Five stages, with validation at every step
Every stage ends with something the administration can read and approve. Comments are taken on board along the way, not at the end, so that the document handed over belongs to the beneficiary.
Is set in the proposal, according to complexity, the data available and the activities contracted
From defining the scope to support for approval
Defining the scope and collecting the documents
What the analysis covers and what it does not, who is responsible for communication within the administration, which documents and data exist. This is also where missing information is identified, so that the gaps do not surface later.
Validated: the scope of the analysis, the list of documents and the work timetable.
Diagnosis and consultations
Analysis of documents and data, discussions with the administration's services and the specialists involved and, where agreed in the proposal, site checks. The result is a picture of risks, vulnerabilities and capacities, plus an analysis of the continuity of essential services.
Validated: the diagnosis and the criteria that will be used for prioritisation.
Prioritising measures and projects
Organisational measures and investments are ranked against the agreed criteria. For each investment a project sheet is prepared, with the justification, objective, indicative budget, maturity and the preparation steps that follow.
Validated: the order of priorities and the list of project sheets.
Drafting, comments and revision
Drafting of the full document, sending it out for comments and revising it on that basis. Comments are recorded, including those not taken on board, with the reason.
Validated: the final version of the document.
Handover, training and support for approval
Handover of the materials in editable formats, training for the people involved and support through the review and approval process, in line with the procedures that apply to the beneficiary.
Validated: the handover and the materials for the approval process.
The timetable is set in the proposal, according to complexity, the data available and the activities contracted. Institutional approval procedures follow a separate timetable.
Four contributions from the administration
Without them, the analysis remains a desk exercise. With them, the document describes the real community.
A coordinating person
A single point of contact in the administration, who gathers information from the services and passes on the comments.
The documents and data available
Whatever already exists, in whatever form it exists. Incomplete documents are useful too: they show where the gaps are.
The agreed access to staff and sites
Discussions with the services involved and the visits agreed together, within the limits set in the proposal.
Comments and intermediate validations
The administration's response at each stage, within the agreed deadlines.
Roles brought in according to the scope of the analysis
The named members of the team and the project lead are set out in the technical proposal, according to the scope of the analysis and the activities contracted. We do not publish a fixed team, because no two projects are the same.
Project coordination
The single point of contact with the administration, the timetable and reporting by stage.
Risks and service continuity
Diagnosis of risks and vulnerabilities, analysis of the continuity of essential services.
Funding and public policy
Analysis of possible funding sources and the conditions that apply, as published.
Urban planning and spatial data
Alignment with urban planning documents and presentation of the information on maps.
Legal and public administration
Fit with the applicable legal framework and with the beneficiary's procedures.
Public communication
Proposals for informing and preparing the population.
No parallel structures
How the work is coordinated. Coordination follows an arrangement agreed with the beneficiary, which respects the existing legal responsibilities of the administration's services and structures. We do not propose new committees that would duplicate structures already provided for by law, and we do not assign tasks to institutions that are not party to the contract.
How we work with administrations
Together with the administration, not instead of it
The document is built with the in-house team. The team remains its owner and can update it.
Sources in plain sight
Every legal or financial statement shows its source and the date on which it was checked.
Modular
The sections are independent, so any of them can be developed further later, as a separate piece of work.
Built for decisions
The analysis ends in priorities and project sheets, not in descriptions. What comes after each project sheet is stated explicitly.
Let us agree the scope and the timetable together
A 30-minute call, then a technical and financial proposal, contracting through the applicable procedure and the start of the project.
Request a 30-minute call →