10 Implementation plan
This Clause translates the project solution (Clause 9) into a system of actions with time frames, resources and those responsible. The result is used as the source data of the management system (Clause 11) and of monitoring (Clause 12).
This Clause does not select or rank the measures of Clause 9 and does not establish the management system of Clause 11. The intensity of detail is determined by 5.1.6.
10.1 General requirements for the implementation plan
10.1.1 Purpose of the implementation plan
The purpose of the implementation plan is to operationalize the project solution (Clause 9) into a system of specific actions that secure the transition from the current state of the territory to the target state described in the vision (Clause 8). The plan determines the sequence, the time frames, the resources and those responsible for each measure of the project solution.
The composition of the measures is inherited from Clause 9 and is not formed anew. The target scenario of measures of 9.2 is not reopened. The plan shall demonstrate a contribution to the objectives refined on the basis of the analysis results (5.4.2–5.4.4) without reproducing the system of objective-setting.
10.1.2 Composition and format of the plan
The implementation plan includes a list of measures. The fields of the name, the type, the link with the objectives, the expected effect, the spatial reference and the indicative cost are inherited from 9.3.3. For each measure the following are additionally indicated:
a) the responsible implementer and the co-implementers, including public and professional initiatives where they are appointed (10.4.1, 10.4.9);
b) the time frames of implementation and the stage of implementation (10.2.1);
c) the volume of confirmed and unconfirmed financing;
d) the mechanisms and sources of financing;
e) the monitoring indicators (in accordance with Annex B; 4.5.7);
f) assignment to the territory of the historic settlement or an effect on the subject of protection of the historic settlement.
In mode A, fields a), b), d) and e) provide the indicators of the achievement of objectives, the time frames, the sources of financing and the responsible implementers for the list of measures for the implementation of the master plan. The measures distinguished by field f) form the list of measures for the sustainable development of the territory of the historic settlement under subparagraph 2 of paragraph 3 of Article 60 of Federal Law No. 73-FZ [1].
10.1.3 Traceability of the measures of the plan
Each measure of the implementation plan shall have a traceable link with:
a) a measure of the project solution (Clause 9);
b) the sustainable development objectives (5.4.2–5.4.4);
c) the identified problem fields and their causes (7.10, 7.13);
d) the elements of the vision of territorial development (Clause 8);
e) the principles of sustainable development (Clause 4).
The chain of traceability is ensured: "measure of the plan — measure of the project solution — objective — problem field — principle". Traceability is documented within the implementation plan. The measures of the plan are related to the fields of iterative analysis (5.4.5).
10.1.4 Creating conditions, rather than prescribing activity
The measures of the implementation plan shall be aimed at creating favourable conditions for the development of the territory (4.1.4). Priority is given to measures for the removal of infrastructural constraints, the formation of institutional conditions and the development of competence.
10.1.5 Cross-sector character
The measures of the implementation plan inherit the cross-sector character of the measures of the project solution (9.3.2; 4.5.5). For each measure the established operational roles of the interested departments are retained. When the measures are decomposed into components, the cultural aspect and the potentials of heritage are integrated into each element of the functional urban model.
10.1.6 Basing on factual data
The implementation plan is formed on the basis of the evidence base of the analysis (7.13.3; 4.5.6), of the financial and investment justification of the project solution (9.8) and of the verification of the measures with the target groups (9.4.5). Decisions taken on the basis of incomplete data are accompanied by an assessment of the risks associated with the incompleteness of the information (5.8.3).
10.2 Staging and prioritization
Staging and prioritization secure the continuity of the process of sustainable development (4.1.3; 4.5.8). The results of the ranking of measures (9.4.3), of the financial and investment justification (9.8), of the pilot projects (9.9) and of reconciliation with the documents of strategic planning (5.5.3) are used.
10.2.1 Time horizons
The measures of the implementation plan are distributed over three time horizons: priority measures — up to and including 3 years; medium-term — over 3 and up to and including 6 years; long-term — over 6 years (5.5.1, item d; 8.4.1). For each horizon a separate block of measures is formed, with an indication of the resources and those responsible. In mode A, measures beyond the term of the master plan are not included in the list of measures for the implementation of the master plan.
