10th Report - Government shared services

We are astounded that the Cabinet Office appears unable to clearly articulate the value for money case of its Shared Services Strategy. The Cabinet Office claims that the Shared Services Strategy is now set to deliver £4.3 billion in benefits. … Read more We are astounded that the Cabinet Office appears unable to clearly articulate the value for money case of its Shared Services Strategy. The Cabinet Office claims that the Shared Services Strategy is now set to deliver £4.3 billion in benefits. But this figure does not reflect costs, and the department was initially unable to quantify what these costs are or how they relate to the costs of continuing with individual services for each department. The Cabinet Office has developed a dashboard 3 bringing together clusters’ delivery data, including data on benefits, costs, and milestones. But the Cabinet Office cannot enforce timely, accurate and good quality returns, limiting the dashboard’s usefulness. The Cabinet Office has granted clusters discretion over key delivery decisions, notably outsourcing. It has not quantified the value-for-money case of the Synergy cluster outsourcing to Capita relative to the Unity cluster’s in-house service model. This Committee’s predecessors have criticised Capita’s poor performance on a range of government contracts, including those with the Ministry of Defence for handling recruitment and with NHS England for supporting primary care services. More recently, Capita’s poor performance administering the Civil Service Pension Scheme is a matter of ongoing concern for this Committee. Correspondence we received from the Cabinet Office after our evidence session—on benefits, costs and cluster outsourcing—is inconsistent with the National Audit Office’s findings, and lacks sufficient rigour to establish shared services’ value for money. recommendation The Cabinet Office should urgently publish a case for change outlining how its Shared Services Strategy will deliver value for money, including: a. the economic case, comparing the current way forward’s benefits and costs to viable alternatives; b. a roadmap which clearly sets out timetables, dates and costs until all elements of government in scope of the strategy would be onboarded; and c. a Show less

The Cabinet Office does not have the mandate to deliver its strategy successfully. In 2025 the Cabinet Office introduced a two-tier board setup to bring together the clusters and the Cabinet Office central team, but this setup is still dependent … Read more The Cabinet Office does not have the mandate to deliver its strategy successfully. In 2025 the Cabinet Office introduced a two-tier board setup to bring together the clusters and the Cabinet Office central team, but this setup is still dependent on other boards and teams to enable delivery. The Cabinet Office acknowledges that numerous decisions that are crucial to delivery of the strategy, such as managing interdependencies or securing departments’ continued buy-in, are not managed effectively. In the case of the failed Applicant Tracking System (ATS), decisions were taken at an ‘ATS Board’ which sits outside the Shared Services Strategy’s governance structures and was unable to effectively manage the interdependencies that led to the programme being abandoned. Within the Strategy, key responsibilities for delivering shared services are spread across clusters, government central functions and departments, with no single person being in charge of co-ordinating and implementing the strategy. recommendation The Cabinet Office should appoint a single person to be in charge of delivering government shared services, with accountability and the required mandate for doing so. This appointee will be required to update the Committee annually on progress against delivery of the strategy. Show less

HM Treasury and the Department for Education are not formally committed to onboarding to their assigned shared services cluster, thereby undermining the strategy. The Cabinet Office has assigned HM Treasury and the Department for Education to the Matrix cluster, with … Read more HM Treasury and the Department for Education are not formally committed to onboarding to their assigned shared services cluster, thereby undermining the strategy. The Cabinet Office has assigned HM Treasury and the Department for Education to the Matrix cluster, with onboarding scheduled for November 2027. The Cabinet Office understands these departments to have unconditionally bought into joining shared services at the outset, and maintains that their participation in shared services is not optional. Both departments have already received funding and invested in modern, cloud-based back-office systems. HM Treasury now claims that it has the right to unilaterally decide whether to proceed with joining its assigned shared services cluster or not, subject to its Accounting Officer’s assessment of further information from the Matrix cluster. Clusters’ delivery has been delayed by the Cabinet Office’s ineffective management of interdependencies with other government digital programmes. According to HM Treasury, delays in Matrix mean the department now expects to receive most of this information in the summer of 2026, before making a decision in December 2026. The Department for Education’s formal commitment is also subject to further information on feasibility and value for money. Accounting Officers report to the Transformation Board on the status of their department’s commitments. For a strategy whose ambition rests on government acting as ‘One Civil Service’, a case-by-case approach sets very a dangerous precedent, rendering the strategy optional and therefore potentially unworkable. 5 recommendation The Cabinet Office should urgently clarify: a. the role of the Transformation Board in securing and maintaining departments’ commitment to shared services; and b. its position on the obligations for departments that currently use modern cloud-based back-office systems to onboard to their assigned shared service cluster; In the Treasury Minute Response, we expect confirma Show less

