NAME OF THE PROJECT: Uhuru Terminal

LOCATION:

A B C D E F G H I J
Criteria Description Weight 100% 75% 50% 25% Score Weighted
Score

>Tsh 5 B <Tsh 5 B >Tsh <Tsh 4B >Tsh <Tsh 3B

1 Project Size
Is project large enough to 4B 3B >Tsh 1 B
offset transaction costs?
5% 50 2.5
Yes. No The laws Significant law No existing
Is the legal framework to changes require minor amendments law or bylaw
guide the project needed amendments is required to support
Compliance to given laws
2 implementation, the project
and regulations
satisfactory? E.g updated
bylaws
5% 50 2.5
Yes. Clear Idea is Idea is Project idea
Does the LGA has a clear and realistic realistic, realistic but is not clear,
conceptual vision of the roadmap to somehow not clear how means to
Clear and realistic idea of project? eg facilities to be succesfull clear with the to achieve it achieve is
project roadmap but not clear,
3 the project (what is to be constructed, nature of implementati there is room and not
done) services to be delivered, on for realistic
methodology or approach to improvement
use, scope etc
10% 75 7.5
Economic and financial
appraisal

4
 Does the project generate or Revenue
has a potential demand to generated Project may Project may
4.1 has a generate generate Project has
generate revenues, and be
susitanable?. potential to revenue, with revenue, but no potential
cover project a low demand has a high to generate
20% costs risks demand risks any revenue 50 10
4

There is a
Will the project be likely to get High reasonable No
4.2 financing (from both public possibility to indicationof Minimal possibility to
and/or private sponsors)? access both accessing one chances of get funding
public and of the accessing from public
private financing either or private
20% financing options financing investors 50 10

How necessary is the project?

Is the project a priority, does High priority There is a
5 Strategic issues it meet the social needs and with a critical little need,
is in line with government need that There is a clear somehow Not a
plans? aligns to need, aligns aligns with priority, no
government with our plans the plans, not need but
10% plans but not urgent a priority interesting 100 10

Land is not
Suitable land is yet
No suistable
already earmarked, or
Does the LGA own a piece of LGA owns the land, LGA
earmarked but is not suitable
land, and is has no
6 Land availability land that fits the identified requires but LGA may
suitable for financial
project? compensation. have financial
the project capacity to
Its in the capacity to
acquire
current budget acquire a new
land
10% 100 10
 There are
minimum There is High risks
7 Risk considerations Does the project present any risks that can medium risks which are Substantial
known significant risks, be that are likely managable risks which
challenges or obstacles to its managable to be but with a are not
succesfull implementation? 10% effectively managable high cost managable 50 5

Technical
Does the LGA have technical team is No technical There is No inhouse
Capacity of the local and financial capacity to capable and capacity but technical technical or
8
government prepare the project? (dedicated funds for LGA has funds capacity but financial
team and funds to cover project to outsource LGA lack capacity to
preparation costs e.g feasibility preparations project funds for prepare the
study, designs and drawings etc) 10% are available preparation preparations project 75 7.5
Total Weight 100% Total weighted Scores 65

Note:
LGA should set its own criteria (column B) and fix its weights in column D, as appropriate depending on the project and own circumstances
Column D, must be equal to 100%
Column I, is filled depending on the response from column E to H
Column J is calculated by Weight x score = Column D*Column I
LGAs should select a project with the highest weighted score
 NAME OF THE PROJECT: Market/Shopping centre
LOCATION:

A B C D E F
Criteria Description Weight 100% 75%

>Tsh 5 B <Tsh 5 B >Tsh

1 Project Size
Is project large enough to 4B
offset transaction costs?
5%
Yes. No The laws
Is the legal framework to changes require minor
guide the project needed amendments
Compliance to given laws
2 implementation,
and regulations
satisfactory? E.g updated
bylaws
5%
Yes. Clear Idea is
Does the LGA has a clear and realistic realistic,
conceptual vision of the roadmap to somehow
Clear and realistic idea of project? eg facilities to be succesfull clear with the
project roadmap but
3 the project (what is to be constructed, nature of implementati there is room
done) services to be delivered, on for
methodology or approach to improvement
use, scope etc
10%
Economic and financial
appraisal

Does the project generate or Revenue

has a potential demand to generated Project may
4.1 has a generate
generate revenues, and be
susitanable?. potential to revenue, with
cover project a low demand
20% costs risks
4

