Search

Note: This includes one project that joined assurance oversight and closed since the previous report in March 2025.

The number of projects and their total budget remained relatively stable over the past year. Most (81.6%) active projects under central assurance oversight are Tier 2 or Tier 3 projects, which is consistent with the bulk of active projects continuing from last year.

Flagship digital investments (Tier 1) continue to represent the lowest proportion of active projects, experiencing a 0.1% increase from 18.3% in 2025 to 18.4% in 2026. These projects have the longer-than-average duration of 4.5 years. This reflects the fact that these are strategically significant projects, which are more complex and therefore carry a high level of risk. The $469.1 million total budget increase in Tier 1 projects over the past year is mainly due to some existing projects receiving previously agreed funding and several projects rolling up into one overarching program. 

While the average duration of Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects remains similar to last year, the average duration of Tier 3 projects has increased by over three-quarters of a year (0.8 years). This longer average delivery period for Tier 3 projects is due to a combination of project extensions, legislative delays, additional funding and delivery issues. Some Tier 3 project timelines have also been affected by delivery issues in dependent projects or shifting agency priorities.

Most new projects under central assurance oversight are smaller and less complex

Compared with last year, fewer projects (71.7% less) joined central oversight. This reflects lower levels of new funding decisions in the most recent Budget. This was influenced by the 2025 federal election and caretaker conventions, which limited the number of proposals progressing to approval compared with non-election years.

A total of 13 out of the 15 projects new to assurance oversight this year are Tier 2 and Tier 3 level investments, consistent with DTA advice strongly encouraging smaller, less complex projects. This is evident through our recommendations for APS agencies modernising the software systems that streamline their core business processes (Enterprise Resource Planning modernisations) to develop essential features only, while minimising customisations. 

We encourage smaller projects because they have greater chances of success. Smaller projects generally experience fewer complexities and are agile, resulting in a more efficient and effective responses to delivery challenges as they emerge.  

Nearly half of the continuing projects under central assurance oversight have changed their end dates

Since the last report, 48.3% of the projects that continued under oversight reported changes to their completion dates. While a few are projected to finish ahead of schedule, the majority are now expected to conclude later than originally planned.

Project timelines may change due to a combination of internal and external factors affecting delivery. Common causes include technical challenges, resource constraints and vendor performance issues that affect delivery of milestones. In some cases, external dependencies such as legislative changes and evolving international policy requirements cause schedule adjustments. There are also instances where the substantial work has concluded to schedule, but agencies opt to keep project arrangements intact while they embed change and ensure intended outcomes are achieved. 

Many digital projects are delivered in smaller sequential phases or tranches, each providing defined functionality and benefits. This method is in line with DTA advice as it reduces risk and enables flexibility to adapt to changing requirements. For some projects, a change in end date is due to the overall project receiving funding for the next tranche of work. For others, a change reflects a more refined end date following additional planning for future tranches. 

The DTA will capture agency insights through Digital Maturity Assessments. Released in March 2026, the Digital Maturity Assessments will help agencies make smart, future-focused digital investment and resourcing decisions to better support the users of their digital services.

Making the performance of digital projects more transparent

In recent years, the Australian Government has invested not just in new digital projects but also in understanding the mix of projects underway and how they can best be supported to succeed. Transparency is an essential element of good governance. This page sets out improvements made to ensure Australians know how their digital projects are performing.

All Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects now have delivery confidence assessments

Delivery Confidence Assessments (DCAs) indicate how likely a project is to meet its objectives at a given point in time and are usually provided as a rating on a 5-point scale from High to Low. DCA ratings are useful in supporting improved project performance in 2 ways. At the individual project level, they provide an indication of when a project may need some support, and at the aggregate level they provide transparency on how all projects are progressing.

A lower DCA rating highlights risks or issues that need attention. This is not a forecast of failure – rather, it is an early warning system enabling timely interventions to address underlying challenges. By taking the right corrective actions, projects can improve confidence and successfully deliver expected outcomes for Australians, on time and within budget.

The DTA plays a crucial role in this process by working closely with agencies when confidence decreases. We help by: 

• providing guidance and support to project teams
• facilitating the best use of assurance processes
• promoting strategies to address issues as early as possible, when course corrections are more likely to succeed.

Ultimately, this collaborative effort aims to improve the likelihood of successful project delivery, ensuring that investments provide the expected benefits to Australians and businesses.

Since the introduction of the Australian Government’s IOF in November 2021, the focus has been on understanding project performance as well as creating the conditions that are necessary to support project success. DCA ratings provide initial insights on project performance so, as more projects provide DCA ratings, we gain a more complete picture to identify areas for learning and improvement.

Transparency and understanding of project performance is increasing

There has been a continued focus on improving the availability and quality of DCAs. These assessments are undertaken by skilled independent assurers whenever possible to ensure objectivity, strengthening early oversight and influencing how projects are managed day-to-day. 

