Preparation Design Construction Occupation & use

Gateway 1 Gateway 2 Gateway 3 Gateway 4 Gateway 5 Financial close / Gateway 6 Gateway 7

Key decision 1
Strategic & spatial fit
2
Corporate fit
3
Detailed bid appraisal
4
Budget approval
5
CAPEX / VAT
6
contract signature
7 Practical 8
Financial closure reported to CPG
Stakeholders:
MCC

Project specific Employers Information

Requirements (EIRs) issued supported by:
Red Book (MCC levels of detail / quality
standards)
BB98 / 99 compliance
PrISM (Project InformationMCC
System
CAPITAL
linked to SAP) is used as both a financial an 1
project management tool
Community Strategy / LAA
Relevance to the appropriate
In-use data provides benchmark /m2
approval CAPEX centric - limited Opex other than briefing completion School staff / Governors
Pupils
Procurement: Local community
Via existing framework Refinement of proposals and elemental cost plan Open book work package tenders Parents
Mini competition based on EOI Site specifics - topographical survey / building Partners (links to business / links to
3 - 4 weeks surveys Inhibitors: sports / arts / culture)
Qualitative - weighted 70% quality / Stakeholder requirements Client - change of external environment e.g. change of government etc. Decision making / inform design Client / partner: Secure by Design
Manchester, Planning department / building control Variations FMMCC
Team contribute to and ownGATEWAY PROCESS
Familiarisation
30% costPROCESS
PROGRAMME GATEWAY (prelims + margin) MCC CAPITAL PROGRAMME GATEWAY PROCESS CAPITAL PROGRAMME MCC-CAPITAL
help PROGRAMME GATEWAY PROCESS FM team etc.
requirements Refurbishments their decisions Gateway 1 inform decision
Gateway D&B or2Construct OnlyGateway 3
Gateway Gateway 1 Gateway 2 Gateway 3 Gateway 2 Gateway 3makingGateway 1 Gateway 2 Gateway 3 Engage FM team pre-drop 3 MCC regeneration team
Strategic, Corporate and Spatial fit tested by
Gateway 1 Review Group
(Monthly)
Additional information required after
Gateway 1 assessment tested by Gateway 2
Review Group (Weekly)
Detailed bid appraisal by
Scrutiny Panel
(Weekly)
Strategic, Corporate and Spatial fit tested by
Gateway 1 Review Group
Additional information required after
Gateway 1 assessment tested by Gateway 2
Detailed bid appraisal by
Scrutiny Panel Commissioning
Strategic, Corporate and Spatial fit tested by
Gateway 1 Review Group
Additional information required after
Gateway 1 assessment tested by Gateway 2
Detailed bid appraisal Strategic,
Scrutiny Panel
by Corporate and Spatial fit tested by
Gateway 1 Review Group
Additional information required after
Gateway 1 assessment tested by Gateway 2
Detailed bid appraisal by
Scrutiny Panel Apprenticeship communities
Drivers Drivers (Monthly) Review Group (Weekly) (Weekly) Drivers (Monthly) Review Group (Weekly) Drivers (Weekly) (Monthly) Review Group (Weekly) (Weekly)
Submission: Gateway 1 and Rapid Risk Check Submission: Gateway 2 additional information Submission: Gateway 3 and updated Rapid Risk Check
Community Strategy / LAA
Relevance to the appropriate
Submission: Gateway 1 and Rapid Risk Check Submission: Gateway 2 additional information Submission: Gateway 3 and updated Rapid Risk Check
Community Strategy / LAA
Relevance to the appropriate
Training / upskilling
Submission: Gateway 1 and Rapid Risk Check Submission: Gateway 2 additional information
Community Strategy / LAA
Submission: Gateway 3 and updated Rapid Submission:
Relevance to the appropriate
Risk Check Gateway 1 and Rapid Risk Check Submission: Gateway 2 additional information
TC agreed
Submission: Gateway 3 and updated Rapid Risk Check

Hand-over
SRF / local plans SRF / local plans SRF / local plans
Evaluation criteria: NOTE: Only submissions where the Gateway 1 Evaluation criteria: Evaluation criteria: NOTE: Only submissions where the Gateway 1 Evaluation criteria: Evaluation criteria: NOTE: Only submissions where the Gateway 1 SRF / localEvaluation
plans criteria: Evaluation criteria: NOTE: Only submissions where the Gateway 1 Evaluation criteria:
Relationship to other public Strategic fit (internal and external partners) Review Group require additional information need go Review of mandate and business case Relationship to other public Strategic fit (internal and external partners) Review Group require additional information need go Review of mandate and business case Relationship to other public Strategic fit (internal and external partners) Review Group require additional information need Relationship
go toReview
other public
of mandate and business case Strategic fit (internal and external partners) Review Group require additional information need go Review of mandate and business case
assets in the area

Client sign off

Outline business case and current status
Area Service Boards
Accessibility to communities
Geographic fit and impact on other projects
Spatial fit with external partners (e.g. GMP, NHS)
Potential funding sources/procurement
Neighbourhood strategies
to Gateway 2 Review of feasibility/ option studies assets in the area Outline business case and current status to Gateway 2 Review of feasibility/ option studies assets in the area Outline business case and current status to Gateway 2 assets in the area
Review of feasibility/ option studies Outline business case and current status to Gateway 2 Review of feasibility/ option studies
Evaluation criteria:
Approval of further information requested at
Consultation with partners/key stakeholders
Indicative costs/ delivery timescales/ spend profile
Appraisal of funding and procurement
Area Service Boards
Accessibility to communities
Geographic fit and impact on other projects
Spatial fit with external partners (e.g. GMP, NHS)
Potential funding sources/procurement
Evaluation criteria:
Approval of further information requested at
Consultation with partners/key stakeholders
Indicative costs/ delivery timescales/ spend profile
Appraisal of funding and procurement
Area Service Boards
Accessibility to communities
Geographic fit and impact on other projects
Spatial fit with external partners (e.g. GMP, NHS)
Potential funding sources/procurement
Evaluation criteria:
Approval of further information requested at
Area Service Boards
Consultation with partners/key stakeholders
Indicative costs/
Accessibility to communities delivery timescales/
Geographic fit and impact on other projects
spend profile
Spatial fit with external partners (e.g. GMP, NHS)
Appraisal of funding and procurement Potential funding sources/procurement
Evaluation criteria:
Approval of further information requested at
Consultation with partners/key stakeholders
Indicative costs/ delivery timescales/ spend profile
Appraisal of funding and procurement Benefits realisation: How does the team climb
Neighbourhood strategies Neighbourhood strategies Neighbourhood strategies

- proceed to construction this learning curve?