There is a
Will the project be likely to get High reasonable
4.2 financing (from both public possibility to indicationof
and/or private sponsors)? access both accessing one
public and of the
private financing
20% financing options
 How necessary is the project?
Is the project a priority, does High priority
5 Strategic issues it meet the social needs and with a critical
is in line with government need that There is a clear
plans? aligns to need, aligns
government with our plans
10% plans but not urgent

Suitable land is
already
Does the LGA own a piece of LGA owns the
earmarked but
land, and is
6 Land availability land that fits the identified requires
suitable for
project? compensation.
the project
Its in the
current budget

10%

There are
minimum There is
7 Risk considerations Does the project present any risks that can medium risks
known significant risks, be that are likely
challenges or obstacles to its managable to be
succesfull implementation? 10% effectively managable

Technical
Does the LGA have technical team is No technical
Capacity of the local and financial capacity to capable and capacity but
8
government prepare the project? (dedicated funds for LGA has funds
team and funds to cover project to outsource
preparation costs e.g feasibility preparations project
study, designs and drawings etc) 10% are available preparation
Total Weight 100% Tot

Note:
LGA should set its own criteria (column B) and fix its weights in column D, as appropriate depending on the project and ow
Column D, must be equal to 100%
Column I, is filled depending on the response from column E to H
Column J is calculated by Weight x score = Column D*Column I
LGAs should select a project with the highest weighted score
G H I J
50% 25% Score Weighted
Score

<Tsh 4B >Tsh <Tsh 3B

3B >Tsh 1 B
75 3.75
Significant law No existing
amendments law or bylaw
is required to support
the project

100 5
Idea is Project idea
realistic but is not clear,
not clear how means to
to achieve it achieve is
not clear,
and not
realistic

75 7.5

Project may
generate Project has
revenue, but no potential
has a high to generate
demand risks any revenue 75 15

No
Minimal possibility to
chances of get funding
accessing from public
either or private
financing investors 75 15
 There is a
little need,
somehow Not a
aligns with priority, no
the plans, not need but
a priority interesting 75 7.5

Land is not
yet
No suistable
earmarked, or
land, LGA
is not suitable
has no
but LGA may
financial
have financial
capacity to
capacity to
acquire
acquire a new
land
100 10

High risks
which are Substantial
managable risks which
but with a are not
high cost managable 50 5

There is No inhouse
technical technical or
capacity but financial
LGA lack capacity to
funds for prepare the
preparations project 50 5
Total weighted Scores 74

pending on the project and own circumstances

 NAME OF THE PROJECT: Agro Processing Pick any Agri-product
LOCATION:

A B C D E F
Criteria Description Weight 100% 75%

>Tsh 5 B <Tsh 5 B >Tsh

1 Project Size
Is project large enough to 4B
offset transaction costs?
5%
Yes. No The laws
Is the legal framework to changes require minor
guide the project needed amendments
Compliance to given laws
2 implementation,
and regulations
satisfactory? E.g updated
bylaws
5%
Yes. Clear Idea is
Does the LGA has a clear and realistic realistic,
conceptual vision of the roadmap to somehow
Clear and realistic idea of project? eg facilities to be succesfull clear with the
project roadmap but
3 the project (what is to be constructed, nature of implementati there is room
done) services to be delivered, on for
methodology or approach to improvement
use, scope etc
10%
Economic and financial
appraisal

Does the project generate or Revenue

has a potential demand to generated Project may
4.1 has a generate
generate revenues, and be
susitanable?. potential to revenue, with
cover project a low demand
20% costs risks
4

There is a
Will the project be likely to get High reasonable
4.2 financing (from both public possibility to indicationof
and/or private sponsors)? access both accessing one
public and of the
private financing
20% financing options
 How necessary is the project?
Is the project a priority, does High priority
5 Strategic issues it meet the social needs and with a critical
is in line with government need that There is a clear
plans? aligns to need, aligns
government with our plans
10% plans but not urgent

Suitable land is
already
Does the LGA own a piece of LGA owns the
earmarked but
land, and is
6 Land availability land that fits the identified requires
suitable for
project? compensation.
the project
Its in the
current budget

10%

There are
minimum There is
7 Risk considerations Does the project present any risks that can medium risks
known significant risks, be that are likely
challenges or obstacles to its managable to be
succesfull implementation? 10% effectively managable

