Readiness Review
Identify the gaps. Prioritise the next steps.
An independent review of the project’s climate case, financing assumptions and delivery arrangements. The result is a prioritised work plan for the next stage of preparation.
Readiness Review
Identify the gaps. Prioritise the next steps.
When this service is useful
A project has an initial concept or draft, but the team needs an independent view before committing to further studies or a funding application. The review establishes what is supported, what is missing and which decisions require attention.
What the review examines
- The problem and climate objective: whether the proposed intervention responds to a defined risk or emissions source.
- The project logic: whether activities, expected results, indicators and costs tell a consistent story.
- The financing assumptions: the potential source, access partner, instrument and outstanding eligibility questions.
- Delivery and inclusion: institutional roles, environmental and social risks, gender, affected communities, procurement and monitoring.
What the client receives
A structured review with scored findings, an evidence register, a decision log and a prioritised action plan. A management briefing identifies issues that prevent progress, matters needing further analysis and improvements that can be addressed during drafting.
Information needed to begin
The existing concept or draft, indicative budget, available studies, proposed partners and any funder feedback. Missing documents are recorded as gaps; unsupported claims are not treated as established facts.
How to use the result
Use the findings to allocate responsibilities, commission necessary studies and decide whether to proceed, revise the concept or reconsider the funding option. The review is an independent preparation assessment; it does not determine fund eligibility or replace legal or technical due diligence.
- Indicative duration
- 5 to 10 working days
- Limit
- Not fund approval, accreditation advice or legal due diligence.
Preparation
Before you commission a review
Identify the decision the review must support: continue preparation, commission studies, change the funding route or pause. Agree which documents can be shared and who can answer questions. The initial enquiry needs only a short summary; project files can follow through an agreed channel.
A low score identifies work to do. A high score cannot override an unresolved access, legal or safeguards issue. Findings should remain traceable to the evidence reviewed.