Stakeholders/ partnership support Gateway 1 Revenue and VAT affordability Stakeholders/ partnership support Gateway 1 Revenue and VAT affordability Stakeholders/ partnership support Gateway 1 Revenue and VAT affordability Stakeholders/ partnership support Gateway 1 Revenue and VAT affordability
Contribution to Total Place Contribution to Total Place Contribution to Total Place Contribution toOrganisation
Total Placefor delivery to Manchester Method

~2 month design development

Impact on asset portfolio / estate management Organisation for delivery to Manchester Method Impact on asset portfolio / estate management Organisation for delivery to Manchester Method Impact on asset portfolio / estate management Impact on asset portfolio / estate management Organisation for delivery to Manchester Method

Minimum 2 weeks In house designers develop Stage B scheme (if contractors appointed to 12 - 13 weeks
AMP Strategy Support from Area Regeneration Teams Project set up: Asset management appraisal AMP Strategy Support from Area Regeneration Teams Project set up: Asset management appraisal AMP Strategy Support from Area Regeneration Teams Project set up: AMP Strategy Asset management appraisal Support from Area Regeneration Teams Project set up: Asset management appraisal
Grant/External funding requests If project approved at Gateway 1 or 2: Grant/External funding requests Grant/External funding requests Grant/External funding requests
Original client brief reviewed Statutory services (M&E) Fire risk assessments (Client led)
Contribution to carbon reduction targets Evidence of consultation with MCC Service Areas Contribution to carbon reduction targets If project approved at Gateway 1 or 2: Evidence of consultation with MCC Service Areas Contribution to carbon reduction targets If project approved at Gateway 1 or 2: Evidence of consultation with MCC Service Areas
Contribution to carbon reduction targets If project approved at Gateway 1 or 2: Evidence of consultation with MCC Service Areas
Shared Services Priorities and shape of MCC Capital Programme Project code set up on PrISM Impact on carbon reduction targets Shared Services Priorities and shape of MCC Capital Programme Project code set up on PrISM Impact on carbon reduction targets Shared Services Priorities and shape of MCC Capital Programme Project code set up on PrISM Impact on carbon reduction targets Priorities and shape of MCC Capital Programme Project code set up on PrISM Impact on carbon reduction targets
Shared Services
Project location captured on Corporate GIS

Framework partners involved (buildability / best practice)

Clarification of service plans priorities Evidence of risk workshop Clarification of service plans priorities Project location captured on Corporate GIS Clarification of service plans priorities Project location captured on Corporate GIS Clarification of service plans priorities Project location captured on Corporate GIS

Construct only)
S 106 contributions S 106 contributions Evidence of risk workshop S 106 contributions Evidence of risk workshop
S 106 contributions Evidence of risk workshop
Affordability appraisal with available*resources Business Tools: Affordability appraisal with available*resources Business Tools: Affordability appraisal with available*resources Business Tools:
&evaluated at Practical Completion
Affordability appraisal with available*resources Business Tools:
Fabric & finishes PPM User risk assessments Drive continuous
Submit
Lease renewals Potential VAT impact Project documentation maintained on PrISM Lease renewals Lease renewals Lease renewals
Potential VAT impact Project documentation maintained on PrISM Potential VAT impact Project documentation maintained on PrISM Potential VAT impact Project documentation maintained on PrISM

improvement
Manchester Method (MM) Stage: Start up MM Stage: Start up MM Stage: Start up Manchester Method (MM) Stage: Start up MM Stage: Start up MM Stage: Start up Manchester Method (MM) Stage: Start up MM Stage: Start up MM Stage: Start up Manchester Method (MM) Stage: Start up MM Stage: Start up MM Stage: Start up

2 - 3 months - principles established Reactive maintenance Training (H&S, COSHH, Working at Height etc.)
MCC Capital
MCC Programme
Outcome: Proceed to Gateway 2 or 3 or Reject Outcome: Proceed to Gateway 3 or Reject Outcome: Recommendation to City Treasurer Outcome: Proceed to Gateway 2 or 3 or Reject Outcome: Proceed to Gateway 3 or Reject Outcome: Recommendation to City Treasurer

planning
Outcome: Proceed to Gateway 2 or 3 or Reject Outcome: Proceed to Gateway 3 or Reject Outcome: Recommendation to CityOutcome:
TreasurerProceed to Gateway 2 or 3 or Reject Outcome: Proceed to Gateway 3 or Reject Outcome: Recommendation to City Treasurer
MCC CAPITAL PROGRAMME GATEWAY
MCC CAPITAL
PROCESSPROGRAMME GATEWAY
MCC CAPITAL
PROCESSPROGRAMME GATEWAY PROCESS
CAPITAL PROGRAMME GATEWAY PROCESS Stakeholders: Lifecycle Public events - risk assessments
Gateway 1 Gateway 2 Gateway 1 Gateway 3 Gateway 2 Gateway 1 Gateway 3 Gateway 2 Gateway 3 School head & other stakeholders involved
Gateway 7Delivery Gateway 6
Gateway 5 Gateway 4 Gateway 7 Gateway 6 Delivery Gateway 5
2 - 4 weeks
Gateway 4
application
Gateway 7 Gateway 6 Delivery Gateway 5 Gateway 7 Gateway 6
Gateway 4 Delivery
Head teacher
Gateway 5 Gateway 4
Ground Zoning (out of hours) - how does this impact on
Gateway process
Financial closure Practical completion CAPEX / VAT approval via Budget approval via Financial closure Practical completion CAPEX / VAT approval via Budget approval via Financial closure Practical completion Financial closure
CAPEX / VAT approval via Practical completion
Budget approval via
Delivery of Project to the Delivery of Project to the Delivery of Project to the CAPEX / VAT approval via Budget approval via
Gateway 1 Gateway 2 Gateway 3 Delivery of Project to the
Basic information increased through
Strategic, Corporate and Spatial fit tested by Additional information required Strategic,afterCorporate and SpatialDetailed fit tested bid
byappraisal by Additional information required Strategic,
afterCorporate and Spatial Detailed
fit tested bidbyappraisal by Additional information required after Detailed bid appraisal by appraisal by appraisal by appraisal by appraisal by appraisal by appraisal by appraisal by appraisal by
Gateway 1 Review Group Gateway 1 assessment tested by Gateway Gateway 2 1 Review Group Scrutiny PanelGateway 1 assessment tested by Gateway Gateway2 1 Review Group Scrutiny Panel Gateway 1 assessment tested by Gateway 2 Scrutiny Panel Manchester Method City Treasurer / Executive Member Finance Executive & Council Manchester Method City Treasurer / Executive Member Finance Executive & Council Manchester Method City Treasurer / Executive Member Finance Executive & Council Manchester Method City Treasurer / Executive Member Finance Executive & Council
Scrutiny Panel Scrutiny Panel Scrutiny Panel Scrutiny Panel Scrutiny Panel Scrutiny Panel Scrutiny Panel (AnnualScrutiny Panel
Caretaker / building manager Security / catering MEP / risk assessments for e.g. fire & security
Strategic, Corporate and Spatial fit tested by Drivers Additional information required after (Monthly) Detailed bid appraisal by
Review Group (Weekly) (Monthly) (Weekly)Drivers Review Group (Weekly) (Monthly) (Weekly) Review Group (Weekly) (Weekly)
OWNER: Senior Responsible Owner (Weekly) (Annual programme and monthly increases) OWNER: Senior Responsible Owner (Weekly) (Annual programme and monthly increases) OWNER: Senior Responsible Owner (Weekly) programme and monthly increases)
OWNER: Senior Responsible Owner (Weekly) (Annual programme and monthly increases)
Drivers (Weekly) (Weekly) SUPPORT: Programme/Project Delivery Team (Weekly) (Weekly) (Weekly) (Weekly) (Weekly) (Weekly)
value added information:
Gateway 1 Review Group Community Strategy Gateway 1 assessment tested by Gateway 2 Scrutiny Panel SUPPORT: Programme/Project Delivery Team SUPPORT: Programme/Project Delivery Team SUPPORT: Programme/Project Delivery Team
/ LAA Community Strategy / LAA Community Strategy / LAA Submission: Gateway 7 Submission: Gateway 6 Submission: Gateway 5 Submission: Consolidated report from City Treasurer Submission: Gateway 7 Submission: Gateway 6 Submission: Gateway 5 Submission: Consolidated report from City Treasurer Submission: Gateway 7 Submission: Gateway 6 Submission: Gateway 5 Submission: Gateway 7Submission:
Submission: Gatewayreport
Consolidated 6 from City Treasurer Submission: Gateway 5 Submission: Consolidated report from City Treasurer
(Monthly) Submission: Gateway 1 and Rapid Risk Check Submission: Gateway 2 additional Submission:
information Gateway Submission:
1 and Rapid Risk
Gateway
Check 3 and updated Rapid Submission:
Risk Check Submission: GatewaySubmission:
Gateway 2 additional information 1 and Rapid RiskGateway
Check 3 and updated Rapid Submission:
Risk CheckGateway 2 additional information Submission: Gateway 3 and updated Rapid Risk Check
Drivers Relevance to the appropriate Review Group (Weekly) (Weekly)
FM service provider - mixed bag / Cleaning Cleaning
Relevance to the appropriate Relevance to the appropriate Review: Review: Delivery: Appraisal: Appraisal of annual budget bids: Review: Review: Appraisal: Appraisal of annual budget bids: Review: Review: Appraisal: Review: Review:
Appraisal of annual budget bids: Appraisal: Appraisal of annual budget bids:
Delivery: Delivery: Delivery:

Infrastructure (MEP)
Community Strategy / LAA SRF / local plans Evaluation criteria: SRF / local plans NOTE: Only submissions where the Evaluation
Gateway 1criteria: Evaluation criteria:SRF / local plans NOTE: Only submissions where theEvaluation Gateway 1 criteria: Evaluation criteria: NOTE: Only submissions where the Gateway 1 Evaluation criteria: Closure of SAP Final Red/ Amber/ Governance and Project management (Part A) Financial scrutiny by Capital & Projects Comments from Scrutiny Panel / City Treasurer Closure of SAP Final Red/ Amber/ (Part A) Financial scrutiny by Capital & Projects Comments from Scrutiny Panel / City Treasurer Closure of SAP Final Red/ Amber/ Closure of SAP
(Part A) Financial scrutiny by Capital & Projects Final from
Comments Red/ Scrutiny
Amber/ Panel / City Treasurer (Part A) Financial scrutiny by Capital & Projects Comments from Scrutiny Panel / City Treasurer
Submission: Gateway 1 and Rapid Risk Check Submission: Gateway 2 additional information Submission: Gateway 3 and updated Rapid Risk Check Governance and Project management Governance and Project management Governance and Project management
Relationship to other public Relationship to other public Relationship to other public capital account Green report Team Cross-service prioritisation via Strategic Executive capital account Green report capital account Green report capital account Green report
Relevance to the appropriate Strategic fit (internal and external partners) Review Group require additional information need
Strategic go
fit (internal and external
Review of mandate and businessReview
partners) case Group require additional information need
Strategic fit go
(internal and external of mandate and businessReview
Reviewpartners) case Group require additional information need go Review of mandate and business case Utilising the Project Information System Manchester Utilising the Project Information System Manchester Team Cross-service prioritisation via Strategic Executive Utilising the Project Information System Manchester Team Cross-service prioritisation via Strategic Executive
Utilising the Project Information System Manchester Team Cross-service prioritisation via Strategic Executive

inconsistent approach
assets in the area assets in the area
to Gateway 2 assets in the area
to Gateway 2 Performance review Lessons Learned (Part B) VAT scrutiny by VAT Group Management Team and Executive Group Performance review Lessons Learned (Part B) VAT scrutiny by VAT Group Management Team and Executive Group Performance review Lessons Learned (Part B) VAT scrutiny by VAT Group Performance review LessonsTeam
Management Learned
and Executive Group(PrISM) business tool
SRF / local plans Outline business case and current status Outline business case and current
Reviewstatus
of feasibility/ option studies Outline business case and Review of feasibility/ option studies Gateway 2
current status to Review of feasibility/ option studies (PrISM) business tool (PrISM) business tool (PrISM) business tool (Part B) VAT scrutiny by VAT Group Management Team and Executive Group

Visualisation
Evaluation criteria: NOTE: Only submissions whereGeographic the Gateway Evaluation criteria:Boards Benefits Realisation report (Part C) Technical scrutiny by Capital & Projects Overall programme matched to available financial Benefits Realisation report Benefits Realisation report Benefits Realisation Overallreport
Area Service Boards fit and1impact on other projects Area Service Geographic fit and impact onConsultation
other projectswithArea Service
partners/key Boards
stakeholders Geographic fit and impact on Consultation
other projects
with partners/key stakeholders Consultation with partners/key stakeholders Monthly RAG reporting / Document housekeeping Monthly RAG reporting / Document housekeeping (Part C) Technical scrutiny by Capital & Projects Overall programme matched to available financial Monthly RAG reporting / Document housekeeping (Part C) Technical scrutiny by Capital & Projects programme matched to available Monthly
financial RAG reporting / Document housekeeping (Part C) Technical scrutiny by Capital & Projects Overall programme matched to available financial
Relationship to other public Review Group require additionalSpatial
Strategic fit (internal and external partners) Accessibility to communities information need go
fit with external partners (e.g. GMP,Review
NHS) of mandate
Accessibility toEvaluation criteria:
and business
communities case Spatial fit with external partners
Indicative
(e.g. GMP,
costs/NHS)
delivery Evaluation
timescales/
Accessibility to criteria:
spend profile
communities Spatial fit with external partners
Indicative
(e.g. costs/
GMP, delivery
NHS) timescales/ Evaluation criteria:
spend profile Indicative costs/ delivery timescales/ spend profile
report End Project report Forecasting and financial tracking Team resources report End Project report Forecasting and financial tracking Team resources report End Project report Forecasting and financial tracking Team report End
resources Project report Forecasting and financial tracking Team resources

MCC Health & Safety

Updated Lessons Handover Plan (Part D) Asset scrutiny by Corporate Property Updated Lessons Handover Plan Updated Lessons Handover Plan Updated Lessons Handover Plan
assets in the area Outline business case and current status Neighbourhood to Gateway 2 Approval
Potential funding sources/procurement Review of feasibility/ option studies of further information requested at
Potential funding sources/procurement
Appraisal of funding and procurement Approval of further information requested at
Potential funding sources/procurement
Appraisal of funding and procurement Approval of further information requested at Appraisal of funding and procurement Risk management and issue resolution Risk management and issue resolution (Part D) Asset scrutiny by Corporate Property Risk management and issue resolution (Part D) Asset scrutiny by Corporate Property Risk management and issue resolution (Part D) Asset scrutiny by Corporate Property

Communication data (marketing)

strategies Neighbourhood strategies Neighbourhood strategies Learned report including Learned report including Learned report including Learned report
Stakeholders/ partnership support Gateway 1 Stakeholders/ partnership support
Revenue and VAT affordability Gateway 1 Stakeholders/ partnership support
Revenue and VAT affordability Gateway 1 Revenue and VAT affordability Change control (Part E) Sign off by relevant officers Appraisal of monthly budget increases: Change control (Part E) Sign off by relevant officers Appraisal of monthly budget increases: Change control (Part E) Sign off by relevant officers Appraisalincluding
of monthly budget increases:Change control (Part E) Sign off by relevant officers Appraisal of monthly budget increases:
Area Service Boards Geographic fit and impact on other projects Contribution to Total Place
Impact on asset portfolio / estate management
Consultation
Contribution with
to partners/key
Total Place stakeholders
Impact on asset portfolio / estate
Organisation
management Contribution to Total Place
for delivery to Manchester Method Impact on asset portfolio / estate
Organisation
management
for delivery to Manchester Method Organisation for delivery to Manchester Method
responsibility for
Day to day delivery / Stage Reviews Projects over 500k or impacting more than two Comments from Scrutiny Panel / City Treasurer responsibility for
Day to day delivery / Stage Reviews Projects over 500k or impacting more than two Comments from Scrutiny Panel / City Treasurer
responsibility for
Day to day delivery / Stage Reviews Projects over 500k or impacting more than two responsibility for
Comments from Scrutiny Panel / City Treasurer Projects over 500k or impacting more than two
Day to day delivery / Stage Reviews Comments from Scrutiny Panel / City Treasurer

