4 Steps in the Investment

Planning Process

Before delving into the details of the CIP process,18 it is 6. Capital investment decisions are not transparent and
useful to sum up common problems with capital invest- allow opportunities for all sorts of abuses: from un-
ment in the absence of a proper process: necessary “pet projects” promoted by local politicians
or officials to conflict-of-interest deals to outright cor-
1. Capital investment plans do not include realistic as- ruption.
sumptions about funding/financing and end up being 7. Capital investment decisions are made without suf-
a “wish lists.” ficient public participation, including by the business
2. Capital investment decisions are made without ref- community.
erence to life cycle costs and management. This dis-
connect from the realities on the ground often occurs Capital programming and budgeting is a dynamic process
when capital investment is funded or planned at the that generally involves four stages:
central or regional level—or by donors—but manage-
ment of the completed asset and the operations and 1. Financial planning
maintenance costs are the responsibility of the LG. 2. Project identification and prioritization
3. Capital investments result in LGs taking on a level of 3. Program and project management
debt that is unsustainable or that substantially con- 4. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E).
strains future activities.
4. Local governments plan or establish PPPs without a The complexity of the process depends on the law; the
clear justification and without the capacity to manage extent of central government regulations; and the LG’s
them effectively. size, organizational structure, staff capabilities, and fi-
5. Capital investment priorities are distorted by the nancial condition. For planning, this process can be di-
availability or lack of funding for specific sectors/ vided into a number of steps. Many elements of financial
works. For example, the existence of grants or cen- planning were considered in the previous chapter; the
tral government funding for specific types of projects rest are presented in this chapter and the next and de-
may result in such projects being implemented—and
picted in figure 2.19
increase the city’s O&M expenses—even if these proj-
ects are not priorities for the community.

18 Note that the appendixes contain useful sample documents 19 This chapter draws partly from several documents produced
for most of the steps described in this chapter and the next. by the Local Government Reform Project II/Croatia/US-
Many of these samples can be used as templates that may AID/Urban Institute during 2004–07 and the Municipal
be adapted for local conditions by LGs that do not yet have Economic Growth Activity/Serbia/USAID/Urban Insti-
their own forms. tute, and other USAID-sponsored guidance documents.

29
30 Guidebook on Capital Investment Planning for Local Governments

Figure 2. Steps in Investment Planning Process

Establish policies
Determine
for capital
Step 1: organizational Step 2: investment
structure
planning

Establish project
Step 3: selection criteria

Implement and monitor

investment projects Develop
Step 4: calendar, forms,
and instructions

Adopt capital
Prepare project
Step 10: program and Step 5: requests
budget

Draft capital
program Review project
Step 9: and budget
Step 6: requests
documents

Match projects
Prioritize project
Step 8: to available Step 7: requests
funding

Source: Remake based on various USAID-funded project materials.

 Steps in the Investment Planning Process 31

Step 1
Box 8. Approaches to
Determining the Organizational CIP Committees: Lessons
Structure from the Case Studies

The process of developing CIP documents requires co- 1. São Paolo, Brazil. São Paolo has a special con-
ordination, oversight, and preparation of the project rec- sultative council, associated with the department in
ommendations to be included in the CIP. It is therefore charge of capital planning (Case Study 2). The coun-
necessary to ensure an equitable and efficient process that cil has 17 members with 2-year pro bono terms:
complies with policies and guidelines. The organizational ■■ Five members are elected directly by the popula-
structure will depend on local circumstances, including tion, 1 for each of the 5 big sectors of the city.
the size of the LG. For midsized and large jurisdictions, a
■■ Three are nominated by professional and business
common approach follows:
associations: Instituto de Engenharia (Engineering
Institute), Associação Comercial (Commercial As-
A CIP Committee is responsible for drafting policies sociation) and Federação do Comércio (Commer-
for CIP development, determining the process and the ce Federation).
timeframe, overseeing each step and providing additional
■■ One is delegated by the City Council.
guidelines, reviewing project requests, organizing public
participation, assigning priorities, and recommending the ■■ Eight are nominated by the Mayor (all City Sec-
Capital Investment Plan to the Mayor. The committee’s retaries, 3 of whom are permanent members:
composition is either defined by the elected body (local Planning, Government and Participation, and
Council) or the Mayor. Partnership).

