The performance of GeoNet is regularly scrutinised by international experts, who also propose possible new directions for the project.
The first strategic review of GeoNet completed in October 2004 concluded that the project met the best international standards and was poised to make a valuable contribution to public good. However, the review recommended additional investment to realise this opportunity.
In June 2005 the Earthquake Commission (EQC) announced it would increase its funding to NZ$8 million a year to ensure GeoNet was built and operated to the originally-recommended specification.
The second strategic review of GeoNet took place in October 2008, with the panel reporting, "GeoNet has delivered on the original proposal in March 2000, and in some cases exceeded requirements. Its cautious, staged roll-out of equipment has been a wise approach to ensuring the long term stability of the networks and the data collected. EQC has shown unique leadership for GeoNet in providing the backbone for other agencies to extend so that New Zealand has a leading edge integrated hazard monitoring network.".
Just before Christmas 2009, EQC and GNS Science signed a new 10 year agreement which commenced in July 2010, funding GeoNet at approximately NZ$9 million a year over the first five years.
The third strategic review took place in October 2012. In particular, the panel reported "The GeoNet project has demonstrated flexibility and adaptability to quickly modify the current work plan in response to sudden events. The project has demonstrated resilience by dealing with substantial disruptions to normal business conditions caused by the major hazard events since the 2008 review. These events include the four major Canterbury earthquakes and associated aftershock sequence, three tsunami events, and the volcanic eruptions at Tongariro and White Island. In particular the staff and management of the GeoNet project deserve much credit for responding to the needs of the stakeholders, especially the public, during the Canterbury Earthquake events, while maintaining professional standards and the 'business as usual' elements of the project."