Upload
juniper-morris
View
214
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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!