The Cabinet Office is failing to manage effectively the interdependencies with other government change programmes. At least 25 other digital change programmes across government must work with the shared services systems. Mismanaged interdependencies have resulted in avoidable costs, delays and … Read more The Cabinet Office is failing to manage effectively the interdependencies with other government change programmes. At least 25 other digital change programmes across government must work with the shared services systems. Mismanaged interdependencies have resulted in avoidable costs, delays and pose a weak point for clusters’ delivery of the strategy. The failure of one interdependent programme, the Cabinet Office’s Applicant Tracking System (ATS) programme, is alone estimated to cost between £26 million and £38 million. In January 2025, concerns about interdependency management led the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority to urgently recommend the creation of a central design authority, capable of holding to account change programmes and the shared services clusters. In its response, the Cabinet Office failed to fully address the concerns raised by NISTA. Despite its 2025 refresh of governance, the Cabinet Office has not found a way to manage these interdependencies effectively. recommendation The Cabinet Office should: a. Review its decision not to address NISTA’s recommendation by implementing a government corporate services board with a mandate for mediating between clusters, functions and interdependent change programmes; and b. present the Committee with an action plan to address risks with interdependent change programmes. Show less

Implementation of the strategy is being delayed by the lack of reliable, consistent government HR and commercial data. In 2023, the Government Finance Function began leading ‘NOVA’. NOVA is the guidance and standards that functions should follow when setting up … Read more Implementation of the strategy is being delayed by the lack of reliable, consistent government HR and commercial data. In 2023, the Government Finance Function began leading ‘NOVA’. NOVA is the guidance and standards that functions should follow when setting up all their processes like hiring an employee or paying a grant. If followed, 6 these standards, should allow all departments to map processes in the same way, improving the quality of data and making bringing data together a lot easier. We have regularly commented on the connection between data quality and efficiency in government. The Cabinet Office itself recognises that NOVA is a key element of how it intends to save money for the taxpayer. While the Finance and Grants Functions have followed these standards and converged their data across government, the Government People Function’s adoption of converged HR data and processes was delayed. The Cabinet Office cannot provide a precise timeline for the Government People Function to implement required changes to its HR data and processes, only that it expects the data and processes to align before departments join their assigned shared services cluster. The Government Commercial Function opted out of NOVA from the beginning. recommendation a. The Government People Function should commit to a roadmap and timeline for implementing all NOVA processes. b. The Government Commercial Function should commit to engaging with NOVA, and implementing its revised functional standard. 7 1 Feasibility and governance of the Shared Services Strategy Introduction Show less

On the basis of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence from the Cabinet Office, HM Treasury and the senior responsible owner of the Synergy cluster on their progress in delivering the 2021 Shared Services Strategy.1

