Transparency data

NISTA Annual Report 2024-25

Published 11 August 2025

1. Foreword by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Darren Jones

Infrastructure – whether economic social or digital – is the foundation on which Britain’s public services are built. Citizens rightly expect public services that enhance their quality of life, support their wellbeing, and ensure their security. From the hospitals that anchor our communities, to the nuclear and offshore energy that lights our homes, and to the digital services that underpin daily life, robust infrastructure is essential to a thriving, modern society.

It is also a vital driver of economic growth and national prosperity. Yet for too long, the sector has suffered from a multitude of issues, challenges and setbacks. This government will deliver on its commitment to provide a clearer, more ambitious vision that fixes the foundations and rebuilds Britain. One that benefits the public, businesses, and investors alike.

Last year, I set out a defined vision for fundamentally transforming how projects are planned, funded, and delivered across the UK, underpinned by our Plan for Change. And I am pleased to say we have now begun walking that path.

In Autumn 2024, I announced the creation of the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA), bringing together the strategic expertise of the National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) and the delivery focus of the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA). NISTA has a strong mandate and benefits from direct ministerial oversight from the centre of government. And while it supports the delivery of critical infrastructure, it also spans service transformation, defence and digital projects.

I am pleased to announce that NISTA – which also provides expertise on private finance, spatial planning, and leads the Government Project Delivery Function - has now published its 10 Year Infrastructure Strategy and Infrastructure Pipeline.

This government will do things differently and learn lessons from past mistakes. In June 2025, I set out a comprehensive 10 Year Infrastructure Strategy to restore confidence in the UK’s infrastructure. Backed by at least £725 billion of government funding over the coming decade, it will deliver tangible improvements for people across the country, such as over £6 billion per year to create safer hospital environments, £600 million per year to improve safety and security in prisons and the wider justice sector, and £3 billion per year to transform learning environments in schools and colleges.

We have also introduced the Infrastructure Pipeline – a transformative tool that offers investors and businesses regular updates on 780 planned public and private sector projects. This transparency gives industry the clarity and confidence to invest in workforce numbers and skills, and to plan effectively for the long term.

The Pipeline is designed to build supply chain capacity, tackle skills shortages, and create high-quality jobs, all while supporting our modern Industrial Strategy by driving business investment. Bringing industry with us on this journey is essential if we are to deliver the next generation of infrastructure and major projects.

This annual report showcases 213 of the largest, most innovative and high-risk projects and programmes delivered by the government, worth £996 billion, with benefits totalling £742 billion.

It is important to recognise that not every project in the portfolio is measured by direct monetary benefits – particularly those led by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and Ministry of Justice (MoJ). We are living in an increasingly volatile world, facing new and complex threats that require a robust and modern response. Military Capability projects alone account for £327 billion of the Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP) and, ultimately, the safety and security of the nation are beyond price.

This year’s report is more concise than in previous years, as the majority of the current GMPP was inherited from the previous administration, with this snapshot covering March 2024 to March 2025. Since then, we have made significant progress through allocating essential funding for infrastructure maintenance and structures, launching new projects and programmes with the potential to transform lives, and learning important lessons from past shortcomings, including those identified in the James Stewart review of HS2.

Our ambition has a bright future and there is no room to lose momentum. I am committed to working alongside NISTA, government departments, and industry to drive meaningful change and ensure that infrastructure is firmly at the heart of Britain’s progress.

2. Foreword by NISTA Chief Executive Officer, Becky Wood

Infrastructure is the backbone of a modern, thriving society. Delivered well, it quietly enables prosperity, supports communities, and underpins essential public services. Yet, the delivery of infrastructure and public services in the UK has long been challenged by complexity, fragmentation and missed opportunities. These challenges have at times led to inefficiencies, slow progress and a lack of coherence across the system. And it is clear from the indicators in the Annual Report 2024-25 that there is much to address in continuing to improve on our collective approach to delivery.

The creation of the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA) is a pivotal first step in addressing these persistent issues. By uniting the strengths of the National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) and the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA), NISTA will be positioned as a single centre of excellence at the heart of government. Our remit now spans economic and social infrastructure, service transformation, defence, and digital projects, reflecting the scale and interconnectedness of the challenges we face.

