Archived [2022-03-02] - Directive on the Management of Projects and Programmes

This page has been archived on the Web

Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.

Archived

This page has been archived on the Web.

Note to reader

While the requirements in the Directive on the Management of Projects and Programmes, including the mandatory procedures and appendices, take effect on , with the exception of the requirements of 1.3 and 1.4, departments have six months to fully transition to the new directive.

With respect to requirement 1.4, projects approved under the Policy on the Management of Projects or the rescinded Project Approval Policy prior to , have until , to transition to the Directive on the Management of Projects and Programmes.

1. Effective date

  • 1.1This directive takes effect on .
  • 1.2This directive replaces the following Treasury Board policy instruments:
  • 1.3Departments will have six months to transition to the new directive. With the following exceptions, requirements will come into full effect on .
    • 1.3.1Effective immediately:
      • Appendix C: Project Approval Limits
    • 1.3.2Effective one year from the effective date in section 1.1:
      • Requirement 4.1.6
  • 1.4In-flight projects, with final authorities in place as of the effective date in section 1.1 and that are scheduled to close within one year from the effective date, will be exempt from transitioning to the directive.

2. Authorities

  • 2.1This directive is issued pursuant to section 7 of the Financial Administration Act and section 31 of the Public Service Employment Act.

3. Objectives and expected results

  • 3.1The objective of this directive is that government projects and programmes are effectively planned, implemented, monitored and controlled, and closed to enable the realization of the expected benefits and results for Canadians.
  • 3.2The expected results of this directive are as follows:
    • 3.2.1Governance and controls over projects and programmes are effective;
    • 3.2.2Decisions are made throughout the life of the project and programme with a view to maximizing efficiency and ensuring the realization of benefits;
    • 3.2.3Performance measurement data are used in support of regular monitoring of project and programme health and evidence-based decision-making; and
    • 3.2.4Capacity for project and programme management, commensurate with organizational need, is developed and maintained.

4. Requirements

Senior designated official(s) for the management of projects and programmes

  • 4.1The senior designated official(s) for the management of projects and programmes is responsible for the following:
    • 4.1.1Establishing, documenting, and maintaining a department-wide project and programme management framework, consisting of processes, systems and controls, anchored in professional best practices;
    • 4.1.2Consulting key departmental stakeholders including procurement, real property, information technology, finance, and human resources in the development of the project and programme framework;
    • 4.1.3Embedding within the project and programme framework an approach to project gating, that establishes;
      • 4.1.3.1The project gates that each project and programme must pass through;
      • 4.1.3.2The evidence required in support of gate decisions; and
      • 4.1.3.3The process for documenting the gate decisions;
    • 4.1.4Making available to all departments and agencies, in a manner and timeframe determined by the Comptroller General of Canada, the deputy head approved departmental project and programme management framework;
    • 4.1.5Supporting management and expenditure decision-making, accountability, and transparency by establishing:
      • 4.1.5.1Processes for the monitoring and control of the department's projects and programmes; and
      • 4.1.5.2Standard performance measures and performance measurement tracking processes for the department's projects and programmes;
    • 4.1.6For all projects with a total cost of $25 million or greater, collecting and submitting to the Office of the Comptroller General, baseline project information on scope, schedule, costs, and risks, following receipt of:
      • Project approval;
      • Expenditure authority;
      • Amended project approval;
      • Amended expenditure authority; and
      • Project close-out;
    • 4.1.7Implementing processes that promote the coordinated management of related projects to reduce risk, contribute to shared outcomes, and realize efficiencies and benefits not available from managing the projects individually;
    • 4.1.8Identifying and addressing the department's needs with respect to acquiring the necessary knowledge, experience, and skills in project and programme management;
    • 4.1.9Putting in place a process to collect and make available best practices and lessons-learned;
    • 4.1.10Completing the Organizational Project Management Capacity Assessment as provided for in Appendix A: Mandatory Procedures for Organizational Project Management Capacity Assessment; and
    • 4.1.11Establishing processes and standards, consistent with direction provided by the Comptroller General of Canada, for the authoring, review and approval of Project Complexity and Risk Assessments.

