Case 1. – Verification of the Inception Report

Please assess the Inception report in terms of:Activities,Output Resources andTiminigby using the following distributed documents:Extract from the Terms of ReferenceExtract from the Technical ProposalExtract from the Inception Report

Case 1. Findings

Activities: TP 2. Strategy/Activities Proposed vs IR 3.3 Expected Results

New activity included for project management

Assessment:Not in contradiction with ToRDoes not modify objectives or purposesMight cause problems in input allocation – KE

days should be reduced on other activities

Case 1. Findings

Activities:Activity 2.7 deletedAssessment:

No related output mentionned in ToRActivity specified in ToR and Technical

ProposalShould be re-included

Case 1. Findings (Cont’d)Output:Missing outputs:

R.1: ‘Necessary capacity for project monitoring and reporting ensured’; ‘Min. 300 OTS checks and field visits’;

R.2: ‘Management, … support to final beneficiaries’; ‘Project management capacity of beneficiary institutions improved’

R.3: ‘Operation Generation capacity’; ‘More demand oriented operations designed’

Case 1. Findings (Cont’d)Output:AssessmentMissing from TP tooNo clear link to Activity in ToRNeed to identify activities to outputs explicitely

Case 1. Findings (Cont’d)

Output:Activity 1.3: ‘organizational structure revised’

(TP) vs ‘support ensured’ (IR)Assessment:

No such output in ToRRevision has been proposed not simply supportBeneficiary can refer to TP

Case 1. Findings (Cont’d)Output: TP 2. Strategy/Activities Proposed vs. IR 3.3

Expected ResultsActivity 1.10 4 study visits instead of 5Activity 1.11 6 internship instead of 5Assessment:

ToR specifies, should be aligned, but there is room for consideration if no overall cost reduction can be demonstrated

Case 1. Findings (Cont’d)

Resources TP 2. Strategy/Input Table vs. IR 7. Resources

KE days reduced in SCs 1.1 – 1.3 and increased in Project management and Closure phase, total (300) remained unchanged

LTNKE days decreased in SCs 1.1, 1.3, and 1.4., total reduced from 700 to 550

ONKE days increased in SCs 1.2 – 1.4 from 700 to 1000

Case 1. Findings (Cont’d)

Resources TP 2. Strategy/Input Table vs. IR 7. ResourcesAssessment

Contribution of KE reduced in SCs – shift to project management from technical content

Replacement of KE and LTNKE involvement by ONKE – danger of shift from senior to junior expertise

Decrease of KE and LNKE input in SC 1.1 is not compensated, overall input reduced

Overall increase in 1.2 shall be justified

Case 1. Findings (Cont’d)

Time schedule: TP 2. Strategy/Activities Proposed vs. IR 3.3 Expected Results- Prolonging duration and shifting completion of activities:

Activity Duration (month) Completion (month)

1.4 From 6 to 12 From 12 to 18

1.7 From 3 to 6 From 21 to 24

2.4 From 4 to 6 From 30 to 32

3.1 From 16 to 20 From 20 to 24

Case 1. Findings (Cont’d)

Time schedule (Cont’d)AssessmentExtended duration of activities as a possible

consequence of shift in experts’ structure (see assessment of input)

Danger of shift of milestones towards the last phase of the project

Completion of 1.4 RCOP evaluation due to delay coincides with 1.5 RCOP revision

Case 2. – Verification of the Inception Report

Please assess the Activities undertaken in inception period (both inception and non-inception) in terms ofActivities,Output Resources andTiminig

by using the distributed documents:Extract from the Technical ProposalExtract from the Inception Report

Case 2. FindingsTP 2. Strategy/Input Table vs. IR 7. Resources vs. IR 4.

Inception Activities + IR 5. Non-inception ActivitiesResources:KE inception activities: 33 in IR 4-5, instead of 30 in IR 7

(and TP Input Table)Assessment: Inception activities shall be aligned with

Inception Report Chapter 7. Resources KE overall activities 52 for 2 months (less potential

working days in 2 months)Assessment: Inception activities shall be in line with

working day numbers

Case 2. Findings (Cont’d)Resources/timingNo spending of NKE mandays under SC 1.3Disproportionately high spending of NKE

mandays under SC 1.4 (25%)Activity 2.2 has not started (planned start

month: 1) Assessment: find justification in Inception

Report text under Key Issues, Review of Risks, or Changes in the Workplan If delays not justified, request for contingency planif overspendings not justified, consider to reject