The Cabinet Office treats shared services as a strategy rather than a single change programme. It therefore failed to produce a full strategy-level business case from the outset. The case for change it produced in its place 4 C&AG’s Report, … Read more The Cabinet Office treats shared services as a strategy rather than a single change programme. It therefore failed to produce a full strategy-level business case from the outset. The case for change it produced in its place 4 C&AG’s Report, figure 3 5 C&AG’s Report, para 15 6 C&AG’s Report, key facts page, figure 5 7 Letter from the Cabinet Office to PAC dated 3 June 2026, p. 4 8 Committee of Public Accounts, Shared services written evidence 9 Letter from the Cabinet Office to PAC dated 3 June 2026 9 lacked the required detail on the benefits and costs of shared services.10 In 2023, the previous Public Accounts Committee recommended that the current strategy should be supported by a regularly-updated case for change, revised to include realistic and complete business case information in line with HM Treasury guidance.11 Despite these warnings, the Cabinet Office told us that it still refers to the clusters’ business cases for work on benefits and costs, as the department chose to manage the strategy as five different change programmes rather than one single project.12 Show less

The Cabinet Office told us that its Shared Services Strategy is now entering an important phase.13 In the Matrix cluster, plans had foreseen two departments joining shared services in July 2026.14 The Cabinet Office now expects the first two departments … Read more The Cabinet Office told us that its Shared Services Strategy is now entering an important phase.13 In the Matrix cluster, plans had foreseen two departments joining shared services in July 2026.14 The Cabinet Office now expects the first two departments (the Cabinet Office and the Department for Culture, Media and Sports) to onboard to Matrix in December 2026 instead, but has offered no explanation as to why onboarding is being delayed.15 Show less

We noted parallels between the Shared Services Strategy and other cross-government cloud transformation initiatives. The Office for National Statistics launched the Integrated Data Service (IDS) programme in 2020.16 The programme set out to harness cloud platforms and innovative systems and … Read more We noted parallels between the Shared Services Strategy and other cross-government cloud transformation initiatives. The Office for National Statistics launched the Integrated Data Service (IDS) programme in 2020.16 The programme set out to harness cloud platforms and innovative systems and processes to improve the usability of data across government in decision-making. Digital transformation also promised efficiency gains through faster statistics and cost cuts.17 The programme’s ambitious promises proved undeliverable. In 2025, the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA) reviewed the programme’s delivery, giving a ‘Red’ delivery confidence assessment in part due to the IDS ‘being unable to demonstrate sufficient progress in unlocking cross- government data sharing’ and an interdependent relationship with another digital transformation programme.18 In March 2026, the Office for National Statistics confirmed that it had closed the IDS, after spending a reported £240 million.19 10 C&AG’s Report, Government shared services, Session 2022–23, HC 921, para 15 11 Committee of Public Accounts, Government Shared Services, Fiftieth Report of Session 2022–23, HC 734, 5 May 2023, Para 2 12 Qq 8, 36; Letter from the Cabinet Office to PAC dated 3 June 2026, p. 2 13 Q 1 14 C&AG’s Report, Update on government shared services, Figure 5 15 Letter from the Cabinet Office to PAC dated 3 June 2026, p. 4 16 National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority, Annual report table summary 2024/25 17 Office for National Statistics, Integrated Data Service (IDS) 18 National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority, Annual report table summary 2024/25 19 Q 5; Office for National Statistics, FOI-2026–3378, Integrated Data Service reviews and assessments 10 Uncertain value for money Show less

Since this Committee last reported on shared services, the Cabinet Office responded to concerns about its understanding of costs, benefits and value for money by updating its strategy’s case for change.20 The Cabinet Office has also created a dashboard designed … Read more Since this Committee last reported on shared services, the Cabinet Office responded to concerns about its understanding of costs, benefits and value for money by updating its strategy’s case for change.20 The Cabinet Office has also created a dashboard designed to bring together cluster-held data on costs, benefits and delivery milestones.21 The Cabinet Office told us that 1,600 people consult the dashboard daily, and that the tool helps manage challenges to delivery.22 The dashboard relies on the Cabinet Office commissioning returns from clusters about their plans.23 As the Cabinet Office lacks the mandate to enforce these commissions, the quality and completeness of the data the dashboard contains varies significantly. For example, one part of the dashboard had missing data for 21 out of 64 returns. Incomplete data has undermined the dashboard’s usefulness to the Cabinet Office, including on understanding clusters’ performance and value for money.24 Show less