The importance of transparency in major digital projects is highlighted in a recent report by the Western Australian Auditor General:

Increasing transparency would allow government to focus effort and oversight on those projects that most need it and not allow underperforming projects to go unnoticed. Transparency is key to ensuring entity accountability for their IT. (Note 7)

How the Australian Government’s digital projects are performing

This page describes the performance of digital projects currently under central assurance oversight. Digital projects present unique challenges, and the improvements described in previous sections are helping to create the right conditions for projects to succeed. 

As noted in the previous section, a significant achievement since last year’s report is that all Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects have now reported their delivery confidence assessments. The trend from these assessments shows that most projects are on track to deliver their agreed outcomes, with 60.0% reporting a Medium-High or High DCA rating.

While the proportion of Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects reporting a Medium-High or High delivery confidence remains unchanged from last year, the proportion of total budget associated with these projects has grown to 69.5%, up from 52.9% last year. This means that the government’s complex and strategically significant digital projects with the most investment are increasingly on track to deliver their expected benefits.

Tier 1 projects have seen the greatest change, with more of the government’s investment in these projects on track. Almost three-quarters (74.2%) of the budget allocated to Tier 1 projects is attributed to those reporting Medium-High or High delivery confidence, almost double the 39.4% in 2025. Additionally, the average budget of Tier 1 projects with Medium or lower confidence has nearly halved, falling from $256.0 million in 2025 to $137.9 million in 2026. This indicates that delivery risk is now concentrated in smaller projects, which offer greater agility to respond to changing priorities – helping reduce delivery risk across the government’s digital portfolio. 

Projects reporting Medium-High or High delivery confidence have common themes that enable this result. Successful delivery of project milestones and tranches is the most reported reason for improved delivery confidence, as this is clear evidence a project is achieving its goals. Another theme is undertaking regular assurance activities, such as independent assurance assessments, which are highly valuable in maintaining accountability and allow for timely adjustment when issues arise. Other enabling factors include having proactive risk management, which allows threats to be identified and addressed in a timely manner. Similarly, strong governance and leadership is critical for efficient and effective decision-making. 

Reforms supporting success: Guidance for creating successful governance boards to steer digital projects

An effective digital project governance board is essential for managing the complexities and challenges inherent in digital projects. Recent consultations with Australian Government agencies and their leaders have highlighted a lack of comprehensive guidance on establishing and operating successful governance boards, particularly within the digital sector.

To address this gap, the DTA has developed new guidance in collaboration with the University of Queensland Business School, to assist Senior Responsible Officials and agency leaders in creating high-performing boards for digital projects.

This resource clarifies the distinct role of digital project boards and how they differ from other governance structures. It presents practical, evidence-based recommendations concerning optimal board composition, requisite skills and behaviours for effective oversight, and proven strategies for navigating common challenges throughout the project lifecycle.

A self-assessment tool is provided to enable boards to review and enhance their governance practices, identify areas for improvement, and develop actionable plans while leveraging existing strengths.

This publication contributes to the DTA’s digital project research series – a collaborative initiative with academic institutions, industry partners and government agencies to examine and shape key factors impacting digital project outcomes.

More information is at: Digital project research series.

No projects have a Low delivery confidence

Across Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects, projects rated Medium-Low or Low in 2025 (14.8%) fell sharply in 2026 (8.3%), with no projects now reporting a Low delivery confidence.

Tier 1 projects have seen the greatest change, dropping from 20.0% with Medium-Low or Low delivery confidence in 2025 to just 5.6% with Medium-Low delivery confidence in 2026.

The total budget invested in Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects with a Medium-Low or Low delivery confidence has also dropped, from 25.0% with Medium-Low or Low delivery confidence to 6.5% with Medium-Low delivery confidence. 

With no Tier 1 or Tier 2 projects now rated Low, there are fewer projects and far less investment in projects with the lowest levels of delivery confidence.

In 2026, commonly reported reasons for Medium-Low delivery confidence are schedule-related concerns such as schedule pressure, slippage or compressed timelines. Other reasons relate to resource constraints and capability gaps, which can be attributed to critical skills shortages across government agencies. As noted in the State of the Service Report 2024–25, a large proportion of agencies identified digital and ICT (85%), data (77%) and portfolio, program or project management (46%) skills as their largest specific critical skills shortages (Note 8).

Other factors include external dependencies and policy/legislative uncertainties. While often beyond a project’s control, these factors can be addressed through proactive risk management, as identified earlier as a common theme in projects reporting a Medium-High or High delivery confidence. 

Despite recent improvements in overall delivery confidence, there are emerging short-term pressures. One-third of projects reporting a Medium or lower delivery confidence have a planned completion date within the next 6 months. Projects at this stage of implementation are more susceptible to schedule slippage and quality risks, particularly where dependencies and residual issues converge late in the delivery cycle.