Inclusive eGovernment: sustainable services for excluded people

Acronym of the case:

MC-eGov

Web address of the case:

http://www.mcegov.eu

Country of the case:

Pan european

Posting Date:

27 January 2009

Last Edited Date:

28 January 2009

Author:

Neil McDonald (ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd)

multi-channel | integrated | sustainable

Type of initiative

Other

Case Abstract

This year-long Project has been addressing â€œMulti-channel Delivery Strategies and Sustainable Business Models for Public Services addressing Socially Disadvantaged Groupsâ€.
In the current environment of economic and social stress, the demand for services for socially excluded people is significant, and is putting government finances under ever greater pressure. Because services for disadvantaged groups in society are complex and often expensive, efficiency and effectiveness are central to designing and delivering services that offer sustainable value to socially excluded people. This can mean multi-channel services, but, overall, integration is the key. Integration requires new ways of approaching the issue, including fresh thinking on business models and a renewed commitment to achieving common social policy goals.
The study:
â€¢ Presents research evidence supporting the validity and significance of Inclusive eGovernment approaches;
â€¢ Offers a practical framework for understanding inclusive eGovernment, and identifying the components and key steps necessary to move forward;
â€¢ Uses real case study material to illustrate inclusive eGovernment approaches in action;
â€¢ Promotes a â€œsustainable network valueâ€ paradigm.

Description of the case

Domain

eGovernment

Topic

Regional and Local | User-centric Services | Multi-channel Delivery | Inclusive eGovernment

Sector

Date

January 2008 to February 2009

Date operational

January 2008

Target Users

Citizen | Administrative | Intermediaries | Civil society

Target Users Description

The study outputs are primarily aimed at the decision-makers who are involved in building and delivering service portfolios aimed at socially excluded groups.
The intention is to inform this important group about the practical experiences from around the EU. At the outset this can even mean gaining a wider understanding of what is regarded as social exclusion in other member states.
At a secondary level the audience comprises those who are involved in some form of partnership with government to deliver services to socially excluded groups, e.g. the Third Sector and Social Enterprises.

Scope

International | National | Regional (sub-national) | Local (city or municipality)

Status

Research

Language(s)

English

Policy Context and Legal Framework

The brief given to MC-eGov was to identify successful multi-channel strategies for the delivery of sustainable public services to socially excluded groups and people. The i2010 Initiative sets Europe the high-level challenge â€œto ensure that the benefits of the information society can be enjoyed by everyoneâ€, acknowledged by the Inclusive eGovernment Agenda , stating that â€œaround 30% of Europeâ€™s population does not use any eGovernment servicesâ€ and that a substantial proportion of the non-users will suffer some form of social exclusion.
As a result there is a significant i2010 challenge to address the needs of socially excluded groups because â€œmany of these excluded citizens are amongst those who need and consequently rely most heavily on government support â€“ and would stand to benefit the most from accessing them on-lineâ€ .
The study was conceived and commissioned in 2007, at a time when many European governments were experiencing increasing demand for, and costs of providing, public services for socially excluded people. The public services, such as support for homeless people, service portfolios for families living in poverty, or services for people suffering long-term health and employment problems, are very different from the characteristic high-impact eGovernment services. For example, with tax, customs, and licenses, income is received by governments, and the e-channels are important in reducing the cost of collection (for example involving organisational and service reengineering, interoperability etc.) and increasing the levels of compliance (for example involving information integration, and making it easier to access and use the services). The measurement of success in those high-impact services can involve cost-benefit approaches such as return on investment (more taxes collected at less cost). Whereas for services aimed at socially excluded people, the return on investment is more challenging.

Project Size and Implementation

Type of initiative

Awareness-raising information

Overall Implementation approach

Partnerships between administration and/or private sector and/or non-profit sector

Technology choice

Not applicable/not available

Funding source

Public funding EU

Project size

Implementation: Not applicable/not available

Implementation and Management Approach

The core focus of this study has been the detailed investigation of services and projects (cases) that show the characteristics of being services for socially excluded groups/citizens, having a multi-channel and eGovernment focus, and showing the potential to be delivered sustainably.