Project sponsor (programme sponsor)

  • 4.2The project sponsor (programme sponsor) is responsible for the following:
    • 4.2.1The planning, definition, implementation, transition, and close-out of the project or programme;

    Leadership and alignment

    • 4.2.2Providing visible active leadership and timely direction to mitigate project and programme risks, resolve issues, and act on opportunities;
    • 4.2.3Collaborating with key departmental stakeholders such as procurement, real property, information technology, finance, legal, and human resources in the planning and implementation of the project or programme;
    • 4.2.4Where applicable, seeking integrated approval of the project, procurement and real property authorities;
    • 4.2.5Maintaining effective relationships with key external stakeholders including implicated departments and common service providers;
    • 4.2.6Ensuring where business change is required to achieve the business outcomes, that the project and programme scope of work includes all the activities and outputs necessary to bring about this change;
    • 4.2.7Ensuring programmes employ an appropriately flexible procurement strategy, to reduce risk and/or provide opportunity for earlier, incremental realization of benefits; and
    • 4.2.8Applying as appropriate, incremental, iterative, agile, and user-centric principles and methods to the planning, definition, and implementation of the project;

    Governance

    • 4.2.9Communicating roles, responsibilities, accountability, and authority for project and programme governance to all key stakeholders;
    • 4.2.10Enable effective decision-making by ensuring essential project and programme information and performance measures are tracked and shared with all key stakeholders;
    • 4.2.11Exercising due care in the assignment of the project manager by ensuring the project manager has the required competencies and experience to manage:
      • 4.2.11.1The work needed to realize the project's outputs; and
      • 4.2.11.2The relative complexity, risk, materiality, and significance of the project;
    • 4.2.12Documenting roles and responsibilities, and delegating authorities to the project manager through a project charter;
    • 4.2.13Documenting and communicating project and programme governance decisions to the project and programme team and all key stakeholders;
    • 4.2.14Assessing the project and programme governance to confirm its effectiveness and inclusiveness, and adjusting it as needed; and
    • 4.2.15Ensuring that the level of seniority at which governance is exercised and the frequency of governance meetings are commensurate with the complexity and risk of the project or program;

    Additional governance requirements for joint and enterprise projects and programmes

    • 4.2.16Working with key stakeholders to establish a common governance framework and mechanisms; and
    • 4.2.17Ensuring the roles, responsibilities, accountabilities and authorities of all departments are documented in signed agreements and are reviewed and maintained throughout the life cycle of the project;

    Project gating

    • 4.2.18Establishing a project gating plan at the outset of the project, consistent with the department's framework, that;
      • 4.2.18.1Documents the decisions that will be taken at each gate, the evidence and information required in support of the gate decisions, the criteria used to assess the evidence, and the gate governance; and
      • 4.2.18.2Reflects the specific risks of the project; input from key departmental and external stakeholders; the procurement strategy; and project dependencies and constraints;
    • 4.2.19Including at each gate: a revalidation of the business case; confirmation that the intended benefits are still relevant and attainable; and an overall determination of the ongoing viability of the project;
    • 4.2.20For gate decisions involving consideration of operational readiness or deployment decisions, seeking and documenting input from stakeholders that are affected by the decision;
    • 4.2.21Conducting assurance activities and independent reviews in accordance with the project gating plan; and
    • 4.2.22For each gate, making a determination as to whether the project has met the requirements of the gate; and

    Additional gating requirements for joint and enterprise projects

    • 4.2.23Ensuring that gate decisions consider the interests and input of all impacted stakeholders;

    Project approval

    • 4.2.24Ensuring the completion of the project complexity and risk assessment in accordance with Appendix B: Mandatory Procedures for Project Complexity and Risk Assessment;
    • 4.2.25Seeking project approval and expenditure authority as per the requirements outlined in Appendix C: Project Approval Limits and Appendix D: Programme Approval, Project Approval and Expenditure Authority; and
    • 4.2.26Support decision-making by integrating procurement planning in project approvals by ensuring that requests for project approval include market analysis and procurement strategies;

    Benefits management and transition to operations

    • 4.2.27Ensuring that the project's and programme's expected outcomes and benefits are clearly defined and measurable as an input into the business case;
    • 4.2.28Ensuring that a benefits realization plan is in place at the time of project approval and is monitored and updated throughout the project life cycle;
    • 4.2.29Ensuring the business owner(s) responsible for the realization of benefits is identified in the benefits realization plan;
    • 4.2.30To support transition of the project to operations, ensuring that:
      • 4.2.30.1A transition plan is developed prior to the commencement of the implementation phase; and
      • 4.2.30.2 The transition plan is updated throughout the project life cycle;

