Since 2010, the government has made a number of changes to its procurement structures and processes. There have been signs of good progress in key areas: expenditure on common goods and services is more centralised; participation by small and medium enterprises (SMEs) has increased; and the Government Procurement Service is an improvement on its predecessor. The creation of a Chief Procurement Officer and associated positions has formed clearer lines of responsibility at the centre, and the Cabinet Office now has a firmer grip of procurement expenditure. Overall, the NAO expresses confidence in the Service's reported savings of £426 million in 2011-12 as a result of reductions in price owing to centralised procurement. Nevertheless, there have been problems in implementing the reforms, including ineffective governance structures, unrealistic targets, incomplete data and weaknesses in contract management. Government is not maximising the potential for savings through centralised procurement. There are some operational issues with GPS's management of the central contracts, with departments raising concerns about the inconsistency of contract management and the quality of customer service. And some weaknesses in implementation mean that the centralised approach is not releasing procurement resources in departments as originally expected. Roles and responsibilities for day-to-day contract management are unclear and there are inadequate mechanisms by which departments and the centre of government can hold each other to account. The Cabinet Office will have to lead a major cultural shift across government if the centralising of buying goods and services is to deliver the significant benefits on offer.