MCC Childrens Services

Accessibility to communities NHS) Strategy Evaluation criteria:
Spatial fit with external partners (e.g. GMP, AMP Indicative costs/ Project
AMP Strategy delivery set
timescales/
up: spend profile AMP StrategyProject set up: Project set up:
financial completion wards are subject to the key decisions process and Bids constrained by available financial resources
financial completion wards are subject to the key decisions process and financial completion wards are subject to the key decisions process and financial completion wards are subject to the key decisions process and
Support from Area Regeneration Teams Support from Area Regeneration AssetTeams
management appraisal Support from Area Regeneration Asset Teams
management appraisal Asset management appraisal Recommended Bids constrained by available financial resources Bids constrained by available financial resources Bids constrained by available financial resources
Potential funding sources/procurement Approval of further information requested at Appraisal of funding and procurement must be submitted to Scrutiny Committee members Recommended must be submitted to Scrutiny Committee members Recommended must be submitted to Scrutiny Committee members Recommended must be submitted to Scrutiny Committee members
Neighbourhood strategies Grant/External funding requests Contribution to carbon reduction targets Grant/ExternalIf funding requests
project approved at Gateway 1 or 2: Contribution to carbon reductionEvidence
targets Grant/External
of consultation with MCC funding
If project
Service requests
approved
Areas at Gateway 1 or 2: Contribution to carbon reductionEvidence
targets
of consultation with MCC If project
Serviceapproved
Areas at Gateway 1 or 2: Evidence of consultation with MCC Service Areas follow-on actions via the City Treasurer follow-on actions follow-on actions follow-on actions
Stakeholders/ partnership support Gateway 1 Priorities and shape of MCC Capital Programme Revenue and VAT affordability
Project code set up on PrISM Priorities and shape of MCCImpactCapitalonProgramme
carbonShared
reduction targets Project code set up on PrISM Priorities and shape of MCC Impact
CapitalonProgramme
carbon reduction targets Project code set up on PrISM Impact on carbon reduction targets via the City Treasurer via the City Treasurer via the City Treasurer
Shared Services Shared Services Services
Contribution to Total Place
Energy management unit
Business Tools: Any updates to Asset Any updates to Asset Any updates to Asset Any updates to Asset

