Quality Assurance Sheet
Title of document
Author
Due date
Due date
Tracker number
Quality assurance
Name/Signature
Date
Peer reviewer
The paper has been reviewed and meets the quality
standards for advice (see below).
Proof reader
There are no spelling or grammatical errors, the paper is
formatted correctly, and it meets MBIE’s style guide.
Technical review (as applicable)
The paper has substantial technical elements that meet the
required standards.
Legal Data analysis Finance Other
Author
I have incorporated the feedback, or agreed how it will be
addressed with the peer reviewer and proof reader.
Sign-off
Name/Signature
Date
Manager
I am satisfied with the quality of this document, and it may
be submitted to the Minister’s office.
Quality standards for advice
Context
Analysis
Advice
Action
Explains why the decision-
Is clear, logical and informed by evidence
Engages the decision-maker and tel s the full
Identifies who is doing
maker is getting this and
story
what next
where it fits
Purpose, context,
Clearly defines the problem or
opportunity, Enables a clear and informed decision or
Enables effective
priorities, and
rationale for intervention, and policy
next steps
implementation
connections across
objectives
government are clear
Is communicated in a clear, concise and
Explains how the
Uses relevant analytical frameworks and
compel ing way
solution wil be
Outlines previous advice
methodologies
monitored and
and history of the issue
Is free and frank
evaluated
Incorporates Treaty and te ao Māori
analysis
Reflects diverse perspectives
Is informed by relevant research and
Outlines risks and mitigations
evidence
Anticipates decision-maker’s needs, next
More detailed guidance is
Assesses options to make impacts clear and
steps, and is timely
reveal workable solutions
available in the DPMC Policy
Quality Framework on the
Makes any limitations of the analysis and
Policy Place
advice clear
Reveals diverse views, experiences and
insights and engagement approaches
① Unacceptable
② Poor
③ Acceptable
④ Good
⑤ Outstanding
Does not meet the relevant quality
Does not meet the relevant quality
Meets the relevant quality standards
Meets al the relevant quality
Meets all the relevant quality standards
standards in fundamental ways.
standards in material ways.
overall, but with some shortfalls.
standards.
and adds something extra.
MBIE’s performance standard is 3.3.
Please file this QA sheet in the relevant MAKO folder along with the paper that is signed out to the Minister’s office.
Editing and reviewing papers
Key questions to ask
Key things to do
•
•
Imagine yourself orally briefing the Minister in a meeting – what would you say? That’s the
What’s the elevator pitch?
key message.
•
Make the key messages clear and put them up front.
What is this all about?
•
Provide a strong, clear story.
Can you explain the key points in
•
Keep it short – prune, and prune again.
three sentences?
•
Annex non-essential material.
•
Minimise noting recommendations.
•
Keep the Executive Summary short – less than a page is ideal.
•
The Executive Summary should cover: What’s the problem? Why do we have to fix it? How
wil we fix it? What are the risks and what are we doing about them?
Why is the Minister getting
•
Outline how the issue relates to the Minister’s priorities or government strategy.
•
this?
Explain what’s happened before – even if the Minister is familiar with the issue.
•
Remind the Minister what has already been done or agreed.
How does it fit with the Minister’s
•
Refer to previous briefings and advice.
priorities?
•
Explain how attending a meeting or event can further the Minister’s objectives.
Was there prior advice?
•
Explain why the Minister is getting the paper, and why now.
Why should the Minister care?
Is the analysis clear and
•
Reflect the way you have thought about the issue in the logic and structure of the paper
logical?
so the framework is clear.
•
Structure the paper so the argument flows logically.
Is the framework used clear?
•
Use tables, boxes and diagrams to il ustrate key points.
Is the analysis robust?
•
Ensure that the analysis is supported by sound evidence.
Does the evidence support the
analysis?
•
If the evidence is inconclusive or the outcomes uncertain, say so.
Does the advice stack up?
•
Make sure the advice fol ows logically from the analysis.
•
Work with other teams to ensure advice is “joined up” across MBIE.
•
Provide a clear MBIE view.
Does the advice fol ow from the
•
Provide al the evidence and analysis needed to support the advice and permit an
analysis?
informed decision.
