2.4 We conducted a desk review of a non-representative sample of four of the 'agreed' savings. We looked only at 'agreed' savings because these are the pipeline savings that are reported as being closest to signature. We looked at:
• two larger 'agreed' savings that were awaiting signature and were each around £100 million in value; and
• two smaller 'agreed' savings from two sponsoring departments included in the main sample.
2.5 In the four cases we looked at, the unadjusted pipeline savings appear reasonable, based on the nature of the saving and the rationale set down in the business case. However, the timing and therefore the extent of the savings which may be secured remains uncertain:
• in one case, the timing of signature depends on the outcome of other commercial matters under negotiation and;
• in another case a detailed business case has been prepared in conjunction with the contractor, but is still pending final scrutiny by senior management before it is signed off.
2.6 There remains a risk that these savings do not proceed to signature. However, we conclude that the Treasury's approach which scores only a proportion of the savings for internal purposes is reasonable, although we have not sought to validate the percentages applied to the reported pipeline savings to generate the confidence-adjusted value. There is a reasonable prospect that in due course some savings in the pipeline will be converted into signed savings.
2.7 Some departments have reported savings that do not fall within the scope of this savings initiative, because either the savings were achieved between January 2010 to July 2011 (i.e., before the ministerial commitment), or they arise from departmental review of projects managed by bodies those departments sponsor, prior to contract signature. For example, the Department for Communities and Local Government intervened with a number of authorities to improve the value of contracts prior to signature resulting in £102 million of reported savings. We have not audited these savings.