The responsibilities of the consultative council are to ad-

There is no universal formula for selecting the members vise the Mayor and the Planning Secretary on public
of this committee. In some jurisdictions, the committee policies related to the multiyear plan and to monitor ex-
includes members of the local council and business and ecution of its hundreds of programmed actions, ensuring
professional communities. Other LGs’ CIP Committees that there is no overlap and that they comply with the
are comprised of technical staff from key departments, city and sector policies.
public enterprises, and budgetary institutions. In deciding 2. Nis, Serbia. The CIP Committee has 13 mem-
who should be a member of the committee, the following bers, including the Mayor and Deputy Mayor,
should be considered: but no representatives of citizens or businesses.
Only five members of the CIP Committee were
■■ This process requires knowledge, time, and commit- involved in project evaluation, further limiting
ment from the CIP members. representation.
■■ Members of the committee should be officials and/or
professionals who understand the importance of the
plan.
■■ The CIP recommended by the committee must be sup- The Coordinator for CIP Preparation should be a mem-
ported by the local council and the public. ber of the CIP Committee and is responsible to:
■■ The role of the committee is critical in balancing com-
peting needs for capital funding in the CIP process. ■■ Coordinate the entire process
Having various interests represented on the committee, ■■ Organize meetings of the Committee
therefore, is crucial. ■■ Ensure that the Committee makes all of the required
decisions
It is instructive to see the difference between two actual ■■ Ensure that all involved carry out their tasks on the
approaches (box 8). schedule.
32 Guidebook on Capital Investment Planning for Local Governments

The CIP Coordinator usually is appointed by the Mayor reduce) spending on “pet projects” by politicians that
(or the executive in charge) and should have sufficient au- do not serve the public interest (such as commercial
thority in the LG to make the required decisions, direct real estate).
others’ work, and resolve any disputes.
The policy also may outline priorities for capital invest-
The Technical Support Office provides support through- ment, which then should be reflected in the project se-
out the process. The staff train government departments lection criteria. For example, for cities that do not expe-
and enterprises on the CIP process and, in particular, on rience fast growth, the policy may state that the priority
how to prepare project requests; compile data; help with should be given to investment that preserves the useful
needs assessment and cost estimates; review project re- lives of existing infrastructure and public facilities.
quests; and draft a preliminary Capital Investment Plan
for the CIP Committee to finalize. ■■ Definition of what constitutes a capital investment
project. In effect, this definition sets the minimum cri-
teria for inclusion in the CIP (usually, the minimum
Step 2 cost and useful life of the asset). For example, in Case
Establishing Policies for Capital Study 1, capital investment projects are defined as cost-
Investment Planning ing not less than 100,000 Euro with a period of imple-
mentation (construction) not less than 2 years.
One of the first tasks of the CIP Committee is to develop ■■ Assignment of organizational responsibility for capi-
a clearly defined written policy for the capital investment tal investment plan preparation and submission.
plan. An illustrative sample policy is presented in appen- Outlined above, under Step 1.
dix 5. The policy should cover, at least, the following: ■■ Methods of financing capital projects. This policy
should list specific sources that are available and that
■■ Period covered by the Capital Improvement Plan. As the LG intends to use, accompanied by the specifics of
noted, the period usually is 3–7 years. In Nis, the pe- using these sources. For example, it can be very useful
riod is 5 years (Case Study 1), and in São Paolo, 4 years to state in the policy that net revenues from the sale
(Case Study 2). of land and property will be used for capital projects
■■ Eligible types of investment. The policy should list the only and to identify other revenue sources earmarked
types of investment eligible for inclusion in the CIP for capital investment. Such revenues may include a
and identify which types/components of cost should certain portion of the operating surplus and the total
be included. For example, the policy presented in ap- of various land-based revenues, such as the land devel-
pendix 5 stipulates that rehabilitation, replacement, opment fee, revenues from selling development rights,
reconstruction of existing infrastructure, public-use fa- and lease fee.
cilities, and social-use and government-use properties ■■ Borrowing limits. These limits are defined in specific
under the mandate of the city government are eligible terms in compliance with national and subnational
for inclusion. Also eligible are the construction of these laws and regulations, in accordance with local views on
types of new infrastructure facilities, if and when con- borrowing, and based on a preliminary understanding
struction is economically and financially justified, and of the LG’s current financial standing. Setting these
the acquisition of land for such construction. Acqui- limits in this policy does not imply that borrowing nec-
sition of equipment and vehicles for public functions essarily will reach the limits, because a more detailed
under the mandate of the LG also is allowed. With analysis of the financial capacity later in the process
respect to cost components, the policy in appendix 5 may further limit borrowing (see sample schedule of
states clearly which expenses must be funded and from the CIP process in appendix 7).
which budget—capital or operating. Note that, if the ■■ Criteria for prioritizing projects or how and who will
policy identifies eligible types of projects clearly enough establish the criteria. The policy should establish who
and the policy is followed in practice, it can prevent (or is charged with developing (drafting) these criteria and
 Steps in the Investment Planning Process 33

