Image description
PLACEHOLDER
OffIMAGE GOES HERE
Image description
PLACEHOLDER
OffProjects reporting Medium or lower delivery confidence
While many projects are on-track, some projects are reporting lower levels of delivery confidence
Projects reporting Medium or lower delivery confidence
| Total projects (Tier 1 and 2) | 62 |
| Number with Medium or Lower delivery confidence | 23 |
| Percentage of total projects with Medium or lower delivery confidence | 37.1% |
| Total budget of projects with Medium or lower delivery confidence | $3.5 billion |
| Tier 1 Projects with Medium or lower delivery confidence | 45.0% |
| Tier 2 Projects with Medium or lower delivery confidence | 33.3% |
As this table shows, a higher proportion of Tier 1 projects (45.0%) are reporting a delivery confidence of Medium or below compared to Tier 2 projects (33.3%), likely reflecting the added risks and complexities inherent to these projects.
Common themes among projects rated Medium or lower are:
- dependencies on changes to, or introduction of, new legislation
- the complex nature of the technological solutions being implemented – including where integration of systems across organisations and even jurisdictions is required to achieve outcomes
- where digital transformation is occurring concurrent with major organisational changes, or at a pace the organisation is struggling to sustain (e.g., due to multiple concurrent digital projects putting pressure on an agency’s enterprise capability).
- challenges attracting and retaining staff with the required skills including in digital disciplines such as cybersecurity, as well as in project/program management disciplines such as benefits, change, risk, budget management, and integrated scheduling.
Projects reporting lower levels of delivery confidence are generally challenged by more than one of these themes. As noted in the July 2023 Review of the Modernising Business Registers Program, ‘the difficulty of effectively implementing a digital and ICT transformation project increases exponentially with each additional layer of complexity’.[1]
[1] The Australian Government the Treasury, Independent Review into Modernising Business Registers, p. 338.
Reducing risk through robust assurance and governance
Parallel development of legislation and digital capabilities can lead to significant delivery risks, including budget overruns, delays and, in extreme cases, project failures. Sometimes urgent factors make this concurrent work necessary, but where this occurs the associated risk must be managed carefully.
For high-risk digital projects, robust assurance and governance are crucial. The DTA seeks to mitigate risk by adding central funding and governance controls. An example is recommending the government quarantine part or all project funding, releasing it upon successful early discovery work and other proof points that indicate likely successful delivery.
Changes in delivery confidence
The government’s digital projects are being delivered against a backdrop of rapid and continuous technological change. This dynamic environment is reflected in the changes in delivery confidence ratings over the past year as projects move through different stages in their development.
Understanding overall changes in delivery confidence to target engagement and reforms
Reforms supporting success
Ensuring digital projects deliver expected benefits for Australians on time and on budget sits at the heart of each of the reforms highlighted throughout this report.
How digital projects are monitored and supported from the centre of government
In the past year, more projects have come under central monitoring and oversight as part of the Australian Government’s Digital and ICT Investment Oversight Framework (IOF).
This world-class framework is designed to ensure digital projects are strategically aligned, carefully prioritised, meet digital policies and standards, and realise expected benefits for Australians.
The IOF starts with setting a clear strategic direction, which is then reinforced throughout the lifecycle of project design, funding and implementation. Throughout this lifecycle, best-practice digital policies and standards set clear requirements with agencies supported to meet these requirements by the DTA.
Image description
IOF Digital and ICT Investment Oversight Framework.
Six interconnected states delivering coordinated advice and action for governmentin ensuring projects deliver to expected benefits and outcomes. The diagram shows four headlines with various states of the IOF below them as subheadings.
- Image headline: Pre-budget
- Subheading: Strategic planning: Defines the Australian Government’s digital and ICT-enabled investment portfolio and its future objectives and identifies capability gaps.
- Subheading: Prioritisation: Prioritises, plans and advises on investments to deliver on the Australian Government’s digital and ICT objectives.