    Additional requirements for joint and enterprise projects and programmes

    • 4.2.31Working with participating departments to ensure that requirements 4.2.27 through 4.2.30 reflect a joint or enterprise perspective;

    Performance measurement and lessons learned

    • 4.2.32Reviewing, at the commencement of a project, lessons learned from similar projects;
    • 4.2.33At the end of each project phase, documenting lessons learned and sharing with all key stakeholders and the Senior Designated Official responsible for the management of projects and programmes; and
    • 4.2.34Completing a project close-out report and sharing with the departmental committee that approved the project as well as the Senior Designated Official responsible for the management of projects and programmes;

Other roles

  • 4.3The Secretary of the Treasury Board is responsible for the following:
    • 4.3.1Establishing and documenting processes for the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS) review of departments' Organizational Project Management Capacity Assessments and Project Complexity and Risk Assessments;
  • 4.4The Comptroller General of Canada is responsible for:
    • 4.4.1Providing government-wide functional leadership to the project management community, including the development and sustainability of the project management community through talent management and community development strategies;
  • 4.5The Chief Information Officer of Canada is responsible for:
    • 4.5.1Establishing a digital investment oversight program and, as part of that program:
      • 4.5.1.1Identifying those digital projects or programmes that are subject to oversight by the Chief Information Officer of Canada; and
      • 4.5.1.2Conducting oversight activities with respect to identified digital projects or programmes, including:
        • 4.5.1.2.1Requiring the responsible deputy head to commission, at the relevant department's cost, one or more independent reviews of projects or programmes to ascertain whether specific actions are required to address issues or mitigate risks;
        • 4.5.1.2.2Commissioning one or more independent reviews of projects or programmes, at the relevant department's cost, to ascertain whether specific actions are required to address issues or mitigate risks; and
        • 4.5.1.2.3Requiring the responsible deputy head to undertake specific course corrections as deemed necessary by the Chief Information Officer of Canada based on evidence gathered in the course of overseeing identified projects or programmes;
    • 4.5.2Recommending cancellation of digital projects or programmes to the Treasury Board when evidence demonstrates that the project or programme is not viable; and
    • 4.5.3Assigning a project sponsor for a digital project that involves multiple departments (joint or enterprise projects) and for which a single responsible project sponsor has not been named.

5. Roles of other government organizations

  • 5.1Not applicable.

6. Application

  • 6.1This directive and related appendices apply to the organizations listed in section 6.1 of the Policy on the Planning and Management of Investments..
  • 6.2This directive and related appendices apply to all Government of Canada projects and programmes as defined in the Policy on the Planning and Management of Investments.
  • 6.3Requirements within this directive and related appendices are to be applied in a scalable fashion commensurate with the needs of the department and the risk and complexity of the project or programme.
  • 6.4Requirements 4.1.1 through 4.1.4 apply to those departments with an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class of 1 and higher.
  • 6.5Requirement 4.1.10 and Appendix A apply to those departments seeking a project approval authority limit greater than the base limit of $2.5 million.
  • 6.6This directive does not apply to projects funded by the federal government through transfer payments. The Treasury Board Policy on Transfer Payments and its supporting directives set out requirements for managing and approving projects funded through transfer payments.
  • 6.7Agents of Parliament
    • 6.7.1The following organizations are considered agents of Parliament for the purposes of the directive:
      • Office of the Auditor General
      • Office of the Chief Electoral Officer
      • Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada
      • Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
      • Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
      • Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
      • Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada
    • 6.7.2For greater certainty, the definition of a project does not include the performance of audits, investigations, or other statutory mandate activities of the agents of Parliament.
    • 6.7.3With regard to the agents of Parliament, the following do not apply:
      • subsection 4.1.6
      • subsection 4.2.25
      • subsection 4.5.1.1
      • subsection 4.5.1.2, including 4.5.1.2.1, 4.5.1.2.2 and 4.5.1.2.3
      • subsection 4.5.2
      • Appendix A: Mandatory Procedures for Organizational Project Management Capacity Assessments subsections A.2.2.3.1; A.2.2.4; A.2.2.5, including A.2.2.5.1, A.2.2.5.2 and A.2.2.5.3; A.2.2.6; A.2.2.7; A.2.2.8; A.2.2.9; A.2.2.10 and A.2.2.11
      • Appendix B: Mandatory Procedures for Project Complexity and Risk Assessments subsections B.2.2.4, including B.2.2.4.1; B.2.2.5, including B2.2.5.1; B.2.2.6; B.2.2.7 and B.2.2.8
      • Appendix C: Project Approval Limits
      • Appendix D: Programme Approval, Project Approval and Expenditure Authority
      • Appendix E: Project Brief

