From Committees to Clarity: How to Govern a $10B Transit Program

Transit megaprojects don’t stumble in construction, but in coordination. When decision paths aren’t clear, costs climb quietly. The right playbook aligns decision rights, accountability and assurance, so a $10 billion program stays on course.

Canada is building some of the most expensive transit projects in the world. The talent exists — in design, construction and delivery — but the way we make decisions can quietly slow progress and inflate costs.

If you’ve wondered why megaprojects drift, the answer rarely has to do with concrete or steel — it’s governance. In this second installment of our multi-part Transit Cost Clarity series, we continue to translate national research into a practical playbook that all Canadian transit agencies can apply, with no legislative changes required.

When governance works, transit projects and programs advance.

The importance of governance in mega transit programs

Large transit programs, especially those north of $10 billion in value, live or die by decision making. Good governance helps transit program owners make the right calls quickly, instead of leaving risks to quietly compound. The goal of good governance isn’t to add bureaucracy. It’s intended to clearly identify who decides what, when and with which evidence to keep programs moving forward successfully.

Consider these four guiding elements, which are key to good decision-making. They may seem simple, however they are foundational to large transit programs:

• Strategic Alignment: Ensuring that a capital program supports long-term regional mobility benefits, sustainability and economic objectives.
• Risk Management: Identifying, mitigating and escalating risks at the appropriate decision-making levels.
• Transparency and Accountability: Establishing clear responsibilities and decision-making authorities.
• Engagement: Managing relationships across municipalities, utilities, regulators and communities.

Together, these four elements define the foundation of a governance framework that connects strategy to program delivery. The challenge is finding a way to structure these principles so they work in practice. That’s where the three-layer governance model comes into play.

A three-layer model

Strong governance isn’t about adding layers, it’s about structuring clarity. How do good decision-making principles come to life on a $10 billion transit program? The answer lies in design: a governance framework built on three coordinated layers that connect strategy to delivery. Here’s what each layer involves:

1. Strategic Layer

• • Government and/or funding agencies that provide policy direction, approve budgets and define the strategic mandate for the program of work.
  • Transit agency boards that are accountable for overall program delivery, performance monitoring and public reporting.
  • Program steering committees, comprising senior executives from funding and delivery agencies, that approve major business case decisions, budget adjustments and strategic risks.

2. Program Management Layer

• • Program directors and/or executives serving as the single point of accountability for program outcomes.
  • The Program Management Office (PMO), which integrates the scope, schedule, cost, risk and reporting across all projects to ensure cohesion and consistency.

3. Project Delivery Layer

• • Project directors and managers who deliver the major program elements, such as civil works, stations, systems and rolling stock.
  • Engineering and technical teams who manage project design, integration, compliance and assurance.
  • Commercial and procurement teams that oversee contract strategy, market engagement and performance management.

For this structure to work, each group must clearly understand its role and how it connects to the others. Information and decision-making flow both ways: strategic direction moves downward from government priorities, while operational insights and maintenance requirements move upward from the field. Approvals and decisions aren’t always top-down — they can and should rise from the bottom when grounded in asset conditions, operational realities and state-of-good-repair needs.

When these three layers form a continuous feedback loop incorporating direction, execution and assurance, programs remain responsive, informed and balanced from the boardroom to the construction site.

Checks and balances that prevent drift

While structure provides clarity, it’s assurance that sustains it. Even the best-designed governance framework can drift over time without independent checks and transparent oversight.

To do this successfully, transit program owners will need:

• Independent oversight committees reporting to the program and strategic boards.
• Technical and financial advisors providing assurance on risk, cost and program schedules.
• Stage-gate reviews at key milestones, including business case approvals, procurements, contract awards and commissioning.
• External audits and regulatory reviews to maintain transparency.

These mechanisms don’t slow programs down — they safeguard them. Independent oversight, regular reviews and transparent reporting keep governance grounded in evidence and focused on outcomes. When assurance is built-in, programs don’t drift — they deliver.

Reporting that drives action (not PDFs no one reads!)

Transparency doesn’t end with oversight. It is reinforced in the way teams share information. Similarly, reporting serves as more than documentation; it’s how complex transit program teams communicate, adjust and stay accountable to their goals.

To deliver megaprojects on budget and schedule, program teams and owners need to operate as one team, leveraging clear information pathways and time-bound responses.

Clear accountability takes shape through:

• RACI frameworks, which identify who is responsible, accountable, consulted and informed for all roles.
• Regular reporting to government, boards and other interested parties.
• Defined escalation protocols for risks, with dollar thresholds guiding decision elevation.

When governance reporting is concise, visual and action-oriented, it becomes a catalyst for problem-solving. Done thoroughly, it enables leaders to make the right decision once, and make it fast.

The power of engagement

Internal alignment builds efficiency, while external engagement builds legitimacy. Public confidence is non-negotiable for all mega transit programs. To help achieve it, owners can integrate engagement directly into their governance frameworks through:

• Municipal and utility coordination forums and steering committees to resolve corridor conflicts.
• Community advisory committees for transparency and responsiveness.
• Environmental and regulatory oversight to safeguard compliance and sustainability.
• Operations planning and access reviews to identify project-level access conflicts across the program.
• System safety assurance to ensure the integration of engineering and safety requirements across the program and between projects.

Layered oversight isn’t bureaucracy — it’s how transformative infrastructure gets delivered and safeguarded.

Governance on a $10 billion transit program isn’t just paperwork — it’s how you make decisions with discipline, transparency and speed. When agencies get decisions and escalation triggers right, they unlock clearer accountability, faster issue resolution and durable public trust.

The five non-negotiables

Every megaproject needs its fundamentals. For transit program owners, these five non-negotiables form the foundation for strategic, structured governance and continuous improvement across every layer of delivery:

1. Map the current state and define the governance regime. Review existing conditions, then define a governance framework that outlines decision rights, reporting, assurance, coordination, communications and controls.

2. Embed independent assurance. Ensure project and program teams are consistently working in accordance with the program governance regime.

3. Coordinate the handover and commissioning. Manage transitions between project teams within the same governance framework to maintain the program schedule and meet transit agency obligations.

4. Monitor and manage resources. Track project-level resource demand and availability to identify potential shortfalls and/or surpluses, ensuring efficient and effective use of program resources.

5. Commit to continual improvement. Develop and implement a sustainable, repeatable governance and reporting strategy to refine practices over time.

The lesson is simple but often overlooked: governance builds momentum. When decision-making is structured, transparent and backed by clear accountability, even the most complex transit programs move forward faster, smarter and more efficiently.