Technical
Does the LGA have technical team is No technical
Capacity of the local and financial capacity to capable and capacity but
8
government prepare the project? (dedicated funds for LGA has funds
team and funds to cover project to outsource
preparation costs e.g feasibility preparations project
study, designs and drawings etc) 10% are available preparation
Total Weight 100% Tot

Note:
LGA should set its own criteria (column B) and fix its weights in column D, as appropriate depending on the project and ow
Column D, must be equal to 100%
Column I, is filled depending on the response from column E to H
Column J is calculated by Weight x score = Column D*Column I
LGAs should select a project with the highest weighted score
G H I J
50% 25% Score Weighted
Score

<Tsh 4B >Tsh <Tsh 3B

3B >Tsh 1 B
100 5
Significant law No existing
amendments law or bylaw
is required to support
the project

100 5
Idea is Project idea
realistic but is not clear,
not clear how means to
to achieve it achieve is
not clear,
and not
realistic

75 7.5

Project may
generate Project has
revenue, but no potential
has a high to generate
demand risks any revenue 75 15

No
Minimal possibility to
chances of get funding
accessing from public
either or private
financing investors 50 10
 There is a
little need,
somehow Not a
aligns with priority, no
the plans, not need but
a priority interesting 100 10

Land is not
yet
No suistable
earmarked, or
land, LGA
is not suitable
has no
but LGA may
financial
have financial
capacity to
capacity to
acquire
acquire a new
land
100 10

High risks
which are Substantial
managable risks which
but with a are not
high cost managable 75 7.5

There is No inhouse
technical technical or
capacity but financial
LGA lack capacity to
funds for prepare the
preparations project 75 7.5
Total weighted Scores 78

pending on the project and own circumstances

 NAME OF THE PROJECT: Abattoir
LOCATION:

A B C D E F
Criteria Description Weight 100% 75%

>Tsh 5 B <Tsh 5 B >Tsh

1 Project Size
Is project large enough to 4B
offset transaction costs?
5%
Yes. No The laws
Is the legal framework to changes require minor
guide the project needed amendments
Compliance to given laws
2 implementation,
and regulations
satisfactory? E.g updated
bylaws
5%
Yes. Clear Idea is
Does the LGA has a clear and realistic realistic,
conceptual vision of the roadmap to somehow
Clear and realistic idea of project? eg facilities to be succesfull clear with the
project roadmap but
3 the project (what is to be constructed, nature of implementati there is room
done) services to be delivered, on for
methodology or approach to improvement
use, scope etc
10%
Economic and financial
appraisal

Does the project generate or Revenue

has a potential demand to generated Project may
4.1 has a generate
generate revenues, and be
susitanable?. potential to revenue, with
cover project a low demand
20% costs risks
4

There is a
Will the project be likely to get High reasonable
4.2 financing (from both public possibility to indicationof
and/or private sponsors)? access both accessing one
public and of the
private financing
20% financing options
 How necessary is the project?
Is the project a priority, does High priority
5 Strategic issues it meet the social needs and with a critical
is in line with government need that There is a clear
plans? aligns to need, aligns
government with our plans
10% plans but not urgent

Suitable land is
already
Does the LGA own a piece of LGA owns the
earmarked but
land, and is
6 Land availability land that fits the identified requires
suitable for
project? compensation.
the project
Its in the
current budget

10%

There are
minimum There is
7 Risk considerations Does the project present any risks that can medium risks
known significant risks, be that are likely
challenges or obstacles to its managable to be
succesfull implementation? 10% effectively managable

Technical
Does the LGA have technical team is No technical
Capacity of the local and financial capacity to capable and capacity but
8
government prepare the project? (dedicated funds for LGA has funds
team and funds to cover project to outsource
preparation costs e.g feasibility preparations project
study, designs and drawings etc) 10% are available preparation
Total Weight 100% Tot

Note:
LGA should set its own criteria (column B) and fix its weights in column D, as appropriate depending on the project and ow
Column D, must be equal to 100%
Column I, is filled depending on the response from column E to H
Column J is calculated by Weight x score = Column D*Column I
LGAs should select a project with the highest weighted score
G H I J
50% 25% Score Weighted
Score

<Tsh 4B >Tsh <Tsh 3B

3B >Tsh 1 B
25 1.25
Significant law No existing
amendments law or bylaw
is required to support
the project

100 5
Idea is Project idea
realistic but is not clear,
not clear how means to
to achieve it achieve is
not clear,
and not
realistic

75 7.5

Project may
generate Project has
revenue, but no potential
has a high to generate
demand risks any revenue 75 15

