Note 2. Our operating segments reflect these three functional areas. The Accounting Officer is accountable for the propriety and expenditure of all three institutions and the Commission board has a general oversight role for the totality of expenditure. The board’s primary role, however, is to focus on the ‘core’ Civil Service Commission’s functions, in particular those derived directly from the 2010 Act.

1.8 Future changes in Accounting Policy

We provide a disclosure if we have not yet applied a new accounting standard which we know or reasonably estimate to be relevant to these financial statements. We have not adopted any standards early.

IFRS 17 Insurance Contracts sets out the principles for the recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure of insurance contracts and replaces the previous standard IFRS 4 Insurance Contracts. IFRS 17 is being applied by HM Treasury in the Government Financial Reporting Manual (FReM) from 1 April 2025. The Commission does not hold any insurance policies. It is, therefore, not expected to have a material impact on the Civil Service Commission’s financial statements.

2. Operating segments

The Civil Service Commission provided secretariat support to the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments and the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments. The spend for each area is reflected in the table below.

Category	2022/23	2022/23	2022/23	2022/23	2021/22	2021/22	2021/22	2021/22
£000	CSC[footnote 11]	OCPA	ACOBA	Total	CSC	OCPA	ACOBA	Total
Commissioner, ex commissioner or committee member fees	555	63	39	657	569	63	32	664
Other gross expenditure	1,284	223	263	1,770	1,036	182	297	1,515
Income	(0)	(0)	(0)	(0)	(0)	(0)	(0)	(0)
Net expenditure	1,839	286	302	2,427	1,605	245	329	2,179
Of which accruals total	241	26	39	306	194	6	12	212

3. Staff, commissioner, ex-commissioner and office holders costs

£000	2022/23 Total	2021/22 Total
Wages and salaries	1,621	1,446
Social security costs	156	143
Other pensions costs	252	224
Total	2,029	1,813

Notes

Please see page 68 for fuller analysis of staff costs (wages and salaries includes holiday pay accruals)

4. Other expenditure

Category	2022/23 £000	2021/22 £000
Accommodation, utilities and IT costs	202	216
Professional Services	52	49
Supplies and services	99	68
Other staff related costs	(1)	14
Travel, subsistence and hospitality	32	7
External audit fee[footnote 12]	14	12
Total	398	366

Notes:

Professional Services was previously referred to as ‘consultancy’; of the £52k total, £28k relates to the work carried out by the Government Internal Audit Agency (GIAA) (£25k 2021/22); £21k relates to work carried out in relation to the production of the Annual Report (£22k 2021/22), £2k to the commissioners’ payroll contract (£2k 2021/22) and £1k for costs related to the recruitment of new Commissioners.

Supplies and services incorporates £18k legal advice from Government Legal Department and KC Adam Heppinstall, £69k press officer costs, and £12k related to ad hoc costs for the running of the secretariat.

Travel and subsistence incorporates expenses incurred by staff, Commissioners and office holders; the increase from 21/22 reflects the reduction in remote working requiring increased travel, particularly by Commissioners in the course of their work.

Staff related costs includes Chief Executive’s membership of the Association of Chief Executives; the total appears as a negative figure due to a training cost accrued in 2021/22 which was not ultimately incurred.

5. Trade and other payables

Category	2022/23 £000	2021/22 £000
Trade payables	11	21
Accruals	295	191
Total	306	212

Accruals total includes £162k Commissioner fees and expenses, £34k staff pay costs, £26k holiday pay accrual and £29k internal and external audit fees.

6. Related party transactions

The Civil Service Commission is an independent executive NDPB funded by the Cabinet Office.

Back office services are provided to the Commission from the Cabinet Office under a memorandum of understanding, with a total of £202k for the period ending 31 March 2023 (2021/22: £216k)

No manager or other related party has undertaken any material transaction with the Commission during the year. No compensation has been paid to management and commissioners, except remuneration which has been reported in the Remuneration Report (see page 60).

7. Events after the reporting period

In accordance with the requirements of IAS 10, events after the reporting period are considered up to the date on which the accounts are authorised for issue.

This is interpreted as the date of the certificate and report of the Comptroller and Auditor General.

A new Chief Executive, K. Walia, joined the Commission on 1 August 2022 and it was agreed that Accounting Officer responsibilities would be temporarily retained by Peter J Lawrence OBE until publication of the 2021/22 accounts. Although no formal letter of appointment was issued (by the Principal Accounting Officer for the Cabinet Office, Alex Chisholm), K. Walia discharged the duties of Accounting Officer from 1 November 2022 until she left the organisation in May 2023. Kate Owen was appointed as interim Chief Executive on 15 May, and Accounting Officer on 7 June 2023.

A recruitment campaign for a permanent Chief Executive will be run in 2023/24. There are no other events to report.

1. NDPB Accreditation ↩

2. This figure was reported as 42% in the 2021/22 annual report, based on the information published by the Cabinet Office; this was later corrected to 89%. ↩

3. How we work ↩

4. How we work ↩

5. Register of data protection fee payers - Entry details ↩

6. Commissioners includes the First Civil Service Commissioner, the Public Appointments Commissioner, and current Civil Service Commissioners ↩

7. Office holders refers to the chair and members of Advisory Committee on Business Appointments. ↩

8. Civil Service sickness absence 2022 ↩

9. The Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (ACOBA) and the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments (OCPA) ↩

10. The Civil Service Commission itself (encompassing GFiE), the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (ACOBA) and the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments (OCPA). ↩

11. Incorporating expenditure related directly to GFiE, which totalled £450k, of which £30k were accruals. In 2022/23 it was agreed that the work of the GFiE programme would transfer to the Cabinet Office as of 1 April 2023. ↩

12. No fees were paid for non-audit services to the National Audit Office, the Commission’s external auditors. ↩