who will approve them. Typically, the CIP Commit- have the following characteristics20:
tee drafts the criteria for prioritizing CIP projects, and
either the local council adopts them as an ordinance or ■■ Is understandable to both participants and users of the
the Mayor establishes them in a special decree. process
■■ Methods and timing of public participation. The ■■ Is practical in terms of cost, time, and personnel avail-
policy may state that the CIP Committee is responsible able to carry it out
for securing public participation and indicate during ■■ Considers all major consequences of a project
which periods, but may leave it to the Committee to ■■ Is supported by reliable, relevant information
define specific methods. ■■ Avoids double-counting evaluation criteria (use of two
highly interrelated criteria)
This policy (or set of policies) usually is approved by the ■■ Indicates clearly whether the key value judgments (for
local council as a special local ordinance and becomes a example, assigning “weights” to each criterion) are to
binding document that should be followed in the CIP be made by technical experts or elected officials
process, under CIP Committee supervision. ■■ Provides information not only on the relative ranking
of projects but on their individual merits or value
■■ Identifies critical and noncritical projects
Step 3 ■■ Is applicable to a wide range of projects
Establishing Project Selection ■■ Considers the interdependence of the suggested projects.
Criteria
Priority setting is guided either by ranking projects or by
calculating a total score for each. In the latter case, the
The project evaluation and prioritization process is more
total score is the sum of the project scores for each crite-
objective and rational if criteria are predetermined and
rion. The higher the total score, the higher the priority.
clearly defined. It is important that the CIP Committee
Sometimes the score for each criterion is weighted in the
involves key individuals, including key staff, the Mayor,
total with predefined weights.
and members of the representative body, in defining the
selection criteria. Public participation through focus groups
Appendix 6 provides two examples of simple project rat-
and suggestion boxes can be used to provide citizens and the
ing systems. Under the first option, all projects are sorted
business community with an opportunity to participate in
into 4 priority groups. A project goes into the first (high-
the formulation and review of selection criteria. To pro-
est) priority group if it satisfies 6 or more criteria from a
vide guidance to those drafting the requests, evaluation
predefined list of 6–10; it goes into the second priority
criteria should be established prior to the preparation of
group if it satisfies only 4 criteria, and so forth.
project requests (Step 5).

However, no evaluation system is perfect. Not all crite- Step 4

ria will apply to every project. Good judgment, common
sense, and political considerations will continue to play
Developing Calendar, Forms,
important roles, particularly when a local council approves and Instructions
a CIP in which project priorities were established using
the selection criteria. Nevertheless, carefully prepared Calendar
criteria will sharpen distinctions among projects, narrow Capital programming should be scheduled to begin well
the range of disagreement, provide a basis for discussion, before the operating budget cycle to avoid an excessive
and, hopefully, make the entire process more transparent. staff workload and ensure adequate time for review. Ini-
It is critical that project selection be supported by accurate tiating capital programming several months prior to the
and relevant information. Moreover, practical experience
shows that it is desirable that the priority setting process 20 Adapted from Hatry and others 1984.
34 Guidebook on Capital Investment Planning for Local Governments

development of the operating budget also provides valu- departments in developing the forms to ensure that the
able information on the potential effects of capital projects staff will be able to successfully use them. Pilot testing the
on the operating budget. In addition, adequate time needs forms and instructions will help to identify and correct
to be allowed for the CIP Committee and local council to problems prior to a city-wide introduction of the form.
review project requests and obtain public input before the The CIP Coordinator should provide training for all
city staff and local council must focus on the operating project-submitting departments and enterprises on how
budget. Appendix 7 furnishes a sample CIP calendar. to prepare the forms. During the request preparation pe-
riod, s/he should provide continuing TA to departments.

