PREPARATION FOR THE
ASSESSMENT & MODERATION
IMPROVEMENTS WORKSHOP
LCLR PROGRAMMES
1982
In preparation for the moderation on Monday 14 June we are seeking confidence and
consideration across the following areas:
ACT
•  Eligibility of projects included within the LCLR programme
•  Alignment of LCLR programmes to AMP/ PT Equivalent or business cases
•  Understanding programme certainty, deliverability & affordability
•  The appropriateness of AO GPS alignment ratings for their programme
•  Understanding how the LCLR programme delivers against activity class objectives
•  Investment Advisors identifying issues following their preliminary review
Investment Advisors will need to present the findings of their reviews during the moderation. The
presentation should be in the form of a PowerPoint and/or other visual platforms and can include
handouts.
INFORMATION
A summary of the LCLR programme assessments against the confidence and consideration areas
should be provided to [email address] and [email address] by
Wednesday 2 June.
The questions outlined in the “Assessment of LCLR activities” need to be completed for each of
your LCLR programmes under review in the lead up to the moderation. These will form the basis of
the summary of the LCLR programme assessments which will be provided the ACMs and the
NLTP Development Team. These assessments should be attached as a supporting document in
OFFICIAL
TIO.
Additional information that supports investment in the AOs LCLR programme, that is provided by
THE
an AO or their Investment Advisors, should be added as a supporting document in TIO.
Additional fields in TIO
With the completion of the TIO LCLR module additional fields need to be completed to ensure the
activity can be submitted to the RTC f or RLTP and NLTP inclusion. This includes additional
inf ormation such as:  UNDER
•  Public name (if any)
•  Benefits and Measures
•  Updating phase detail pages
As the activity’s Investment Advisor, you will need to ensure the AO has provided the required
additional information, as well as, completing any additional fields required of yourself (i.e. NZTA
Recommendation for inclusion into the NLTP).

RELEASED

Assessment of LCLR activities
Question
Work Completed
Eligibility
Are projects within the LCLR
This is a cursory check of the value entered into the spreadsheet only.
programme under $2m total
If “NO” then consider whether the activity should be included as a
implementation cost for their
larger improvement within the appropriate activity class.
delivery?
Is there anything to suggest
This is a basic sense check of the project description and primary
1982
projects within the programme
benefit and that it is able to be funded in accordance with the LTMA
may not be able to be funded
(e.g. section 20)
using the NLTF?
ACT
Is there anything to suggest
This is a cursory check if projects within the programme should be
projects within the programme
included as part of a continuous programme within the appropriate
should be funded through a
activity class. For example, bridge or Public Transport renewals.
continuous programme?
Is the project discrete (i.e. is
The investment advisor should rely on their professional judgement
there evidence to suggest that
and knowledge of the AO including business cases/ strategies etc that
it’s part of a larger project that
have previously been developed
has been split-up for the
purpose of accessing LCLR
f unds)?
INFORMATION
Alignment with the AMP/ PT Equivalent or Business case
Is the LCLR programme
It is expected that the Investment Advisor will be familiar with these
responding to a problem
documents already, if the LCLR spreadsheet identifies a business case
identified in the AMP, PT Equiv.
the Investment Advisor is unfamiliar with – they should review the
or a business case?
business case in InfoHub or request a copy from the AO. There should
be a line of sight between the LCLR activity and the problems identified
in the AMP or PT equivalent etc.
OFFICIAL
Does the AMP, PT Equiv. or a
It is likely that AMP, PT Equiv. or a business case will need to
business case, and the
demonstrate good alignment with the GPS 2021-24 to meet the
problems identified, align with
investment thresholds for inclusion.
THE
the GPS strategic priorities
(Saf ety, Better Travel Options,
Improving Freight Connections,
Climate Change)?
Are you satisfied that the
This is a cursory check of the intervention and that it contributes to
proposed LCLR activity will
achieving the stated primary benefit – this will help inform the overall
UNDER
contribute towards meeting the
assessment of the LCLR programme
identified GPS strategic priority?
Is there f it-for-purpose analysis
The investment advisor should be looking at the source documents – it
to support the identified LCLR
may be analysis has only been high level, Investment Advisors should
intervention(s) in any of the
rely on their professional judgement and their knowledge of the AO to
above docs?
answer this question. Has there been a consideration of value-for-
money e.g. most economical option chosen?
RELEASED
Has the Approved Organisation
The investment advisor should rely on their professional judgement
considered the intervention
and knowledge of the AO including business cases/ strategies etc that
hierarchy?
have previously been developed
Programme Certainty/ Deliverability/ Affordability
Is there any reason to conclude
Investment Advisors should rely on their professional judgement and
that the project is unlikely to be
knowledge of the AO, experience with similar projects.
delivered in the NLTP period?
WAKA KOTAHI NZ TRANSPORT  AGENCY
DOCUMENT TITLE // 2