In June 2025, we set out a bold vision with the publication of the first 10 Year Infrastructure Strategy, establishing a new longer-term framework for infrastructure delivery at a national level. In July 2025, we published the first dynamic Infrastructure Pipeline in support of the delivery of this longer-term framework, and we are now commencing work on many other elements of the whole system change that the delivery of the 10 Year Infrastructure Strategy will depend on. There will be an initial focus on the implementation of a new approach to spatial planning, delivering on our social infrastructure roadmap, and streamlining and enhancing the support NISTA can offer in relation to assurance and advice in support of effective delivery.

We cannot do this alone of course. Partnering effectively across government, with industry, with academia and with investors will be critical to NISTA’s success. We will need to foster genuine collaboration, build trust, and consider with care how to ensure we understand the experience of those on the front line of delivery and those who will rely on the infrastructure we are delivering. At the same time, we need to reflect the lessons being learned across the portfolio into our approach in real time.

We have set an ambition over the next year to pilot new assurance and approvals processes, strengthen our data and analytical capability, and embed a culture of openness and accountability. These are essential foundations, but they must be matched by a willingness to learn from the past and adapt as we go.

Transformation is a long-term endeavour. It will require sustained commitment, honest reflection on what works and what does not, and a shared determination to overcome obstacles together. NISTA is committed to being a high-performing, inclusive, and outward-facing organisation – one that attracts and develops the best talent, and whose expertise is accessible to all. The scale of the opportunity, from safer hospitals and transformed schools to decarbonised energy and modernised defence, is enormous, but so too is the effort required.

We are very much looking forward to working with our partners to deliver this ambition.

3. The Government Major Projects Portfolio

The Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP) ensures robust oversight of the government’s most complex and strategically significant projects and programmes. The criteria for GMPP projects are typically those where approval is required from HM Treasury (HMT), either because the budget exceeds a department’s delegated authority level and/or because the project is novel, complex, contentious, or requires primary legislation. While the GMPP spans many of the government’s most high-profile projects, it represents only a portion of the projects delivered across government, with most departments having further projects and programmes within their portfolios that do not meet the above GMPP criteria.

On 1 April 2025, the Infrastructure Project Authority (IPA) of Cabinet Office and the National Infrastructure Commission (NIC), an executive agency of HM Treasury, became the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA). The GMPP data presented was reported to the IPA by departments on 31 March 2025, before the transition.

Some projects on the GMPP receive independent scrutiny and assurance from the IPA. The Expert Advisory Team in the IPA provides specialist project delivery, commercial and financial advice, deploy practical tools and make specific recommendations to help improve the chance of successful delivery. Projects on the GMPP provide quarterly data returns on delivery progress. This data is used alongside wider IPA market intelligence and information to monitor progress across the portfolio where risks and insights are shared with departments and the centre of government. This year’s GMPP comprises 213 projects, with total Whole Life Costs (WLC) of £996 billion and £742 billion of monetised benefits that are delivered by 20 departments and their arm’s-length bodies (see table 1).

GMPP projects fall into one of four categories, determined by the purpose and nature of their delivery (see headline figure):

Infrastructure and construction projects: improving and maintaining the UK’s energy, environment, transport, telecommunications, sewage and water systems, and constructing new public buildings. These high investment projects are essential to the nation’s economic growth, development and prosperity and are prioritised accordingly across government.

Transformation and service delivery: projects changing ways of working and improving the relationship between government and the people of the UK and harnessing new technology to improve public services and/or make government more efficient.

Information and Communication Technology (ICT): projects enabling the transition from old legacy systems to new digital solutions, equipping government departments for the future, and delivering efficiencies and other benefits of advances in innovation and technology.

Military capability projects: vital to the effective operation of the Armed Forces, they deliver the integrated training, personnel, structures, equipment, infrastructure, ICT and logistic support needed to enable the Armed Forces to maintain the UK’s national security.

GMPP projects aim to provide innovative and meaningful benefits to the UK, many of which have no real or estimated market price. For example, out of the 45 military capability projects worth a combined WLC of £327 billion, only two reported benefits this year due to the inherent complexity in monetising national security benefits.

The difficulty in accurately monetising the benefits of public goods and projects delivering public value extends beyond defence to other areas including justice, health, and life sciences. But progress can and has been made in articulating these benefits, and departments continue to build on their benefits capabilities (with IPA and HMT’s support) to give a more rounded picture of value for money. The IPA and departments are working to improve the number and type of projects that report benefits by sharing best practice, developing new guidance, and sharing examples between departments.