10.2.2 Criteria for forming the priority measures
The priority measures include:
a) pilot projects (9.9) as a method of tuning and verifying project solutions before scaling (4.5.8);
b) measures for the removal of critical infrastructural constraints that determine the viability of the territory (4.1.4; 7.4.4), including the conditions of technological connection to engineering networks;
c) measures to complete the formalization of the status of the historic settlement where it is insufficient (5.1.2) and to fill the gaps in the record documentation of cultural heritage objects (7.3.6);
d) where the integral ranking index is applied (9.4.3) — measures with the highest value of the index;
e) measures aimed at preventing irreversible consequences for historical and cultural heritage (7.13.2);
f) measures for the development of the competence of interested parties (9.3.1, item e) as measures that enable the other types of measure;
g) measures supported by confirmed financing;
h) the bringing of the land-use and development rules into conformity with the decisions of the sustainable development documentation for the territory of the historic settlement, with the agreement of the draft land-use and development rules with the cultural heritage protection authority (paragraphs 5–7 of Article 60 of Federal Law No. 73-FZ [1]).
10.2.3 Logic of the sequence of measures
When the sequence of measures is determined, the following dependencies are taken into account:
a) infrastructure measures that remove constraints on development, including technological connection to the networks, precede the investment projects that depend on the availability of infrastructure;
b) organizational measures, including a change in the regulatory framework and the formation of institutions, precede the measures for which they are a necessary condition;
c) measures for the development of the competence of interested parties precede the forms of participation that require a high level of competence (4.2.1, 4.2.4);
d) measures for the formalization of the status of the historic settlement and for the filling of the documentation precede the measures that depend on the existence of an approved subject of protection and of investment passports;
e) pilot projects precede the scaling of the corresponding decisions.
For measures with a long implementation period, intermediate results are determined.
10.2.4 Structuring by blocks of confirmation of financing
The measures of the implementation plan are structured by the blocks of 9.8.5. Proposed investment projects and the measures that enable them are set out in a separate section of the plan and are not taken into account in the calculations of the need for infrastructure and financing until the investor's intentions are confirmed.
10.2.5 Pilot projects as priority measures
Pilot projects (9.9) are included in the priority measures of the implementation plan. For each pilot project the time frames of implementation, the criteria for assessing the results and the feedback mechanism are determined (9.9.3). The results of the implementation of the pilot projects are the basis for a decision on scaling the corresponding measures on the medium-term horizon. Negative results of pilot projects are the basis for the adjustment of the corresponding measures of the project solution (9.14).
10.2.6 Reconciliation with the horizons of the documents of strategic planning
The stages of the implementation plan are linked to the horizons of the documents of strategic planning in force: the Spatial Development Strategy of the Russian Federation, the documents of territorial planning of the Russian Federation and of the subject of the Russian Federation, the master plan (where one exists), the strategies of socio-economic development, the state and municipal programmes, and the national projects (5.5.3). In mode A the stages of the implementation plan coincide with the stages of the list of measures for the implementation of the master plan. Programmes for the integrated development of utility, transport and social infrastructure systems and state programmes are indicated as the mechanisms for the implementation of the measures. Synchronization of the measures of the plan with the budget cycle and with the planning cycles of the programmes in force is ensured. Where there are overlaps with the measures of programmes in force, coordination is ensured in order to avoid duplication or contradictions.
10.3 Resource and financial provision
Resource and financial provision is based on the financial and investment justification of the project solution (9.8) and secures the integration of investment planning (4.4.7). The results of the analysis of budget possibilities and of the investment environment are used (7.5.2, 7.5.6).
10.3.1 Inheritance of the financial and investment justification
The implementation plan is based on the financial and investment justification of the project solution (9.8). The cost estimates, the sources of financing and the results of the comparison with budget possibilities are transferred into the plan, with detail by stages.
10.3.2 Detail of financing by stages and sources
For each stage of implementation (10.2.1) the following are determined:
a) the volume of budget financing, broken down by levels: federal, regional, local;
b) the volume of extra-budgetary investment;
c) the funds of development institutions and of targeted programmes;
d) other sources.
For each measure the volume of confirmed and unconfirmed financing is indicated. For the priority measures the detail is carried out down to specific programmes and budget lines where the information exists.
10.3.3 Multi-channel financing
The multi-channel character of the financing of the measures of the implementation plan is ensured. The attraction of extra-budgetary investment is worked out. The measures are optimized to the financing criteria of federal and regional development institutions (9.8.4). Compatibility of the format of the documentation of the plan with the requirements of the corresponding programmes and support mechanisms is ensured. For the measures for the preservation and integration of heritage (9.3.1, item d) specialized sources of financing are determined.
