13. In addition to the difficulties setting up CCS, it has also displayed weaknesses in other areas, such as: customer focus and effective communication, leading to departments doubting CCS's capability to deliver quality services; providing reports to departments on CCS's service performance; and control over processes. CCS's internal audit team found weaknesses in stakeholder engagement, market and business intelligence, and supplier and contract management. CCS told us that a lot of issues were due to the problems with the operating model that was established at the start.14
14. The National Audit found: that CCS did not have a current business case for the proposed changes or quantified the benefits that CCS would achieve from them; that it had not set clear expectations on time frames for improvements to its operations and services; that it did not have a full baseline of CCS activity; that its governance was insufficiently clear and that CCS had not prepared a clear strategy to build commitment from its customers. CCS confirmed that at the time of the review, the NAO assessment had been correct and that a full business case for how it will work with departments was not yet in place.15
15. CCS told us there had been improvements in their performance. For example, CCS said that, even though customer satisfaction was still negative, it was trending in the right direction. It also said that staff engagement had improved from 49% to 54 %, which it believed showed increased confidence in the leadership team. The Cabinet Office and CCS now believe that CCS is set up for success. However, it still needs to develop a business case that demonstrates how it will work with departments and how much volume it will carry out. It agreed in February 2016 to invest in new systems which will improve data quality and management information.16
____________________________________________________________________________
14 Qq 4, 8, 9, 12, 13, 18, 19, C&AG report, paras 1.7, 1.28, 2.17, 2.18, Figure 9 and Figure 15
15 Qq 62, 95, C&AG report, para 3.17 and Figure 18
16 Q 8, 9, 52, 55, 60, 62, 63, 108, 111, 112, C&AG report, para 2.9, 2.10