The whole life cost of the GMPP portfolio continues to rise despite the reduction in the overall number of projects. This reflects several new large high-cost projects joining and smaller projects successfully leaving the GMPP.

The GMPP remainers from last year have increased their whole life costs by an average of £0.4 billion from £4.0 billion to £4.4 billion.

3.1 Infrastructure and Construction

(See headline figure)

Infrastructure and Construction is the largest GMPP category in terms of Whole Life Cost. Currently there are 68 projects in the portfolio, the same as last year, with a total Whole Life Cost of £433 billion, and total monetised benefits of £384 billion. As with Military Capability projects, these projects are typically lengthier than projects in other categories (with an average duration of 10.9 years).

3.2 Transformation and Service Delivery

(See headline figure)

Transformation and Service Delivery is the largest category by project number, totalling 76 projects this year. This is a decrease on last year when there were 89 projects on the GMPP in this category, with many leaving after successful delivery. Projects in this category have the second lowest average whole life cost (£2.6 billion) and are the third largest category in terms of total whole life costs (at £200 billion). On the other hand, these projects have the second largest amount of reported monetised benefits, totalling £295 billion. They are often shorter (7 years) compared to the other categories.

3.3 Military Capability

(See headline figure)

Military Capability is the second largest category in terms of total whole life costs (£327 billion) and, in line with their scale, these projects are often lengthier than other categories, with an average forecast duration of 20 years. There are 45 projects in this category, up from 44 projects last year. Military Capability projects are reporting the lowest amount of monetised benefits (£22 billion). All Military Capability projects are delivered by the Ministry of Defence (MOD).

3.4 Information and Communications Technology (ICT)

(See headline figure)

Information and Communications Technology (ICT) is the smallest category by number and value with 24 projects at a total whole life cost of £36 billion, but it is still an important part of the portfolio with many projects in other categories having significant digital components. ICT capability projects are reporting monetised benefits of £42 billion. On average, these projects take 8.4 years to deliver.

4. GMPP departmental overview

(See figure 5)

The GMPP consists of projects from 20 departments with varying portfolio sizes. MOD has the largest portfolio and the highest whole life cost by department. This year, there are 47 MOD projects on the GMPP, which account for over a fifth of the portfolio by number. MOD delivers all the 45 Military Capability projects, as well as one ICT project and one Infrastructure and Construction project.

The Home Office (HO) has the second largest portfolio. Of the 21 projects that are led by HO, 15 are Transformation and Service Delivery projects, five are ICT projects, and one is an Infrastructure and Construction project.

The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) has the third largest portfolio in terms of number of projects and the second highest whole life cost by department. Of the 20 projects that are led by DESNZ, 17 are Infrastructure and Construction projects, 2 are Transformation and Service Delivery projects, and one is an ICT project.

The Department for Transport (DFT) has the fourth largest portfolio in terms of number of projects and is the third most significant contributor to the GMPP’s whole life cost. Of the 19 projects that are led by DFT, 16 are Infrastructure and Construction projects, and 3 are Transformation and Service Delivery projects.

There are several departments with multiple GMPP projects that are actively managed as part of wider portfolios. This is in line with the Government Project Delivery Functional Standard (GPDFS), which identifies that ‘a portfolio comprises part of or all of an organisation’s investment required to achieve its objectives, such as other portfolios, programmes, projects, other work and work packages’. The GPDFS sets the expectation that all departments will adopt a portfolio management framework to manage their major projects and programmes.

The maturity of portfolio management varies across departments. For example, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has a well-developed central portfolio approach to govern major project investments, to actively manage resources and to adjust delivery priorities in response to changes in context. Other departments take a similar approach, with arrangements tailored to suit the nature of the portfolios and to dock with existing governance, accountabilities and responsibilities.

A portfolio approach allows the departments to ensure that their mix of projects and programmes helps to deliver their strategic objectives. Through a combination of tailored advice and support and the introduction of portfolio-level assurance tools, the IPA aims to help departments deliver their individual projects successfully.

