Criteria and Weighting | Priority and Risk level | Score |
Government priority: 25% The level and timing of project or program priority, where: ■ The level of priority for a project is specifically mandated (or where a Ministerial authority has been given to mandate that a project is a priority) in documents such as the NSW Budget, Premier's Priorities, State Infrastructure Strategy, Election Commitment, or is a response to a Legislative Change. Alternatively, the project is an enabler of a mandated priority project. ■ The timing of the priority project can be either within or outside the Forward Estimates and relates to planning/ development commencement, construction commencement or construction completion. These two conditions should exist. | Very high Government priority Mandated priority project, and final business case or construction to be completed within forward estimates | 5 |
High Government priority Mandated priority project, and final business case or construction to commence within forward estimates | 4 | |
Medium Government priority Mandated priority project, and final business case or construction to be completed outside forward estimates but within the next 1-2 years beyond forward estimates | 3 | |
Lower Government priority Mandated priority project, and final business case and construction to commence outside forward estimates but within the next 3-6 years beyond forward estimates | 2 | |
Very low Government priority Agency priority in Agency Strategic Plan over the next 10 years | 1 | |
Extremely low Government priority Not a documented Government priority | 0 | |
Interface complexity: 20% The extent to which the project or program's success will depend on the management of complex dependencies with other: ■ Institutions - certain bodies are contributing to the funding of the project or will be given operational responsibility; and/or ■ Projects or services - there are fundamental interdependencies with other projects or services that will directly influence the scope and cost of the project. | Very high interface complexity risk ■ Institutional interface between Federal, local and private entities, or ■ Fully interdependent on other projects or services | 5 |
High interface complexity risk ■ Institutional interface with 2 entities (Federal, local or private), or ■ Important interdependencies with other projects or services | 4 | |
Medium interface complexity risk ■ Institutional interface with 1 entity (Federal, local or private), or ■ Some interdependencies with other projects or services | 3 | |
Low interface complexity risk ■ Institutional interface with 1 entity, or ■ Minor interdependence with other projects or services | 2 | |
Very low interface complexity risk ■ Very little or infrequent interface with entities, or ■ Very little interdependence on other projects or services | 1 | |
Extremely low interface complexity risk No interface complexity | 0 | |
Complexity of procurement: 20% The extent to which a project or program requires, sophisticated, customised or complex procurement methods (non-traditional), thereby increasing the need for a careful assessment and management of risk. Procurement complexity may also be influenced by the extent of agency experience and capability. For example, some procurement methods (e.g. ECI) may be used more commonly by some agencies and represent a lower procurement risk. | Very high procurement complexity risk Highly complex procurement. For example Public Private Partnership (PPP), or a Hybrid that includes a PPP. | 5 |
High procurement complexity risk Unconventional complex procurement. For example an Alliance or hybrid Alliance. | 4 | |
Medium procurement complexity risk Some procurement complexity. For example, Early Contractor Involvement. | 3 | |
Lower procurement complexity risk Minor procurement complexity. For example Directly Managed Contract. | 2 | |
Very low procurement complexity risk Business as usual procurement. For example Design and Construct. | 1 | |
Extremely low procurement complexity risk No procurement complexity. For example routine procurement method for a routine infrastructure product that is purchased. | 0 | |
Agency capability: 20% The extent to which the sponsor agency has demonstrated capability (skills and experience), or can access through recruitment or procurement the required capability in the development and / or delivery of the type of project or program proposed and/or its delivery strategy. | Very high agency capability risk No projects of this type previously delivered over the last 10 years | 5 |
High agency capability risk Few number of projects of this type previously delivered over the last 10 years | 4 | |
Medium agency capability risk At least 5 projects of this type over the last 5 years | 3 | |
Lower agency capability risk Multiple recurring projects | 2 | |
Very low agency capability risk Business as usual type projects | 1 | |
Extremely low agency capability risk No agency capability risk for routine | 0 | |
Essential service: 15% The extent to which a project is essential to meet a deficiency that would otherwise have serious adverse impacts on the functioning of an existing community or the growth of a new community. | Very high essential service Addresses an urgent and critical deficiency that could have an adverse impact upon service delivery for an existing community or the growth of a new community. For example: ■ The provision of water or energy security; or ■ An accelerated and unexpected demand for services (such as meeting rising demand for correctional facilities or to provide essential transport access) | 5 |
High essential service Addresses a serious deficiency that could have a high impact upon service delivery for an existing community or the growth of a new community. | 4 | |
Medium essential service Addresses an important deficiency that could have a medium impact upon service delivery for an existing community or the growth of a new community. | 3 | |
Lower essential service Addresses some deficiency that could have a low impact upon service delivery for an existing community or the growth of a new community. | 2 | |
Very low essential service Addresses minor deficiency that could have a very low impact upon service delivery for an existing community or the growth of a new community. For example the provision of cultural projects. | 1 | |
Extremely low essential service Not an essential service | 0 |