Government Operations — what every Commonwealth entity actually does
1,371 entities. 21,577 entity-operation pairs. Two layers of work: Core (what an agency exists to do) and Supporting (the back-office every agency runs to stay alive). Five citizen-facing Core archetypes, four government-to-government, ten universal Supporting ops — and a modernisation backlog you can name.
Commonwealth entities
1,371
Every federal department, statutory agency, joint venture and council on record
Entity × operation pairs
21,577
The full operating fingerprint of the federation
Core operations
5,014
Mission-defining work — what each agency exists to do
Supporting operations
16,563
Universal back-office, ~3× the volume of Core
Core archetypes
9
5 citizen-facing + 4 government-to-government
Universal back-office ops
10
Identical at every one of 1,371 entities
Universal ops with no WoG platform
6
FOI, briefings, risk register, correspondence, records, ANAO
Operation patterns indexed
61
Full reference catalogue (Core + Supporting)
Overview — Core first, Supporting second
Every entity runs two kinds of work. Core operations are what the agency exists to do — they absorb leadership time, tie to published strategy, and produce the citizen-facing outcomes the agency is named for. CASA exists to issue and audit aviation licences. Services Australia exists to determine and pay benefits. The ATO exists to collect revenue and pursue evasion. Each defines a different shape of work.
Supporting operations are the cross-cutting back-office every agency runs to stay alive — procurement, FOI, briefings, records, risk, annual reports, workforce. The dataset is 21,577 entity-operation pairs: 5,014 Core, 16,563 Supporting. The Supporting back-office is ~3× the volume of mission-defining work. That ratio is the whole story.
The page-one question
A reader picking between two agencies wants to know what each does in Core terms — not how their procurement modules differ. Core answers the first question; AGA capabilities answer the second. Core operations are where strategy lives — every policy ambition eventually becomes a change to a Core op. Supporting is where strategy bleeds out — every dollar spent rebuilding the same back-office is a dollar not spent on Core.
The 9 Core archetypes
Citizen / business-facing (5)
Government-to-government (4)
Submission-to-decision
ops.submission_to_decision · runs at ~300 entities
Applicant submits a structured dossier. Regulator triages, assesses against published criteria, decides yes / no / conditions. Result is published.
Where it lives
Innovation leverage
Most leveraged citizen-facing Core pattern — the shape is consistent across ~300 entities, each on its own intake stack. A shared regulatory submission platform is the largest single Core target in the Commonwealth.
Parent AGA capability
Service registration and licensing · Case management
The universal back-office — 10 ops, 1,371 entities each
Ten Supporting operations apply to every one of 1,371 Commonwealth entities — 63% of the entire dataset by row count. Six of them have no whole-of-government platform. Each dollar of duplication shows up 1,371 times. The case for whole-of-government investment in any one of these is identical: build it once, retire the 1,371 bespoke variants.
Procurement
Procurement · 1,371 entities
AusTender + emerging GovERP
FOI request handling
Case mgmt + Doc/records exchange · 1,371 entities
None — every agency runs its own intake
Ministerial briefing & correspondence
Case mgmt · 1,371 entities
None — every department has built its own
Records management
Doc/records exchange · 1,371 entities
None — three+ competing EDRMS products
Annual report production
Performance and assurance · 1,371 entities
PGPA template (paper) — written from scratch each year
Corporate plan production
Performance and assurance · 1,371 entities
PGPA template (paper) — written from scratch each year
Enterprise risk management
Risk management · 1,371 entities
None — most are spreadsheets
Inbound correspondence triage
Case mgmt · 1,371 entities
None — each agency's public inbox is its own funnel
Workforce management
Human resources · 1,371 entities
APSjobs + emerging GovERP HR
ANAO audit response
Performance and assurance · 1,371 entities
None — workflow inside each agency
The 2×2 — where the modernisation backlog lives
Core · shared infra exists
Grants (Grants Hub) · Benefit (Centrelink, myGov — modernising) · Cyber (ASD CTIS).
Core · NO shared infra
Submission-to-decision · Licence + audit cycle · Compliance monitoring · Investigation & enforcement · Forecasting / modelling.
The interesting quadrant. Five major Core platforms missing — the modernisation backlog where strategy lives.
Supporting · shared infra exists
Procurement (AusTender) · Annual report (PGPA) · Workforce (GovERP HR).
Supporting · NO shared infra
FOI · Briefing notes · Risk register · Correspondence triage · Records management · ANAO response.
Six universal Supporting ops with no shared platform. Where the cost compounds 1,371 times over.
Innovation targets — ranked by leverage
Ranked by (entities running) × (estimated unmet need) × (strategic linkage). Core innovation moves an agency's strategy. Supporting innovation moves the cost line. Both are real. Neither is technically hard. Each is politically and architecturally hard — for different reasons.