[TYPICAL SCHOOLS] E - Detail design

Impact on asset portfolio / estate management Clarification of service plans priorities Organisation for delivery to location
Project Manchester Method
captured on Corporate GIS
Clarification of service plansEvidence
priorities of risk workshop Project location captured on CorporateClarification
GIS of service plansEvidence
prioritiesof risk workshop Project location captured on Corporate GIS Evidence of risk workshop Business Tools: Business Tools: Business Tools: Business Tools: Business Tools: Business Tools: Business Tools: Business Tools: Business Tools: Business Tools: Business Tools:
S 106 contributions S 106 contributions S 106 contributions Financial closure on SAP Register Business Tools: Register Business Tools: Register Business Tools: Register Business Tools:
AMP Strategy Support from Area Regeneration Teams Project set up: Asset management appraisal
Affordability appraisal with available*resources Business
Affordability appraisal with Tools:
available*resources Affordability appraisal Business Tools:
with available*resources Business Tools: and PrISM annually after Business Tools:
Project /Programme documentation managed on PrISM
CAPEX details and approval recorded on PrISM
Project codes and budget profile input to SAP Financial closure on SAP
Business Tools:
Project /Programme documentation managed on PrISM Project codes and budget profile input to SAP Financial closure on SAP
Business Tools:
Project /Programme documentation managed on PrISM Financial closure on SAPProject codes
Business
and budget profile input to SAP
Tools:
Project /Programme documentation managed on PrISM Project codes and budget profile input to SAP
Lease renewals Lease renewals Lease renewals Actual and committed spend recorded on SAP G/W status & relevant documentation updated on PrISM and PrISM annually after Actual and committed spend recorded on SAP CAPEX details and approval recorded on PrISM G/W status & relevant documentation updated on PrISM and PrISM annually after Actual and committed spend recorded on SAP CAPEX details and approval recorded onand PrISM
PrISM annually afterG/W status & relevant documentation updated
Actualon PrISM
and committed spend recorded on SAP CAPEX details and approval recorded on PrISM G/W status & relevant documentation updated on PrISM
Grant/External funding requests Contribution to carbon reduction targets If project approved at Gateway 1 orPotential
2: VAT impact Evidence of consultation with MCC Service Areas Potential VAT impact Project documentation maintained on PrISM Potential VAT impact Project documentation maintained on PrISM Project documentation maintained on PrISM outturn SAP and PrISM updated outturn SAP and PrISM updated outturn SAP and PrISM updated outturn SAP and PrISM updated
Shared Services Priorities and shape of MCC Capital Programme Project code set up on PrISM
Manchester Method (MM) Stage: Start up Impact on carbonMM reduction
Stage: targets
Start up Manchester Method (MM) MM Stage:
Stage:Start
Startup up MM Stage: Start up Manchester Method (MM) MMStage:
Stage:Start
Startup up MM Stage: Start up MM Stage: Start up MM Stage: Project closure MM Stage: Delivery & Stage Controls MM Stage: Managing a project MM Stage: Initiation MM Stage: Project closure MM Stage: Delivery & Stage Controls MM Stage: Managing a project MM Stage: Initiation MM Stage: Project closure MM Stage: Delivery & Stage Controls MM Stage: Managing a project MM Stage: Project closure
MM Stage: Initiation MM Stage: Delivery & Stage Controls MM Stage: Managing a project MM Stage: Initiation
Clarification of service plans priorities Project location captured on Corporate GIS Evidence of risk workshop
S 106 contributions Outcome: Proceed to Gateway 2 or 3 or Reject
Affordability appraisal with available*resources Business Tools: Outcome: Proceed to Gateway 3Outcome: or RejectProceed to Gateway Outcome: 2 orRecommendation
3 or Reject to City
Outcome:
Treasurer
Proceed to Gateway 3Outcome:or Reject Proceed to Gateway Outcome: 2 or
Recommendation
3 or Reject to City
Outcome:
TreasurerProceed to Gateway 3 or Reject Outcome: Recommendation to City Treasurer Outcome: Project completion & financial closure Outcome: Successful delivery Outcome: VAT sign off & approval to spend Outcome: Inclusion in the Capital Programme Outcome: Project completion & financial closure Outcome: Successful delivery Outcome: VAT sign off & approval to spend Outcome: Inclusion in the Capital Programme Outcome: Project completion & financial closure Outcome: Successful delivery Outcome: VAT sign off & approval Outcome:
to spend Project completion
Outcome:& Inclusion
financial closure
in the Capital Programme
Outcome: Successful delivery Outcome: VAT sign off & approval to spend Outcome: Inclusion in the Capital Programme
Lease renewals Potential VAT impact Project documentation maintained on PrISM
H/Capital and Projects/CAPTIAL//MCCGATEWAY/Gateway flowchart/version 14.00. 9.3.12 Capital Finance, Projects & VAT - Corporate Services (800 6759) H/Capital and Projects/CAPTIAL//MCCGATEWAY/Gateway flowchart/version 14.00. 9.3.12 Capital Finance, Projects & VAT - Corporate Services (800 6759) H/Capital and Projects/CAPTIAL//MCCGATEWAY/Gateway flowchart/version 14.00. 9.3.12 Capital Finance, Projects & VAT - flowchart/version
H/Capital and Projects/CAPTIAL//MCCGATEWAY/Gateway Corporate Services (8009.3.12
14.00. 6759) Capital Finance, Projects & VAT - Corporate Services (800 6759)
Manchester Method (MM) Stage: Start up
Gateway 7 MMGateway
Stage: Start
6 up MM Stage: Start
Gateway 7 up Gateway 6 Gateway 7 4 Gateway 6
Delivery Gateway 5 Delivery Gateway Gateway 5 Delivery Gateway 4 Gateway 5 Gateway 4
Outcome: Proceed to Gateway 2 orFinancial closure
3 or Reject
appraisal by
Scrutiny Panel
Practical completion
Outcome:
appraisal by
Scrutiny Panel
Reject of Project toFinancial
Proceed to Gateway 3 orDelivery
Manchester Method
Outcome:
the
closure
appraisal by
Scrutiny Panel
Practical
Recommendation completion
to
CAPEXCity/ VAT
appraisal
Scrutiny
by [PROGRAMME LEVEL] Inception / portfolio management
Treasurer
approval via
City Treasurer / Executive Member Finance
Panel (Weekly)
Financial closure
Delivery of Project to theBudget approval via
appraisal
Scrutiny
(Annual programme
by
Manchester Method Executive & Council
Panel
Practical completion
CAPEX
appraisal
Scrutiny
/ VAT approval via
by
Delivery of Project to the
City Treasurer / Executive Member Finance
Panel
and monthly increases) (Weekly)
Budget approval via
Manchester Method Executive & Council
OWNER: Senior (Annual programme
CAPEX / VAT approval via
City Treasurer / Executive Member Finance
and monthly increases) (Weekly)
Budget approval via
Executive & Council
(Annual programme and monthly increases)
[TYPICAL SCHOOLS] F - Production information 6 months 1 year
RIBA work stages
OWNER: Senior Responsible Owner OWNER: Senior Responsible Owner Responsible Owner
(Weekly) (Weekly) SUPPORT: Programme/Project Delivery(Weekly)
Team (Weekly) SUPPORT: Programme/Project Delivery (Weekly)
Team (Weekly) SUPPORT: Programme/Project Delivery Team
Gateway 7 Gateway 6 Delivery
Submission: Gateway 7 Submission: Gateway 6
Gateway 5 Submission: Gateway 7
Gateway 4
Submission:Submission:
Gateway 6 Gateway 5 Submission:
Submission: Consolidated report7 from Submission:
Gateway Gateway 6 Gateway 5
Submission:
City Treasurer Submission: Consolidated report from City Treasurer
Submission: Gateway 5 Submission: Consolidated report from City Treasurer
Financial closure Practical completion Review: Review: Delivery: via Review: Review:
Appraisal: Delivery: AppraisalReview:
of annual budget bids: Review:
Appraisal: Delivery: Appraisal of annual budget bids:Appraisal: Appraisal of annual budget bids:
Delivery of Project to the
Closure of SAP CAPEX
Final Red/ Amber/ / VAT approval Closure of SAP Budget (Part
approval
Final Red/ via
Amber/
A) Financial scrutiny by Capital &Governance
Projects and Project management Closure of SAP
Comments from Scrutiny Panel / City (Part Final
TreasurerRed/ Amber/
A) Financial scrutiny by Capital &Governance
Projects Comments from Scrutiny Panel / City Treasurer
(Part A) Financial scrutiny by Capital & Projects Comments from Scrutiny Panel / City Treasurer
appraisal by appraisal by City Treasurer
Governance and Project management
/ Executive Utilising
Member Finance Executive & Council
and Project management
Manchester Method capital account Green report capital account
the Project Information System Manchester Green
Team report capital
Cross-service account
prioritisation
Utilising the Project Information System Manchester via Team
Strategic Green report
Executive Cross-service prioritisation
Utilising the Project Information System Manchester via Team
Strategic Executive Cross-service prioritisation via Strategic Executive
Scrutiny Panel Scrutiny Panel
[PROJECT LEVEL] A - Appraisal [PROJECT LEVEL] B - Strategic brief [TYPICAL SCHOOLS] C - Outline proposals [TYPICAL SCHOOLS] D - Detailed proposals Stages G H - Tender doc. / action J - Mobilisation K - Construction to PC L - Completion M - Feedback
Performance review
OWNER: Senior Responsible Owner Lessons Learned (Weekly) (PrISM) business tool Performance review
(Annual programme(Part Lessons
and Learned
B) monthly
VAT scrutinyincreases)
by VAT Group (PrISM) business tool Performance review
Management Team and Executive Group Lessons Learned
(Part B) VAT scrutiny by VAT Group (PrISM) business tool Management Team and Executive Group (Part B) VAT scrutiny by VAT Group Management Team and Executive Group
(Weekly) (Weekly) Benefits Realisation report Monthly RAG reporting / Document housekeeping report
Benefits Realisation (Part C) Technical scrutiny by Capital Monthly
& ProjectsRAG reporting / Document Benefits Realisation
Overall programme
housekeeping report
matched to available
(Partfinancial
C) Technical scrutiny by Capital &Monthly
ProjectsRAG reporting / Document
Overall programme matched to available
housekeeping (Part
financial
C) Technical scrutiny by Capital & Projects Overall programme matched to available financial
SUPPORT: Programme/Project Delivery Team
report End Project report report End Project report report End Project report
Submission: Gateway 7 Submission: Gateway 6 Forecasting and financial tracking Team resources Team resources Team resources
Updated Lessons Handover PlanSubmission: Gateway 5 Submission:
Updated Lessons Consolidated report from
Handover Plan City Treasurer Forecasting and financial tracking Updated Lessons Handover Plan
Forecasting and financial tracking
Risk management and issue resolution (Part D) Asset scrutiny by Corporate Property
Risk management and issue resolution (Part D) Asset scrutiny by Corporate Property
Risk management and issue resolution (Part D) Asset scrutiny by Corporate Property
Review: Review: Delivery: Learned report including
Appraisal: Change control
Learned report
Appraisal of annual budget including
(Part E) bids:
Sign off by relevant officers Change control Learned report
Appraisal of monthly budget increases: including
(Part E) Sign off by relevant officers Change control Appraisal of monthly budget increases: (Part E) Sign off by relevant officers Appraisal of monthly budget increases:

Target Cost / Agreed Maximum Price Build Up

Closure of SAP Final Red/ Amber/ responsibility for responsibility
Projects for
over/ 500k or impacting moreDay
than responsibility for
Governance and Project management (Part A)completion
Financial scrutiny by Capital & Projects
Day to day delivery / Stage Reviews Comments from Scrutiny Panel City Treasurer to two Reviews from Scrutiny Panel / City Projects
day delivery / Stage Comments Treasurer over 500k or impacting moreDay thantotwo
day delivery / StageComments Projects over 500k or impacting more than two
Reviews from Scrutiny Panel / City Treasurer Comments from Scrutiny Panel / City Treasurer
financial financial
wards completion
are subject to the key decisions process and financial
wards are completion
subject to the key decisions process and
capital account Green report Team Cross-service prioritisation via Strategic Executive Bids constrained by available financial resources Bids constrained by available financialwards are subject to the key decisions process and
resources Bids constrained by available financial resources
Utilising the Project Information System Manchester Recommended Recommended
must be submitted to Scrutiny Committee members Recommended
must be submitted to Scrutiny Committee members must be submitted to Scrutiny Committee members
Performance review Lessons Learned (PrISM) business tool (Part B)actions
follow-on VAT scrutiny by VAT Group Management Team and Executive Group
viafollow-on
the actions
City Treasurer follow-on
via the actions
City Treasurer via the City Treasurer
Benefits Realisation report Monthly RAG reporting / Document housekeeping
Business Tools: (Part
Any C) Technical
updates to Asset scrutiny by Capital & Projects Overall
Business Tools: programme matched
Any to available
updates to Asset financial BusinessBusiness
Tools: Tools:
Any updates to Asset
3 months - who
Principle actions
Business Tools: Business Tools: Business Tools: Business Tools: Business Tools:

1. Briefing 2. Design development 3. Pre-handover 4. Initial period aftercare 5. Years 1 - 3 aftercare

report End Project report Register
Team BusinessRegister
Tools: Register
Forecasting and financial tracking Financial closure on SAP Project /Programme documentation managedresources
Financial closure
on PrISMon SAP Financial
Project codes
Project /Programme documentation and on
managed closure
budget on SAP
profile
PrISM inputBusiness
to SAP Tools: Project codes
Project /Programme documentation and budget
managed profile input Business
on PrISM to SAP Tools: Project codes and budget profile input to SAP
Updated Lessons Handover Plan Business Tools: Business Tools: Business Tools:
and PrISM annually after (Part D) Asset scrutiny byActual
Corporate Propertyspend recorded and SAP annually after CAPEX details and approval recordedActual
onPrISM on PrISM statusand PrISM annually after CAPEX
updateddetails and approval recorded Actual
on PrISM CAPEX details and approval recorded on PrISM

needs training etc?

Risk management and issue resolution and committed and committed spendG/W recorded & relevant
on SAP documentation on PrISM and committed spend G/W status &
recorded onrelevant
SAP documentation updated on PrISM G/W status & relevant documentation updated on PrISM
Learned report including outturn SAP and PrISM updated outturn SAP and PrISM updated outturn SAP and PrISM updated
Change control (Part E) Sign off by relevant officers Appraisal of monthly budget increases:
responsibility for

Soft landings
Day to day delivery / Stage ReviewsMM Stage: Project closure Projects over 500k or impacting more
MM Stage: than two
Delivery MM Stage:
& Stage Controls Project from
Comments closure
MM Stage:
Scrutiny Managing
Panel a project MM Stage: Delivery & Stage
/ City Treasurer MMInitiation
MM Stage: Stage: Project closure
Controls MM Stage: Managing a project MM Stage: Delivery & StageMM Stage: Initiation
Controls MM Stage: Managing a project MM Stage: Initiation
financial completion wards are subject to the key decisions process and
Outcome: Project completion & financial closure Outcome: Successful Bids
delivery Outcome: constrained
Project by available
completion
Outcome: financial
& financial
VAT resources
closure
sign off & approval to spend
Outcome: Outcome:
Successful delivery Outcome:
InclusionProject
in the completion
Capital & financial
Outcome:
Programme
VAT signclosure
off & approval to spendSuccessful delivery
Outcome: Outcome: Inclusion in the Capital
Outcome:
Programme
VAT sign off & approval to spend Outcome: Inclusion in the Capital Programme
Recommended
Define roles and responsibilities Explain Soft Landings to all participants. Review past experience Review design targets Review against design targets. Include additional requirements related to Soft Review against design targets. Confirm roles / responsibilities Incorporate and Soft Support in the first few weeks of occupation Monitoring, review, fine-tuning & feedback
must be submitted to Scrutiny Committee members
follow-on actions
Any updates to Asset
via the City Treasurer Include FM staff &/or contractors in reviews.
Supporting activities
Business Tools: H/Capital and Projects/CAPTIAL//MCCGATEWAY/Gateway flowchart/version 14.00. 9.3.12 H/Capital and Projects/CAPTIAL//MCCGATEWAY/Gateway flowchart/version 14.00. 9.3.12 Capital Finance,
H/Capital
Projects
and &
Projects/CAPTIAL//MCCGATEWAY/Gateway
VAT - Corporate Services (800 6759) flowchart/version 14.00. 9.3.12 Capital Finance, Projects & VAT - Corporate Services (800 6759) Capital Finance, Projects & VAT - Corporate Services (800 6759)
Financial closure on SAP
and PrISM annually after
Register
Business Tools:
Business Tools:
Project /Programme documentation managed on PrISM Business Tools:
CAPEX details and approval recorded on PrISM
Business Tools:
Project codes and budget profile input to SAP Identify processes and sign-off gateways Agree performance metrics Review usability and manageability Involve the future building Landings procedures Involve the future building managers of all parties in relation to SL Demonstrate control interfaces. Landings requirements Set up home for resident on-site attendance Operate review processes.
Actual and committed spend recorded on SAP G/W status & relevant documentation updated on PrISM
outturn SAP and PrISM updated
Agree design targets managers Include evaluation of tender responses to Soft requirements Liaise with move-in plans independent post-occupancy evaluations
MM Stage: Project closure
Stage B presentation to MCC panel for technical / commercial health check
MM Stage: Managing a project MM Stage: Initiation
Outcome: Project completion & financial closure
MM Stage: Delivery & Stage Controls
Outcome: Successful delivery Outcome: VAT sign off & approval to spend Outcome: Inclusion in the Capital Programme
Landings requirements
Cross checks Contractors proposals
H/Capital and Projects/CAPTIAL//MCCGATEWAY/Gateway flowchart/version 14.00. 9.3.12 Capital Finance, Projects & VAT - Corporate Services (800 6759)
Outline brief / outline budget Stage D presentation to MCC panel for technical / commercial health check Target cost (pain / gain) Discharge of planning conditions Lessons learnt (0 months / 12 months)
data drop & A4 sheet
RAG report
Digital O&Ms post-occupancy
Data drops
validation
1 High level schedule of accommodation 2a

10% affordability sanity check on CAPEX
Surety of cost increases from Gateway 4 to Gateway 5
2b Technical & commercial review
Sign off to proceed to planning application submission
3

Work packages
Programmes 4 CDMC produces H&S file
validation
5

Post-occupation review (12 months)
Space provision (usage / occupancy rates etc.) n n
Desk top study Derogations from Red Book / Kit of Parts Soft Landings training plan (different Does the asset work?
CDMC review
Option appraisals FM teams / AIM systems) Does the building support the delivery of the
BIM Approximate
project phases
Portfolio
management
Question to answer

What is the information

management strategy?
BIM deliverable (to answer question)

BIM Strategy & Standards to be used across the

portfolio
BIM Maturity Level

Levels 1, 2 & 3
Approximate project
phases
To OGC Gateway 1
Business Justification (for
Question to answer

How are stakeholder needs captured?

BIM deliverable (to answer question)

An electronic brief that is in a format that may be used for automated validation of
proposals
BIM Maturity Level

Levels 2 & 3 Review of quality standards

Approximate
project phases
To OGC Gateway 2
Procurement
Question to answer

What information do facilities

managers need to manage the
BIM deliverable (to answer question)

Extracts from the BIM Strategy & Standards to be

used across the portfolio
BIM Maturity Level

Levels 2 & 3
Approximate
project phases
OGC Gateway 3A
Design Brief &
Question to answer

What is the Concept Design?

BIM deliverable (to answer question)

Rendered block diagram in site context including significant equipment

layout, generally to UK equivalent of AIA*Level of Development: 100
BIM Maturity Level

Level 1 2D
Levels 2 & 3 3D
Approximate
project phases
OGC Gateway -
Intermediate point
Question to answer

Is the design developed to demonstrate

detailed proposals for:
BIM deliverable (to answer question)

UK equivalent of AIA Level of Detail: 200

BIM Maturity Level

Levels 1, 2 & 3
Approximate project phases

OGC Gateway 3B
Detailed Design Approval
Question to answer

Use of rule based auto-

generation of objects
BIM deliverable (to answer
question)
Levels 2 & 3 where such rules
have been developed
BIM Maturity Level

Use of rule based auto-

generation of objects
Approximate project phases

OGC Gateway 3C:

Detailed Design Approval
Question to answer

Is the information presentable

so as to obtain statutory
BIM deliverable (to answer
question)
To be developed Refer to the
Planning Portal project?
BIM Maturity Level

To be confirmed
Approximate project phases

OGC Gateway 5
Establish Service
Question to answer

Does the facility meet the brief?