Is there any reason or evidence
Investment Advisors should rely on their professional judgement and
to suggest the project may not
local knowledge, Council databases including RMA planning
be low risk?
documents may be useful.
Is there any evidence to suggest  Investment Advisors should rely on their professional judgement and
project costs could exceed the
knowledge of Council projects/ previous performance. Consider
$2m investment threshold?
whether the activity should be included as a larger improvement within
the appropriate activity class.
Is the LCLR programme
Investment Advisors should rely on their professional judgement and
af f ordable?
knowledge of the Council.
1982
Does the programme represent
Investment Advisors should rely on their professional judgement and
value f or money (locally and
local knowledge.
f rom the NLTF)?
ACT
GPS Alignment
Do you agree with the AO’s self-
Investment Advisors should be familiar with the IPM – it is not expected
assessment of the GPS
the Investment Advisors would check each rating however may want to
alignment by activity class?
interrogate outliers including VH, or test a sample if there are a large/
disproportionate number of projects identified with a H GPS alignment
rating.
Activity Classes
Provide an overview of the
Provide your understanding of the programme and how it achieves
LCLR programme across the
activity class objectives
activity classes
INFORMATION
Have LCLR projects been
This is a cursory check of the LCLR programme’s projects to ensure
assigned to the correct activity
they have been assigned to the correct activity class.
class?
Is the LCLR programme
This is a cursory check of the LCLR programme, and its projects, to
applying for f unding under the
ensure to ensure submitted activities aligns to the LCLR bid being
correct activity classes?
assessed. OFFICIAL
General
Comment on the completeness
Is programme in TIO ready for submission to the RTC which includes:
THE
and the quality of information
•  Ensuring all mandatory fields completed for inclusion into the
included within TIO
NLTP
•  Confirming the information included in TIO accurate and of
high quality
•  Ensuring Investment Advisor fields are complete and ready for
submission
UNDER
Comment on the quality of the
Is the LCLR programme spreadsheet submitted in TIO completed to
inf ormation captured within the
the required standard which includes:
LCLR programme spreadsheet
•  Ensuring errors from the upload of the spreadsheet have been
resolved
•  Sufficient detail has been included within the activity list, for
individual LCLR projects, to ensure a thorough review of the
LCLR programme can be undertaken
RELEASED
•  Findings from the Investment Advisor’s programme
assessment is completed and captured within the bid tab, and
for any assessments at LCLR project level, this information
captured against the individual activity in the ‘Activity List’ tab

WAKA KOTAHI NZ TRANSPORT  AGENCY
DOCUMENT TITLE // 3

IMPROVEMENT ACTIVITIES
In preparation for the moderation on Monday 14 June we are seeking confidence and
consideration across the following areas:
•  Eligibility of new improvement activities
•  Review the Improvement Activities to confirm sufficient information has been submitted for
inclusion and that the information is accurate
•  Completion of a Waka Kotahi assessment of submitted improvement activities
•  Understanding activity certainty, deliverability & affordability
1982
•  Investment Advisors identifying issues following their review
Investment Advisors will need to discuss the findings of their reviews when we do a detailed review
ACT
of  activities, by activity class, during the moderation.
Completed assessments for all AOs need to be captured within each individual activity within TIO
by Friday 4 June.
Pre-moderation assessment of improvement activities
It is expected Investment Advisors will complete a thorough assessment of each activity against the
IPM, within their area of responsibility.
TIO has been updated with new phases of existing activities and new activities, that were originally
captured within the AO’s submitted excel spreadsheets, now being captured within the system. You
should do a sense check of these new phases and activities to ensure they have accurately
INFORMATION
transf erred.
Additional information that supports investment in an activity, that is provided by an AO or their
Investment Advisors, should be added as a supporting document in TIO.
Additional fields in TIO
With completion of TIO is additional fields that need to be completed within the system to ensure
OFFICIAL
the activity can be submitted to the RTC f or RLTP and NLTP inclusion. This includes additional
inf ormation such as:
•  Public name (if any)
•
THE

