Major digital projects list
Scope
This appendix contains information on digital projects under central oversight and assurance through the DTA Assurance Framework for Digital & ICT Investments. The IOF guides government’s digital investments across 6 interconnected states: Strategic planning; Prioritisation; Contestability; Assurance; Sourcing; and Operations. The DTA provides advice and assurance on these projects including in our role administering the Assurance Framework for Digital and ICT Investments, which governs the Assurance state of the IOF.
The appendix includes details on active projects as well as projects that concluded assurance oversight since the Major Digital Projects Report 2025.
This appendix does not include:
- projects not subject to the Assurance Framework
- projects sustaining existing digital capability, which are not subject to the Assurance Framework
- recently funded projects yet to formally commence or enter assurance oversight
- projects led by agencies in the Australian Intelligence Community as well as the Department of Defence – these projects are subject to other assurance and oversight processes overseen by either the Office of National Intelligence or the Department of Defence.
Withheld project data
In a small number of cases, project data has been withheld at the request of lead agencies. Data is only withheld in exceptional circumstances where release would be prejudicial to the national interest and/or commercial negotiations. This includes in situations where releasing project budget information would compromise an agency’s ability to achieve a value for money outcome in negotiations with commercial delivery partners. These are denoted as ‘NFP’ (not for publication) in the portfolio tables in the appendix.
Data collection and further enquiries
The DTA works closely with each Senior Responsible Official to validate data and monitor progress for every project. We coordinate reporting across government to promote transparency to ministers and the Australian community.
However, given the potential for commercial sensitivities to arise, especially when agencies are remediating project challenges, all project-specific enquiries should be directed to the relevant agency.
Explanation of table column headers
The portfolio tables in the appendix includes the following column headers.
| Column header | Description |
|---|---|
| Project name and description | The name of the project as advised by the lead agency and a high-level description of the project, including:
|
| DCAs | The delivery confidence for the project as reported:
Where a delivery confidence is not included for 2024 or 2025, this means a project was not required to report for the purposes of the February 2024 or March 2025 report – for example, because the project had not yet commenced. |
| Delivery status | The delivery status of the project for the purposes of this February 2026 report. |
| Total budget ($ million) | The total budget (including both digital and non-digital budget components). Numbers are rounded to one decimal place. |
| Digital budget ($ million) | The portion of total budget devoted to the design, development, implementation, deployment, sustainment and testing of digital and ICT capability. Numbers are rounded to one decimal place. |
| Project timeline | The date the project commenced to the project end date. For active projects, this is the expected end date of the project as advised by the lead agency. For projects that have concluded assurance oversight, this is the actual end date of the project as advised by the lead agency. |
Key for delivery confidence
Delivery confidence is an assessment of a project’s overall trajectory to deliver on intended outcomes and benefits. A lower delivery confidence rating signals there are issues or risks that need to be addressed. However, a low rating does not necessarily mean a project will fail. Instead, it is an early warning, allowing for timely interventions to support the project team in mitigating risks and overcoming challenges.
The DTA plays a crucial role in this process. By working closely with agencies, we help to ensure that the right measures are taken if delivery confidence decreases. This involves providing guidance, resources and support to project teams, helping them make the best use of assurance processes, and promoting strategies to address emerging issues. This collaborative effort aims to improve the likelihood of successful project delivery, so that investments provide expected benefits to Australians and businesses.
Delivery confidence assessments are based on independent assurance assessments since the release of the last data on the digital project portfolio. Where an independent assessment is not available, the delivery confidence assessment is provided by the lead agency (self-assessment).
| Rating | Description |
|---|---|
| High | Successful delivery of the investment to time, cost, quality standards and benefits realisation appears highly likely and there are no major outstanding issues that at this stage appear to threaten delivery significantly. |
| Medium-High | Successful delivery of the investment to time, cost, quality standards and benefits realisation appears probable however constant attention will be needed to ensure risks do not become major issues threatening delivery. |
| Medium | Successful delivery of the investment against budget, schedule, scope and benefits, appears feasible but significant issues already exist, requiring management attention. These appear resolvable at this stage and, if addressed promptly, should not present a cost/schedule overrun or loss/delay of benefits. |
| Medium-Low | Successful delivery of the investment requires urgent action to address major risks or issues in several key areas. Changes to budget, schedule, scope or benefits may be necessary if the investment is to be delivered successfully. |
| Low | Successful delivery of the investment requires changes to budget, schedule, scope or benefits. There are major issues with investment definition, schedule, budget, quality and/or benefits delivery, which do not appear to be manageable or resolvable without such changes being made. |
| Not reported | Delivery confidence was not reported by the lead agency. |
| NFP | Not for publication |
Key for project tiers
There are 3 possible tier ratings for digital projects, with higher tiered projects subject to increased levels of central monitoring and oversight.
Tier 1
Tier 1 investments represent the Australian Government’s most complex and strategically significant digital or ICT investments, responsible for transforming the experience of people and business and realising the APS enterprise view by improving the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations.
Tier 2
Tier 2 investments are usually complex and strategically significant digital or ICT investments but may not have the same whole-of-government emphasis or the same criticality to the digital agenda as Tier 1 investments or, if they do, they are of lower estimated total cost.
Tier 3
Tier 3 investments are significant digital or ICT investments. They are likely focused on meeting the needs of one agency or, sometimes, a small group of agencies. They generally represent lower risk.