Minimum Income Guarantee: Experts by Experience Panel report

Principle four: monitoring and evaluation

The Minimum Income Guarantee should be delivered with continuous monitoring, evaluation and learning. This should be reviewed regularly to ensure it continues to deliver the policy objectives.

Rationale

This principle reflects that the panel see the need to regularly review the Minimum Income Guarantee level to ensure that it is fit for purpose, delivers the policy objectives, and provides accountability to society. It also reflects the need to monitor how the rollout of the Minimum Income Guarantee impacts on individuals and society, including how there could be unintended positive and negative impacts both financially and socially that should be monitored.

Considerations

• Any review needs to be against what the policy objectives are.
• It needs to be reviewed to ensure the policy is palatable to society but also that if there are intended consequences or difficulties in the wider service landscape that these are dealt with quickly so as not to undermine the policy objectives.
• Periodic public consultation should be considered as part of the review - lived experience/from wider community (impact on businesses etc).
• Recognise that it may take time to see the benefit of the implementation of the Minimum Income Guarantee.
• Need to clearly identify what expected impact is, before this is rolled out so impact can be monitored.

Communications

• Reassurance that we are providing checks and balances.
• Reminding people what Minimum Income Guarantee is and appeal to values re: compassion/social contract - this may be something they need access to at some point.

Support

29 members voted on the level of support for this principle. Overall supported by 96% of panel members of which:

• 72% (21 members) 'strongly support'
• 24% (7 members) 'support'
• and 3% (one member) 'strongly oppose'

Members were asked, "if you do not support principle four, please tell us what would be needed for you to support it". No members provided comments on how their support would be increased. As explained in the introduction, one member who disagrees with the idea of a Minimum Income Guarantee used this space to further emphasise their disagreement.