This VFM assessment uses net present value as of <insert date of bid submission>, when bids were received. It includes the costs to <describe the component activities design/build/finance/maintain/operate, etc. and the agreement term>. It also includes the impact of risk transfer (as discussed later in this section) but excludes costs common to both methods, such as <describe any major exception items that were not included in the VFM analysis>.3
<provide a brief summary - max. 50 words - of the financial outcomes, both as a lump sum and a percentage of the PSC. If a financial advisor was involved in the calculation of the numbers on bid day, attach a copy of the advisor's summary report in Appendix A and refer to it here>
<Insert a very simple graphical representation of the value for money here as "Figure 1" - an Excel histogram chart will suffice. Ensure that the scale for the NPV axis starts as zero, otherwise there can be a perception that the government is manipulating the figures to show only part of the picture.>
Private financing by the contractor costs more than public financing by government, but in the case of <insert the project name here>, that cost was more than offset by the following factors:
<Provide a numbered list here of the top 3-5 items that offset borrowing costs, e.g. risk allocation, innovations, schedule savings, etc. Include an explanation of how the item generated quantitative value (max. 100-150 words per item) >
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3 Capital and renewal costs for both methods were developed by <name the consultant that prepared the base cost estimates>. Inflation and discount rates were provided by the Ministry of Finance and Enterprise. <Name the consultant, if any, that provided the financial modeling> developed the financial model.