Regional mechanisms for accompanying investors, including a single window and the plan for bringing cultural heritage objects into economic use, are used as an instrument of implementation and do not replace the implementation plan of the historic settlement (4.4.5).
10.3.4 Budgetary sustainability
The list of measures the implementation of which is provided for from budget funds is formed on the basis of the forecast balance of the budget of the public-law entity (a subject of the Russian Federation and/or a municipality) for the horizon of the priority stage. Confirmed forecast revenues are revenues provided for by the law (decision) on the budget or by an approved forecast of socio-economic development and of the budget. Extra-budgetary sources are not included in that limit and are indicated separately. Expenditure of the priority stage from budget funds shall not exceed the confirmed forecast revenues of the corresponding budget.
10.3.5 Verification of the realism of the financial model
A retrospective analysis of expenditure by fields (9.4.4) is applied to the priority stage of the implementation plan. If the cost of the measures of the priority stage exceeds the actual expenditure in the corresponding field over recent years by several times or by an order of magnitude, and there is no justification of the sources of financing, the sustainability of the plan is called into question and an adjustment of the composition of the measures or of the sources is required.
10.3.6 Non-financial resources
The implementation plan takes into account the need for non-financial resources:
a) personnel resources, including the availability of specialists in the field of restoration, preservation of heritage and urban planning (data of 6.4.6, analysis of 7.5.5); where there is a deficit, measures for the training of personnel are included in the priority measures;
b) land resources: the availability of the land plots necessary for the implementation of the measures, and the legal regime of the land plots;
c) engineering capacities: the availability of spare capacities of the engineering infrastructure and clear conditions of technological connection; where they are insufficient, measures for increasing them are determined, taking into account the sequence (10.2.3);
d) information resources: the availability of the data necessary for the implementation of the measures (data of Clause 6).
10.4 Those responsible, coordination and the participation of interested parties
The organization of coordination and of the participation of interested parties secures the integrated approach and the cross-sector management model (4.5.5), the participation of interested parties (4.2.4), the coordination of state protection and development (4.5.4) and the leadership of governing bodies (4.5.9). The groups of interested parties identified under 5.2.1 participate. This subclause appoints those responsible and the forms of implementation of the plan and does not replace the implementation management system of Clause 11.
10.4.1 Appointment of those responsible
For each measure of the implementation plan the principal responsible implementer and the co-implementers from related sectors are determined. Those responsible are inherited from the measures of the project solution (9.3.2). The responsible implementer or a co-implementer may be a public authority, an organization, or a public or professional initiative (10.4.9). The appointment is recorded in the fields of 10.1.2.
For measures that affect cultural heritage objects and the historic environment, the person responsible for ensuring compliance with the protection regimes and with the requirements for the quality of interventions is determined.
10.4.2 Implementation coordinating body
For the coordination of the implementation of the plan it is recommended that a working group (project office) be formed (3.3.7), including representatives of the public authorities in the field of territorial development, urban planning and heritage protection, of business, of the professional community, of public organizations in the field of heritage, representatives of residents, and of educational and scientific organizations (5.2.1). The working group (project office) secures the coordination of the implementation of the plan, the legitimacy of decisions and the taking into account of the interests of interested parties. The composition, the powers and the procedure of work are determined by a regulation approved by the authorized body.
The working group (project office) coordinates the plan as a whole and does not replace the implementers of the measures. A single project office is not the only form of implementation of the plan (10.4.9). This clause does not establish the organizational structure of the management system of Clause 11. In the absence of a working group (project office) and of a coordinating body (11.2.1), their functions established by Clauses 10–12 are performed by the authorized body (3.3.8).
10.4.3 Principles of decision-making
Transparency and the documentability of decisions on implementation are ensured (4.5.10). Decisions are taken on the basis of consensus, with the possibility of recording and publishing dissenting opinions. Where proposals of participants are rejected, a reasoned justification is formed. Leadership of the management in the implementation of sustainable development decisions is ensured (4.5.9). The implementation of the plan is linked to the formalized assessments of the activity of governing bodies that are in force on the date of development of the documentation.
10.4.4 Expert support
For the assessment of sectoral questions of implementation and of the conformity of measures with the objectives and with the quality requirements, internal experts from the working group and external experts are engaged. Quality control points are determined at the key stages of the implementation of measures: intermediate results, pilot sections, stages of work, acceptance. The expert assessment is documented and is part of the evidence base for the quality of implementation.
