How does one capital project compare in importance to another project? What are the standards of comparison? How can the departmental, financial and executive perspectives of project importance be brought to bear in the development of a government's Capital Program? This is the complex apples to oranges capital project prioritization task all governments face.
The CIPAce™ Project Ranking module empowers governments to provide greater clarity and transparency in their prioritization process.
The module is highly configurable to precisely match your government's current or desired prioritization process. The module supports both the flexible census and highly-structured criteria based approaches to the ranking process. Multiple ranking phases are also supported. Some examples of possible combinations of these approaches and phase are:
- An initial ranking based on useful life, asset condition, political impact .
- A departmental priority based on a highest to lowest project order.
- A multiple criteria based approach looking at the strategic goal alignment of each project weighting both the evaluation criteria and the evaluator
Once scores are tallied, the result will be quantified and summarized as an aggregated ranking result. The relationship between the results of your ranking process and the financing phase of Capital Program Development is built into the design level of CIPAce™. Thus the synthesized high value ranking data can be immediately and continuously applied to your funding decision process.