- Image headline: Budget
- Subheading: Contestability: Ensures proposals are robust and meet whole-of government digital standards immediately prior to government consideration.
- Image headline: Implementation
- Subheading: Assurance: Provides assurance to the Australian Government that investments are on-track to deliver expected benefits/ throughout delivery.
- Subheading: Sourcing: Ensures the Australian Government obtains the best value for money from digital and ICT-enabled investments.
- Image headline: Ongoing
- Subheading: Operations: Regular data collection provides intelligence on the size, health and maturity of the Australian Government’s digital and ICT-enabled investments
Reforms supporting success – enabling project success through good assurance
Since 2021, the Australian Government has invested in strengthening central oversight of digital projects. This central oversight works to ensure best practice is systematically applied as digital projects are designed and delivered across agencies. By driving the adoption of best practice, central oversight plays a key role in giving each digital project the best chance of success.
The Assurance Framework for Digital and ICT Investments mandates global best practice in the use of assurance for digital projects. While assurance doesn’t in itself deliver outcomes, effective assurance is critical to good governance and decision-making. All projects in this report are subject to the Assurance Framework and must apply its ‘key principles for good assurance’. These principles draw on global best practice and, when applied effectively, provide confidence that digital projects will achieve their objectives, without leading to excessive levels of assurance.
The Assurance Framework also includes escalation protocols to support agencies to resolve delivery challenges digital projects might encounter. Central oversight of assurance also ensures that lessons learned from across digital projects are systematically incorporated into the design and delivery of future projects to reduce the risk of delivery issues arising in future.
Reforms supporting success – ensuring digital projects are well designed
The DTA works with agencies to ensure robust and defensible proposals for spending on all new digital projects.
Each proposal must align with the government’s strategies, policies and best practice digital standards as part of the Digital Capability Assessment Process (DCAP).
For complex, high-risk and high-cost digital projects, the DTA offers additional support through the ICT Investment Approval Process (IIAP). This involves working with agencies to develop and mature implementation planning to support success. A comprehensive business case must clearly demonstrate the need for funding, based on thorough policy development, a well-planned approach to delivery and mechanisms for reviewing project progress. This process aids government decision-making on whether to fund large and complex digital project proposals.
The DTA’s digital policies and standards codify best practice and ensure digital projects are positioned to succeed
The policies that apply to digital projects in the Australian Government are constantly being reviewed and updated. This is necessary to ensure they best support agencies in delivering the world-class data and digital capabilities needed to support the missions set out in the Data and Digital Government Strategy.
Image description
The image shows a central circle with lines leading off to the subheadings.
Image headline (in the centre): 'Best Practice Digital Policies and Standards'
Sub headings:
- Secure Cloud Strategy
- Helps agencies transition to cloud-based services while maintaining appropriate security and functionality.
- (Administered jointly with Home Affairs)
- Hosting Certification Framework
- Provides guidance on identifying and sourcing hosting services that meet enhanced privacy, sovereignty and security requirements.
- (Administered jointly with Home Affairs
- Cyber Security Guidelines
- Identifies key standards, practices and procedures that are designed to harden and protect technology and information from cyber threats.
- (Administered jointly with Home Affairs).
- Assurance Framework (Refreshed)
- Ensure that assurance is applied effectively to support successful implementation of digital investments.
- (Refreshed with updated guidance and support within the last 12 months)
- Benefits Management Policy (New)
- Standardises benefit management practices for government digital investments to help agencies deliver their outcomes.
- Digital Sourcing Framework
- Provides a set of principles, policies and guidance that shows agencies how to buy digital products and services on behalf of the Australian Government.
- Digital Experience Policy (New)
- Focuses on improving the experience for people and businesses interacting digitally with government information and services.
- Digital and ICT Reuse Policy
- Ensures a whole of government focus on reuse of digital and ICT capabilities.