What does MBIE think?
Is the paper easy to read?
•
Use narrative headings to “storyline” the paper and make the key messages clear.
•
Use direct language to make clear action-oriented recommend actions.
Who’s doing what next?
•
Identify what fol ow-up work is needed, who wil do it and when.
•
Make it clear what MBIE wil do.
Are the recommended actions
•
If you have identified a risk explain how we wil mitigate it.
clear?
What MBIE wil do?
What are the fol ow-ups?
Are the basics right?
•
Use the right template.
•
Make sure the information on the cover page is right.
•
Use plain English and active voice.
Are all the hygiene factors attended
•
Use the QA process.
to?
•
Make sure there are no formatting, spel ing or grammatical errors.
•
Get robust peer review from an experienced person outside your team.
•
Put yourself in the Minister’s shoes.
Does it help the Minister?
•
Think about how the Minister wil use the advice in practice (eg in a meeting with
stakeholders or to support Cabinet discussion) to help you structure the paper.
Wil it be useful to a busy Minister?
•
Make talking points usable: short sentences, in the Minister’s voice, on a separate page,
Is it easy to grasp the key points?
and spaced to aid readability. Read them aloud.
Does it provide everything the Minister
•
Set meeting agendas to reflect what the Minister wants from the meeting (not just what
needs?
the stakeholders want).
•
Provide al the col ateral needed (eg draft letters) and anticipate what’s needed next.
Peer Review Feedback Sheet
Title of briefing
Author
Peer reviewer/date
This sheet supports peer reviewers to provide effective feedback.
Before you start, be clear about the kind of help the author is seeking: the context for the paper, what kind of help they want (and any weak points they are
worried about), and when and how the feedback is to be provided.
Then, read the paper through. Once you’ve read the paper, use the prompts on this sheet to ensure you consider al the matters that contribute to producing a
quality paper. Address al of the relevant areas (eg a meeting briefing may not require analysis).
Consideration
Comments
Overal impression
What is most important for making this
briefing better?
Context
Purpose, context, priorities, and
connections across government are clear
Outlines previous advice and history of
the issue
Analysis
Clearly defines the problem or
opportunity, rationale for intervention,
and policy objectives
Uses relevant analytical frameworks and
methodologies
Incorporates Treaty and te ao Māori
analysis
Is informed by relevant research and
evidence
Assesses options to make impacts clear
and reveal workable solutions
Makes any limitations of the analysis and
advice clear
Reveals diverse views, experiences and
insights and engagement approaches
Advice
Enables a clear and informed decision or
next steps
Is communicated in a clear, concise and
compel ing way
Is free and frank
Reflects diverse perspectives
Outlines risks and mitigations
Anticipates decision-maker’s needs, next
steps, and is timely
Action
Enables effective implementation
Explains how the solution wil be
monitored and evaluated
① Unacceptable
② Poor
③ Acceptable
④ Good
⑤ Outstanding
Does not meet the relevant quality
Does not meet the relevant quality
Meets the relevant quality standards
Meets al the relevant quality
Meets all the relevant quality standards
standards in fundamental ways.
standards in material ways.
overall, but with some shortfalls.
standards.
and adds something extra.
MBIE’s performance standard is 3.3.
Revie w and Revision Checklist
Questions to ask
Things to do
What’s the
What is this al about?
Imagine yourself briefing the Minister in a meeting –
elevator pitch?
Can you explain the key points in three sentences?
what would you say? These are the key points.
Keep the paper short – prune, and prune again.
Annex non-essential material.
Keep the Executive Summary short – less than a page.
Context
Is the purpose of the paper clear?
Explain why the Minister is getting the paper, and
Explains why the
why now.
Why is the Minister getting this advice and why
decision-maker is
now?
Be clear about what action or decision is required.
getting this and
How does it fit with the Minister’s priorities?
Outline how the issue relates to the Minister’s
where it fits
What previous advice has the Minister received?
priorities or Government strategy.
Recap what’s happened before – even if the Minister
is familiar with the issue.
Remind the Minister of what has already been done
or agreed.
Analysis
Is the issue clearly defined?