10.4.5 Cross-sector coordination
Mechanisms for the coordination of cross-sectoral measures are ensured (4.5.5). For each measure the operational roles of the interested departments are recorded. When the measures of the plan are decomposed into components, the cultural aspect and the potentials of heritage are integrated into each element of the functional urban model. Regular meetings of the coordinating body are held with an established periodicity. On individual questions special meetings are held: exchange of information, design of decisions, taking of decisions. All decisions of the meetings are minuted.
10.4.6 Participation of interested parties during implementation
The informing of the target groups on the progress of implementation of the plan and the collection of feedback at each stage are ensured (4.2.4). A register of interested parties is kept, with the tracking of comments and proposals received. A plan of regular information on the progress of implementation is formed. For each stage of implementation the formats of participation of interested parties are determined. The development of the competence of interested parties in the field of sustainable development and the preservation of heritage is regarded as a condition that enables the quality of their participation (4.2.1; 5.2.3). All comments of interested parties are recorded and considered by the coordinating body, with a plan of action determined for each communication.
10.4.7 Management of communications during implementation
The formats and channels of communication between the participants in implementation are determined. The accessibility of information on the progress of implementation for all participants is ensured (4.5.10). The information system for implementation management serves as an instrument of coordination (11.6). A response to communications from the participants in implementation within the established time frames is ensured.
10.4.8 Operational monitoring by the coordinating body
The working group (project office) ensures regular operational monitoring of the implementation of the plan: fulfilment of the schedule, conformity of the measures with the quality requirements, fulfilment of decisions and instructions. On the basis of the results of operational monitoring, management actions are formed: adjustment of time frames, resources and those responsible. Operational monitoring differs from the monitoring of the achievement of the sustainable development objectives (Clause 12) and provides for the management of the current progress of the work.
10.4.9 System of support for public and professional initiatives
In addition to the single coordinating body of the plan, a system of support is formed for public and professional initiatives and organizations that may implement individual fields of measures or individual measures (4.1.4, 4.2.4). The support system creates legal, institutional, informational and resource conditions for the initiatives of residents, public organizations, professional communities, educational and scientific organizations, and bearer communities of practices.
An initiative may be the responsible implementer or a co-implementer of a field of measures or of an individual measure. The appointment is recorded in the fields of 10.1.2. Local initiatives taken into account in the project solution (9.11.3) receive an implementer and support at the stage of the plan.
Initiatives are not taken out of the implementation plan. For measures implemented by initiatives, traceability (10.1.3), time frames and stages (10.2), the requirements for the preservation of heritage (10.5), the quality matrix (10.5.3) and the plan of response to a substantial adverse change in external conditions (10.7.2) are retained. The coordinating body ensures the reconciliation of the initiatives with one another and with the budget cycle and does not duplicate the management system of Clause 11.
10.5 Requirements for the preservation of heritage during implementation
The requirements of this subclause are applied at the stage of implementation, and not only at the stage of design. The quality matrix (9.12.1) and the assessment under 7.12 are used.
10.5.1 Protocols for the protection of heritage during the implementation of projects
During the implementation of infrastructure and investment projects on the territory of the historic settlement, the preservation of cultural heritage objects, of the elements of the subject of protection of the historic settlement, of archaeological objects and of other attributes of historical and cultural value is ensured. For projects implemented in the immediate vicinity of cultural heritage objects or on territories with archaeological potential, protocols for the suspension of work in the event of unforeseen finds are established.
The implementation plan determines measures to minimize the adverse effects of construction work on the historic environment and on heritage objects, including vibration, dust and loads on the foundations of adjoining historic buildings.
10.5.2 Iterative assessment of effects and of impact at the stage of implementation
The assessment under 7.12 is carried out iteratively at the stage of implementation: the condition of the elements of the subject of protection (7.12.1) and the indirect conditions affecting the subject of protection and the historic environment (7.12.2) are tracked. In the event of unforeseen adverse effects the mitigation hierarchy is applied (4.3.6). Where incompatibility with the subject of protection or a substantial indirect effect leading to degradation is identified, the decision to suspend the implementation of a measure of the implementation plan, to exclude it or to revise it is taken by the coordinating body with the involvement of an independent assessment under 7.12 (10.4.2, 10.4.4); in the absence of a coordinating body, by the authorized body (3.3.8). This clause establishes the decision on a measure of the plan and does not regulate the suspension of work: work is suspended in the cases and in the procedure established by the legislation of the Russian Federation, including paragraphs 4 and 7 of Article 36 of Federal Law No. 73-FZ [1].
