Electronic Monitoring Expansion

Rating: Compared to financial year 24/25-Q4, the NISTA Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) rating for 25/26-Q4 remains at Amber. This is primarily due to delays in migration to a new service requiring legacy contract extensions, with limited schedule contingency remaining.

Schedule: Compared to financial year 24/25-Q4, the programme's end date at 25/26-Q4 changed from 30/11/25 to 15/06/26.This is primarily due to delays in migration to a new service.

Cost: Compared to financial year 24/25-Q4, the project's Whole Life Costs at 25/26-Q4 increased from £857.610m to £1,161.10m. This is primarily due to an increased demand for Electronic Monitoring services being greater than the modelling that informed the original business case. 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.

Source: NISTA Major Projects Annual Report 2025-26 (data)

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‚ The schedule has been re-baselined following supplier driven implementation delays, but there remain limited schedule contingency.

Schedule: Compared to financial year 23/24-Q4, the project's end-date at 24/25-Q4 increased from 31/12/2024 to 30/11/2025. This is primarily due to the following factors‚ The schedule has been re-baselined following supplier driven implementation delays.

Cost: Compared to financial year 23/24-Q4, the project's departmentally agreed Whole Life Cost at 24/25-Q4 (measured in £m) remains the same at 858. 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)

Rating: Compared to financial year 22/23-Q4, the Infrastructure Project Authority's Delivery Confidence Assessment rating at 23/24-Q4 remained at Amber. This is primarily due to the following factors. New contracts have been awarded, however there is limited mobilisation schedule contingency.

Schedule: Compared to financial year 22/23-Q4, the project's end-date at 23/24-Q4 remained schedule to finish on 2024-12-31. This is primarily due to the following factors. The project remains on track for completion in line with the current baseline schedule.

Cost: Compared to financial year 22/23-Q4, the project's departmental-agree Whole Life Cost at 23/24-Q4 decreased from 1214m. to 858m. This is primarily due to the following factors. The decrease is due to contract savings.

Source: IPA Annual Report 2023-24 (data)