Evaluating the impact of our work is a critical part of getting our interventions right and helping us improve our performance. We evaluate our work in a range of ways.
Ex post impact evaluations
Ex post (after the event) impact evaluations focus on quantifying the impact of our interventions. They seek to assess what would have happened if we hadn’t intervened and take into account other external factors that have created changes in the business environment of the relevant sectors. These evaluations assess whether our intended outcomes have been achieved. They also look at what has worked and what hasn’t – and if not, why not. Where possible, we make comparisons to our expected impact before intervening.
Our framework outlines how and why we intend to use ex post impact evaluation to assess the impact of our interventions on consumers, firms and markets.
As part of delivering against our Mission’s decision-making framework, we will publish our ex post impact evaluations on this page.
- EP18/1: An evaluation of our guaranteed asset protection intervention
- EP18/2: An evaluation of bringing additional benchmarks into the regulatory and supervisory regime
- EP18/3: An evaluation of reducing barriers to entry into the UK banking sector
- EP19/1: An evaluation of our general insurance renewal transparency intervention
Post-implementation reviews provide an overall view of whether the rule we brought in was implemented as intended, whether firms are still complying and the state of the market.
Thematic reviews play a significant part of our approach to supervision. They assess a current or emerging risk involving an issue or product across a number of firms in a sector or market. They assess firms’ compliance with our rules, their practices and behaviours, and suggest ways of tackling any problems we identify.