No
Minimal possibility to
chances of get funding
accessing from public
either or private
financing investors 75 15
 There is a
little need,
somehow Not a
aligns with priority, no
the plans, not need but
a priority interesting 75 7.5

Land is not
yet
No suistable
earmarked, or
land, LGA
is not suitable
has no
but LGA may
financial
have financial
capacity to
capacity to
acquire
acquire a new
land
100 10

High risks
which are Substantial
managable risks which
but with a are not
high cost managable 75 7.5

There is No inhouse
technical technical or
capacity but financial
LGA lack capacity to
funds for prepare the
preparations project 75 7.5
Total weighted Scores 76

pending on the project and own circumstances

 NAME OF THE PROJECT: Students Hostel Assume there is a University in a close proximity
LOCATION:

A B C D E F
Criteria Description Weight 100% 75%

>Tsh 5 B <Tsh 5 B >Tsh

1 Project Size
Is project large enough to 4B
offset transaction costs?
5%
Yes. No The laws
Is the legal framework to changes require minor
guide the project needed amendments
Compliance to given laws
2 implementation,
and regulations
satisfactory? E.g updated
bylaws
5%
Yes. Clear Idea is
Does the LGA has a clear and realistic realistic,
conceptual vision of the roadmap to somehow
Clear and realistic idea of project? eg facilities to be succesfull clear with the
project roadmap but
3 the project (what is to be constructed, nature of implementati there is room
done) services to be delivered, on for
methodology or approach to improvement
use, scope etc
10%
Economic and financial
appraisal

Does the project generate or Revenue

has a potential demand to generated Project may
4.1 has a generate
generate revenues, and be
susitanable?. potential to revenue, with
cover project a low demand
20% costs risks
4

There is a
Will the project be likely to get High reasonable
4.2 financing (from both public possibility to indicationof
and/or private sponsors)? access both accessing one
public and of the
private financing
20% financing options
 How necessary is the project?
Is the project a priority, does High priority
5 Strategic issues it meet the social needs and with a critical
is in line with government need that There is a clear
plans? aligns to need, aligns
government with our plans
10% plans but not urgent

Suitable land is
already
Does the LGA own a piece of LGA owns the
earmarked but
land, and is
6 Land availability land that fits the identified requires
suitable for
project? compensation.
the project
Its in the
current budget

10%

There are
minimum There is
7 Risk considerations Does the project present any risks that can medium risks
known significant risks, be that are likely
challenges or obstacles to its managable to be
succesfull implementation? 10% effectively managable

Technical
Does the LGA have technical team is No technical
Capacity of the local and financial capacity to capable and capacity but
8
government prepare the project? (dedicated funds for LGA has funds
team and funds to cover project to outsource
preparation costs e.g feasibility preparations project
study, designs and drawings etc) 10% are available preparation
Total Weight 100% Tot

Note:
LGA should set its own criteria (column B) and fix its weights in column D, as appropriate depending on the project and ow
Column D, must be equal to 100%
Column I, is filled depending on the response from column E to H
Column J is calculated by Weight x score = Column D*Column I
LGAs should select a project with the highest weighted score
University in a close proximity

G H I J
50% 25% Score Weighted
Score

<Tsh 4B >Tsh <Tsh 3B

3B >Tsh 1 B
25 1.25
Significant law No existing
amendments law or bylaw
is required to support
the project

100 5
Idea is Project idea
realistic but is not clear,
not clear how means to
to achieve it achieve is
not clear,
and not
realistic

50 5

Project may
generate Project has
revenue, but no potential
has a high to generate
demand risks any revenue 50 10

No
Minimal possibility to
chances of get funding
accessing from public
either or private
financing investors 25 5
 There is a
little need,
somehow Not a
aligns with priority, no
the plans, not need but
a priority interesting 50 5

Land is not
yet
No suistable
earmarked, or
land, LGA
is not suitable
has no
but LGA may
financial
have financial
capacity to
capacity to
acquire
acquire a new
land
100 10

High risks
which are Substantial
managable risks which
but with a are not
high cost managable 75 7.5

There is No inhouse
technical technical or
capacity but financial
LGA lack capacity to
funds for prepare the
preparations project 50 5
Total weighted Scores 54

pending on the project and own circumstances

PROJECT RANKING AND SELECTION

Project Name Scores Ranking

Uhuru Terminal 65 4
Market/Shopping centre 74 3
Agro Processing 78 1
Abattoir 76 2
Students Hostel 54 5