The Cabinet Office told us that the quality of data returns it uses in its dashboard has improved.25 According to the Cabinet Office, clusters have now developed robust business cases, meaning its overall Shared Services Strategy is set to achieve … Read more The Cabinet Office told us that the quality of data returns it uses in its dashboard has improved.25 According to the Cabinet Office, clusters have now developed robust business cases, meaning its overall Shared Services Strategy is set to achieve £4.3 billion in benefits over a 15-year period.26 The National Audit Office reported the benefits net of cost which shared services clusters are expected to achieve at £1 billion.27 The Department acknowledged that its £4.3 billion figure does not account for costs, and could not quantify what the total costs of delivering shared services are. The Cabinet Office also suggested that the benefits of shared services would need to be compared to the cost of departments proceeding with individual back-office systems.28 Show less

In its subsequent correspondence with the Committee, the Cabinet Office clarified that its Strategy’s £4.3 billion benefits figure had been calculated from a mixture of its dashboard and clusters’ full business cases. The Cabinet Office’s correspondence reported shared services’ change … Read more In its subsequent correspondence with the Committee, the Cabinet Office clarified that its Strategy’s £4.3 billion benefits figure had been calculated from a mixture of its dashboard and clusters’ full business cases. The Cabinet Office’s correspondence reported shared services’ change costs at £846 million in one section, and ‘around £1.6 billion’ in another section: as compared to a mid-range estimate of £4 billion had each department procured their systems individually. While giving no further details on 20 Treasury Minutes, Government Response to the Committee of Public Accounts on the Forty-eighth to the Fifty-fourth reports from Session 2022–23, CP 902, July 2023 21 C&AG’s Report, para 1.15 22 Qq 12, 71 23 Q 12 24 Q 11; C&AG’s Report, para 9, 1.16, 1.23 25 Q 12 26 Q 24 27 C&AG’s Report, key facts page 28 Qq 38, 39 11 the £1.6 billion figure, its £846 million cost calculation was based on HM Treasury’s commitment to Matrix, Synergy and Unity clusters in Spending Review 2025.29 These costs are therefore not calculated from the same baseline as the benefits the Cabinet Office has given. This is because they exclude the costs incurred by two other clusters (Defence and Overseas); by departments’ separate commitments, including funding for shortfalls left by HM Treasury’s spending review; and by HM Treasury’s approval of a further £300 million in reserve funding between 2021 and 2025.30 The fact that the Cabinet Office could not provide the high-level cost-benefit analysis we asked for at our hearing, appears to confirm lack of clarity in the Cabinet Office about this whole project. Show less

The Cabinet Office has given clusters discretion over their delivery models. This has led to several different approaches to clusters’ implementation of shared services.31 Written evidence we received from the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) noted that civil servants … Read more The Cabinet Office has given clusters discretion over their delivery models. This has led to several different approaches to clusters’ implementation of shared services.31 Written evidence we received from the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) noted that civil servants impacted by the strategy have been consulted to varying degrees depending on the cluster their department is assigned to. Some clusters are also providing shared services through outsourcing, while others deliver their back-office operations in-house. Given Capita’s poor performance in administering Civil Service Pensions, the PCS has expressed concern over the Synergy cluster’s decision to award an outsourcing contract for providing HR and payroll services to over 250,000 civil servants to the provider, which is reportedly valued at £700 million.32 Show less

