In this article, José Argudo, UK Evaluation Society Trustee, unpacks the quieter story behind last week’s Budget — what Reeves’ statement really means for evaluation, evidence, and the rising expectations now placed on how public spending is justified.
A budget that raises the stakes for evaluation
Last week’s Autumn Budget landed with a heavy emphasis on tax – who pays more, where thresholds shift, and what the fiscal tightening means for households and businesses. Much of the commentary, unsurprisingly, has focused on the political choices around revenue raising, the distributional impacts, and whether this represents a reset in expectations for the public finances.
But beneath the noise of tax changes sits a quieter – yet arguably more consequential – story. One that has not featured prominently in the morning headlines, ministerial clips, or social media reactions.
This Budget signals a step-change in how government spending will be judged, scrutinised, and justified. As the fiscal position tightens and the path to economic recovery becomes more demanding, the pressure on departments to demonstrate value, effectiveness and real-world impact will intensify. The decisions announced on Wednesday [26 November, 2025] are only the beginning. What matters next is what follows: how programmes are delivered, how results are measured, how evidence is generated at pace, and how future fiscal adjustments will be informed by what works – and what doesn’t.
This is the part of the Budget that isn’t splashed across front pages, yet it will shape the work of analysts, economists, evaluators and policymakers long after the tax debate settles. If last week’s statement was about adjusting the fiscal levers, the coming months will be about justifying the spend that remains.
And that is why the Budget has profound implications for the evaluation system – not because it allocates more money to evaluation (it doesn’t), but because it raises the stakes, sharpens expectations, and demands a new degree of clarity, purpose and discipline in how we generate and use evidence.
What follows in this blog is an attempt to unpack that quieter narrative: what Reeves’ Budget really means for evaluation, analytics and the future of evidence-led policymaking.
Fiscal tightness makes evaluation more important - and more contested
Within the budget there is a clear statement on the commitment to “[…] reforming the public spending control and accountability framework to drive value for money and enable the public sector to deliver the government’s priorities efficiently and effectively”[1].
This strengthens the case for evaluation. It gives analysts a clear mandate to challenge weak assumptions, scrutinise spending proposals, and bring evidence into decisions earlier and more forcefully. In other words, providing a clear political mandate for evidence-led spending decisions. I think it is telling, when the Office for Value for Money is being evaluated on whether it …delivers value for money[2].
But we should be honest: this does not translate into a blank cheque for more evaluation, nor is it realistic to try and evaluate everything. This budget gives evaluation a stronger platform, but also comes with higher and more formal expectations around clear theories of change, consistent use of economic appraisal methods, and credible impact attribution, especially where programmes claim fiscal savings or productivity benefits.
Policymaking will move faster than evidence can - so we must maximise what we already know
The pace of delivery on many Budget measures will be rapid and the need to link spending to outcomes, a requirement; it was stated that “[…] departments will publish medium term outcomes linked to their SR25 funding as well as strategic plans setting out how they will deliver their outcomes.” Delivery and decisions will move fast, and evidence must keep up.
But high-quality evaluation takes time – years, not months – not because of its complexity but also the need to let results materialise. The result is a gap between the speed of policymaking and the speed of evidence generation. To bridge the gap, the priority is reuse, pragmatism and looking at what is already out there. Tap into the UK Evaluation Taskforce’s Registry[3]. Synthesise prior studies into rapid, decision-ready insights. Unlock underused departmental findings – which we know have the potential to unlock additional impact across the portfolio[4] – and commission new evaluations the help validate or further close this evidence gap.
Take for instance the closure of the Energy Company Obligation (ECO) as an effort to reduce energy bills; this programme has been evaluated extensively[5] – so we should expect to use these findings to shape the future of ECO. Another good example of this is showcased in a recent blog[6] by Fiona Larner, UK Evaluation Society Vice Chair, highlighting how existing evidence can increase preparedness and missed opportunities around Covid-19.