Forms and Instructions It is important to note that even when LGs use relatively
sophisticated project request forms in the CIP process,
Project request forms are used to collect detailed informa-
these forms often are less detailed and have fewer support-
tion on each proposed project. Obviously, there should be
ing materials than may be required at a later stage. The
consistency between the project selection criteria and the
request for additional information usually arises once the
project request forms. The forms should contain the infor-
project is approved as a part of the CIP, especially if the
mation and data needed for project rating. Pertinent proj-
project will need external financing from lenders or grant-
ect information includes department/enterprise, project
ees. Therefore, “packaging” the CIP-included projects to
name, location, description, purpose, priority according
present them to lenders and grantees is a separate activity
to department/enterprise, justification of need, expected
and reviewed in chapter 6.
useful life, estimated capital costs (total and annual), rec-
ommended sources of financing, status of planning and
engineering, construction data, net effect on annual costs Step 5
(M&R, operations), effect on local revenues, relation-
ship to other projects, and conformance with local plans.
Preparing Project Requests
Completed forms make it possible for the CIP Coordina-
See Chapter 2 on the identification of investment projects
tor or CIP Committee to compare projects, assign whole-
at this stage of the CIP process. Note that LGs with sub-
of-government priority, and even determine suitability for
stantial deferred maintenance and deferred investment in
the CIP. An incomplete form often is the first sign that a
existing assets should be particularly diligent in assessing
project is not ready to be considered for the CIP.
their past unsatisfied needs and should include them in
the project requests.
Appendix 8 provides two sample project request sheets. In
developing a local form, it can be a good idea to review
forms that are required by national or donor agencies for
Starting the Annual Cycle
capital projects. For example, in developing its project
request form, the City of Nis in Serbia slightly modified This step on the CIP calendar should be officially an-
a form needed to apply for funding from the National nounced by the Mayor (or executive in charge of CIP) to
Investment Fund (Case Study 1). the LG representative body. The CIP Coordinator should
send out requests for project proposals, instructions for
Use of standardized forms and instructions ensures uni- their completion, and a timetable to all contributing de-
formity and completeness of the information supplied by partments and enterprises. These documents should be
various departments and enterprises. The CIP Coordina- signed by the mayor (or executive in charge of CIP). If
tor should design the forms and instructions. A common departments sense that top management is not involved
mistake to be avoided is to require information that is not or not committed to the CIP process, they are likely to
needed for review and evaluation. reduce their efforts.

If the CIP process is being organized for the first time, Local government staff should not expect too much too
the CIP Coordinator should work closely with 1 or 2 key soon. If this is the first year of developing a CIP, staff
 Steps in the Investment Planning Process 35

should have realistic goals. The CIP Committee and CIP was not known when the request was prepared and
Coordinator might want to introduce a simple program approved. As a result of these unforeseen factors, cost
in the first year and add new features in subsequent years. and time overruns on government capital investment
The first year may be spent working with department projects are very common.
heads and gathering important information on a few of ❍❍ There is no universal way to handle this challenge,
the most important projects. The CIP Coordinator should and LGs usually find compromises in their
ensure that the first departmental CIP meeting takes place approaches that are acceptable in their particular
at a time when most participants are able to meet. The local situations. For example, some governments,
first meeting is to review the forms and calendar and to especially when the CIP process is not yet fully
answer questions. developed, allow rough cost estimates in the project
requests, but later have a second phase to clarify these
After carefully reviewing the forms, the CIP Coordinator estimates with project-specific data for the projects
should be very clear about the timetable. Offering separate selected for inclusion in the draft CIP. Furthermore,
meetings with the staff who will fill out the forms can be in well-established CIP systems, project requests
useful. During this period, while departments and enter- show how the requested amount will be distributed
prises are preparing project requests, the CIP Coordinator over time (see sample forms, appendix 8). For
should follow up with telephone calls and personal visits large projects, first-year expenditures usually are
to these departments and enterprises, to see what progress for studies and other preparatory work, including
is being made and/or whether any major obstacles have clarification of the costs for the later stages of the
been encountered. project. These activities can be undertaken before
the projects are considered for the CIP.
Addressing challenges. When departments or enterprises ❍❍ Another very common practice is that the CIP
prepare project requests, this step poses a number of chal- itself, even after being approved, is not a budget
lenges to the entire CIP process: document, so it does not provide any spending au-
thorization. Instead, only the first-year requests for
■■ How does a LG balance the schedule and resource con- funding from the CIP are included in the annual
straints of the CIP process with project preparation budget and authorized (table 4).
needs? Preparation of accurate project requests requires ❍❍ Another practical approach is to stipulate in the CIP
substantial work that is lost or becomes outdated if the documents that as soon as a project is approved as a
project is not included in the CIP. For example, it is not part of the CIP, relevant departments or enterprises
efficient to complete all of the needed feasibility studies, may use their budgets to pay for studies, surveys,
including financial and economic analyses (especially for investigation of options, and engineering advice.
large scale projects) and impact studies; and to make ac- ■■ Are all costs recognized and accounted for? In their
curate cost estimates before the project is approved for CIP processes, governments and their departments
the CIP. In fact, in practice, these procedures are beyond commonly recognize components of the investment
the technical and financial capacity of most LGs. How- costs21 and include them in cost considerations and
ever, without such studies and reliable cost estimates, planning. However, governments often do not in-
LGs are at risk of approving projects that turn out to be clude in their analysis and decisionmaking other cost
substantially more expensive to implement than initially components, such as the cost of financing and com-
planned, or not feasible at all due to legal or ecological ponents of life cycle costs such as R&M (chapter 2).
factors that were not identified in the requests. For example, Case Study 1 indicates that, in the City
❍❍ For example, it could turn out that a city does not have
21 The investment costs include feasibility and planning stud-
clear ownership of a land site on which it had planned
ies, engineering and architectural design, land acquisition,
to build a school. Resolving this legal issue could demolition, construction and construction management,
postpone the project for a long time. It could happen contingency, site improvements, equipment, and furnish-
that the site has serious soil contamination, which ings.
36 Guidebook on Capital Investment Planning for Local Governments