BIM deliverable (to answer
question)
3D model
Test & commissioning attribute
BIM maturity level

All levels Have outputs been achieved?

Approximate project phases

Post completion validation /

after care
Question to answer

Initial period aftercare:

Are systems working?
BIM deliverable (to answer
question)
BIM maturity level

Inputs to the building operational Levels 2 & 3

performance evaluation (BOPE):
curriculum?
deliverables Lessons learnt Does the environment work?
each option) Do the concepts being considered meet them? Schedule of facilities compared to electronic brief + electronic 3D sketch Levels 2 & 3 Strategy soft & hard utilities? Concept Approval between 3A and 3B approvals? information specifications (from COBie data
What are the portfolios (Master Plan) Model information and Levels 1, 2 & 3 Does the designs performance meet the portfolios Early stage simulations, calculations and costs Levels 1, 2 & 3 - Coordinated design intentions Zones allocated to demonstrate adequate space for Level 1 Calculations Is the design coordinated at A detailed model including both Level 1 2D
technical strategies? representations relating to the strategies e.g. for a What site information is to be The survey and associated constraints parametric Levels 1, 2 & 3 requirements? End of RIBA Stage E Technical a component and building geometry and specification Level 2 3D associated models End of RIBA Stage H Is there sufficient site 2D CAD based Levels 0 & 1 End of RIBA Stage K Performance simulations set) compared to actual values
coordination, including building services. Level 2 associated
Feedback to Gateway 1 process
RIBA Feasibility stage A How will BIM be managed and exploited in this project? A contractual BIM implementation plan for the project defining different levels of design Levels 1, 2 & 3 RIBA Stage B End of RIBA Stage C End of RIBA Stage D Design Preconstruction (to Tender Construction to Practical Room / other schedules
Is the asset working for the community?
campus, distribution of electricity, water, gas, fuel, provided? data from earlier stage element level of detail? information and detailed 2D Level 3 3D integrated model information available to achieve 3D model based on laser scan Level 2 optional Metered consumption of energy, 3 (integrated BIM) TBC
Appraisal maturity for each project phase, who will develop the content, to what standards, who will Feasibility - What is the outline proposal for structural design? Structural design sufficient for simulation modelling for loads, including Levels 1, 2 & 3 3D models
waste water, communal heating & chilling Concept Design Development drawings generated from it. Action) a reliable tender? survey (optionally including high Level 3 requirement completion (Life cycle carbon assessment) water etc.
be authorised to use it, for what purpose, how it will be coordinated, who will own what Strategic Briefing What will be the generic Generic services philosophy recorded Levels 1, 2 & 3 wind + simulation models & reports geometry Level 3 integrated model
ICE PMF UK equivalent of AIA Level of definition photographic overlay). (Life cycle cost assessment)
Size and weight information in model Years 1-3 aftercare: Inputs to the building operational Levels 2 & 3
Did the cost calculation work?
ICE Project Management and how information incompatibilities shall be resolved. This is to include the means and produced for or by services philosophy (passive / ICE PMF Concept ICE PMF Concept - Site layout Survey of site, Point cloud data processed to form 3D site Level 2 - Optional Within Detailed Design NR GRIP 5 ICE PMF
What performance benchmarks Analyses of existing facilities, using a standard Levels 1, 2 & 3 natural ventilation / % renewable Temporary construction loads assessed development: 300 Is there sufficient design Model with both geometric, Level1 2D model What changes have been Traceability information All levels Are systems working and performance evaluation (BOPE)
Framework (PMF) Gate 0 protocols for the communication of information between parties. This is to be reconfirmed the client Design Design model. Level 3 - Required Detailed Design Gateway 6 - Project close
are available for the portfolio? coding system e.g. UNICLASS energy etc) Does the design meet statutory Model with sufficient information Level 1 2D information to get a reliable specification and performance Level 2 3D associated models incorporated? (configuration management) are the stake holders specifications (from COBie
Strategy for each project phase below. What are the output requirements from services Zoning of services sufficient for first iteration of spatial requirement Level 1 2D NR GRIP 5
What are the portfolios Extracts of information from the strategy models Levels 1, 2 & 3 ICE PMF systems? Levels 2 & 3 3D geometry standards? to demonstrate a compliant Level 2 3D associated models tender (model, drawings, data, with confirmation of the Level 3 3D integrated model What has been built? As built model All levels needs satisfied? data set) + inclusion of soft user
What is the available site? 3D laser and / or radar survey generated solid model and CDF Grid including ground Optional at any level, 1, 2 NR GRIP 4 Within NR GRIP 4 High definition photography overlay on 3D survey. Level 2 - Optional Within Detailed Design TfL CIMM NR GRIP 8
performance objectives? TfL CIMM Pipeline Feasibility How will design and material Any metrics that are defined in the brief that could Levels 2 & 3 design. Level 3 3D integrated model specifications, schedules, room absence of clashes between Positional accuracy attribute perception ratings (comfort etc)
conditions and existing structures. (May be existing information from a reliable BIM or GIS or 3 Single Option Can the services and structure be combined within the Combined model to demonstrate the first iteration of coordination Level 1 2D Single Option Level 3 - Required Within Develop Project closeout
Have the stake holders needs Model information that covers them Levels 1, 2 & 3 What physical constraints are there on and around the site? quality be defined? be obtained from the model. Manufacturers model Simulations of: data, bills of quantities, finishes, building, structure and services. information How does a specific Metered consumption of energy, 3 (integrated BIM) TBC
source). Selection Concept Design within the 3D volumes available? Levels 2 & 3 3D geometry Selection TfL CIMM
been captured? Network Rail (NR) Are there any specific FM information for mandated products (if any) - minimal - Planning & spatial arrangements Develoment model superimposed upon 3D laser survey Level 2 - Optional - energy use during life wlak throughs etc)? Generally UK equivalent of AIA 3D laser or radar survey product / element perform? water etc.
Google maps / OS Maps Minimum for Level 1,2 or 3 Can Building Regulations Part L and Energy High level simulation models and reports. Level 1 2D Within Develop TfL Spearmint Within Initiation TfL CIMM
GRIP up to 3 option requirements? data for cost, volumetric information, part codes, model viewable from a range of pre-agreed perspectives. Level 3 - Required and related carbon use Level of Development: 400 generated model information
Does the concept meet the Model information that confirms that they may be Levels 1, 2 & 3 or survey needed TfL CIMM Performance Certificate Requirements be met? Levels 2 & 3 3D geometry TfL CIMM Deliver / Close Tracked changes made by client Levels 1, 2 & 3
selection and relevant performance parameters) 2D general arrangement drawings, plans, cross sections and calculations Does the design meet the FMs Model sourced information that Levels 1, 2 & 3 What is the basis for a Schedule of quantities & cost All levels
stake holders needs? achieved Procure Procure / Design TfL Spearmint (configuration management of
What services constraints (water / drainage / electricity) exist? Existence and current utilisation parameters available for inclusion in a model. All levels if relevant How will whole life cost be Model information conforming to BS ISO 15686 and Optional - Level 2 Can the Clients BREEAM or LEED objectives be met? elevations, produced from the model. - acoustics and PAVA needs e.g. access, adaptability, responds to the FMs questions, valuation? build up.
Within Initiation TfL Spearmint model(s))
TfL CIMM assessed? BSI PD 156865 to an agreed level of precision Required - Level 3 performance cost, information on the basis of as appropriate
TfL Spearmint Has the concept been designed for efficient Modularisation strategy evident in the model. Level 1 2D TfL Spearmint Close How does a specific product / Object test result & date All levels
What other data is available about this site or asset? (from Validated information from geometric and attribute databases & FM systems All levels if relevant Define Requirements What format shall the Model information compliant with the clients Level 1 manufacture and assembly? Build sequence recorded in the model. Levels 2 & 3 3D geometry Schedule of facilities produced from the model. Level 1 2D model - fire & smoke modelling and design, accommodation etc.?
Within Initiation Within Initiation element perform? attribute information*
existing client records) information be delivered to the technical standards or; BS1192, BS7000:1, BS8451 Level 2 How easy is it to build? Critical elements of the model designed in detail. + time Levels 2&3 3D model evacuation
Is there a means of controlling Definition of how the nominated All levels How will the facility be Associated operation attribute All levels
What site specific safety considerations need to be made? Safety briefing information contained in model (EG location of power cables, gas pipes, Level 1, 2 and 3 in an TfL Spearmint client in? (or equivalent) or; Level 3 Critical logistics routes verified in the model. - vehicle and people movement
- Elevation treatment Rendered model information of the required elevations. Level 2 - Optional distribution of documents? supplier shall communicate operated? information*
filled in basements, pits etc). appropriate form for the Within Initiation IFC or proprietary format(s) Levels 1, 2 & 3 capacities
What is the preliminary cost estimate? Schedule of capital costs based upon aggregated quantity and rate take Level 2 and obtain responses from the
Version 06, updated to include output from the Soft Landings workshop 12.01.12. Reference to any existing H&S File or O&M systems BIM Implementation Plan Using classification codes for building objects as Level 3 - Required Is the design safe to construct? Model includes construction Level 1 2D client.
How is the facility to be Associated maintenance All levels
off from the model and an associated schedule of assumptions.
AIA The American Institute of Architects specified or using UNICLASS to UK equivalent of - Construction systems Structural information in the model. Level 1 2D model sequence and identifies working Level 2 3D associated models maintained? attribute information*
What is the initial view of capital cost? Model of the developments volumes Level 1: from 2D model
AIA*Level of Development: 100 Envelope information in the model. Levels 2&3 3D model at height and edge protection. Level 3 3D integrated model What is the relevant Health and Associated H&S attribute All levels NB. If design & build this table requires
BIM Building Information Modelling Schedule of internal volumes, land, floor, wall and roof areas or service runs aligned with Level 2 & 3: from 3D model How will the outline planning Drawings, renditions and reports generated from Level 1 from 2D model
Whole life cost assessment based upon this plus in use simulation Level 3
results and documented maintenance assumptions. (As per BS) Is the design safe to use? 3D walk through for Level1 3D sketch Safety information? information* validation to ensure that the information is
BRE The Building Research Establishment generic cost data as aggregated by the cost estimator
Feedback to Client (DQI type assessment)
application information be model. Levels 2 & 3 from 3D - Environmental systems Generic services and control systems sizing / capacity Level 1 2D model
Fabric not normally represented. How shall the facility be procured? Recommendations based upon an analysis of the model and associated All Levels stakeholder assessment. Level 2 3D associated models *for transfer to FM system appropriate for either use as employers
BREEAM BREs Environmental Assessment Methodology generated? model information included in the model. Levels 2&3 3D model
Level of detail to be developed cost assessments Level 3 3D integrated model requirements or contractors proposals.
Schematics referenced.
CDF Common Data Format What is the initial view of revenue (FM) cost? Oriented model that minimises energy use. Level 1: from 2D model How will the outline proposals be communicated to the A model with separate layers for structure and services compliant with All Levels - Buildability Optimised construction sequence and programme information Level 1 extruded 2D to 3D
CIMM TfL programme & project process for underground transport Energy use target or aspiration using an initial environmental performance model Level 2 & 3: from 3D model client? specified Standards. developed in the model. Levels 2&3 3D model
GIS Geographical Information System
Access to user-friendly data - driven by hand held zapper
Major maintenance and capital replacement costs identified
GRIP Network Rail project management process
What is the initial view of revenue income? Schedule of (floor) areas by rental classification Levels 1, 2 & 3
Childrens Services / Client Group Ability to provide 3D walk through presentation from the primary model.
Schedule of facilities included within the development.
Level 2 & 3
All Levels Clash prevention confirmation simulations for Level 1 extruded 2D to 3D
IFC Industry Foundation Classes (data formats) - Services & structure including profiles, basic Levels 2&3 3D model