The need for clear evaluation strategies
The Budget challenges us to move beyond “more evaluation” toward “better evaluation” purposeful, pragmatic, and designed to make a difference. This will require departments to have clear evaluation strategies to keep pace with policy delivery. As such evaluation strategies should:
1. Set clear boundaries and parameters | Evaluation must be selective and disciplined. Departments need to be explicit about what will require evaluation and what type and plans to link it directly into decision making. |
|---|
2. Evidence that works now – and later |
|---|
Evidence should serve immediate decisions and remain useful for future policy. Design evaluations that generate transferable insights and strengthen institutional learning. |
3. Purposeful, sequenced, feasible |
|---|
Align evaluation with the pace of policymaking. Prioritise fast feedback for urgent decisions, sequence studies for impact, and keep feasibility realistic when delivery moves quickly. |
4. Strategic opportunity for portfolio thinking | With greater complexity of the challenges and policies supporting similar set of outcomes. There is an opportunity to evaluate at the portfolio level to understand interactions, cumulative effects, and system-wide impact – not just individual programmes. |
|---|
Evaluation strategy becomes the balancing point between political urgency and analytical credibility.
A moment for evaluation leadership
This Budget demands confident leadership from evaluation heads; Chief Economists and Directors of Analysis need to take a more strategic role. This means setting sharper priorities, establishing clearer governance, and ensuring evidence is embedded in delivery. It also requires a louder analytical voice – confidently stating what is worth evaluating, what is not, and what the evidence is telling us.
Leadership now extends beyond individual departments. Evaluation must become a system capability, built on collaboration and shared learning. That means reusing proven delivery models, adopting common templates, and expanding cross-government communities of practice.
In a tight fiscal climate, the greatest value will not only come from new studies but from learning faster and smarter. To the extent that peer learning becomes a fiscal strategy: departments sharing insights before problems recur, analysts co-designing solutions, and evidence flowing across boundaries[7].
Evaluation leadership isn’t just technical – it’s strategic. It’s about clarity, speed and collaboration to turn evidence and evaluation into impact and action. Coincidentally, the theme of UK Evaluation Society’s 2026 conference; Bridging the gap: evaluation to action[8].
A Budget that raises expectations for evidence - and opportunity for the profession
Reeves’ Budget sets a clear mandate: stronger accountability, faster delivery, and better use of evidence. Expectations are higher, timelines shorter, and scrutiny greater. This is about clear purposeful, value driven evaluation.
The evaluation community must be disciplined, be strategic, be curious and be collaborative – prioritising evaluations that add real value, reusing existing evidence, and ensuring insights are timely and actionable.
If we meet these challenges, evaluation will not just support decisions – it will shape them. That is the opportunity this Budget creates: to make evidence central to public spending and to deliver measurable impact for society.
Author bio - José Argudo
José is an experienced economist, evaluator, and social researcher who is passionate about using robust evidence to drive better decision-making and accelerate the energy transition. With a proven track record of shaping and evaluating public policy across government departments, arm’s-length bodies, and the third sector, he specialises in strategy development, policy design, and agile delivery grounded in rigorous analysis and research.
His work spans energy, environment, sustainability, and innovation—always with a focus on creating transparent, credible solutions to local, national, and global challenges.
In 2025, José became a Trustee of the UK Evaluation Society, contributing his analytical expertise and strategic insight to strengthen the Society’s leadership, governance, and long-term vision for the evaluation profession.
[3] Home – Evaluation Registry – GOV.UK
[4] https://evaluation.org.uk/increasing-the-value-of-public-rd/
[5] See for example Evaluation of the Energy Company Obligation (ECO) Phases 2t and 3 – GOV.UK
[6] Evaluative Practices in the UK Covid-19 Inquiry – UK Evaluation Society
[7] See for example the Evaluation Services Unit (ESU) was launched by the Open Innovation Team in 2024 to make it quicker, easier and more affordable for civil servants to deliver high-quality evaluations. (1) Post | LinkedIn
[8] https://evaluation.org.uk/community-learning/evaluation-conference/