of Nis, departments and enterprises participating in

the first CIP process did not include future operations Box 9. Cost Savings from a Simple
and M&R costs in their project requests. As already Life Cycle Costing Decision
discussed, including even rough estimates as part of
the financial analysis is important. Guidelines for The Park District of Urbana, Illinois in the United States
making these estimates are suggested in chapter 2 and maintains detailed expense records for each of its land
and property assets. The business office, which main-
appendix 1.
tains the records, discovered that the heating expenses
■■ Are material cost savings attempted in project re-
for one of its properties were very high. An inspection
quests? Construction technology and materials are and cost-benefit analysis revealed that changing the old
changing rapidly, but municipal utilities and depart- heating system to gas would pay for itself in two years
ments of public works often either are not familiar and permanently decrease operating expenses. This re-
with these new opportunities or are not concerned placement was included in the Park District’s budget and
with potential costs savings from the use of cheaper implemented.
contemporary materials, equipment, and technology.
Source: Kaganova and others 1999.
For example, a municipal utility may suggest upgrad-
ing a sewage network using cast iron pipes, which were
used in the past. However, using plastic alternatives suggested above for large projects: to allocate resourc-
could save up to 33 percent of the cost. This example es from the operating budget or the special funds to
indicates that scrutinizing technologies and the costs of conduct the required studies before the project enters
material inputs is very important for capital investment the CIP cycle. As noted, given the complexity of such
planning. A challenge for LGs, especially small- and PPPs, not many cities are expected to use them to
medium-sized ones, is to ensure that their technical create and operate capital facilities. However, glob-
staff have the capacity and incentives to keep up to date ally, a broad range of local properties, facilities, and
on cost-effective technical solutions. infrastructure have been built and operated through
■■ Can simple life cycle savings be found? Savings of this PPPs (box 10). Before undertaking such PPPs, LGs
kind are not necessarily difficult to achieve or complex are well advised to build their capacities to manage
(box 9). Looking for such opportunities should be en- contractual relations by starting with simpler, short-
couraged as a part of asset management and CIP. term contracts.
■■ When should projects for donors be “packaged”?
Some projects are expected to be cofinanced through Finally, although the finance staff should provide recom-
external funding (grants, borrowing). These projects mendations for capital financing alternatives, it is ben-
will require much more careful and detailed prepara- eficial for the operating departments and public enter-
tion (“packaging”) for presentation to potential spon- prises preparing project requests to recommend financing
sors than is typically needed for financing through the sources. Individual staff in these entities sometimes pos-
LG’s own sources. The implication is that after such sess financing source information not otherwise available.
a project is included in the approved CIP, the project Suggestions of proposed financing methods should be
will need to undergo the second, in-depth appraisal recorded as specifically as possible in the project request
and “packaging.” forms.
■■ When is the right time to consider PPP options? As
mentioned, another challenge is to identify projects
that are suitable for PPPs. The short period allocated Step 6
for project requests in an annual CIP preparation Reviewing Project Requests
cycle is not sufficient to carry out the initial steps to
identify whether a particular service/investment need At this point in the process, the completed project request
can appropriately be considered for a PPP. A possible forms have been received from the operating depart-
solution to this timing challenge resembles the one ments and public enterprises. The first step is for the CIP
 Steps in the Investment Planning Process 37