The Cabinet Office told us that granting clusters discretion over delivery decisions was intended to give them some autonomy over how the strategy was implemented. The Cabinet Office and the senior responsible owner of the Synergy cluster explained that for … Read more The Cabinet Office told us that granting clusters discretion over delivery decisions was intended to give them some autonomy over how the strategy was implemented. The Cabinet Office and the senior responsible owner of the Synergy cluster explained that for the departments in the Synergy cluster, which have already outsourced their back-office operations for ten years, it can be assumed that continued outsourcing would be most practical and therefore continue to represent value for money.33 The Cabinet Office acknowledged that assessments informing value for money decisions like the merits of outsourcing are taken at the cluster level rather than at the level of the strategy.34 The department later provided the Committee with the factors these assessments had considered, but not a quantified value-for-money case favouring outsourcing as compared to insourcing.35 The senior responsible owner of the Synergy cluster recognised the concerns surrounding Capita’s administration of pensions, but believes that Capita’s 29 Letter from the Cabinet Office to PAC dated 3 June 2026, pp. 2-3 30 C&AG’s Report, Figures 3 and 4 31 C&AG’s Report, paras 1.5-1.6, 2.3-2.4 32 SHS0004, Written evidence submitted by the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) 33 Qq 85, 91, 93; Letter from the Cabinet Office to PAC dated 3 June 2026 34 Q 94 35 Letter from the Cabinet Office to PAC dated 3 June 2026 12 award for shared services was a different scenario and the product of a twelve-month procurement process.36 However, we also note recent reports suggesting that Capita’s winning bid may have been 40% under the government’s ‘should-cost’ model.37 The Cabinet Office’s mandate and governance Show less

The Cabinet Office develops and oversees the Shared Services Strategy, but relies on the five clusters and numerous stakeholders across government to deliver shared services. Each cluster has its own internal governance structures. Over the period 2022 to 2025, the … Read more The Cabinet Office develops and oversees the Shared Services Strategy, but relies on the five clusters and numerous stakeholders across government to deliver shared services. Each cluster has its own internal governance structures. Over the period 2022 to 2025, the Cabinet Office coordinated delivery stakeholders’ actions through a quarterly Shared Services Board. Two reviews by the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA) in 2025 cited the absence of a single point of ownership under that setup. NISTA recommended that the Cabinet Office instead make plans for a central authority with an enhanced governance mandate, including over clusters.38 The Cabinet Office responded by refreshing governance arrangements in 2025. The senior responsible owners of the clusters now sit on a lower-tier decision-making board, called the Service and Technical Design Authority. This board reports to the higher-tier Shared Services Board, which comprises Director General-level attendees.39 Show less

The Cabinet Office considers that it oversees the overall Shared Services Strategy, but not for each of the five clusters’ successful delivery.40 The Cabinet Office considers that the senior responsible owner and lead department Accounting Officer of each cluster are … Read more The Cabinet Office considers that it oversees the overall Shared Services Strategy, but not for each of the five clusters’ successful delivery.40 The Cabinet Office considers that the senior responsible owner and lead department Accounting Officer of each cluster are responsible for their respective programme. The Cabinet Office shared that the cluster-based approach to accountability had been a conscious and pragmatic choice over delivering shared services as one single government project.41 The Cabinet Office also noted that a cluster-based governance model was ministerial preference. In the department’s opinion, the current two-tier governance structure allows it to bring clusters together for decisions affecting delivery and interdependencies with other change programmes.42 36 Q 82 37 The Register, Capita £370M bid 40% under UK.gov estimate for Oracle HR and finance system project 38 C&AG’s Report, paras 1.17, 1.20, 1.22, 3.5 39 Qq 2, 14, 73 40 Q 7 41 Q 8 42 Q 15 13 Show less

Numerous other boards are involved in shared services decision making despite not being part of the formal governance. These include the Civil Service Transformation Board and the Applicant Tracking System (ATS) board, both of which also make decisions on delivery … Read more Numerous other boards are involved in shared services decision making despite not being part of the formal governance. These include the Civil Service Transformation Board and the Applicant Tracking System (ATS) board, both of which also make decisions on delivery and managing interdependencies. Clusters have expressed difficulties in using these parallel governance structures to resolve their concerns. In May 2025, NISTA noted that unclear accountabilities and competing mandates between the Shared Services Strategy’s governance structures and other boards meant decision-making was not yet fully developed.43 Show less