7. References

8. Enquiries

Appendix A: Mandatory Procedures for Organizational Project Management Capacity Assessments

A.1 Effective date

  • A.1.1These procedures take effect on .
  • A.1.2These procedures replace the following Treasury Board policy instruments:
    • Standard for Organizational Project Management Capacity Assessments()

A.2 Procedures

  • A.2.1These procedures provide details on the requirement set out in section 4.1.10 of the Directive on the Management of Projects and Programmes.
  • A.2.2Mandatory procedures are as follows:
    General requirements
    • A.2.2.1All departments seeking an increase to the base project approval authority limit of $2.5 million must do so using the Organizational Project Management Capacity Assessment (OPMCA).
    What the assessment covers
    • A.2.2.2The assessment measures the capacity of a department to successfully deliver a defined volume of work over a fixed period of time.
    • A.2.2.3The generally accepted method to establish this volume of work is to prepare a list of all planned and active projects of $2.5 million and greater, covering the period of time for which the requested authority will be in effect.
      • A.2.2.3.1If this is not practicable, the department must meet with TBS in advance of starting the OPMCA and confirm how the volume of work will be established and communicated.
    Evidence in support of the OPMCA
    • A.2.2.4TBS must be consulted at the start of the process to confirm the evidence that will be used to support the OPMCA;
    • A.2.2.5 Sources of evidence must include:
      • A.2.2.5.1A representative sample of recent projects;
      • A.2.2.5.2 Findings from the past three years of internal or external audits, evaluations, reports, or other findings addressing the departments project management capacity; and
      • A.2.2.5.3Treasury Board conditions from the past three years pertaining to project management capacity.
    Submitting the OPMCA
    • A.2.2.6Submit the draft OPMCA, with its evidence, to TBS for review.
    • A.2.2.7Revise, if necessary, the OPMCA based on TBS's feedback.
    • A.2.2.8Submit the deputy head–approved final OPMCA to TBS through the approved centralized application.
    • A.2.2.9Prepare the Treasury Board submission to seek approval of the Organizational Project Management Capacity Assessment Class.
    Changes in Organizational Project Management Capacity Assessments
    • A.2.2.10Inform TBS in a timely manner of any significant changes to the organizational project management capacity that may affect the Treasury Board approved capacity class.
    • A.2.2.11If requested by TBS, revise the OPMCA.

A.3 References

  • Guide to Using the Organizational Project Management Assessment Tool
  • Organizational Project Management Assessment Tool

Appendix B: Mandatory Procedures for Project Complexity and Risk Assessments

B.1 Effective date

  • B.1.1These procedures take effect on .
  • B.1.2These procedures replace the following Treasury Board policy instruments:
    • Standard for Project Complexity and Risk Assessments(2010)

