Evolve: WAN/LAN (Networks)
MOJ · MOJ_0050_2122-Q3
Department page: Ministry of Justice
| Data as at | Rating | End date | Whole-life cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| March 2024 | Amber (the department's own assessment) | 24 February 2028 | £253m (price basis not stated) |
| March 2025 | Amber (the department's own assessment) | 16 August 2028 | £253.2m (price basis not stated) |
| March 2026 | Green (the department's own assessment) | 15 December 2028 | £253.89m (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: Compared to financial year 24/25-Q4, the Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) rating at 25/26-Q4 has increased to Green. This is primarily due to increased time contingency within plans, and significant activities being either complete or in progress in line with project plans.
Schedule: Compared to financial year 24/25-Q4, the project's end date at 25/26-Q4 changed from 16/08/28 to 15/12/28. This is primarily due to revision of planned activity timelines to increase contingency based on insights from lessons learned.
Cost: Compared to financial year 24/25-Q4, the project's Whole Life Costs at 25/26-Q4 has increased from £253.20m to £253.89. This is primarily due to delays resulting in cost increases. All costs have been reported in 2024/25 base prices in line with NISTA requirements. This is a change from previous years where costs were reported in nominal prices. All costs reflect this accounting reduction regardless of any actual changes.
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‚ Timetable risks due to complexity of multiple procurements mobilisations and limited schedule contingency.
Schedule: Compared to financial year 23/24-Q4, the project's end-date at 24/25-Q4 increased from 24/02/2028 to 16/08/2028. This is primarily due to the following factors‚ The schedule was re-baselined due to complexity of multiple procurements mobilisations.
Cost: Compared to financial year 23/24-Q4, the project's departmentally agreed Whole Life Cost at 24/25-Q4 (measured in £m) remained at 253. This is primarily due to the following factors‚ The Whole Life Cost has remained static, and the budget remains aligned to the current baseline business case.
Source: NISTA Annual Report 2024-25 (data)
March 2024
Rating: Compared to financial year 22/23-Q4, the Senior Responsible Owner's Delivery Confidence Assessment rating at 23/24-Q4 remained at Amber. This is primarily due to the following factors. Timetable risks due to the complexity of multiple procurements.
Schedule: Compared to financial year 22/23-Q4, the project's end-date at 23/24-Q4 increased from 2026-08-30 to 2028-02-24. This is primarily due to the following factors. The programme has rebaselined its schedule following a change of procurement approach.
Cost: Compared to financial year 22/23-Q4, the project's departmental-agree Whole Life Cost at 23/24-Q4 remained at 253m. This is primarily due to the following factors. The Whole Life Cost has remained static, and the budget remains aligned to the current baseline business case.
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 →