Low Cost/Low Risk Improvements
IAF application and TIO changes
June 2017
Introduction to Low Cost/Low Risk
• All funding applications need to show alignment with outcomes
desired by Government policy
• Low Cost or low risk improvements are no exception
Key consideration taken into account:
What’s the best way to demonstrate a robust evidence base for small
scale projects which are considered low cost/ low risk
Current v Future State
Current State
• Improvement activities up to $300K funded using a
streamlined approach (minor improvements)
• Capturing key information on each improvement activity via a
spreadsheet
• Summary information of the proposed total programme of
works via TIO fields
Future State
• Proposed name change to ‘low cost/ low risk improvements’
• Proposed threshold increased – up to $1M per activity
• Improved programme management during NLTP
• More alignment to BC principles/ IAF
A balanced approach to Streamlined Assessment
• Based on the streamlined assessment for Low cost/Low risk proposals,
including a higher funding threshold, we’ve taken into consideration:
•
Reasonable Value for Money assurance
•
Alignment to the IAF
•
Alignment to the Business Case Approach
•
Obtaining necessary information without overburdening staff, or
potentially discouraging good applications
• Delivers a balance between robust, thorough assessment and a more
streamlined approach.
Enhanced approach to Streamlined Assessment
•
Individual activity detail captured in the NZTA spreadsheet
template
•
Key information summarised and uploaded directly into TIO
•
Investment assessment will be made at the programme level
only (influenced from spreadsheet)
•
Some improved functionality and enhanced checks and
balances in both TIO and spreadsheet
LCLR spreadsheet – key changes
• Roading & PT – sign off of each activity (proposed)
• Roading & PT - additional (automated) column to capture
outcome class – dependent on primary benefit chosen
• PT only - additional (automated) column to capture intervention
type
• PT only - if “intervention” type is service related, funding will be
available for a trial* - additional information is required around
proposed performance of the trial
TIO LCLR programme management
Proposed changes to the investment assessment:
•
NZTA spreadsheet template must be updated yearly with revised
cashflows for each LC/LR project (both approved and proposed)
•
Conditional funding support – during the 3 year programme,
claiming funding is conditional on entry and submission of the prior
years’ NZTA spreadsheet template
•
TIO programme cashflows need to align to the updated NZTA
spreadsheet template *
1st year
claiming
access:
available upon
NLTP approval/
adoption
2nd year
claiming
access:
conditional on
updating and
submission of
revised s/sheet
[end of 1st
year]
3rd year
claiming
access:
conditional on
updating and
submission of
revised s/sheet
[end of 2nd
year]
TIO LCLR programme vs phase
• Clearer distinction between roading and PT LC/LR programme
‘phases’
• Provides more clarity and assists investment partners with both
LC/LR programmes
ACTIVITY AREA:
• Outline 111111111
• Alignment to key 11
documentation 11
• Contact details 111
PHASE AREA
(separate for roading vs PT:
• Specific templates available
• Supporting documents 11111
(specific spreadsheet to attach)
• Benefits capture for each
• IAF Assessment for each
TIO LCLR programme assessment
• Investment assessment will be made at the programme level
(i.e. TIO), but entered/ recorded within the phase type
• Benefit information will be collated from the spreadsheet
template and automatically upload into TIO (again recorded
against each phase type)
• The outcome class summary captured in TIO allows
assessment against Results Alignment criteria
TIO LCLR programme assessment (cont)
• LC/LR IAF assessment profile
• Results Alignment - default is high unless outcomes are
significantly different from Results Alignment criteria
• Cost-benefit Appraisal - default is medium based primarily
on supporting spreadsheet detail, and any other information
that demonstrates value for money
• Work Categories
• Public transport now has its own distinct work category (532),
distinct from PT infrastructure (531)
Key takeaway:
LC/LR programme vs Continuous Programme vs Improvement
LC/LR programme
Operational programme Improvement activity
Group of small scale
improvement activities
Group of on-going related
operational activities
Stand-alone improvement
activity, can be part of a
package
Dependency
Activities usually
independent of one
another
Activities primarily
dependent on one another
Activities usually
interdependent when part
of a package
Funding size
< $1M per activity
(proposed)
Variable, no limit except
time period
> $1M per activity
Timing of
approval
At start of NLTP
At start of NLTP
At time of development of
each stage, separate to the
NLTP adoption, seeks only
NLTP inclusion
Funding
approval
3 years but conditional
release (i.e. ability to
claim - following year)
3 year approval
(if “pass”, i.e. no rework or
fail with conditions)
Upfront, one off approval
(usually)
Single stage
Single stage
Multiple stages
Type
Assessment
of Business
Case