RLTP Objectives and Priorities
•  Benefits and Measures
•  Reviewing the project owner assessment and updating your Waka Kotahi assessment
•  Updating phase detail pages
As the activity’s Investment Advisor, you will need to ensure the AO has provided the required
additional information, as well as, completing any additional fields of yourself (i.e. NZTA
UNDER
Recommendation for inclusion into the NLTP).

Question
Work Completed
Eligibility
Is there anything to suggest the
This is a basic sense check of the project description and primary
project may not be able to be
benefit and that it is able to be funded in accordance with the LTMA
RELEASED
f unded using the NLTF?
(e.g. section 20)
Should the project form part of
This is a cursory check of the value entered into the spreadsheet only
the LCLR programme?
to identify any potential LCLR activities.
Review the Improvement Activities
Review of  submitted
•  Confirm the information in the spreadsheet is accurate based on
improvement activities?
previous business case phases (e.g. PBC or AMP)
WAKA KOTAHI NZ TRANSPORT  AGENCY
DOCUMENT TITLE // 4

•  Check the IPM self-assessment. The self-assessment will be
based on the draft IPM. We are not requiring Councils to carry-out
another self-assessment following the release of the final IPM.
•  Confirm projects included are complete (e.g. cost and cashflow)
Complete a Waka Kotahi
•  Complete the NZTA assessment based on the finalised IPM
assessment of submitted
•  Complete the NZTA assessment of project delivery (certainty)
improvement activities?
Alignment with the AMP/ PT Equivalent or Business case
Is the project responding to a
It is expected that the Investment Advisor will be familiar with these  1982
problem identified in the AMP,
documents already, if the improvement spreadsheet identifies a
PT equivalent or a business
business case the Investment Advisor is unfamiliar with – they should
case?
review the business case in InfoHub or request a copy from the AO.
There should be a line of sight between the improvement activity and
ACT
the problems identified in the AMP or PT equivalent etc.
Project Certainty/ Deliverability
Is there any reason to conclude
Investment Advisors should rely on their professional judgement and
that the project is unlikely to be
knowledge of the AO, experience with similar projects.
delivered in the NLTP period?
General
Is the inf ormation included within
Are activities in TIO ready for submission to the RTC which includes:
TIO complete and of high
•  Ensuring all mandatory fields completed for inclusion into the
quality?
INFORMATION
NLTP
•  Confirming the information included in TIO accurate and of
high quality
•  Ensuring Investment Advisor fields are complete and ready for
submission

OFFICIAL
Waka Kotahi Assessment
Investment Advisors will need to undertake individual assessments for each of their AO’s submitted
activities over $2M. The assessment includes:
THE
•  Investment Prioritisation Method (IPM) Profile – What is the Waka Kotahi assessment of
the IPM profile. If the Waka Kotahi profile varies to the project owner’s assessment, then
please provide comments that support this assessment in the NZTA assessment fields.
•  NZTA assessment of the IPM profile –How has the IPM applied, what is the selected and
why, and what level of evidence can be supplied to support the selected rating.
UNDER
•  NZTA Confidence in Delivery - Provide a rating from the drop down box to represent your
conf idence in this project proceeding to implementation within the NLTP.
Inf ormation on the Investment Prioritisation Method can be found at:
https://www.nzta.govt.nz/planning-and-investment/planning/investment-decision-making-
f ramework-review/investment-prioritisation-method/

RELEASED
Issues or  Questions
If  you have any questions or issues please contact the NLTP Team on [email address]
WAKA KOTAHI NZ TRANSPORT  AGENCY
DOCUMENT TITLE // 5

Document Outline