KPI Review

Did the investment actually reduce the risk?

The closing loop on the lifecycle: every PR24 performance commitment, its live ODI exposure, and whether the spend delivered the risk-reduction the model said it would.

YTD penalty
£16.0M
YTD reward
£1.0M
YE net forecast
+£34.3M
Redress budget
£40M
Programme spend YTD
£948M
2 On track4 Watch3 Off track0 Breachacross PR24 performance commitments — see the overview for the headline target ramp.

Performance commitments & ODI exposure

Sort by year-end ODI forecast, year-to-date earned/lost or status. Selecting a commitment opens its trajectory chart on the right.

ODI tracker · AMP8 Year 2

Performance commitments vs ODI exposure

Performance commitmentProgressYTD ODIYE forecast
YTD penalty
£16.0M
YTD reward
£1.0M
YE net forecast
+£34.3M
Trajectory · delivered vs modelled vs target

Storm overflow spill reduction

Waste Management · −32% vs baseline · £1.5 bn allowance (inc. £410M additional)

Off track
Actual deliveredModelled at FDTarget glide-path
Progress to target
38%
YTD ODI
+£6.4M
Year-end forecast
+£14.8M
ODI rate

£0.31M per percentage point above target

Most recent commentary

Scarborough Bay spill cluster pushed Q2 above trajectory; year-end forecast assumes Marine Drive PS recovery in Q3.

Delivered vs modelled risk reduction

The variance column is the closing-loop question: every pound spent should buy a known number of risk-reduction units. Where the bars diverge, the next planning cycle has to adjust.

Delivered vs modelled risk reduction

Did the spend buy the risk reduction we promised?

Each row is an AMP8 investment programme. Modelled = the risk-reduction units the FD assumed for the spend; delivered = what the asset graph says we actually got.

  • Storm overflow reduction
    Storm overflow · £184M YTD of £1.50bn allowance
    -16 pts vs model
    Modelled
    38
    Delivered
    22

    16-point shortfall concentrated in coastal catchments — Scarborough drives 40% of the gap.

  • Nutrient removal at WwTW
    Nutrients · £156M YTD of £1.60bn allowance
    -12 pts vs model
    Modelled
    30
    Delivered
    18

    Tertiary upgrades commissioning later than planned at three sensitive WwTWs.

  • Continuous river monitoring
    Monitoring · £22M YTD of £0.10bn allowance
    +3 pts vs model
    Modelled
    55
    Delivered
    58

    On plan. CIM coverage already delivering Scarborough Bay evidence on demand.

  • Sewer structural rehabilitation
    Mains & network · £132M YTD of £1.10bn allowance
    -14 pts vs model
    Modelled
    35
    Delivered
    21

    Victorian interceptor backlog larger than DWMP assumed; CCTV programme accelerated.

  • Clean water network resilience
    Mains & network · £148M YTD of £1.20bn allowance
    +5 pts vs model
    Modelled
    42
    Delivered
    47

    Pressure management outperforming model — early-AMP reward trajectory on leakage.

  • Treatment works uplift
    Treatment · £210M YTD of £1.80bn allowance
    -4 pts vs model
    Modelled
    40
    Delivered
    36

    Marginal underperformance — dosing-control retrofit at two WTWs pending.

  • Catchment & climate resilience
    Resilience · £96M YTD of £1.00bn allowance
    -6 pts vs model
    Modelled
    25
    Delivered
    19

    SuDS rollout on plan; distributed storage trials yet to show network benefit.

Quarterly executive read-out → exportable PDF would land here (mocked). Continual Improvement feeds the variance back into Planning and Risk.