What we examined

Our review followed one line of inquiry:

1. Are public entities transparently reporting the performance of their major projects against cost, time, scope and benefits?

To answer this question, we surveyed 15 of the 19 entities in scope for this review and examined 113 selected major projects.

Appendix A lists agencies’ formal letters of response to this review along with their recommendation action plans. Appendix G contains the entity responses to our survey.

Download a PDF copy of Appendix G: Changes to outputs.

Download a PDF copy of Appendix F: Changes to objectives.

Download a PDF copy of Appendix E: Fair presentation framework assessment criteria.

Download a PDF copy of Appendix D: How VAGO assesses departments' performance measures.

Download a PDF copy of Appendix C: Review scope and method.

Download a PDF copy of Appendix B: Abbreviations, acronyms and glossary.

Download a PDF copy of Appendix A: Submissions and comments.

Departments annually review their performance information and have processes to check if they comply with the RMF’s requirements. 

However, our analysis of updates to the 2024–25 performance statements shows that these processes do not support departments to consistently meet the RMF’s requirements. 

Some departments told us they find it difficult to meet some of the RMF’s requirements and review their performance information within required timeframes.

Covered in this section:

DTF’s performance statement helps users understand its role of providing financial, economic and commercial advice to the government. And its performance measures provide insights into the quality, quantity and timeliness of its performance.

However, we identified that only 67 per cent of performance measures give users the information they need to meaningfully assess DTF’s performance over time. We also could not reproduce DTF’s results for 61 per cent of its published performance measures, which means we cannot assure the accuracy of these results.