The Cabinet Office recognises the continuing role of other boards and channels in governance activities. The department told us that responsibility for obtaining departmental buy-in to join shared services is agreed with each department’s Permanent Secretary at the Transformation Board, … Read more The Cabinet Office recognises the continuing role of other boards and channels in governance activities. The department told us that responsibility for obtaining departmental buy-in to join shared services is agreed with each department’s Permanent Secretary at the Transformation Board, which does not form part of the two-tier set-up.44 The Cabinet Office clarified that the Transformation Board additionally acts as a third tier of escalation for issues which the Shared Services Board itself cannot resolve.45 However, key Cabinet Office officials and cluster stakeholders responsible for delivering shared services, including the senior responsible owner of each cluster and the Cabinet Office Director of the Shared Services Strategy, do not regularly attend the Transformation Board.46 The Cabinet Office acknowledges that its attempts to manage interdependencies have not been consistent. The department indicated that clusters’ concerns about interdependencies between shared services and the Applicant Tracking System (ATS) programme had been worked both through the Shared Services Strategy’s governance channels, as well as a parallel governance channel consisting of the ATS advisory board. This inconsistency caused delays to clusters’ design decisions, and led to the ATS programme’s abandonment in October 2025 at a cost of between £26 to 38 million.47 43 C&AG’s Report, paras 1.21 - 1.22 44 Qq 79, 80 45 Q 14 46 Qq 78, 81 47 C&AG’s Report, paras 3.7, 3.16 14 2 Working with departments, functions and other change programmes Unclear buy-in Show less

Departments and ALBs are migrating to shared services from different starting points. While some departments are on ageing legacy systems, three departments—the Department for Education, HM Treasury and the Home Office—have already invested in modern, cloud-based platforms that also provide … Read more Departments and ALBs are migrating to shared services from different starting points. While some departments are on ageing legacy systems, three departments—the Department for Education, HM Treasury and the Home Office—have already invested in modern, cloud-based platforms that also provide back-office operations like finance and HR.48 Although the Matrix cluster has made plans to onboard the Department for Education and HM Treasury to shared services in August 2027, these departments have indicated that they would now welcome more information from Matrix about the likely costs to them before making a final commitment to join.49 The lack of these two departments’ formal commitment affects Matrix’s ability to plan and impacts its benefits calculation.50 Show less

HM Treasury confirmed to us that while the department is supportive of the strategy, it has not yet signed up to the Matrix system.51 HM Treasury considers that its Permanent Secretary has the right to decide whether to go ahead … Read more HM Treasury confirmed to us that while the department is supportive of the strategy, it has not yet signed up to the Matrix system.51 HM Treasury considers that its Permanent Secretary has the right to decide whether to go ahead with joining the cluster’s system or not subject to further information on benefits and service level, which the department now expects to receive from Matrix in the summer of 2026.52 In subsequent correspondence, the Cabinet Office told us that its own move to shared services will be delayed until December 2026. This delay will affect the HM Treasury Accounting Officer’s final decision on whether to onboard, which will also be delayed to December 2026 assuming there are no further delays.53 These actions, by two major Government departments, send a very poor reputational signal to the rest of the project. 48 Qq 26, Q32, Q50; C&AG’s report, paras 1.5, 2.6 49 Q 44; C&AG’s Report, para 14, Figure 5 50 C&AG’s Report, para 2.8 51 Q 45 52 Q 47 53 Letter from the Cabinet Office to PAC dated 3 June 2026, p.5 15 Show less

The Shared Services Strategy has historically had mixed buy-in from departments. In 2022, not all departments were fully supportive of the cluster model. Clusters considered that departmental buy-in suffered because the Cabinet Office did not calculate the benefits of its … Read more The Shared Services Strategy has historically had mixed buy-in from departments. In 2022, not all departments were fully supportive of the cluster model. Clusters considered that departmental buy-in suffered because the Cabinet Office did not calculate the benefits of its Shared Services Strategy across government.54 In 2023, the previous Public Accounts Committee also noted that departments were still acting independently rather than collaboratively.55 According to the Cabinet Office, all departments had nonetheless unconditionally signed up to shared services at the outset.56 Show less

