Value for Money Report Clause Samples

Value for Money Report a report to be developed for the Project Owner independently of the Alliance to report on matters including the extent to which the Participants, the performance of the Works have satisfied the requirements of the VfM Statement. VfM Statement the Project Owner's value for money proposition for the Project, set out in Schedule 5 as may be amended or substituted by the Project Owner in accordance with clause 3(c). Victorian Inspector the inspector appointed under the Victorian Inspectorate ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ (Vic). VicTrack Victorian Rail Track, a body corporate established under the Transport Integration Act2010 (Vic). VicTrack Retail Project Brief the letter with the subject "St Albans Grade Separation Project – VicTrack Retail Project Brief", including the Outline Specification for Retail Components, dated 10 October 2014, with annotations as shown in the version dated 14 August 2015 sent by VicRoads to Leighton on 26 August 2015. VIPP the Victorian Industry Participation Policy established under section 4 of the Victorian Industry Participation Policy ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ (Vic).
View Source
Value for Money Report. 6.1 This accompanied the application by the FS DoH for Treasury Authorisation 3, although we do not have the actual letter of application on file. 6.2 According to the practice manual, a PPP project may provide value for money, but be unaffordable if the specifications are too high. Thus, although value for money is a necessary condition for PPP procurement, it is not a sufficient one. 6.3 The way to conduct a value assessment, which according to the manual should take place at feasibility study stage, is to construct a base public sector comparator (PSC) model and then a risk-adjusted PSC model. These two models should then be compared with the PPP reference model, as well as the risk- adjusted PPP reference model, to determine whether the project is affordable and whether the PPP option provides value for money. This in turn assists in making the correct procurement choice. 6.4 According to the manual, a risk matrix should be constructed at feasibility study stage, to identify and track risk allocation throughout the procurement process up to financial close. 6.5 In the absence of a feasibility study we are unable to comment on these aspects. However, the value-for-money report does cover a number of these aspects although more superficially and much further down the procurement process line. The value for money report complies with the practice manual’s recommendations in that it: 6.5.1 provides background to the project and the procurement process; 6.5.2 deals with issues of value for money (although it doesn’t provide the comparison with PSC as the manual recommends); 6.5.3 provides a risk analysis summary, although it doesn’t show risk values, which is advised by the manual. It does, however, set out a risk matrix, allocating risks between the parties and providing comments in each instance. The standardised risk matrix supplied in the manual contains four columns, headed “categories, description, mitigation and allocation”, which is not unlike the kind of detail which has been included in this report; 6.5.4 deals with affordability under the heading “additional costs for FS DoH; 6.5.5 provides a conclusion and a justification for this conclusion. 6.6 The report does not deal with contingent liabilities and sources and conditions of funding, as suggested by the manual. 6.7 It also doesn’t include reference to a legal due diligence or to a management plan, which are recommended by the manual. The reason for this is that the requirement for a managemen...
View Source
Value for Money Report. The Value for Money Report must be a report which identifies why the Target Cost Estimate represents value for money, and in particular must: (a) identify the value of all significant improvements and innovations between the concept design for the Alliance Works at the date of this Agreement and the design for the Alliance Works contained in the Project Proposal; (b) provide a reconciliation, including reasons for all major positive and negative variances in cost, between the budget estimate for the Alliance Works at the date of this Agreement and the Target Cost Estimate; and (c) include any other information that TIDC reasonably requires.
View Source

Related to Value for Money Report

  • Evaluation Report The state must provide a narrative summary of the evaluation design, status (including evaluation activities and findings to date), and plans for evaluation activities during the extension period. The narrative is to include, but not be limited to, describing the hypotheses being tested and any results available.

  • Information on value of contract/lot (excluding VAT) Section VI. Complementary information

  • Entity Accounts Not Required to Be Reviewed, Identified or Reported Unless the Reporting Singaporean Financial Institution elects otherwise, either with respect to all New Entity Accounts or, separately, with respect to any clearly identified group of such accounts, where the implementing rules in Singapore provide for such election, a credit card account or a revolving credit facility treated as a New Entity Account is not required to be reviewed, identified, or reported, provided that the Reporting Singaporean Financial Institution maintaining such account implements policies and procedures to prevent an account balance owed to the Account Holder that exceeds $50,000.

  • Foreign Assets/Account Reporting Information Italian residents who, during the fiscal year, hold investments abroad or foreign financial assets (e.g., cash, Shares and RSUs) which may generate income taxable in Italy are required to report such on their annual tax returns (UNICO Form, RW Schedule) or on a special form if no tax return is due. The same reporting obligations apply to Italian residents who, even if they do not directly hold investments abroad or foreign financial assets (e.g., cash, Shares and RSUs), are beneficial owners of the investment pursuant to Italian money laundering provisions.

  • Accounts Not Required to Be Reviewed, Identified, or Reported Unless the Reporting Finnish Financial Institution elects otherwise, either with respect to all Preexisting Individual Accounts or, separately, with respect to any clearly identified group of such accounts, where the implementing rules in Finland provide for such an election, the following Preexisting Individual Accounts are not required to be reviewed, identified, or reported as U.S.