AOC

Challenge

How can we rigorously assess the economic and time savings involved in the implementation and use of digital administration?

Problematic

The AOC Consortium promotes the development of indicators that allow a systematic and rigorous evaluation of the effectiveness and efficiency of the digital administration and open government initiatives that are carried out. With these indicators, policy makers and public managers can know the social return of initiatives, set priorities and make the best decisions.

One of the key areas of this evaluation is the economic savings that the use of digital administration services entails and comparing it with the associated costs of investment and maintenance of the digital services themselves. Public administrations must ensure the proper use of public resources. For this reason, in 2014 the AOC Consortium launched an internal project to find the best methodology to evaluate the financial and time savings of digital administration.

Initially, we addressed all public bodies, at state and European level, that we were aware had published studies on the savings generated by the use of the set of services of digital administration; and we asked them to provide us with the detail of how they did the calculations for each of the services. Surprisingly, none of the agencies responded to us exhaustively about the methodology used, although we made several attempts to claim the information.

So, the AOC Consortium decided to develop its own methodology.

Proposed solution

Establish a methodology for rigorous calculation of economic and time savings that involves the implementation and use of digital administration and open government services.

To elaborate this methodology we performed the following actions:

  • Identify the most impactful or most relevant digital administration digital services in terms of their use.
  • Define the "user journey" for each of the services.
  • Analyze the steps in the process (journey) in which there is a saving with regard to the processing of the procedures in person, and calculate the associated savings in time and/or money, while breaking down the part of savings for citizens and the part of the administration.
  • Verify the validity of the estimated savings through the supervised completion of procedures or actions by a user.
  • Interviews with users (citizens and public employees) to validate the perception of the savings generated by electronic processing.

The analysis was performed on the following set of digital administration services:

  • Electronic processing (eTRAM)
  • Electronic Invoice (eFACT)
  • Electronic notification (eNOTUM)
  • Inter-administrative processing (EACAT formalities)
  • Data exchange between AAPP (Via Abierta)
  • Intra-administrative processing (Valisa)
  • Documentary repository (SAVE)
  • Documentary archive (iArxiu)
  • Edict and electronic bulletin board (eTauler)

Savings table obtained (version 2.0, year 2021):

Service

Citizen Savings
(per procedure)

AAPP savings
(per procedure)

Total savings
eTRAM

17,75 €

3,13 €

20,87 €
eFACT

5,95 €

 5,11 € 11,06€
eNOTUM

1,24 €

 13,22€

14,46€
EACAT Formalities

n / A

 14,46€

14,46€
Via Abierta

4,33 €

 0,23 €

4,57 €
Suitcase

n / A

 14,46€

14,46€
SAVE it and iArchive

n / A

 2,20 €

2,20 €
e-Dashboard

n / A

 5,00 €

5,00 €

Notes:

  • To achieve the full potential of the above savings, the information systems of the entity must be integrated with AOC services to automate records, procedures and interoperability queries. The main integrations are with the Unified Register (MUX), e-Notum, Via Oberta and e-FACT.
  • In the case of Via Oberta, the maximum potential for savings is achieved with the integration and automation of interoperability queries.
  • These results can be applied independently of the management system integrated with AOC services.

In the "Methodology" section you can find the details of how the savings generated in the different steps of the process of each service are calculated.

Main conclusions of the analysis and the surveys carried out:

  • The citizen values ​​his time very much. In the study, time is valued according to the average salary of a worker, but the reality is that for citizens, time has a much greater value and that it is a serious inconvenience for them to have to travel to an administration office to carry out a procedure that could be done from home.
  • One of the important costs of processing on paper is the financial expense of physical archiving that originates.
  • According to surveys, a citizen carries out an average of 3 procedures a year with all public administrations.

To calculate the savings of the digital administration, the costs of face-to-face processing of a representative sample of actions are analysed. But keep in mind that these costs can vary based on a wide range of factors. In this study, a low-band cost estimate is made for the cases analyzed, to be able to guarantee that the vast majority of AAPPs that manage processes with digital services will enjoy the savings associated with each of them.

With this criterion, it should be understood that this study proposes a minimum or guaranteed amount of savings, which may be higher or much higher depending on the circumstances or the efficiency of each administration.

Methodology

2021 Study of savings for the use of digital administration 2.0

  • Version 2.0 (2021) Detailed review of the methodology applied in 2014 for the eTRAM, eFACT, eNOTUM, EACAT procedures and Valisa services.
  • Evaluation co-financed with the Promotion Fund for the Evaluation of Public Policies (PROAVA) of the Department of the Vice-Presidency and of Economy and Finance.

2018 Study of savings for the use of digital administration 1.1

  • Version 1.1 (2018) Extension of the calculation of savings to the Valisa, eTauler, DESA'L and iArxiu services
  • Version 1.0 (2014) Methodology and calculation of savings generated by the following services: eTRAM, eFACT, eNOTUM and EACAT procedures

Status of the project

In production. The methodology is revised every three years.

More information