Strategic Alignment
Does the proposition credibly support the owner's declared objectives?
Governed infrastructure decision assurance
Infrastructure Decision Assurance
A governed framework for testing whether major infrastructure propositions are sufficiently evidenced, strategically aligned and credibly deliverable to justify progression.
It helps governments, investors, applicants and infrastructure owners decide whether a proposition should proceed, under what conditions, or not at all.
Why it exists
Infrastructure decisions are often committed before the evidence is complete.
Projects are frequently assessed using different assumptions, by different parties and at different stages. As political, commercial and delivery momentum grows, stopping or changing direction becomes harder.
The framework creates a consistent basis for testing a proposition before capital, capacity and institutional commitment are locked in.
Outcome independence
The objective belongs to the owner. The determination does not.
Governments and asset owners define their objectives and priorities. The framework tests whether proposed infrastructure credibly aligns with those declared objectives, and whether the evidence supports progression. It does not set policy or select priorities on an owner's behalf.
The framework is not designed to reach “Proceed”. Its role is to reach the most defensible conclusion.
The owner or government defines objectives and priorities. Decision assurance tests the evidence and issues the determination.
Responsibility 01
Owner or government
Defines objectives and priorities
Responsibility 02
Decision assurance
Tests evidence and issues the determination
- Objectives
- Set by the owner
- Evidence test
- Governed by the framework
- Determination
- Independent conclusion
How decision assurance works
A clear route from proposition to determination.
- 01
Define the proposition
What is being proposed, by whom, and what decision is required?
- 02
Establish the evidence base
Gather authoritative evidence across the relevant market, infrastructure, policy and delivery conditions.
- 03
Test the case
Interrogate assumptions, dependencies, constraints and comparability.
- 04
Resolve conditions
Identify what is proven, what remains uncertain, and what must be satisfied before progression.
- 05
Issue the determination
Produce a traceable conclusion and decision record.
The framework does not replace policy, detailed design or project delivery. It establishes whether a proposition should progress and the conditions that must be satisfied.
Determination dimensions
Each proposition is tested across four determination dimensions.
Evidence
Is the case grounded in verifiable information rather than assumption?
Constraints
Have the factors that could prevent progression been properly identified?
Deliverability
Can the programme be credibly delivered and operated as intended?
Determinations
A defensible determination, not a preferred answer.
Proceed
Evidence supports progression.
Proceed with Preconditions
Defined conditions must be satisfied first.
Do Not Proceed
Evidence does not support progression in its current form.
Inconclusive
Evidence is insufficient or contested to reach a defensible position.
What you receive
A determination is a decision record, not a presentation.
Decision record01
Executive Determination
A concise position for ministers, boards, investment committees and senior decision-makers.
Decision record02
Technical Determination
The evidence, assumptions, constraints, reasoning and conditions supporting the conclusion.
Decision record03
Evidence Request Register
A traceable record of missing, contested or additional evidence required to close the decision.
Who it helps
Different decision-makers face the same underlying risk: committing before the proposition is defensible.
Governments
Prioritise scarce capital, infrastructure capacity and institutional effort on a more defensible basis.
Investors
See the assumptions, dependencies and unresolved conditions behind a proposition before capital is committed.
Applicants and developers
Identify weaknesses and preconditions early, strengthening investability before later due diligence exposes them.
Owners and operators
Use a consistent basis for progressing, conditioning, delaying or stopping a programme.
Infrastructure consumes capital, land, energy, water and institutional capacity. Better evidence helps protect those resources from avoidable commitment.
Why it is different
Different from feasibility. Separated from delivery. Traceable to evidence.
- Feasibility asks
- Can it work?
- Transaction due diligence asks
- What risks sit inside the transaction?
- Project delivery asks
- How should an approved solution be executed?
- Decision assurance asks
- Does the available evidence justify progressing the proposition at all?
Outcome independence
Proceed is not the required result.
Governed methodology
The assessment follows a controlled and versioned method.
Traceable evidence
Conclusions remain attributable to source.
Explicit uncertainty
Inconclusive is a valid professional outcome.
Defined preconditions
Progression can be conditional rather than forced into yes or no.
Reserved human judgement
Tooling can support analysis, but the determination remains human and governed.
Governance
Applied through controlled governance.
The framework uses a controlled methodology, defined decision gates, traceable evidence and versioned governance. Any later CMx advisory, engineering or delivery appointment is separately scoped and subject to conflict controls.
Governed Methodology
Version-controlled method and defined decision gates.
Traceable Evidence
Evidence and assumptions remain attributable to source.
Independent Conclusion
Determinations are not commercially predetermined.
Proceeding is not the objective.Making the right decision is.
Discuss a proposition
Any later CMx capability scope is a separate appointment, subject to conflict controls, and does not depend on a positive determination.
Explore CMx capabilities