10.5.3 Quality matrix at the stages of implementation and operation
The quality matrix (9.12.1) is applied at the stages of construction and operation. The control of conformity is ensured by the coordinating body (10.4.2) with the involvement of experts (10.4.4). The assessment under 7.12 is not replaced by the quality matrix (10.5.2).
10.5.4 Management of change in the historic environment
Any changes in the historic environment that arise in the course of the implementation of measures are checked for compatibility with the subject of protection of the historic settlement and with the protection regimes of cultural heritage objects (4.3.8). The recording of the elements of the subject of protection to be preserved provides the basis, beyond which development is permitted.
Protection obligations and technical condition reports are regarded as documents of investment readiness that are updated and are maintained in the course of implementation, and are not recorded once at the moment of transfer of the object.
The bringing of objects into economic use during the implementation of the plan is checked under 5.4.4, item i). The digital catalogue of investment proposals belongs to open data and does not replace the information system (11.6; 6.9.4).
10.5.5 Intangible heritage during implementation
The implementation of measures shall not destroy the spatial conditions of the transmission of intangible practices: the places, routes and public spaces of occurrence (4.3.5; 9.5.5). Bearer communities participate in work that affects those conditions.
10.6 Link with urban-planning documentation and the management system
The implementation plan secures consistency with the documents of territorial planning (4.3.8, 4.5.4) and the source data for the implementation management system (Clause 11) and for monitoring (Clause 12). The results of the check of the consistency of the project solution with the documents of territorial planning are used (9.10).
10.6.1 Coordination with the documents of territorial planning
The implementation plan secures consistency with the master plan (where one exists), the general plan, the land-use and development rules, the schemes of territorial planning, the territory planning projects and other documents of territorial planning and urban-planning zoning. The list of documents to be developed or updated for the implementation of sustainable development measures (9.10.2) is included in the implementation plan, with an indication of the time frames, those responsible and the procedure of development or updating. Measures for the updating of documentation are included in the priority measures.
Conformity of the functional zones, the territorial zones and the types of permitted use of land plots is ensured. The materials of the vision (8.3.5) are joined to the documents of territorial planning by this clause without lowering the requirements of this standard.
10.6.2 The urban-planning part as an element of the plan
On the basis of the project solution, proposals are formed for amendments to the general plan or the master plan, to the planning designs and to the land-use and development rules (9.10.2). In the implementation plan, specific time frames, those responsible and the procedure of development and of passage through the approval procedures are determined for these proposals. In mode B the urban-planning part may be developed sequentially after the approval of the strategic part of the project solution. In mode A the land-use and development rules and the territory planning projects are prepared sequentially; the time frames of their preparation take into account the period for bringing the land-use and development rules into conformity with the master plan. Until the approval of the land-use and development rules prepared in relation to the territories of historic settlements of federal significance, territory planning projects and land-survey designs within the boundaries of the territory of such a historic settlement are agreed with the federal cultural heritage protection authority (paragraph 8 of Article 60 of Federal Law No. 73-FZ [1]).
10.6.3 Securing the source data for the implementation management system
The implementation plan secures the source data for the implementation management system (Clause 11): the composition of the measures, the time frames, those responsible and the indicators determine the requirements for the organizational structure (11.2), project management (11.3), the coordination of participants (11.4) and the information system (11.6).
10.6.4 Securing the source data for monitoring
The implementation plan secures the source data for the monitoring system (Clause 12): each measure of the plan is linked to measurable monitoring indicators from the system of sustainable development indicators (in accordance with Annex B). Feedback from monitoring to the implementation plan is ensured: the results of monitoring (Clause 12) are the basis for updating the plan (10.9).
10.7 Risk management during implementation
Risk management during implementation uses the results of the analysis of risks and opportunities (7.11.3) and provides for a response to a substantial change in external conditions in the course of implementation.
10.7.1 Identification of implementation risks
On the basis of the results of the analysis of risks and opportunities (7.11.3), the following risks are identified for the implementation plan:
a) financial: insufficiency of financing, a change in budget conditions, withdrawal of investors;
b) legal: a change in the regulatory framework, conflicts of constraints;
c) organizational: a deficit of personnel, insufficient coordination;
d) risks for heritage: unforeseen effects on cultural heritage objects and the historic environment;
e) environmental: an adverse effect on the environment; the climatic parameters of the territory are taken into account as a factor of the condition of the historic environment (7.6.3) without the introduction of separate mandatory climate requirements;
f) social: resistance of interested parties, conflicts of interest, risks of displacement.
