Public decisions grounded in actual market capacity

1. Authority decision

A project may be necessary for the community and formally structured correctly, yet still fail to attract operators able to submit a bid, bear participation costs, assume the required risks or raise capital on the proposed terms. Sentinel works on this information gap: the capacity and incentives of the private market in relation to a concrete public decision.

The objective is to enable the administration to distinguish a public-demand problem from a problem of bankability, scale, risk allocation, industrial capacity or competitive interest.

This area integrates the Regional utvikling with a documented reading of the market and does not replace administrative, technical, legal, accounting or financial assessments assigned to other parties.

2. Why this matters directly to municipalities

The DIPE Annual Report on public-private partnership activity carried out in 2025 states that municipalities account for 44% of PPP contracts classified over 2010–2025. At the end of 2025, the RGS portal recorded 368 PPP projects: 110 did not include an economic-financial plan and, among the 258 projects that did, 56 reported all six economic-financial indicators considered in the report.

These figures do not, by themselves, prove that a project is flawed or unsustainable. They do, however, show how decisive information completeness, verifiability of assumptions and risk allocation consistent with operators’ actual capacity can be.

3. Before launch

• definition of the public decision, expected service and measurable outcomes;
• mapping the potential universe of operators, industrial capacity and availability of capital;
• analysis of comparable transactions, their outcomes, market concentration and reasons for non-participation;
• assessment of proportionality between scale, duration, transferred risks and the cost of participation;
• support for permitted, documented, transparent and non-discriminatory forms of market consultation;
• decision memorandum on the information obtained, assumptions still open and conditions required to proceed.

4. During the procedure

• structured review of expressions of interest, requests for clarification and any withdrawals, without interfering with the procedure or the administration’s responsibilities;
• analysis of the capacity declared by operators, consortia and project companies through public or lawfully accessible sources;
• identification of concentration, dependence on a single financier or supplier, and weaknesses in the execution chain;
• analysis of the economic and industrial causes of limited participation or an unsuccessful procedure;
• organisation of evidence useful to the authority, DIPE and appointed professionals, while keeping market observations separate from reserved assessments.

5. After award

• comparison between initial assumptions, award conditions and execution performance;
• monitoring changes in the counterparty’s ownership, operating and financial structure;
• timely identification of deviations in investment, demand, revenues, costs, timing and stated capacity;
• analysis of possible economic or industrial causes of renegotiations and suspensions, while keeping legal and accounting assessments separate;
• feeding evidence back into the authority’s subsequent planning so that experience becomes reusable administrative capability.

6. Application example: redevelopment and management of a municipal facility

Before. For a sports facility or a building intended for a public service, the analysis covers demand, reasonably achievable revenues, investment requirements, operating costs, potential operators, access to finance, transferable risks and minimum sustainable scale.

During. Participation, composition of bidding groups, dependence on financiers and suppliers, requests for clarification and withdrawals are observed. Sentinel does not assign scores, evaluate bids or intervene in the contracting authority’s determinations.

After. Actual investment, revenues, timing and operating capacity are compared with the initial assumptions, producing an auditable record of deviations and lessons that can be applied to subsequent projects.

7. Outputs for the administration

• map of the market and potentially relevant operators;
• framework of evidence, assumptions and missing information;
• assessment of market interest, industrial capacity, financing appetite and risk of non-participation;
• decision memorandum setting out required conditions, critical issues and responsibilities;
• lessons-learned note following the procedure or commencement of execution.

8. Conditions requiring a no-go

• public decision, requirement or essential data not sufficiently defined;
• transfer of risks that the market cannot credibly assess, price or manage;
• non-mitigable dependence on a single operator, financier, supplier or economic assumption;
• absence or inconsistency of the economic and financial plan where required;
• failure to involve the competent professionals and bodies in reserved matters;
• a request for Sentinel to replace the RUP, provide legal opinions, undertake design activities, attest or certify the economic and financial plan, evaluate bids, assign scores or perform public oversight functions;
• interactions with private operators that cannot be documented, are unauthorised or are incompatible with impartiality, transparency and equal treatment.

Non-public content

Analytical matrices, parties reviewed, operating sources, documentary checks, FX scenarios, payment structures, blocking conditions and engagement methods are not published. They are prepared exclusively in relation to a qualified need and the specific scope of the mandate.