Reforms supporting success – improving benefits management capability
The Australian Government’s Benefits Management Policy for Digital and ICT-Enabled Investments requires agencies to use best practice benefits management for their digital projects. Projects must identify measurable benefits with clear baselines and targets before funding decisions are taken. The minimum policy requirements are adjusted based on project tier, but all projects must focus on securing benefits in addition to preventing cost and schedule overruns.
The DTA oversees the realisation of benefits and identifies emerging risks across digital projects. We also focus on providing advice, support and training to improve public service capabilities.
Investment in this area aims to ensure that digital projects deliver anticipated benefits to the government and Australians.
Image description
Diagram headline: “Active projects by tier, budget and average duration”.
The diagram demonstrates the increase in total number and budget of projects under assurance oversight from February 2024 versus February 2025. February 2024 shows 89 active projects worth a total of $6.2 billion with all projects continuing under oversight. February 2025 shows 110 total active projects broken up into 1 paused project, 32 projects that left oversight, 56 projects that are continuing and 54 projects which joined, all worth a total of $12.9 billion.
OffMost projects coming under central assurance oversight in the past year have been Tier 2 and Tier 3 level investments
| Investment tier Projects | Total budget | Median total budget | Average duration | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Flagship digital investments |
9 |
$1.3 billion |
$154.7 million |
3.2 years |
| 2 Strategically significant digital investments |
20 |
$5.7 billion |
$58.8 million |
3.6 years (see the table note) |
| 3 Significant digital investments |
25 |
$1.4 billion |
$24.0 million |
2.2 years |
Table note: Tier 2 average project duration is affected by 2 outlier projects, each with a duration of 35.0 years. Average duration including these 2 projects is 6.9 years.
Tier 3 projects made up the largest number of additional projects. These projects are usually lower risk and have smaller budgets, with most investing in ‘sustainment’ and ‘product/service enhancement’ rather than establishing wholly new digital capabilities. The increase in Tier 3 investments reflects ongoing efforts to move away from higher-risk large and complex projects to smaller, ‘bite-size’ projects where possible. Evidence suggests these smaller projects generally have a higher rate of success.
Large investments will still be necessary in some cases, and several have been commissioned since the last report. Strong planning and oversight are crucial to ensure new higher-risk investments do not exceed available delivery capacity. Strengthening central oversight, including digital investment planning and prioritisation, is key to balance project loads within capacity and coordinate efforts to expand capabilities of agencies and delivery partners to handle expected growth in digital investment.
Reforms supporting success – planning for the future
From the 2026–27 Budget, Commonwealth agencies will be required to develop digital and ICT investment plans. This will provide a future-focused understanding of the complexities across the government’s digital and ICT landscape and identify future need for investment in digital services.
Digital and ICT investment plans will provide short, medium and long-term views of projects. This will help to balance capacity, instil a culture of strategic digital investment planning focused on the future, improve understanding of criticality and risk, and support long-term ambitions to achieve better digital outcomes for Australians as part of the Data and Digital Government Strategy. The investment plans will also increase visibility of digital investments across agencies, enabling the trial and adoption of new technologies, greater coordination of digital enhancements, and more integrated service delivery across agencies.
The distribution of project by total budget highlights the diversity of projects underway across the Australian Government
Image description
The chart shows the distribution of projects by total budget, in order of smallest to largest budget, broken into Tiers 1, 2 and 3.
The smallest project is Tier 3; Waste Exports Licensing and Declaration (WELD), $0.7 million.
The median project is Tier 2; National Measurement Institute (NMI) Digital Transformation Program, $40.1 million.
The case study on page 47, is Tier 2, National Anti-Scam Centre, $80.1 million.
The case study from page 26, is Tier 1, Crack Down on Fraud, $194.3 million.
The chart indicates the range of projects with the largest project being Tier 2; Resourcing Australia’s Prosperity (RAP) Initiative, $3.4 billion.
