Treasury Deep Review

When to use this

• A proposal promises outcomes over a period long enough for conditions to change.
• A request depends heavily on staffing costs and you want to see the sensitivity.
• A treasury request publishes a total you cannot trace to line items.
• Delivery depends on parties or systems the proposer does not control.
• The proposal prices costs in one currency and requests funds in another.
• You are comparing two proposals whose budgets are presented in different shapes.
• You want to define what you will monitor after enactment, before you vote.
• You want to know which categories drive the request before you question any of them.
• You want to test whether a contingency percentage is doing the work of a missing line item.

When NOT to use this

• No cost assumptions are published at all; ask for them first using the question tracker.
• The action has no delivery component, such as an informational action.
• The proposal is not staffing-led and the roles are incidental.
• The request is small enough that reconstruction costs more than it reveals.
• You are assessing delivery capability rather than cost; use the risk register.
• You are assessing financial assumptions; use the reconstruction workbook or the calculator.
• You are looking for a single correct answer; this tool produces a range.
• You intend the register as an argument against the proposal rather than as an assessment.
• You want a full budget rebuild across all categories; use the reconstruction workbook.

What you'll need

• Any prior delivery record for the same team
• Stated headcount, rates, durations and unit costs
• Stated roles, headcount, hours or days, and rates
• The ADA amount requested and any stated ADA price or FX assumption
• The contingency percentage and the base it applies to
• The currency each cost is incurred in
• The date the proposer priced the budget
• The delivery plan, milestone schedule and dependency list
• The full budget breakdown as published
• The FX and ADA price assumptions used by the proposer
• The team composition and stated capacity
• Your intake brief and claim-evidence map

Estimated completion time

45 minutes

Working time for one governance action, assuming the inputs listed here are already to hand.

How to interpret the result

• Module: Budget reconstruction: A variance under roughly five percent usually reflects rounding and differing assumptions rather than a defect.
• Module: Budget reconstruction: A variance you can explain is not a problem. A variance nobody can explain is the finding.
• Module: Budget reconstruction: If the reconstruction comes out higher than the request, the proposal may be underfunded, which is its own delivery risk.
• Module: Budget reconstruction: Categories where you had to invent assumptions show where disclosure is thin, regardless of the numbers.
• Module: Rates, FX and contingency: The most useful output is which assumption dominates, not the totals themselves.
• Module: Rates, FX and contingency: If the adverse case is unaffordable, the real question is who carries the price risk, not whether the rates are fair.
• Module: Rates, FX and contingency: Contingency above roughly fifteen percent usually indicates either genuine uncertainty or a line item nobody wanted to itemise. Ask which.
• Module: Delivery risk: Read severity as a triage aid, not a measurement. It tells you what to examine next.
• Module: Delivery risk: The gap between raw and residual severity measures how much real mitigation exists. A zero gap means the mitigations are words.
• Module: Delivery risk: A register concentrated in one category tells you where to seek expert input.
• Module: Delivery risk: Material risks with no monitoring indicator mean you would not know if the risk landed.

Limitations

• Module: Budget reconstruction: Reconstruction tests internal consistency, not whether the prices are reasonable in the market.
• Module: Budget reconstruction: It depends on the assumptions the proposer published; thin disclosure produces a weak reconstruction.
• Module: Budget reconstruction: ADA price movement between pricing date and enactment can dominate every line-item difference.
• Module: Rates, FX and contingency: Scenario outputs are only as good as the assumptions you enter, and they are your assumptions.
• Module: Rates, FX and contingency: It does not benchmark rates against any market; it tests internal consistency and sensitivity.
• Module: Rates, FX and contingency: FX and ADA price readings are point-in-time and go stale quickly.
• Module: Delivery risk: Scores are subjective and are not comparable across reviewers without a shared calibration.
• Module: Delivery risk: The register captures foreseeable risks only, and delivery often fails on unforeseen ones.
• Module: Delivery risk: A high-risk register does not mean a proposal should not proceed; it means the risks should be visible and monitored.