this question requires expert review because departments

Box 10. Local Public Facilities and enterprises are not always realistic in their assump-
Built through PPPs tions and can underestimate cost components, particu-
larly the cost of land acquisition or borrowing.
Around the world, local public facilities built through 6. Do projects with large costs need to be broken down
public-private partnerships (PPPs) include roads and into phases that can be financed and built separately?
bridges, parking garages, passenger and freight rail-
ways and stations, light rail systems, metros and sub-
A sample checklist for reviewing project requests appears
ways, ferries, bus lines and terminals, multimodal public
transport hubs and terminals, airports and ports, water
in appendix 9.
treatment and distribution, sewage systems and waste-
water treatment, solid waste management systems, An LG should not be surprised if the first submission of
power generation and distribution, central heating and project requests contains a large number of incomplete
cooling systems, hospitals and jails, city government of- forms, especially if this is the first CIP cycle. Incomplete
fices, sports facilities and auditoriums, police and fire forms may be due to confusion, because not all of the infor-
stations, libraries, school, dormitories and social hous- mation is readily available or because department represen-
ing, and farmers’ markets. tatives underestimated the amount of work involved. The
Source: CDIA 2010. LG should reserve as much time as possible in the schedule
for this step. If information is missing, the CIP Coordina-
tor should contact the appropriate department representa-
tive, who should supply the missing information.
Coordinator to review the forms, checking each for com
pleteness and accuracy. During this initial screening, no Department heads also may be consulted if further clari-
judgment is made regarding the merits of the proposed fication is necessary. If an important department fails
projects. Project ranking and selection occur later in the to submit project requests, the CIP Coordinator should
process, once all of the information required to evaluate speak immediately to the department head. If the depart-
the projects has been compiled. ment head cannot commit to submit the requests on time,
the Mayor (or executive in charge) needs to be notified
In this first round, the CIP Coordinator, with the as- and her/his assistance requested. This kind of delay can
sistance of the technical support staff, reviews project cause enormous problems for the CIP Coordinator and
request forms to determine whether the information ap- the CIP process. In fact, at this juncture, the CIP Com-
pears “reasonable.” Written project justifications should mittee and the Mayor (or executive in charge) need to
demonstrate the level of planning and care that has gone come to a joint decision as to whether to proceed to the
into preparing these project proposals. In reviewing the next step without all of the projects having been submit-
applications, the reviewer needs to ask six questions: ted and reviewed.

1. Is the project appropriate for submission for funding Sometimes, for the sake of efficiency, especially in large
through the capital budget? jurisdictions, the CIP Committee may decide to simplify
2. Is the information complete and accurate? scoring and prioritizing projects. For example22:
3. Has the project justification section been written with
enough detail and specificity to be useful in the evalu- ■■ Conduct a preliminary screening of submitted project
ation? requests and reject some outright (because the data pro-
4. Does the project overlap with submissions from other vided is not complete or the project is not desirable) For
departments? Can two or more of the proposals be relatively inexpensive projects, request less information
consolidated? ■■ Focus the review on the most important projects, or
5. Are cost estimates reasonable? Can these estimates be
used to develop a capital program and budget? Note that 22 Hatry and others 1984.
38 Guidebook on Capital Investment Planning for Local Governments

■■ Focus on projects near the “cutoff” point, that is, proj- 2. The appendix may result in modifications to schedules
ects whose inclusion in the CIP is problematic (for ex- or other details of local projects and prevent waste of
ample, controversial projects), and put less effort into local resources. For example, it makes no sense for
evaluating projects that clearly will be included in the the LG to put new pavement on the main street in
CIP. June, if the central government plans to dig it up in
September to replace a sewage main.
By the end of this step, the CIP Committee will have a list 3. The list of CIP projects and the list of potential cen-
of projects eligible for inclusion in the CIP. Based on the tral projects may be a tool for the LG to guide central
individual project sheets (numbered consecutively), the project selection by making local priorities explicit
CIP Coordinator should create a summary sheet (table and known to the central government.
2). Usually future M&R and operations costs are not in-
cluded in the summary (but they should be recorded on
individual project sheets!). However, future costs should Step 7
be included in the financial planning simulations of the Prioritizing Project Requests
LG budget (chapter 3). If a requesting department or en-
terprise suggests borrowing, the cost of borrowing should If Steps 3, 5, and 6 have been done carefully, Step 7 is made
be included in the summary. Note that the CIP Com- much easier. In this step, the CIP Coordinator needs to
mittee must be clearly informed about which costs are exert all possible skill to manage the work of the CIP Com-
included in such a table and which are not. mittee. The first stage is to review with the procedural rules,
schedule, and desired outcome with the CIP Committee. It
A useful appendix to this list—and, later, to the final list of also is necessary for each committee member to understand
CIP projects—can be a list of capital projects in the LG’s the purpose and scope of each project before attempting
jurisdiction that are sponsored by higher levels of govern- to provide a rating. Conveying this understanding is ac-
ment for the period for which CIP is being developed. It complished by convening the first meeting and asking one
also may be possible to find out what the sponsors of such person from each department to explain each project and
projects expect the future maintenance and repair (M&R) to answer questions. Depending on the number of projects
and operations costs to be—and whether these costs will that need to be evaluated, going through all of these expla-
be the LG’s responsibility. At least three benefits can be nations may take one or more meetings.
expected from adding such an appendix to the CIP:
Second, the criteria need to be reviewed again by commit-
1. If the future annual costs are expected to be paid out tee members and used in a hypothetical review of several
of the local budget, the budget forecast should incor- projects. The hypothetical review doubtless will reveal
porate them (chapter 3 and appendix 3). many unanticipated consequences, and there will be ques-