B.2 Procedures

  • B.2.1These procedures provide details on the requirements set out in subsection 4.2.24 of the Directive on the Management of Projects and Programmes.
  • B.2.2Mandatory procedures are as follows:
    General requirements
    • B.2.2.1The assessment is to be completed for all projects as per the Project Complexity and Risk Assessment (PCRA) thresholds established in Appendix C: Project Approval Limits.
    • B.2.2.2The assessment is to be completed using the Project Complexity and Risk Assessment.
    • B.2.2.3The assessment must take into account the full scope and life cycle of the project.
    Submitting the Project Complexity and Risk Assessment
    • B.2.2.4Prior to the commencement of the definition phase, submit the assessment, with reference to the supporting evidence, to TBS for review and confirmation of the assessed level of complexity and risk.
      • B.2.2.4.1For departments with an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Assessment class, the Project Complexity and Risk Assessment is to be submitted through the centralized application.
    Review of a PCRA
    • B.2.2.5TBS will review the assessed level of complexity and risk within 15 working days after the submission of the PCRA.
      • B.2.2.5.1As part of its review, TBS may request the department provide supporting documentation.
    • B.2.2.6In the event that TBS does not raise questions or request additional information within 15 working days after the submission of the PCRA, the department may assume TBS is in agreement with the assessed level of complexity and risk.
    Changes in project complexity and risk assessments
    • B.2.2.7If during the life cycle of the project there are significant changes that would increase the assessed level of complexity or risk, the complexity and risk is to be reassessed.
    • B.2.2.8Following consultations, TBS may request that a revised assessment, with reference to the supporting evidence, is to be submitted for review.

Appendix C: Project Approval Limits

In exercising oversight, the Treasury Board limits the expenditure authority exercised by ministers in the approval of projects.

All departments and agencies subject to this directive have a base project approval authority limit of $2.5 million (inclusive of the Goods and Services Tax and the Harmonized Sales Tax).

The basis for determining the capacity to manage projects, and seeking an increase to this base amount, is provided in the Mandatory Procedures for Organizational Project Management Capacity. Once approved by Treasury Board, the Organizational Project Management Capacity Class establishes a minister's project approval authority limit.

.

Departments without an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class are to seek the approval of Treasury Board for all projects over $2.5 million (inclusive of the Goods and Services Tax and the Harmonized Sales Tax).

For departments with an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class, the basis for the determination of the appropriate approval authority is the relationship between the approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class of the department and the assessed Project Complexity and Risk Level of the project. Treasury Board may require any project to be brought forward for their consideration and approval.

The threshold for completing a PCRA is as follows:

  • $2.5 million for departments without an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class or with an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class of 1;
  • $5 million for departments with an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class of 2;
  • $10 million for departments with an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class of 3; and
  • $25 million for departments with an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class of 4.

The results of the PCRA will confirm the approval authority and inform the planning, resourcing, governance and management of the project.

Minister's project approval authority limit
Organizational Project Management Capacity ClassProject complexity and risk level
Base (unassessed)$2.5 million
Class 1Level 1
Class 2Level 2
Level 1
Class 3Level 3
Level 2
Level 1
Class 4Level 4
Level 3
Level 2
Level 1

Appendix D: Programme Approval, Project Approval and Expenditure Authority

Programmes

In cases of programmes, departments must consult with TBS early in the programme to confirm the requirements and processes that will support a request for programme approval.

Projects

Departmental project approval

All projects within the departmental project approval authority limit require documented project approval prior to the commencement of the definition phase.

For projects approved within the department, requests for project approval must be supported by a business case and all other documents the department requires as per its project and programme management framework.

Treasury Board project approval and expenditure authority

Projects approved by Treasury Board require two distinct and explicit approvals: project approval and expenditure authority.

In providing project approval, Treasury Board agrees that a requirement has been identified and that there is adequate justification for meeting that requirement through a particular project. Project approval provides authorization to seek expenditure authority, but does not in and of itself convey authority to expend funds on the project. A request for project approval follows completion of the business case and must be supported by an indicative cost estimate.

Expenditure authority provides the authority to expend funds against those activities for which the authority was sought. Expenditure authority granted by Treasury Board indicates that sufficient information is available, at an appropriate level of detail, to proceed with a particular phase or phases of the project. A request for expenditure authority must be supported by a substantive cost estimate.

Prior to receiving project approval and expenditure authority from Treasury Board, the responsible ministers' authority is limited to those activities necessary to seek the initial project approval and expenditure authority such as options analysis, feasibility studies, socio-economic studies, technical investigations, market analysis, topographic surveys, and pricing and availability studies. These activities are commonly referred to as pre-definition activities.

Once granted, project approval and expenditure authority will establish an agreed upon project baseline.

Amended authority in terms of project approval and /or expenditure authority must be sought from Treasury Board when:

  • The total estimated cost changes such that it exceeds expenditure limits (expenditure authority) approved by Treasury Board; or
  • There is a significant change to the anticipated outcomes and benefits identified at time of approval; or
  • There has been a significant change to the project baseline established at time of approval.

