The HVHR Framework comprises a series of project assurance checks and processes for HVHR projects to increase the likelihood that they will achieve their stated benefits and be delivered successfully, on time and to budget.
To this end, the HVHR Framework seeks to:
- verify that robust project planning and procurement processes have been followed to support quality project planning and procurement processes and documentation; and
- provide impartial and informed advice to Government on deliverability risks.
A project will be classified as being HVHR if it is a budget-funded project that is:
- considered high risk using DTF’s risk assessment tool, the Project Profile Model (PPM);
- considered medium risk using the PPM and has a TEI of between $100 million and $250 million;
- considered low risk using the PPM but has a TEI over $250 million; or
- identified by Government as warranting the rigour applied to HVHR investments.
The Project Profile Model (PPM) is DTF's risk-based assessment tool used to determine whether a project should be subject to the HVHR project assurance framework. Further information is available on the Book a Gateway review page.
HVHR investments are subject to extra scrutiny and ongoing involvement by the Treasurer and the Department of Treasury and Finance (DTF). Each HVHR project will have its own Project Assurance Plan. These require DTF, in consultation with departments, to assess project risks at each stage and determine whether there is a case for exemption from certain project assurance functions and/or whether there are additional functions (above the standard set) that should apply. As a result, the level of DTF involvement will vary for each project.
Possible levels of extra scrutiny and ongoing involvement by the Treasurer and DTF are summarised in the table below.
|Business case approval|
Treasurer's approval of:
Closer oversight by DTF of:
High Value High Risk projects and Gateway reviews
HVHR projects are also subject to compulsory Gateway reviews and active monitoring throughout the life of the project. Gateway reviews (Gates 1 through 6) are compulsory for all HVHR projects.
All individual recommendations in a Gateway report with a 'red rating' must be reported to the Treasurer outlining the risk mitigation/s. The report will be submitted to the Treasurer via DTF and must use a recommendation action plan (RAP). This is for Gates 1 to 4 only. These documents are supplied below.
As part of the changes to the HVHR Framework, departments are required to release Gate 6 benefits evaluation reports to DTF for reporting to Government.
An overview of how the HVHR framework, including the Gateway Review Process, is applied to market-led proposals can be found below:
The 2017 update to the High Value or High Risk (HVHR) Project Assurance Framework streamlines and targets the assurance effort for HVHR capital projects.
The 2017 updates to the Framework include changes to:
- optimise the selection of projects with the highest risks or value add opportunities;
- tailor the assurance process for any project based on its characteristics by establishing tailored project assurance plans for each HVHR project;
- update the assurance process when preliminary business cases are not submitted as part of the budget process; and
- require the release of benefits realisation reports, made available to Government.
As part of the changes to the HVHR Framework, departments are required to release Gate 6 – benefits evaluation reports to DTF for reporting to Government.
The unsolicited proposals and the HVHR and Gateway Review frameworks fact sheet provides more information on how the High Value High Risk and Gateway Review processes apply to unsolicited asset proposals that meet the adapted HVHR criteria for unsolicited proposals.
ICT project assurance reviews
ICT Project Assurance Reviews (PAR) were introduced as part of the Government’s ICT Project Assurance Framework approved in November 2017.
PAR reviews aim to provide timely independent advice to the sponsoring Department and DTF on the current progress of the program. They also provide an opportunity for Government to be advised of any areas of concern regarding the program’s progress and recommendations to improve program deliverability.
The terms of reference for PARs are individually composed, based upon current and approaching key decision points and identified risks. PAR reviews are organised by DTF’s gateway unit with the costs for the review borne by the initiator of the review.