In attempting to analyse Departmental performance on the five dimensions outlined Section 7.1, the Review team set out to assemble the widest possible data set to ensure any conclusions were as sound as possible. This work was undertaken with the assistance of the Department, particularly the Corporate Approvals, Performance and Risk ("CAPR") group within DE&S, who provided many man-hours of assistance in collecting current and historical project information. In addition, Sec(EC) at MoD centre provided the team with access to a range of additional historical information on project approvals and business cases that were not available on more current systems within DE&S.
Performance analysis of the Department's equipment project portfolio appears to be well-trodden ground, through the NAO Major Project Report completed annually and the CMIS system Key Performance Indicators ("KPIs") that are regularly reported within the Department. The Review team's objectives were to draw on both these sources, whilst ensuring that our analysis was based on:
• the broadest possible sample of projects (not just major projects or current projects);
• cost, time and capability data that captured the "full picture" of these variables, including the impact of capability tradeoffs over the course of projects that may not be reflected in a simple analysis of costs (e.g., reduction in unit numbers or capabilities within a project to contain costs); and
• relatively mature projects, in view of the team's early observation that cost and time slip in projects almost invariably escalate toward the end, so including immature projects is likely to flatter the performance picture, as these young projects are likely to deteriorate later in life.
Given this approach, our results may diverge from more limit or anecdotal performance measures familiar to the Department, but the Team believes this approach presents the most realistic and robust assessment of performance that could have been assembled within the timescale of the Review.