Manchester City Council schools

Generic simulation results for the services philosophy and schedules Level 2 associated specifications & tolerances
LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design assessment methodology How would the development look on the site (early stage 3D Sketch Level 1 demonstrating that the brief will be met by the resulting development. models
visualisation)? - Access routes
OGC Office of Government & Commerce
Prompts changes to / review of:
Level 3 integrated model - Lifting operations
High definition photo rendition of 3D laser survey. Optional at Levels 2 & 3
PAVA Public Address & Voice Alarm system How will any client specific performance needs be Model based simulations as appropriate. Level 1 Calculations
MCC Capital Projects /
How would development control authorities be convinced of Is the cost plan robust (firm)? Quantity take off from BIM Levels 1, 2 & 3
Spearmint TfL programme & project management process for surface transport met? Level 2 associated
MCC design guidelines
3D solid model overlay onto photo rendition Level 3 Schedule assumptions based on build sequence used in BIM. Levels 2 & 3

Process map
the strengths of the development? models
TfL Transport for London
Programme Manager
Level 3 integrated model Evidence that results of virtual and/or real prototyping of Levels 2 & 3
UNICLASS A coding system for building components published by CPI Will the development meet the flow rate requirements?

How will logistics requirements be met?

People, fluid and or traffic flow model and simulation spreadsheet based

Outline simulation model of people and material flow capacity for the construction phase
Levels 1, 2 & 3

Optional levels 1,2 & 3

How will special presentation needs be met (EG to
stakeholders and approvers)?
Combination of the model plus survey, photographic, rendition and time
sequenced information as specified by the client.
All levels defined by
availability of items above.
innovative and complex elements of the design have been
incorporated into the BIM. Intranet MCC
Design information notes
Is the cost plan and cash flow forecast reliable and the Model containing architecture plus cost and time sequence information. Level 1 2D geometry Is the cash flow forecast reliable? Sensitivity analysis, varying aspects identified as high risk in All Levels Version Date Changes

version 4_17.07.12
Identification of constraints
may suffice risk allowance reasonable? Level 2 3D geometry, the project risk register. 1 06.06.12 Initial issue for workshop
associated models 2 11.06.12 Updated / notes added following workshop 06.06.12
Special interest groups from MCC and supply chain
How will security requirements be met? Outline simulation model of people and material flow capacity for the required security Optional levels 1,2 & 3 Will the development perform as specified Model based simulations as appropriate, demonstrating with All Levels
Design & construct
Level 3 3D geometry + 3 09.07.12 Updated to incorporate MCC comments (via B. Core 06.07.12)
level during construction Identification of constraints by clients requirements including design, 95% confidence that the development will perform as required
integrated model 4 17.07.12 Updated to incorporate MCC comments (via A. Donley 16.07.12)
spreadsheet based may suffice construction and operational budgets? (taking into account the levels of predictability achieved in the
Has the delivery schedule been validated? Time attributes associated with the assembly sequence as planned in the Level 2 - linked
past from similar simulations).
model Level 3 - integrated
Have lessons learnt from prior projects been Incorporation of model objects from prior projects Levels 2 & 3
Are there any deviations from the brief or proposals to Concession request All levels
acted upon?
improve it EG with respect to the use of client standard
BIM objects?