Before implementation

A series of eight arrows, the first five labelled “proposal”, “inputs”, “activities”, “outputs” and “targets” are emphasised with a surrounding rectangle.


What is the problem? To what extent is the need being met? What can be done to address this need? What is the current state? Will the proposed intervention work?

Focus areas

  • needs assessment
  • problem statement
  • supporting design
  • testing assumptions and theory
  • feasibility (in terms of relevance and performance) of multiple scenarios or options
  • establish baseline data and information to assess impacts over time
  • develop a program logic to clarify the rationale for a specific proposal
  • relevant stakeholders
  • inputs and outputs
  • activities
  • anticipated short‑term, medium‑term and long‑term outcomes.

Program characteristics

Program is innovative and in development – exploring, creating, emerging.

Type of evaluation/other terms

Implementation readiness assessment, formative evaluation.

Commonwealth requirements

Before an activity or program is implemented, entities need to plan how an activity or program will be evaluated in order to:

  • meet implementation planning requirements in the Budget and Cabinet processes
  • meet policy requirements in the Impact Analysis Framework, the Charging Framework and the Commonwealth Grants Policy (where applicable)
  • meet legislative requirements to measure, assess, and report on performance under the Commonwealth Performance Framework
  • strengthen program design and ensure the required data for performance monitoring and evaluation can be collected throughout implementation and aligned to existing data collections, where possible
  • support decision‑making.

Risk and assurance review process

Risk and assurance review processes, including appropriate use of the Risk Potential Assessment Tool (RPAT) and the two‑pass capital works and ICT reviews, are also required for proposals that meet certain risk and materiality thresholds.

Back to top