When it is clear that one or more of the above conditions will be realized, departments must initiate in a timely fashion, the process of seeking amended authorities.

Requests for project approval, expenditure authority, or amendments to the same must be supported by the following documentation:

Appended to the submission

  • Project brief (Appendix E)

Provided to TBS at the same time as the draft submission

  • Business case
  • Project Management Plan
  • Project Gating Plan
  • Procurement Plan
  • Appointment letter (where applicable)
  • Project charter

Other plans or documents may be requested by TBS as and when required.

Standard submission approach

Following the conclusion of the initial planning and identification phase, the minister responsible for a project requiring the approval authority of Treasury Board will seek project approval for the project and expenditure authority for the definition phase.

Once the definition phase is completed, the minister responsible for a project will seek expenditure authority for the implementation and close-out phases of the project.

Streamlined submission approach

For projects assessed at a PCRA level 1 or 2 that require Treasury Board approval, departments may be eligible to seek authorities for the entire project through a single submission following the conclusion of the initial planning and identification phase. The submission will seek project approval for the project, expenditure authority for the definition phase, and conditional expenditure authority for the implementation and close-out phases. The project should also seek any required contracting authorities at this time.

To be eligible for this approach, in addition to all other submission requirements, the original submission and associated documents must include a fulsome description of the overall gating approach over the project life cycle and the monitoring and control regime that will be applied to the project. In addition, the overall contingency (a measure of uncertainty) may not exceed 20%.

Departments are to confirm with TBS the suitability of this approach in advance of the preparation of the initial submission.

Following completion of the definition phase, the department may proceed with the implementation, contracting and close-out phases without returning to Treasury Board if the following conditions apply:

  • The Chief Financial Officer confirms in writing to the responsible TBS Program Assistant Secretary, that the project remains within the cost baseline established through the original submission; and
  • The project sponsor confirms in writing to the responsible TBS Program Assistant Secretary, that there have been no significant changes to the project baseline or intended outcomes and benefits.

Associated authorities

In cases where projects also include real property transactions and/or contracting activities which also require Treasury Board approval, departments are encouraged to coordinate all required approvals (project, real property and procurement) to provide a consolidated view to Treasury Board ministers and in doing so, minimize the number of submissions.

Appendix E: Project Brief

  • E.1A project brief must provide Treasury Board, the sponsoring minister, senior departmental officials, and TBS with a clear and concise understanding of the proposed initiative.
  • E.2A project brief must include a description of:
    • E.2.1The expected outcomes of the project; the relationship of the outcomes to the sponsoring department's mandate and programs and to government-wide results; and the significance of the project within the context of the department's investment plan;
    • E.2.2The level of service or capability to be developed or improved; a general description of the output(s); and the outcome(s) to be achieved;
    • E.2.3A summary of the benefits realization plan including indication of the timing of the expected benefits;
    • E.2.4The results of the business case, including a description of each option, the assessment criteria, and a summary of the results of the comparative assessment;
    • E.2.5For the recommended option, the scope, schedule, cost and other critical objectives that will form the project baseline;
    • E.2.6The procurement strategy, including any relevant market information, interdepartmental procurement review process and the proposed strategy for soliciting and awarding relevant contracts, when required;
    • E.2.7The risk management plan including identification of key risks, their probability and potential impact, and the plan to proactively monitor and control them;
    • E.2.8Other features of the project that could affect its progress, such as privacy and environmental issues, land claims, regulatory or legislative changes and agreements with other governments, including international or domestic participants;
    • E.2.9The segmenting of the project into gates and the controls for managing transitions through the gates;
    • E.2.10The proposed timing of engagements with Treasury Board or TBS;
    • E.2.11The performance and outcome measures, including an assessment strategy and provision for independent third-party evaluations when required;
    • E.2.12The governance and management approach to the overall project including:
      • Accountability for project outcomes;
      • Documented roles and responsibilities of participating departments and of the different units within the lead department;
      • The structure and committees focused on governing the project and achieving the project and programme outcomes;
    • E.2.13The communications strategy including identification, nature, and extent of consultations with key stakeholders; and
    • E.2.14The results of the project complexity and risk assessment.