5. GMPP delivery confidence

(See figure 6a/6b)

A Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) is an assessment of the likelihood of a project delivering its objectives to time and cost. Ratings are categorised into three groups - Red, Amber, and Green - with each providing an indication of the likelihood of successful delivery and level of associated risks.

Detailed definitions of each rating can be found in Annex A.

DCAs are not a comprehensive reflection of project performance but reflect a project’s likelihood of success at a specific snapshot in time if issues and risks are left unaddressed. Where a project receives active IPA support or has undertaken an independent IPA assurance in the last six months, the IPA will provide a DCA. For other projects, the DCA is provided by the Senior Responsible Owner (SRO).

DCAs change depending on the challenges projects are facing, the results of focused independent assurance reviews and actions taken by projects. By taking the right steps following reviews and managing delivery challenges effectively, DCAs are often improved over time.

At this year’s snapshot (end of March 2025), 30 projects were rated Green (14% of the GMPP), 31 projects were assigned Red (15%), 135 projects (63%) were rated Amber and 17 were exempt (8%). The number of projects rated as Red in the annual report has increased by four.

There were £198 billion of whole life costs associated with projects rated Red, which is up from last year’s £97 billion. This is mostly driven by a few large GMPP projects that were previously Amber and that moved to Red this year. Amber projects make up a large majority of the portfolio by project number and total whole life costs.

5.1 GMPP Delivery Confidence by Category

It is important to note that GMPP projects are the government’s most difficult and challenging projects to deliver. They are, by definition, large, complex or innovative, with many ‘breaking new ground’. Focusing on supporting these projects is at the core of the GMPP’s purpose.

5.2 GMPP Delivery Confidence by Delivery Phase

It is not unusual for projects to be rated as Red earlier in their lifecycle, when scope, benefits, costs and delivery methods are still being explored. The IPA’s five stage gate approach promotes the identification of potential issues early and the interventions needed to achieve successful delivery. A changing DCA can reflect that project risks are both being identified and mitigated.

Not all Red rated projects are at the same lifecycle phase: some projects are in pre-delivery when others are in delivery (delivery meaning that the majority of a programme’s components have had its final business cases approved). The IPA’s Expert Advisory Team actively supports those projects and programmes to ensure they are set up for success and with a focus on guiding them from a Red to Amber or Green Delivery Confidence Assessment.

Projects in all the Annual Report categories receive similar DCA ratings, and there is no discernible trend between the categories over time.

5.3 GMPP Delivery Confidence Over Time (see figure 3)

GMPP projects present many distinct challenges and complexities that are complicated to summarise over the long term. To describe overall health of the GMPP portfolio over time, the report uses the average DCA rating, which is calculated by attributing a mark from 1 (Green) to 3 (Red) and taking the average of these marks. These are highlighted by a dual trend in the pattern of delivery confidence. In the first eight years there was a decrease in projects’ health, where the average project rating worsened from Amber/Green on the 2013 Annual Report to Amber on the 2020 Annual Report. Since then, projects’ health has plateaued, and the average project rating has remained similar over the past four years.

This year, the majority of projects (63%) are Amber rated meaning the project’s delivery appears feasible but significant issues exist, requiring management attention. These projects appear resolvable at this stage and, if addressed promptly, should not present a cost/schedule overrun. Many of these projects are working through assurance action plans but some continue to have inherent complexities due to the innovative nature of these projects.

6. Changes between 2023-24 and 2024-25

(See figure 7)

Since last year’s report, 29 projects have left the GMPP. In most cases a project leaves the GMPP when it has been successfully delivered or no longer demands regular IPA support. For instance, when a project reaches a business-as-usual stage of delivery, readiness to leave is judged by the IPA alongside departments. Of the 29 projects that left the GMPP this year, 14 reported successful delivery against their objectives; two left to be replaced by another GMPP project; seven left the GMPP because they no longer met GMPP reporting criteria, and six were brought to early closure.

Projects join the GMPP at an early stage of their lifecycle and consequently with an uncertain delivery confidence. This is illustrated in the initial published DCAs for this year’s leavers cohort. Of the 29 projects that left the GMPP in the last year, two left with a Red DCA, 15 with an Amber DCA, nine projects left with a Green DCA and three were exempt. Leaving the GMPP rarely marks the end of a project’s delivery, and for some of the most complex projects the IPA maintains a continued involvement in the project, as required. In line with recent National Audit Office (NAO) recommendations, the IPA is committed to ensuring that all projects leaving the GMPP have had an exit (or equivalent) review which includes consideration of the ongoing tracking of project benefits.