Table 2. Projects to Consider for CIP

(units of local currency)
Project
no. Name Dept. 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total
River Bridge
C-13 C 7,800,000 8,400,000 0 0 0 16,200,000
Replacement
Drainage
C-7 System C 120,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 18,120,000
Improvements
Fire Station
F-3 no. 3 F 0 180,000 220,000 0 0 400,000
Renovation
 Steps in the Investment Planning Process 39

tions about using the criteria. If appropriate for the system The CIP Committee needs to work closely with the fi-
of criteria selected, the CIP Coordinator should prepare nance department on Step 8. Several iterations may be
evaluation sheets for each evaluator to use in rating each required to reconcile the budgetary forecast and list of
project. It is important to realize that this exercise requires suggested projects.
more judgment than precision. In addition, the amount
of work required by the CIP Committee will depend on Due to limited funding, it is common that many projects
the number of projects to review. Evaluation may take a will not be matched to any funding sources. For example,
few meetings or a few months of regular meetings. in many US cities, available annual funds can pay for ap-
proximately only 10 percent of the total need. Further-
The process should enable CIP Committee members to more, projects with the highest priority occasionally do
hold discussions about individual projects and to change not receive funding, but the next projects in line do. Being
their minds and revise their evaluation scores if needed. passed over can occur for several reasons, such as special
Changes often occur as committee members hear from earmarking (for example, from international donor orga-
other members and are a natural part of the process. Re- nizations) and because very large projects often exceed all
member that this evaluation is not a mathematical exer- funding available so must be skipped temporarily.
cise but a process to identify the projects that will most
As mentioned, there are no hard rules for deciding how
benefit the community.
each project should be financed. Relatively small projects
often are funded from the city’s own resources or the re-
The final product in this step is a list of all eligible proj-
sources of its service enterprises, whereas bigger projects
ects in order of priority and arranged by category. A sum-
require multisource financing.
mary report should be compiled that shows the projects
arranged in priority order according to the categories used
The final product in this step is for the CIP Coordinator
in the scoring process.
to develop summary tables. Two of them will be key. The
first is a short list of the projects suggested for inclusion
Public participation in this and the next step can be se- in the CIP, with their ratings and suggested cost alloca-
cured through nongovernmental members of the CIP tions among finance sources (Case Study 1, table 6). The
Committee (box 8). second key table will show, for each project, the suggested
timing of expenditures during the CIP period and the
spending prior to it. In the second table, after both the
Step 8
CIP and the annual budget are approved, the first year’s
Matching Projects to Available spending becomes part of the annual capital budget for
Funding the upcoming year (table 4).

Ideally, one output of the financial analysis would be a Other Summary Schedules
table of revenue sources available for capital financing for Other project summaries should be prepared that arrange
the first year and forecasts for the subsequent years of the the projects by department and prioritize projects by pur-
CIP (chapter 2, financial sources; chapter 3; appendix 3). pose. A list of unfunded projects from the CIP process
also should be created, as it will be the starting point for
This information is the basis for selecting projects for the next year’s CIP. (High priority unfunded projects
year one and the subsequent years of the CIP program. may get funding later in the year as new funding sources
Continuing projects should be funded first. High-priority become available.) Debt and debt service schedules also
projects need to be matched with the remaining avail- should be provided. Tables showing forecasts of total rev-
able funding sources. If some of the sources have special enue available for capital expenditures and total capital
earmarks, projects that qualify for these eligibility rules needs should be prepared for each year of the multiyear
should be matched with these funds. funding cycle (table 3).
40 Guidebook on Capital Investment Planning for Local Governments

The CIP Coordinator or the CIP committee should trans- Step 10

mit the results of this step to the Mayor (or executive in
charge) in a memorandum. Adopting Capital Program
and Budget