OffTier 2 and Tier 3 projects make up the bulk of all active projects under central assurance oversight
Image description
Diagram headline: 'Active projects by tier, budget and average duration'.
Diagram demonstrates active projects by tier, budget and average duration.
20 tier 1 projects have a total budget of $3.8 billon, with an average duration of 4.4 years.
42 tier 2 projects have a total of $7 billion, this is broken up into $3.4 billion for one project, with $3.7 billion spread across the remaining 41 projects and an average duration of 5.1 years.
48 tier 3 projects have a total budget of $2 billion and an average duration of 2.9 years.
OffOf note, almost half of the total budget of all Tier 2 projects relates to a single, multi-decade investment, valued at $3.4 billion. This outlier project skews the average budget of Tier 2 projects ($167.8 million) and means the median budget of $45.0 million better reflects their typical size.
Flagship digital investments (Tier 1) represent 18.2% of active projects and approximately 29.6% of the total budget. Just over half of all Tier 1 projects are reporting a planned completion date between June 2025 to June 2026. Strong ongoing investment planning and prioritisation within each of these projects will be essential for Senior Responsible Officials to smoothly deliver these projects over the next 12 months.
For all tiers, experience shows that the projects most likely to deliver expected benefits on time and on budget have robust approaches to key project management disciplines including governance, risk, benefits and assurance. Strengthening approaches in these areas is a priority for the DTA in our work overseeing all the digital projects included in this report.
Case study: Social services
National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA): Preventing disability insurance fraud
At a glance
Making it easier to get it right and harder to get it wrong
Tier 1
Investment
Tranche 1 (2024)
$83.9 million
Tranche 2 (2025)
$110.4 million
Benefits
Improved integrity and security
$200 million in savings
$400 million redirected from dishonest providers
Summary
The Crack Down on Fraud (CDoF) Program is enhancing the NDIA’s capabilities by streamlining processes and improving ICT systems to detect and prevent fraud and non-compliance.
On 18 February 2024, the government announced initial Tranche 1 funding of $83.9 million to strengthen the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) and make sure every dollar is going to participants who need it.
The CDoF Program has immediately addressed emerging and high-risk issues identified by the Fraud Fusion Taskforce (FFT) – a partnership between 19 Commonwealth agencies, co-led by the NDIA and Services Australia.
It is improving:
- systems that assess, process and pay over 400,000 NDIS claims per day
- systems that check identities to increase participant safety and privacy
- the my NDIS app and NDIS portals.
In addition, the program is building:
- new ICT systems to connect with other agencies, providers and banks so claims and payments can be done faster with less errors
- a new fraud investigation system that will connect with other enforcement agencies.
Saving millions and enhancing security
The program has quickly improved validating and substantiating payments and enhanced pre-payment integrity, ahead of introducing long-term technical solutions. By 30 June 2024, these improvements had enabled over $200 million in savings from non-compliant claims with a further $400 million forecast to be diverted from dishonest providers to genuine disability supports and services.
The CDoF Program has also enhanced identity integrity and provided a consistent, secure experience for accessing NDIS digital platforms via myGov. In its first year, the program delivered a data lake for fraud detection, an integrity management system for investigations, the first phase of a new API Gateway for easier provider interaction with NDIA and stronger cyber event detection. Where appropriate, strategies included leveraging whole-of-government arrangements and reusing existing solutions.
Helping to transform lives
"The NDIS is absolutely transforming the lives of people with disability. It represents the inclusive spirit of our Australian community. The system uplifts being delivered by the talented teams in the CDoF Program will ‘make it easier to get it right and harder to get it wrong’, thus protecting NDIS participants and ensuring the sustainability of the scheme."
Martin Mane,
General Manager Integrity Transformation, NDIA
The program is being delivered in parallel to the most significant legislative reforms since the NDIS started. Participants remain at the heart of this transformation, and the program is working with the disability community to deliver valuable changes.
Off