Figure 18

Common weaknesses

Our assessment

Our analysis

Targets

CCS does not have a current business case for the proposed changes or to quantify the benefits that CCS could achieve from them. CCS is no longer pursuing ambitious targets to rapidly centralise the procurement of common goods and services for central government. However, it is not clear to us what targets CCS is now pursing for central government. In the wider public sector, CCS has set ambitious targets for growth in the use of its services of up to 20% in 2016-17 and around 100% by 2019-20.

Clear plan

CCS has not set clear expectations on time frames for improvements to its operations and services. CCS used an iterative approach to the review. It focused on developing only enough detail to support the next stage of the review. This allowed CCS to adapt the review's timing and engage staff at key stages. However, this approach resulted in a lack of clear milestones which show when the review formally started, when it was due to report its progress or when it was expected to finish. Similarly, CCS has yet to commit to precise time frames for implementation.

Inadequate data

CCS has not got a full baseline of CCS activity (often this is called the 'as is' analysis). However, it did prepare brief summaries of activity in areas that CCS thought were contributing to weakness in services. Without a full baseline analysis, CCS may have addressed only some of the key issues or failed to fully understand the problems that the review set out to address.

Governance, assurance or control

When the full range of CCS's activities are considered, CCS continues to have unclear governance. When CCS was launched in 2014, the CCS board chair was the government's chief commercial officer. However, during the first year of operation, the government decided that this was not the best governance arrangement. It appointed a new chair who was independent from government procurement. During 2015, the government changed the reporting arrangements for some CCS staff to the government chief commercial officer in the Cabinet Office rather than the CCS chief executive. These staff work on complex procurement, the development of commercial capability across government and the management of relationships with strategically important suppliers to government. These are functions which are not normally considered suitable for including in a trading fund such as CCS. In 2015-16, these functions cost around £7 million and are forecast to cost around £9.5 million in 2016-17. When we interviewed departments, around half of department commercial directors (or their representatives) were unclear about aspects of CCS's governance such as which functions reported to the government chief commercial officer role. We believe the current CCS reporting arrangements lead to poor accountability and a lack of transparency.

Customer buy-in

Most central government customers that we interviewed supported the review and the changes arising from it. However, CCS has not prepared a clear strategy to build commitment from its customers. Some departments told us they are not convinced that the review will improve CCS's internal control or service performance. Achieving strong buy-in from these customers remains a challenge for CCS which will take consistency of services and will take time to achieve.

Source: National Audit Office