Conducting the prioritisation and phasing of territorial projects

What the territorial project prioritisation matrix contains

• A framework for the exercise: project owner, time horizon, foreseeable envelope per financial year, capacity profile, decision-making body.
• An inventory register: cost, financing plan, maturity, land status, required authorisations.
• Eliminatory filters applied before any rating: competence, link to the diagnostic, land control, feasibility, operation.
• Seven weighted criteria, inspired by the criteria revised in 2019 by the OECD Development Assistance Committee.
• A rating sheet from 1 to 5, the calculation of the weighted score and a rank stability test.
• Multi-year phasing rules, a timetable per tranche and a summary for the decision-making body.

When to use the matrix

The matrix comes into play when a development programme is drawn up or updated. Indeed, the 2015 organic laws require each programme to identify priorities and to assess its resources and expenditure over its first three years. Territorial project prioritisation thus meets this requirement. Local authorities, agencies and public institutions are its users.

Instructions for use

First, the project owner sets the criteria and their weighting before the projects are examined. Next, the owner lists the projects and applies the eliminatory filters. Then the assessors, preferably at least two, rate each project and record how their differences were settled. Finally, phasing divides large-scale projects into self-contained tranches, within the limits of the envelope for each financial year. The summary then goes to the decision-making body.

Expected outcome

The exercise produces a ranked list of the selected projects, the reasons for exclusion and the conditions to be met. It also provides a phasing timetable per financial year. Criteria, weighting and rating sheets, appended to the decision, thus give the decision an objective basis in the face of later requests.

Key facts

Limitations

The matrix structures a decision; it replaces neither the deliberation of the competent body nor the procedures laid down by the organic laws. Moreover, a high weighted score does not offset an eliminatory filter that has not been cleared. Adaptation to the specific case, review, validation and follow-up fall within consultations and packages, without representation.

Further reading: Institutional Advisory & Territorial Engineering; Organic Law No. 111-14 on regions (Adala, Ministry of Justice).