Step 9 The schedule should include enough time for the public
and for the representative body to review the program and
Drafting Capital Program budget. Workshops and study sessions for the local coun-
and Budget Documents cil offer an informal setting in which to discuss project
proposals with the CIP Committee and technical support
The Mayor (or executive in charge) finalizes the recom- staff. Site visits also are a valuable educational tool.
mended capital program and the budget and submits
them to the representative body (local council). The CIP The first step in engaging the public is to disseminate
program and budget may be combined in one document information about the CIP process through newsletters,
or be presented as two separate documents. Typical com- radio and television programs, and social media. Second,
ponents of the document are: the public should have a chance to provide ionput. Focus
groups and public hearings are good means of obtaining
■■ Capital program message or transmittal letter input from businesses and residents. When the citizens
■■ Summary schedules and businesses participate in the process, they develop a
■■ Detailed project information for the projects recom- better appreciation of the challenges facing local officials
mended for funding in the first year. and the tradeoffs involved (box 4). Public hearings also
provide the residents with an opportunity to consider
A narrative statement or letter of transmittal summarizes how the program affects their community. Public meet-
key issues that have influenced the selection of projects in ings take two forms: public hearings and community
the proposed capital improvement program and budget meetings.
(for example, financial trends, condition assessments, and
new development). 1. Public Hearings
A public hearing is a structured event used to gather
residents’ and businesses’ comments concerning the CIP
prior to its adoption. A public hearing reaches a large

Table 3. Sample Summary of Requested Project Costs, Available Revenues,

and Unfunded Difference
(thousand units of local currency)

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

2007–11 Requested project costs 93,386 208,692 145,104 138,792 49,911
Total 635,884
2007–11
Available revenues 32,009 11,764 18,077 13,040 10,300
Total 85,189
Unfunded difference 61,377 196,927 127,026 125,754 39,611
Total 550,695
 Steps in the Investment Planning Process 41

number of people and provides opportunities for them put, including who is eligible to speak and the time
to comment directly on an issue. Open hearings enable limitations on remarks
major objections to the program and budget to be dis- ■■ Whether written comments will be accepted
cussed before the representative body formally adopts the ■■ How information collected through the public hearing
CIP. A public hearing may result in the need to amend the process will be used
preliminary capital program and budget. These changes ■■ How meetings results (including changes to CIP) will
should be made before submitting the final capital pro- be reported back to the public.
gram and budget to the representative body for adoption.
After completing its review of staff recommendations and
2. Community Meetings public opinion, the representative body should adopt the
Meetings with local residents can be held at the commu- capital program and budget (for at least the first year)
nity or neighborhood level. Meetings can be scheduled to demonstrate its commitment to the program and to
during the CIP process to solicit citizen input on proposed confirm its policy regarding the community’s approach to
capital projects. The informal structure of these meetings meet its future capital needs. Adoption of the program is
enables for indepth discussions, direct and immediate re- not a binding commitment to fund projects other than
sponse to questions and comments, and clarification of for the first year (table 4).
facts or ideas.
Some representative bodies object to formally adopting
To ensure adequate public notice for the meetings, the the program because they believe it restricts their poli-
CIP Coordinator or other designated individual should cymaking authority and flexibility. They may decide to
place an advertisement in the local newspaper or radio approve it in principle or merely accept it. Acceptance is
announcing where and when the public meetings will not binding for the representative body. Instead, the body
occur enough in advance to enable public participation. may only adopt the capital budget and appropriate funds.
The CIP Coordinator also should develop a process for
conducting the public meetings. Failure to adopt the program as a binding document does
not eliminate its value. The program still serves as an ef-
Organizational issues to consider include: fective planning and management tool. Moreover, it keeps
the representative body informed of the LG’s capital needs
■■ Who will represent the LG and helps the body respond to public inquiries about the
■■ What procedures will be used for obtaining public in- status of projects.

Table 4. Sample Fragment of Approved CIP, with First Year Approved Budget
(2010)
Budget by year (thousand €)

Budget approved
Total
Requesting dept./ Before (thou-
# Project enterprise Score 2010 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 sand €)
Airport
Reconstruction Municipal enterprise
1 and Upgrade “Airport” 73 0 1,467 533 0 0 0 2,000
Social Housing Municipal housing
2 Project # 1 enterprise 70 0 0 1,200 2,100 1,200 0 4,500
Livestock Cattle Department of rural
3 Quarantine affairs 67 81 25 0 0 0 0 106
42 Guidebook on Capital Investment Planning for Local Governments

Once the CIP process is established, it produces a rolling Responsibility for managing an approved project normal-
product. The following year, the column for the past year ly is delegated to an operating department. However, the
(2010 in table 4) will be removed, and a new column (for implementation of capital projects requires multiple steps
2015) will be added, with the necessary adjustments to and activities by various departments and actors. At this
the list of projects and cost estimates. stage, multiple inefficiencies and delays commonly hap-
pen, even if the land and financing are available.