Technology solution

Inclusive eGovernment focus on services for socially excluded groups cannot simply continue along the technical development path that has been evident in many of the early e-services such as taxation, licences, and customs which have seen successful transition to eGovernment. They are services that have a strong element of compulsion.

Impact, innovation and results

Impact

Delivering sustainable services to socially excluded people (and groups) involves a process where the policy goals are translated into sustainable outcomes through the central role of multi-channel eGovernment in partnerships which involve the key actors in the service landscape â€“ government, third sector and similar organisations, the private sector, and the socially excluded people themselves. The activities of eGovernment and Inclusive eGovernment combine to deliver value:
â€¢ eGovernment contributes to the transformation of back office processes. It facilitates integration of information through interoperability, information sharing, and information integration, and these activities also contribute to the transformation of front offices.
â€¢ Inclusive eGovernment contributes to the transformation of the front office processes through maximising the channels through which services can be delivered, By maximising the channels the intermediaries who work with socially excluded people can construct service portfolios without the need to go through the service gatekeepers.
â€¢ Inclusive eGovernment further contributes to the delivery of value to socially excluded people through the formation of governance partnerships where knowledgeable stakeholders can represent the complex needs of the beneficiaries, engage the beneficiaries in the creation of networks of value, and focus resources on achieving the policy outcomes for which the services are constructed.
â€¢ Inclusive eGovernment therefore combines the strengths of eGovernment with the strengths of governance that is provided through the actions of people â€“ the actors in the service delivery chains, and the actions also of the socially excluded people themselves.
The much greater importance of service integration for socially excluded people is the key factor that differentiates them from the rest of the population, and they need help with multiple problems within a common supportive delivery framework. Responsible agencies must find their own preferred way to develop service portfolios, along with a sustainable operational model of who delivers these services and how.

Track record of sharing

An interactive workshop was held in Brussels on 22 May 2008 and the results of the study will be disseminated at a final workshop scheduled for 23 February 2009. An ePractice Community on "Inclusive eGovernment" has been established and cases used as part of the study highlighted. The study website at www.mcegov.eu contains all reserach outputs including nearly 20 detailed case study reports, as well as Working Papers, fiorst workshop report, bibliography and news items.

Lessons learnt

While integrating services can importantly involve eGovernment strategies, there are other forms of integration, for example where intermediaries (third sector, NGOs, social enterprises etc.) work with socially excluded people, and link them to a relevant portfolio of services.

Intermediaries can themselves be channels, and can â€œself-organiseâ€ to address the needs of socially excluded groups by being an efficient interface between government services and the needs of a given group. The availability of multi-channel eGovernment services releases the intermediaries from having to rely on government gatekeepers â€“ the intermediaries can work directly with beneficiaries.

By focusing on the â€˜governanceâ€™ of services that deliver networked value, Inclusive eGovernment offers significant efficiency and effectiveness gains in the expensive and complex services that will help deliver sustainable outcomes for socially excluded people. It sees the people for what they need, rather than for who they are.

What we see on a wider scale is the role of intermediaries who â€˜re-engineerâ€™ the back-office processes, and integrate the front-office service provision on behalf of socially excluded people â€“ but where multiple channels, importantly including eGovernment channels, are available the effectiveness of service delivery can be greater.

The outcomes of this study add perspective to other sector-specific studies such as the ICT and Ageing Study which take a perspective of technology inclusion. That study noted the need for service innovation, integration and personalisation in the areas of healthcare for elderly people, for example through public-private partnerships and what they term â€˜third party playersâ€™. Recalling the initial discussion about online tax services, these points reinforce yet again that a technology intervention on its own is unlikely to deliver widespread and sustainable outcomes for the diverse groups of socially excluded people.

Multimedia Content Select a Tab

There isn't any image for this case

There isn't any Video for this case