Transparency data

Synergy Programme Accounting Officer Assessment (April 2026)

Updated 8 April 2026

Applies to England, Scotland and Wales

It is normal practice for Accounting Officers to scrutinise significant policy proposals or plans to start or vary major projects and then assess whether they measure up to the standards set out in Managing Public Money. From April 2017, the government has committed to making a summary of the key points from these assessments available to Parliament where it involves a project within the Government’s Major Projects Portfolio.

This Accounting Officer Assessment considers the Synergy Programme, which is a cross-departmental initiative for which the Department for Work and Pensions Permanent Secretary is the lead Accounting Officer.

1. Background and Context 

Synergy is a Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP) Programme, established as one of five ‘Cluster’ programmes delivering the Shared Services Strategy for Government 2021 (SSSG). It is the largest of the Cluster Programmes and represents a once in a generation opportunity to transform how back-office functions are performed for almost half the Civil Service.

The 4 major government ‘delivery’ departments (plus 98 in-scope arm’s length bodies) working together on the Programme are:

• Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
• Department for Work and Pensions (DWP)
• Home Office
• Ministry of Justice

The Cluster departments deliver critical services for the UK. Synergy is going to transform the way HR, payroll, finance and procurement are performed across the Cluster departments, by simplifying and standardising ways of working, joining up functions, and freeing up time to deliver some of the UK’s most crucial public services. Departments will benefit from the resulting consistent approach that enables better data sharing, better decision-making and simpler processes that are enhanced by better automation and the use of Artificial Intelligence and machine learning.  

I published an Accounting Officer Assessment in May 2025 following His Majesty’s Treasury (HMT) approval of the Full Business Case (FBC) 1 in August 2024, which followed the major procurement of Enterprise Resource Planning and System Integrator services in partnership with Deloitte, Oracle and IBM.

This Assessment provides an update following HMT approval of the Synergy FBC2. This business case sought the release of funding for the business process services (BPS) procurement and continuing implementation. Following HMT approval of FBC2, the procurement outcome was announced in December 2025, with the programme’s new BPS contract expected to be signed in March 2026. FBC2 also secured ongoing funding support for delivery of the Programme and to establish the new Synergy Shared Services Hub (the Hub).  

Synergy is a highly complex programme delivering business transformation across multiple departments. Early delay has occurred resulting from 2 necessary Change Requests which have rebalanced and better aligned the programme integrated plan and streamlined service releases to provide an improved onboarding experience for end users.

Delivery confidence in the programme and its integrated plan has increased and, in consultation with the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA) the programme is now moving from the Service Design phase into Service Delivery Preparation phase.

2. Assessment Against Accounting Officer Standards 

2.1 Regularity

The Programme’s scope falls within existing legal powers for the department to administer spend and contracts of this nature. The procurement exercise has been conducted in accordance with government principles and commercial law.  

HM Treasury provided approval for the FBC2 in December 2025, conditional on:

• Programme spend must be contained within the funding provided through the Spending Review 2025 (SR25) that sets departmental budgets for 2025 to 2026 to 2028 to 2029 - any spending commitment above the funding provided for SR25, or beyond the end of the SR25 period, is at departments risk
• a plan for further assurance within the SR25 period must be agreed with HMT and NISTA
• DWP must notify, and seek approval from, HMT for any cost increases above the agreed SR25 funding or material changes to delivery timelines

The Programme has a robust financial plan, and the Cluster departments have recognised future funding risks and the need to provide ongoing support to the programme.

I am satisfied that this test is met.  

2.2 Propriety 

The Programme supports Parliament’s expectation for departments to join up where there are benefits from doing so and is consistent with the Shared Services Strategy for Government 2021.  

As is typical of programmes of this scale, there are risks in relation to regularity, value for money and feasibility, which are covered in more detail in those sections, but none of which significantly overlay into propriety.

I am satisfied that the propriety test is met. 

2.3 Value for Money  

The Programme continues to demonstrate a positive Net Present Value over the remaining business case period of 10 years and 3 months. The programme has undertaken a robust process to calculate Value for Money and included optimism bias and a sensitivity analysis. The economic case shows an improved positive return on investment from the position at FBC1. The cost-to-benefit ratio has risen from 1.2 to 1.9, driven by an improved and more detailed benefits position and significant savings generated by procuring services as a Cluster.

The Programme has undertaken a detailed review of investment costs, benefits and reflected the outcome from the procurement. Overall, investment costs total £746.4 million and recurrent costs of £1,315.4 million. This is offset by savings of £2,411.6 million, which are all realised within the departments and will help protect frontline services.  

Benefits have improved since FBC1 by £45 million, and benefits exceed costs by the end of 2029/2030 with the project paying back by January 2034.

The Programme Value for Money position is sensitive to delays, which could lead to cost increases and reduced benefits should the point of Go Live be moved back. Optimism bias adjustments (46%) and sensitivity analysis account for the potential for delivery risks materialising.

Value for Money remains positive unless benefits fall below 16% of values included in FBC2. The continued commitment of the four Synergy departments to deliver ‘cluster first’ is essential to the successful delivery of the Programme, including implementing service models aligned with the approved Common Design and mitigating schedule delays.

I am satisfied that the value for money test is met at this stage. 

2.4 Feasibility

The Synergy Programme has made real progress since HM Treasury approval of FBC1.

The integrated programme plan was rephased and baselined over Summer 2025 and has been approved by the four Cluster departments. The full go-live schedule spans 53 weeks. The completion of Common Design in October 2025 and HM Treasury’s approval of FBC2 in December 2025 are two critical milestones the programme has achieved.  

Programme funding has been ringfenced through SR25 which includes the scaling of the Hub within the Programme itself to ensure service management capability and knowledge transfer from partners occurs over time ready for go-lives and live running.

Synergy is, however, delivering large scale, complex business transformation across four major departments and 98 Arm’s Length Bodies. As a Government Major Projects Portfolio programme, Synergy naturally carries a range of anticipated risks that need to be proactively managed. 

Like all major programmes, Synergy is vulnerable to delay and both time and cost risks require careful management by Programme Leadership. The Programme must also pivot from design to delivery. Synergy is revising its ways of working to ensure resources are optimised across the Cluster, to drive delivery and ensure costs are contained within the FBC2 budget including Optimism Bias. This work is due to complete in the current financial year.

Noting the critical dependencies outlined above, I am satisfied that the feasibility test is met at this stage.

3. Conclusion 

In conclusion, I have prepared this summary to set out the key points which informed my decision. My overall assessment is that the Synergy Programme satisfies the requirements of the four accounting officer tests of regularity, propriety, value for money and feasibility to proceed at this stage. 

If any of these factors change materially during the lifetime of this Programme, I undertake to prepare a revised summary, setting out my assessment of those factors. 

This summary will be published on the government’s website. Copies will be deposited in the library of the House of Commons and sent to the Comptroller and Auditor General and Treasury Officer of Accounts. 

Sir Peter Schofield
Permanent Secretary
Department for Work and Pensions