HM Treasury has explained that departmental buy-in for shared services consists of two distinct commitments. Departments’ Permanent Secretaries first signed up to the Shared Services Strategy, and Permanent Secretaries then must make a separate judgement about whether to go ahead … Read more HM Treasury has explained that departmental buy-in for shared services consists of two distinct commitments. Departments’ Permanent Secretaries first signed up to the Shared Services Strategy, and Permanent Secretaries then must make a separate judgement about whether to go ahead with joining their assigned cluster or not. HM Treasury claimed that it is this second judgement which it is yet to make.57 The Cabinet Office said that the Transformation Board, chaired by the Chief Operating Officer of the Civil Service, is the forum through which Permanent Secretaries’ buy-in to all aspects of shared services is obtained.58 As owner of the strategy, the Cabinet Office maintained that Shared Services is going ahead, and joining is not optional for departments.59 Managing interdependencies Show less

At least 25 other government digital transformation programmes are interdependent with shared services. This means that elements of their design or functioning must integrate with clusters’ digital platforms. Clusters have escalated various issues with interdependent change programmes through shared services … Read more At least 25 other government digital transformation programmes are interdependent with shared services. This means that elements of their design or functioning must integrate with clusters’ digital platforms. Clusters have escalated various issues with interdependent change programmes through shared services governance structures. These issues have impaired clusters’ delivery plans.60 Show less

The Cabinet Office reset the governance of shared services in 2025. In July of that year, the Cabinet Office initially proposed to respond to NISTA’s recommendations with a Government Corporate Services Board.61 The Cabinet Office explained to us that this … Read more The Cabinet Office reset the governance of shared services in 2025. In July of that year, the Cabinet Office initially proposed to respond to NISTA’s recommendations with a Government Corporate Services Board.61 The Cabinet Office explained to us that this board would have brought together stakeholders from the Shared Services Strategy, as well as 54 C&AG’s Report, Government shared services, Session 2022–23, HC 921, 30 November 2022, para 2.9 55 Committee of Public Accounts, Government Shared Services, Fiftieth Report of Session 2022–23, HC 734, 5 May 2023, Introduction. 56 Q 49 57 Q 50; Letter from the Cabinet Office to PAC dated 3 June 2026, p.5 58 Q 79 59 Qq 31, 33 60 C&AG’s Report, paras 3.2, 3.6, 3.7 61 C&AG’s Report, para 3.5 16 other initiatives affecting government’s back-office services more widely.62 The Government Corporate Services Board did not go ahead, replaced instead by the present two-tier model. One cluster has expressed concern that the two-tier set-up would not be able to improve the management of interdependencies.63 Show less

The Cabinet Office recognised that managing interdependencies remains complex. Despite the Cabinet Office offering assurances on its current governance arrangements, the Committee remains sceptical about their effectiveness. The Cabinet Office told us that as departments join shared services clusters, the … Read more The Cabinet Office recognised that managing interdependencies remains complex. Despite the Cabinet Office offering assurances on its current governance arrangements, the Committee remains sceptical about their effectiveness. The Cabinet Office told us that as departments join shared services clusters, the robustness of its current two-tier set- up would be subject to new challenge. The department said that it has started work on a fresh review of its governance arrangements which will consider interdependencies.64 The Cabinet Office also recognised that its original proposal for a more ambitious Corporate Services Board may hold advantages. The Department also recognised that such a board may create opportunities for government to bring together the collective efforts of shared services as well as other digital transformation programmes, projects and portfolios.65 Consistent HR and commercial data Show less