Structure the paper so the argument flows logically.
Is clear, logical
Are the policy objectives clear?
Make the analysis proportionate to the scale and
Is there a clear rationale for government
and informed
importance of the issue.
intervention?
by evidence
Identify who has a stake in the issue, and why.
Are the analytical frameworks and methodologies
Document the engagement strategies used.
clear?
Identify how the problem or opportunity and policy
Is the analysis appropriate, robust and logical?
options could affect Māori, uphold the Treaty of
Does the evidence support the analysis?
Waitangi, and affect Māori Crown relationships.
Are Treaty and te ao Māori frameworks used in
If the evidence is inconclusive or the outcomes
the analysis?
uncertain, say so.
Does the analysis reveal diverse views,
Assess the options according to clearly stated criteria.
experiences and insights?
Check that the options are workable, and test with end
Are the options credible?
users if possible.
Does the advice fol ow from the analysis?
Advice
Is it clear what MBIE thinks?
Use narrative headings to storyline the paper and clarify
Engages the
Is the advice free and frank?
key messages.
decision-maker and
Wil the advice help the Minister to act?
Structure the paper so the argument flows logically.
tel s the ful story
Is the paper easy to read and free of errors?
Use tables, boxes and diagrams to il ustrate key points.
Alert the Minister to the possible consequences of
Does it reflect diverse perspectives?
Does it identify risks and mitigations?
particular decisions (even if it chal enges their opinions).
Identify any differences in stakeholder views, and how
to deal with them.
Action
Are the recommended actions clear?
Use direct language to make clear action-oriented
Identifies who is
Is it clear what MBIE wil do?
recommendations (and avoid noting
Are the next steps and fol ow-up actions clear?
doing what next
recommendations).
Does it identify what needs to be implemented, by
whom, when, where, and why?
Identify what fol ow-up work is needed, who wil do it
How wil the policy be monitored and evaluated?
and when.
Make it clear what MBIE wil do.
If you have identified a risk explain how we wil
mitigate it
Explain how the policy wil be monitored and
evaluated.
Wil it be useful to a busy Minister?
Put yourself in the Minister’s shoes.
Does it help
Is it easy to read and grasp the main points?
Think about how the Minister wil use the advice in
the Minister?
Does it provide everything the Minister needs to
make an informed decision or take action?
practice to help you structure the paper.
Make talking points usable: short sentences, in the
Minister’s voice, on a separate page, and spaced to
aid readability. Read them aloud to check them.
Set meeting agendas to reflect what the Minister
wants from the meeting (not just what the
stakeholders want).
Provide all the col ateral needed (eg draft letters) and
anticipate what’s needed next.
MINISTERIAL BRIEFING QUALITY ASSURANCE CHECKLIST
To be used in addition to specific briefing material.
Minister
Writer
Date Due
Tracking number
Content QA
Done
Content addresses the policy/issue/problem/priority/goal
Content accurately captures policy (if relevant)
Content accurately captures processes (if relevant)
Content reflects key messages MBIE wants to convey (if relevant)
Content does not assume previous knowledge
Content does not refer to briefings or papers from the previous administration
Content is tone appropriate
Immediately following the Election and until notified otherwise, all Ministerial
briefings will need to be reviewed by the relevant DCE, GM or their delegate before
sending to a Minister.
Consultation QA
Done
Consultation complete with across MBIE business groups (if relevant)
Consultation with external departments/agencies completed (if relevant)
Proofreading QA
Done
Correct portfolio
Correct Minister, spelling and title (of/for) – check the list of Ministers on the DPMC
websit
e https://www.dpmc.govt.nz/cabinet/ministers/ministerial-list
Tracking number requested and added or updated - em
ail [email address] for
a briefing tracking number
Correct date to send to Minister
Correct security classification
Correct priority
MBIE contact updated with correct title and contact number
Formatting aligns with that Minister’s office preferences
Abbreviations written in full, then abbreviated as appropriate e.g. MBIE
Proof read
Peer reviewed
Ministerial Office Preferences:
http://thelink/how/Pages/Ministerial-office-preferences-for-information-
and-paper-presentation.aspx this will be updated as confirmed by individual portfolios.