Submission-to-decision + Licence cycle
Entities running
~400
Shared platform?
No
Strategic linkage
Deregulation Agenda, Regulator Performance Framework, Data and Digital Government Strategy
Most standardisable specialist Core operation in the dataset. A shared regulatory submission + licence lifecycle platform — applicant identity reused via Digital ID, structured dossier intake, assessor workflow, decision register, post-decision audit scheduling — would be the largest single Core target.
Investigation & enforcement
Entities running
~205
Shared platform?
Some COTS (Niche, Mark43)
Strategic linkage
Many sector strategies (Privacy Reforms, Cyber Security Strategy, Competition Review)
Every regulator runs case management. A Commonwealth case-management spine is plausible. Configuration duplication across ATO / ACCC / ASIC / AFP / OAIC / AUSTRAC / FWO is significant.
Compliance monitoring & data collection
Entities running
~261
Shared platform?
SBR exists but under-delivered
Strategic linkage
Australian Data Strategy, DATA Scheme
Each regulator runs its own intake portal with its own schema. A shared regulatory data intake (SBR-2.0) with schema registry, taxonomy reuse, validation and shared analytics would compound massively.
Shared service provision
Entities running
5 named operators; ~all 1,371 consume
Shared platform?
Yes — that is the shared platform
Strategic linkage
APS Reform, Data and Digital Government Strategy, GovERP, AusTender, Hosting Certification
The five operators — Finance, DTA, Services Australia, AGD, ESA — collectively run the spine. Innovation target here is operational excellence at the five, not new platforms.
Provider panel administration
Entities running
~9
Shared platform?
No — each scheme has its own register
Strategic linkage
NDIS Reform, Aged Care Reform, Skills agenda
Most social spending flows through approved-provider networks. The Disability and Aged Care Royal Commissions both flagged provider-register weaknesses. A shared register pattern across NDIS, aged care and skills is plausible.
Federation oversight
Entities running
~3 named, ~10 substantive
Shared platform?
No — each FFA has its own measurement regime
Strategic linkage
Federation Funding Agreements, Closing the Gap, NHRA, NSRA
CGC, ACARA, AIHW — quietly the most leveraged measurement work in Australia. The Commonwealth's ability to hold states accountable depends on it. None of them share tooling.
Whole-of-government coordination
Entities running
~6 named
Shared platform?
No — each function has its own working method
Strategic linkage
Cabinet Handbook, Crisis Management Framework, National Cabinet protocols
The secretariat function across portfolios. PM&C, National Cabinet, NSC, NEMA, ONI. Mostly PowerPoint and email. Modernisation is part workflow tooling, part doctrinal.
Grant assessment (absorb the long tail)
Entities running
~82 Hub-eligible
Shared platform?
Yes — Community Grants Hub (~$10B/yr)
Strategic linkage
CGRGs
Already has significant whole-of-government tooling. Modernisation path is absorption — bring remaining bespoke grant programs into the Hub. Peer-reviewed (ARC, NHMRC) is separate by deliberate policy.
Forecasting & scenario modelling
Entities running
~20 substantive
Shared platform?
No
Strategic linkage
Australian Data Strategy, evaluation reforms
Treasury, BoM, ABS, Geoscience Australia, CSIRO, BITRE, AIHW, AEMC, RBA — each in its own silo. A shared modelling environment (compute, data linkage, model repository, peer review) doesn't exist.
Benefit determination (modernise the spine)
Entities running
~33
Shared platform?
Partial — Centrelink, myGov, Medicare
Strategic linkage
WPIT, NDIS Reforms, Aged Care Reforms
Highest-volume citizen-facing archetype (~30M annual touchpoints at Services Australia). The entire modernisation backlog is WPIT — in flight for a decade and needs to ship.
Briefing & correspondence (Supporting)
Entities running
1,371
Shared platform?
No
Strategic linkage
—
The largest unaddressed operational target in the Commonwealth. Every agency builds its own brief drafting + clearance tool. Solving this once retires 1,371 bespoke variants.
FOI request handling (Supporting)
Entities running
1,371
Shared platform?
No
Strategic linkage
—
Each agency runs its own intake. A Commonwealth FOI workbench has been on the agenda for a decade. Productivity sink and transparency issue.
Sources
Hand-transcribed from Research/government-operations: 12 markdown chapters and four CSV datasets covering 1,371 Commonwealth entities, 61 operation patterns, and 21,577 entity-operation pairs. Confidence is highest for the universal Supporting layer and for marquee entities (ATO, Treasury, Defence, AFP, CASA, Services Australia, ACCC, ASIC). The long tail of Advisory Bodies and Joint Ventures is intentionally sparse.