Case study 3 – Verification of activities reported in the Interim Report

1. Assess Interim Report’s Chapters 3. a) ‘Major activities undertaken’, Chapter 4. a) ‘Milestones delivered’ and 6. ‘Resource Management’ in terms of: Activities Outputs Resources Timing

by using the following distributed documents: Extract from the Terms of Reference Extract from the Inception Report Extract from the Interim Report

Assumption: all the modifications discovered in Inception Report have been approved, except for Activity 2.7 that has been re-included

2. List the supporting documents that you consider necessary to request from the Consultant

Case 3. Findings

Activities:New activity introduced: ‘3.5 Providing on the

job support to final recipient institutions on building operation generation facility’

Assessment: justified, since output specified in ToR; overall input balance shall be considered

Case 3. Findings

Activities:Activity ‘2.1 Training and support needs

analysis local stakeholders’ deleted, however started in Inception phase

Assessment: probably cancelled;ToR does not specify as activity nor as output;Beneficiary can refer to TP

Case 3. Findings

Output:Activity 1.12 12 training programmes, instead

of 15 specified in TP and confirmed by Inception Report

Assessment:Not in contradiction with ToR (‘minimum 12’)Beneficiary can refer to both TP and Inception

Report

Case 3. Findings (Cont’d)

ResourcesNo unput reported for SC 1.2Assessment: probably a mistake, shall be

corrected

Over-spending of KE days in SC 1.3 (22 instead of 20)

Assessment: correction is needed, if no modification has been approved earlier; but: what if timesheets already approved?

Case 3. Findings (Cont’d)ResourcesRelatively high spending of mandays under SC1.1

(duration of activities in Incept. R. proportion: 17%; days reported: 25%)

(Formula: Months to be spent: 17 / Duration months: 99 vs. WDs used: 107 / Total WDs: 430)

Disproportionately high spending of mandays under SC 1.4 (duration of activities in Interim R. proportion: 8%; days reported: 40%)

Relatively low spending of mandays under SC 1.3, see also Inception finding (duration of activities in Interim R. proportion: 12%; days reported: 5%)

Case 3. Findings (Cont’d)ResourcesAssessment: find justification in ‘Current and

anticipated problems’ chapterIf low use of resources not justified, request

contingency planIf overspendings not justified, consider to reject

Case 3. Findings (Cont’d)TimingActivities not started:

1.1 Support in DIS processes (planned start month: 5)

1.8 Support/coaching to PSCs and SMCs (planned start month: 5)

2.2 Designing Training Programmes (planned start month: 1), see also Inception report finding

Case 3. Findings (Cont’d)TimingActivities not started:

2.5 Preparation of training materials (planned start month: 3)

2.6 Ensuring support to the final recipients for the technical implementation (planned start month: 5)

3.1 On the job support for technical documents (planned start month: 4)

Case 3. Findings (Cont’d)TimingActivities not started:Assessment:

delays shall be justified in chapter on Current and anticipated problems and remedial actions foreseen

Also see high spending of resources in SC 1.4 despite of delay of Activity 3.1

Case 3. Findings (Cont’d)TimingActivity started earlier:

2.3 Organization training programmesAssessment: trainings organised before design of

training programmes (Activity 2.2)

Case 3. Findings (Cont’d)

Supporting documents (for completed actions):Act. 0.1: Paper on situation analysisAct. 0.2: Training Needs Assessment approvedAct. 0.3: Inception Report approvedAct. 1.3: Report on revision of organizational

structure, roles and responsibilitiesAct. 2.1: Support and Training Needs Analysis

approved

Case study 4 – Verification of planned activities in the Interim Report

Assess Chapter 5. ‘Planned major activities’ of the Interim Report in terms ofActivitiesOutputsResourcesTiming

by using the distributed documents:Extract from the Terms of ReferenceExtract from the Inception ReportExtract from the Interim Report

Case 4. Findings (Cont’d)

Time schedule:Reduced duration compensates delay on

activities 1.8, 2.6 and 3.1, - original deadlines kept

Delay, but completion planned in RP2 for activities: 1.1, 2.2 and 2.5

Assessment: delays are planned to overcome in Reporting Period 2

Case 4. Findings (Cont’d)

ResourcesInput aligned with time proportion for SCs 1.1 –

1.3Overspending rate increased (19% vs 80%) in

SC 1.4

Assessment: re-allocation has to be considered for SC 1.4

Final ConclusionsStick to Activity structure of ToR

If modifications are needed, do it under sub(-sub)-activity levels

Avoid input micro-managementFind logic between input and output

deliveredAssess duration changes of activitesUse tables!