20. The ANAO's analysis of the lead or main capability for the 22 Major Projects covered in the 2009-10 MPR shows that thirteen projects have experienced schedule slippage. The total slippage across the Major Projects amounts to 688 months, which represents a 31 per cent increase on the original planned schedule for achieving the final operational capabilities (FOC).10 11 This figure includes the C-17 Heavy Airlift, which is forecast to achieve FOC 11 months ahead of schedule. The average schedule slippage per Major Project amounts to 34 months (almost three years).
21. The projects currently forecast to experience delays of four or more years are: HF Modernisation (120 months), Collins Reliability and Sustainability (99 months), FFG Upgrade (84 months), Collins Replacement Combat System (72 months), ANZAC Anti-Ship Missile Defence Phase 2A (64 months), ANZAC Anti-Ship Missile Defence Phase 2B (49 months) and Wedgetail (48 months).
22. Analysis of the 2009-10 PDSSs indicates that five of the 22 projects in this report have experienced in-year schedule slippage totalling 39 months. These involve FFG Upgrade (HMAS Sydney - 19 months), Bushranger Vehicles (11 months), Air to Air Refuel (three months), Hornet Upgrade (three months) and Armidales (three months). In contrast, the expected FOC date for the HF Modernisation project decreased by eight months.12
23. The reasons for schedule slippage vary, but primarily reflect the underestimation of both the scope and complexity of work by industry and the DMO. PDSS data shows that for more complex projects such as Wedgetail and the FFG Upgrade, the actual schedule for technical work involving system design and integration is often significantly underestimated compared to the original planned schedule. In this regard, the ANAO notes that DMO Major Projects' standard practice does not involve an independent third party review of a project's planned schedule prior to the provision of the forecast project schedule to government for approval. However, an independent review (known as a non-advocate review) can be requested by a Gate Review Assurance Board (GRAB) if considered necessary.13
____________________________________________________________________________
10 In the instances where a Major Project has multiple segments/capabilities with separate FOC dates, the ANAO has used the project's current lead/main capability FOC for calculating schedule performance. The DMO's approach is to use the final FOC date for a project listed in the 2009-10 PDSSs. These two valid approaches lead to a small difference in the calculated percentage by which the Major Projects' total schedule has slipped for the 2009-10 MPR (ANAO - 31 per cent; and DMO - 30 per cent).
11 The Hornet Refurb project does not have an FOC date and therefore is not included in schedule calculations. The C-17 Heavy Airlift project is forecast to achieve the original FOC date 11 months ahead of schedule, and this has been deducted from the total schedule slippage amount.
12 See Part 1, Figure 9.
13 See paragraphs 3.3 to 3.6 for further information on the GRAB review process.