To be ready for shared services platforms, processes and data across government must be ‘converged’, meaning that they are consistent and standardised. In 2023, the Government Finance Function began leading work with other central government functions on ‘NOVA’. NOVA is … Read more To be ready for shared services platforms, processes and data across government must be ‘converged’, meaning that they are consistent and standardised. In 2023, the Government Finance Function began leading work with other central government functions on ‘NOVA’. NOVA is the guidance and standards that central government functions should follow when setting up their processes. For example, NOVA shows all the necessary steps and decision points which government HR professionals must take to recruit a new member of staff, or which government finance professionals must follow to pay a grant. When central government functions implement the NOVA guidance and standards across their processes, it drives convergence and improves data quality.66. With better data, government can better adopt innovative technologies like AI or better understand 62 Q 76 63 C&AG’s Report, para 3.5 64 Qq 74, 76 65 Q 76 66 C&AG’s Report, paras 15, 2.14, 2.15 17 where inefficiencies exist and what can be done to address them, driving productivity gains.67 The Cabinet Office has itself recognised the savings which data and process standardisation through NOVA can enable.68 Show less

Not all central government functions have engaged with NOVA to the same extent, which has directly impacted their readiness to support delivery of shared services. The Government Finance Function and the Grants Management Function are most advanced with implementing converged … Read more Not all central government functions have engaged with NOVA to the same extent, which has directly impacted their readiness to support delivery of shared services. The Government Finance Function and the Grants Management Function are most advanced with implementing converged data and processes across clusters. The Government People Function has not implemented NOVA-converged data and processes across the HR profession in good time. This has caused problems for clusters delivering shared services, notably a year’s delay in the Defence cluster’s HR onboarding of military users. The Government Commercial Function did not engage with NOVA from the beginning.69 Show less

The Cabinet Office, in which the Government People Function sits, conceded that progress on HR convergence was behind relative to the Government Finance Function’s work. The Department attributed this to high pre-existing data convergence in the finance profession before NOVA, … Read more The Cabinet Office, in which the Government People Function sits, conceded that progress on HR convergence was behind relative to the Government Finance Function’s work. The Department attributed this to high pre-existing data convergence in the finance profession before NOVA, as well as to the Government People Function needing to converge around 370 areas of policy-sensitive HR processes, as compared to the Government Finance Function’s 95 areas.70 Show less

The Cabinet Office reported that it has made progress towards fully implementing converged HR processes and standards in 2026.71 The Cabinet Office pointed towards a new £5 million standardisation project it has undertaken to facilitate HR convergence.72 The Cabinet Office … Read more The Cabinet Office reported that it has made progress towards fully implementing converged HR processes and standards in 2026.71 The Cabinet Office pointed towards a new £5 million standardisation project it has undertaken to facilitate HR convergence.72 The Cabinet Office also recognised that convergence was an iterative process given changes to HR policy.73 However, the Cabinet Office could not indicate an exact timeline by which the Government People Function will implement the converged processes and standards required for clusters to onboard departments to shared services.74 In subsequent correspondence, the Cabinet Office stated that it expects these data and processes to align before departments can join their assigned shared services cluster.75 What however is the timetable for this? 67 Committee of Public Accounts, Use of AI in government, Eighteenth Report of Session 2024–25, HC 356, 26 March 2025, para 1 ; C&AG’s report, Improving government’s productivity through better cost information, Session 2024–26, HC 1291, 15 September 2025, para 6 68 Q 55 69 C&AG’s Report, para 2.17 70 Qq 55, 56 71 Q 61 72 Qq 60, 61 73 Qq 56, 59, 66 74 Q 68 75 Letter from the Cabinet Office to PAC dated 3 June 2026, p.4 18 Show less

In the light of the serious problems uncovered during our hearing, the Cabinet Office must review all aspects of the project, to assure themselves and this Committee, that the project will work. If they cannot provide such assurance, they should … Read more In the light of the serious problems uncovered during our hearing, the Cabinet Office must review all aspects of the project, to assure themselves and this Committee, that the project will work. If they cannot provide such assurance, they should abandon the project before even more taxpayer money is wasted. 19 Show less