For each risk the probability, the scale of the consequences and the response plan are determined.
10.7.2 Plan of response to a substantial adverse change in external conditions
The measures that are subject to suspension in the event of a substantial adverse change in external conditions — economic, social, environmental, legal — are determined. When the plan of response to a substantial adverse change in external conditions is formed, the measures are ranked by the priority of preservation. The highest priority of preservation is given to measures aimed at preventing irreversible consequences for historical and cultural heritage (7.13.2), and also to measures with confirmed financing and with obligations that have been accepted. The plan of response to a substantial adverse change in external conditions is activated by a decision of the coordinating body (10.4.2) when the grounds indicated in this clause arise.
10.7.3 Formation of the register of implementation risks
The register of implementation risks is formed on the basis of the analysis of risks and opportunities (7.11.3) and of the identification of risks under 10.7.1. Updating of the register of implementation risks is carried out by the coordinating body within operational monitoring (10.4.8).
10.8 Requirements for the documentation of the implementation plan
The documentation of the implementation plan secures its use in forming the management system (Clause 11) and in monitoring (Clause 12), and its accessibility for interested parties (8.9, 9.13; 4.5.10).
10.8.1 Composition of the documentation of the implementation plan
The implementation plan is documented as comprising:
a) the list of measures with the characteristics under 10.1.2;
b) the schedule, with an indication of the stages, the intermediate results and the dependencies (10.2);
c) the resource statement, broken down by sources and stages (10.3);
d) map-schemes of the measures by stages of implementation, with a spatial reference;
e) the register of implementation risks and the plan of response to a substantial adverse change in external conditions (10.7);
f) the appointment of those responsible, including public and professional initiatives (10.4.1, 10.4.9).
The documentation secures the source data for the implementation management system (Clause 11) and for monitoring (Clause 12). The documentation shall be updated and made available for use by interested parties (4.5.10).
10.8.2 Public version of the implementation plan
The public version of the implementation plan is formed as an accessible presentation for the target groups (8.9.2). The specific character of the stage is: the stages, the time frames, the volumes of financing, those responsible and the expected effects; map-schemes of the measures by stages, infographics of the key indicators, interactive maps where the technical possibility exists. In mode A the list of measures for the implementation of the master plan, if it is approved as a separate document, and its current edition are published (5.1.7, item f).
10.8.3 Traceability in the documentation
The documentation secures full traceability: for each measure of the plan the chain "measure of the plan — measure of the project solution (Clause 9) — objective (5.4.2–5.4.4) — problem field (7.13) — principle (Clause 4)" is traced. The results of verification with the target groups (9.4.5), the results of the assessment under 7.12 (10.5.2) and the results of operational monitoring (10.4.8) are documented.
10.8.4 Structured results
The results of this Clause that are included in its documentation are presented as structured data in a machine-readable form (8.9.5).
10.9 Adaptability of the implementation plan
The adaptability of the implementation plan is secured by the mechanism of review and updating of objectives under 5.7 (the PDCA cycle, the grounds for review), with the particulars established in 10.9.1–10.9.3.
10.9.1 Cycle of review of the implementation plan
The recommended periodicity of review is: for the priority measures — annually; for the medium-term measures — once every 3–5 years; for the long-term measures — when the conditions change substantially. Updating implies not only the adjustment of existing measures, but also the inclusion of new ones.
10.9.2 Grounds for updating the plan
The grounds for updating the implementation plan are the events indicated in 5.7.2 for the review of objectives, and also the results of pilot projects (9.9.3, 10.2.5), a change in budget conditions or the confirmation of previously unconfirmed financing, a review of the vision (8.10) or of the project solution (9.14), and the results of the assessment under 7.12 that have revealed unforeseen consequences (10.5.2). In mode A the updating of the implementation plan is carried out in the procedure for amending the master plan or the list of measures for its implementation.
10.9.3 Securing continuity
When the implementation plan is updated, continuity is ensured and the loss of previously achieved agreements, of confirmed obligations and of the accumulated evidence base shall not be permitted, while adaptability to new conditions is preserved. When the plan is reviewed, the re-engagement of interested parties is ensured (10.4.6, 10.4.9). The results of the updating are documented, with an indication of the grounds for the changes made.