NATIONAL STRATEGIC AUTOMATIC NUMBER PLATE RECOGNITION PLATFORM (NSAP)
HO · HO_0332_2324-Q4
Department page: Home Office
| Data as at | Rating | End date | Whole-life cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| March 2024 | Amber (the department's own assessment) | 30 March 2028 | £284m (price basis not stated) |
| March 2025 | Amber (the department's own assessment) | 30 March 2028 | £538.9m (price basis not stated) |
| March 2026 | Amber (the department's own assessment) | 30 March 2030 | £391.77m (in 2024/25 prices) |
Each year’s cost is shown with its price basis. Costs are not compared between years: the March 2024 and March 2025 reports state no price basis, and from March 2026 costs are in 2024/25 prices.
The department’s commentary
This is the department’s own commentary. It may use different prices from the table above, so its figures may not match.
March 2026
Rating: Exempt under Section 31 (1) - Law enforcement
Schedule: Compared to financial year 24/25-Q4, the project's end-date at 25/26-Q4 remains the same date (29/03/30)
Cost: Compared to financial year 24/25-Q4, the project's departmentally agreed Whole Life Cost at 25/26-Q4 decreased from last year's WLC. This is primarily due to the reduction of the Optimism Bias.
March 2025
Rating: Compared to financial year 23/24-Q4, the Infrastructure Project Authority's Delivery Confidence Assessment rating at 24/25-Q4 remained at AMBER. This is primarily due to the following factors‚ Whilst there have been significant improvements with stakeholder engagement there are further work needed in this area. There are improvements required around planning, dependencies and programme governance. The review acknowledged the commitment of all the stakeholders to remaining delivery and congratulated the team on delivering the platform.
Schedule: Compared to financial year 23/24-Q4, the project's end-date at 24/25-Q4 remained at 30/03/2028. This is primarily due to the following factors‚ The programme is still on track to deliver within the overall timelines.
Cost: Compared to financial year 23/24-Q4, the project's departmentally agreed Whole Life Cost at 24/25-Q4 (measured in £m) increased from 284 to 538. This is primarily due to the following factors‚ The Q4 FY23/24 Whole Life Cost of £284m does not include Optimism Bias. With Optimism Bias, the Whole Life Cost should be £609.63M. The Q4 FY2425 WLC should be £552.51m (incl OB) as reported on GRIP for that period. The drop in the WLC from Q4 FY2324 and Q4 FY2425 relates to the reduction of the Optimism Bias as many risks have been mitigated since plus revised assumptions and costs.
Source: NISTA Annual Report 2024-25 (data)
March 2024
Rating: The Senior Responsible Owner's Delivery Confidence Assessment rating at 23/24-Q4 is Amber. This is primarily due to the following factors. The programme is currently engaging with stakeholders to develop the scope of the future road map. Discussions are due to begin with the existing supplier to develop the exit and decommissioning strategy for the legacy technology. Programme plan for future delivery phases will be developed in line with the future road map and the programme team structure will be revisited to ensure sufficient expertise and resilience. Work is underway to review the existing governance framework to ensure it is clearly understood by key stakeholders.
Schedule: The project's end-date at 23/24-Q4 is 2028-03-30. This is primarily due to the following factors. The programme is currently on schedule to complete by March 2028. The Phase one delivery had moved 8 weeks however this has not impacted on phase two which is due to deliver in October 2024. Commercial activity is underway to deliver the commercial retender exercise by March 2025 to identify the future service provider.
Cost: The project's departmental-agree Whole Life Cost at 23/24-Q4 is 284m. This is primarily due to the following factors. The whole Life costs include the transition from legacy technology to cloud with an evergreening support model, reducing technical debt and enabling future enhancements through exploiting technical advances. The costs include the potential dual running costs to facilitate transition.
Source: IPA Annual Report 2023-24 (data)
Names, figures, dates, ratings and commentary are as the department reported them. Where a rating, cost or date is withheld, the file’s wording is shown. Every major project →