Solutions for such important administrative issues as assuring citizens' safety and peace of mind, and administrative reforms and improvements for more simple and efficient administration must be promoted, as well as the agile handling of themes drawing greater attention among citizens or those requiring urgent solutions.
By utilizing a nationwide research network consisting of Regional Administrative Evaluation Bureaus and other agencies, the MIC intends to improve administrative operations and systems from a different standpoint from other offices and ministries, even though it is within the administration, as a specialized organization for administrative evaluation and inspection, by researching whether the major policies and projects of agencies and ministries are being appropriately operated, and issuing recommendations to them on identified issues.
- TOP
- ＞Administrative Evaluation Bureau(AEB)
Policy Evaluation (Fig. A)
The Policy Evaluation System was introduced in order for the administration to thoroughly implement its accountability to the citizens and to realize efficient and high quality public administration as a pillar of the reforms in central ministries and agencies. The centerpiece for the system involves each administrative organ itself evaluating the policies for which it is responsible, to examine how necessary, efficient, and effective their policies are. The results lead steadily to a review and improvement of the policies. (Fiscal 2007 saw about 3,700 policy evaluations conducted throughout the government.)
The MIC is playing a central role for administrating this Policy Evaluation System, and working on building a framework for policy evaluation to be conducted by each administrative organ. The MIC also conducts evaluation for cross-cutting policies to secure Coherence/comprehensiveness of those policies and checks the quality of policy evaluations conducted by each administrative organ to examine the compliance with standards for ensuring objectivity and rigidity and the adequacy of evaluation.
An Example of evaluation to secure Coherence/comprehensiveness of government policies
In the "Policy Evaluation for Private Finance Initiative (PFI) Projects," the AEB conducts assessment from a comprehensive perspective, including the effectiveness of measures promoted by PFI in considering the purposes of the PFI law, and then recommends corrective action to the Cabinet Office which supervises the system to assure objectivity and transparency in the computation of VFM (value for money - expected reduction in amount of public burden), smoother risk allocation and appropriate risk management (January 2008).
Evaluation of Incorporated Administrative Agencies (IAAs) (Fig. B)
The IAA System is a framework to implement public projects that the government needs not do directly, but that are unlikely to be carried out by the private sector so that the government can provide efficient administrative services that respond to the public needs. (IAAs totaled 100, as of October 2008).
The services delivered by IAAs are subject to periodical and rigorous ex-post evaluation and overall review to ensure their efficiency and to reorganize or eliminate projects that have become relatively unimportant.
The MIC plays an important role in the IAA Evaluation System, in which the Commission on Policy Evaluation and Evaluation of Incorporated Administrative Agencies (CPIAA) established by the MIC issues recommendations for improving or abolishing the main projects and business operations in IAAs.
Achievement of the Review 2007
The CPIAA issued recommendations on 35 IAAs, which had been under the review of the organizations and businesses in fiscal 2007.The recommendation covered more than 300 items including the following: (1) abolishing and prioritizing projects and business operations, (2) reviewing corporate forms in considering the abolishment, privatization or re-categorization of 10 IAAs, and (3) reviewing the organization of local branches and assets owned by IAAs as "preliminary recommendation." These recommendations are reflected in "IAAs Rationalization Plan" approved by the Cabinet in the same year.
Administrative Evaluation and Inspection
Examples
In October 2007, the Prime Minister ordered that appropriate negotiated contracts be further promoted, and based on subsequent consent by the liaison conference for related ministries and agencies, "Administrative Evaluation and Inspection Concerning Appropriate Execution of Contracts" has been conducted. As a result, there were examples showing room for shifting to a contract method that allows for more competition, and this recommendation was given to all offices and ministries (in December 2008).
Administrative Counseling (Fig. C)
Citizens may have a complaint or opinion regarding the national government's administration but be unaware of whom to consult. They may have consulted the competent governmental authority but remain dissatisfied with their explanations or response. The administrative counseling of the MIC is another framework for such citizens to access to government administration easily.
Various contacts for administrative counseling receive as many as 180,000 complaints, opinions, requests, and other comments a year. From a fair, neutral viewpoint, the MIC makes mediations between relevant administrative organizations and complainant to promote the settlement and to promote the improvement of the administrative programs and their management.
Example of improvement based on administrative counseling.characteristic achievement
･Voluntary and continuously insured persons covered by health insurance used to forfeit qualification if they failed to pay their insurance premiums by the due date, regardless of such reasons such as a sudden illness in the family. Mediation has been conducted with the Social Insurance Agency concerning organization and clarification of "due reasons" for exceptions to said loss of qualification, along with a provision made for diversified payment methods including electronic bank transfer (August 2008).
･When large-scale natural disaster occur, the AEB promptly opened a Special General Administrative Counseling Center in cooperation with related institutions. The office responded to a wide range of counseling and inquiries from victims (In cases such as the Iwate-Miyagi Nairiku Earthquake in 2008).
Third-Party Committee to Check Pension Records
The pension records problem has been raised as a compelling and serious issue directly related to daily lives of citizens. As one measure to deal with the pension records problem, the MIC established the Third-Party Committee to Check Pension Records (hereinafter referred to as the "Third-Party Committee").
For citizens who raise objections to replies from the Social Insurance Agency, but lack such evidence as receipts and for whom the Agency has no pension or payment records, the Third-Party Committee will make a fair judgment on corrections to pension records on behalf of those citizens as well as those who have faithfully paid their insurance premiums, so that pensions can be received upon fully examining said objections and related materials.
If the Third-Party Committee judges that the pension records must be corrected, the Minister for Internal Affairs and Communications mediates the corrections of pension records on behalf of the Director-General of the Social Insurance Agency. In honoring said mediation, the Social Insurance Agency shall make corrections that will be reflected in the amounts of pensions for those who raised objections.
In addition to the Central Third-Party Committee, Local Third-Party Committees to Check Pension Records are established in all prefectures nationwide (at Regional Administrative Evaluation Bureaus and District Administrative Evaluation Offices at 50 locations nationwide) to serve for each district. Applications to the Third-Party Committee can be accepted at
regional social insurance offices.