7. Annex: The Annual Report and transparency data on major projects

Under its 2012 mandate, the IPA is required to produce an Annual Report on the GMPP. This is the 13th Annual Report, with some previous reports having been published by the Major Projects Authority (MPA). In accordance with the Government’s Major Projects Transparency Policy, the Annual Report is published at the same time as departments publish the data on their projects that are part of the GMPP. The data published this year was submitted to the IPA in March 2025. The Delivery Confidence Assessments (DCAs) within that data, and included in this report, are provided by IPA for projects where the projects have received active IPA support or have undertaken an independent IPA assurance in the last 6 months. For other projects, the DCA is provided by the Senior Responsible Owner (SRO). The narratives from departments that accompany their published data online provide an update on progress since then.

7.1 Annex A: Explanation of DCA colour ratings

The DCA is an evaluation from the IPA or the SRO of a project’s likelihood of achieving its aims and objectives and doing so on time and on budget.

Green - Successful delivery of the project on time, budget and quality appears highly likely and there are no major outstanding issues that at this stage appear to threaten delivery significantly.

Amber/Green* - Successful delivery appears probable; however, constant attention will be needed to ensure risks do not materialise into major issues threatening delivery. Since the 2021-22 Annual Report on major projects, this rating can no longer be given to projects.

Amber - Successful delivery 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.

Amber/Red* - Successful delivery of the project is in doubt, with major risks or issues apparent in a number of key areas. Urgent action is needed to address these problems and/or assess whether resolution is feasible. Since the 2021-22 Annual Report on major projects, this rating can no longer be given to projects.

Red - Successful delivery of the project appears to be unachievable. There are major issues with project definition, schedule, budget, quality and/or benefits delivery, which at this stage do not appear to be manageable or resolvable. The project may need re-scoping and/or its overall viability reassessed.

Reset - A significant change to a project’s baseline which involves a business case refresh or change.

Exempt - Data can be exempt from publication under exceptional circumstances and in accordance with Freedom of Information requirements, i.e. national security.

*Amber/Red and Amber/Green DCA ratings have not been used since IPA Annual Report 2020/21, when the IPA moved from a five-tier to a three-tier DCA rating system in June 2021. Definitions have been included as the five-tier DCA rating system is referenced for previous versions of the IPA Annual Report in Annex D.

7.2 Annex B: Key names for departments

Acronym	Department
CO	Cabinet Office
DBT	Department for Business and Trade
DCMS	Department for Culture, Media & Sport
DEFRA	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
DESNZ	Department for Energy Security and Net Zero
DFE	Department for Education
DFT	Department for Transport
DHSC	Department of Health and Social Care (formerly DH)
DSIT	Department for Science, Innovation & Technology
DWP	Department for Work and Pensions
FCDO	Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office
IPA	Infrastructure and Projects Authority
HMLR	His Majesty’s Land Registry
HMRC	His Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
HMT	His Majesty’s Treasury
HO	Home Office
MHCLG	Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government
MOD	Ministry of Defence
MOJ	Ministry of Justice
NCA	National Crime Agency
NISTA	National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority
ONS	Office for National Statistics
VOA	Valuation Office Agency

7.3 Annex C: Snapshot periods for Annual Report years

Report	Details
AR 2013	2012-13 Published in 2013 using data as at September 2012
AR 2014	2013-14 Published in 2014 using data as at September 2013
AR 2015	2014-15 Published in 2015 using data as at September 2014
AR 2016	2015-16 Published in 2016 using data as at September 2015
AR 2017	2016-17 Published in 2017 using data as at September 2016
AR 2018	2017-18 Published in 2018 using data as at September 2017
AR 2019	2018-19 Published in 2019 using data as at September 2018
AR 2020	2019-20 Published in 2020 using data as at September 2019
AR 2021	2020-21 Published in 2021 using data as at March 2021
AR 2022	2021-22 Published in 2022 using data as at March 2022
AR 2023	2022-23 Published in 2023 using data as at March 2023
AR 2024	2023-24 Published in 2024 using data as at March 2024
AR 2025	2024-25 Published in 2025 using data as at March 2025