{
  "name": "The assurance framework",
  "description": "What to examine on a capital programme, from first estimate to operating asset, arranged by the four stages of the project to asset lifecycle. Every domain names the published requirements it rests on, and says where it rests on inference instead.",
  "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework",
  "publisher": {
    "name": "Projects Advisors",
    "url": "https://projects-advisors.com"
  },
  "schema_version": "1.0",
  "content_version": "2026-09-20",
  "source_edition": {
    "language": "en",
    "canonical": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework",
    "note": "English is the source edition for this dataset."
  },
  "license": {
    "name": "Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International",
    "id": "CC-BY-4.0",
    "url": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/",
    "applies_to": "The framework data in this file: the domains, their questions, tests and arrangement.",
    "attribution": "The assurance framework, Projects Advisors, https://projects-advisors.com/framework, CC BY 4.0",
    "excluded": [
      "The articles linked from this file, which remain under the site terms at https://projects-advisors.com/terms",
      "The site’s code and interactive tools, which are all rights reserved",
      "The quoted requirement text of third party standards, which belongs to its publishers and is cited here rather than licensed"
    ],
    "terms": "https://projects-advisors.com/licence"
  },
  "generated": "2026-10-14",
  "domain_count": 23,
  "stages": [
    {
      "slug": "inception-and-development",
      "number": "01",
      "name": "Inception & Development",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/lifecycle/inception-and-development"
    },
    {
      "slug": "delivery-and-controls",
      "number": "02",
      "name": "Delivery & Controls",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/lifecycle/delivery-and-controls"
    },
    {
      "slug": "handover-and-transition",
      "number": "03",
      "name": "Handover & Transition",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/lifecycle/handover-and-transition"
    },
    {
      "slug": "operations-and-asset-management",
      "number": "04",
      "name": "Operations & Asset Management",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/lifecycle/operations-and-asset-management"
    }
  ],
  "domains": [
    {
      "slug": "need-and-outcome",
      "number": "01.1",
      "name": "Need and outcome",
      "stage": "inception-and-development",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/inception-and-development/need-and-outcome",
      "question": "Is there a stated outcome this asset is meant to produce, written down separately from a description of the asset itself?",
      "why": "When the outcome is never separated from the solution, every later question collapses into whether the thing was built as drawn. It becomes impossible to ask whether it should have been that thing, because no record survives of what it was for. Programmes in this condition can be delivered perfectly and still deliver nothing.",
      "tests": [
        "Find the document stating the outcome. If the only answer is a business case appendix nobody has opened since sanction, note that as the finding.",
        "Check whether the outcome is expressed as something measurable after handover, rather than as completion of the project.",
        "Establish who owns the outcome after the delivery organisation disbands. A named role, not a department.",
        "Compare the outcome as written at sanction with the outcome as described now. Drift between the two is normal; undocumented drift is the finding."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 4.1, requiring the organisation to determine external and internal issues relevant to its purpose and affecting its ability to achieve the intended outcomes of the asset management system.",
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 6.2.2, requiring asset management objectives to be measurable, monitored and consistent with the organisational objectives.",
        "ISO 21502:2020, Clause 5, on prerequisites for formalizing project management, and Clause 7 practices covering benefit management.",
        "PMBOK Guide, Eighth Edition, November 2025, which carries focus on value among its six core principles."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/doing-the-project-right-and-doing-the-right-project",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/every-appraisal-can-be-right-and-the-portfolio-still-wrong",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/whether-it-was-worth-doing-is-the-least-evaluated-question"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "decision-making-framework",
      "number": "01.2",
      "name": "The decision-making framework",
      "stage": "inception-and-development",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/inception-and-development/decision-making-framework",
      "question": "Are the criteria by which options were chosen written down, and is it recorded who was entitled to choose?",
      "why": "This requirement was added to ISO 55001 in its 2024 edition, and it asks for something that may exist only as habit. Without recorded criteria, an option appraisal cannot be audited: there is no standard against which to say the wrong option was selected, only a preference against a preference. It also makes delegation invisible, so nobody can establish afterwards whether the person who committed the money was entitled to.",
      "tests": [
        "Ask for the documented decision-making criteria. Their absence is itself a nonconformity against ISO 55001:2024, not merely a weakness.",
        "Check that the criteria cover the whole life of the asset and not only capital cost. Criteria that stop at delivery will select assets that are cheap to build and expensive to own.",
        "Trace one significant option decision back through the criteria and confirm the recorded rationale matches them.",
        "Confirm delegation limits exist in writing, and test one commitment against them.",
        "Check the methods and tools used are stated, since the standard requires these alongside the criteria."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 4.5, asset management decision-making, comprising 4.5.1 Framework, 4.5.2 Criteria and 4.5.3 Methods, processes and tools. This subclause is new in the second edition; it has no counterpart in ISO 55001:2014.",
        "PMBOK Guide, Eighth Edition, November 2025, which carries governance as one of its seven performance domains.",
        "ISO 21502:2020, Clause 6, on the project governance framework."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/weighting-and-scoring-is-the-method-the-guidance-warns-against",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/iso-55001-now-requires-you-to-write-down-how-you-decide",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/doing-the-project-right-and-doing-the-right-project",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/the-score-that-is-not-a-number"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "definition-maturity",
      "number": "01.3",
      "name": "Definition maturity and the estimate",
      "stage": "inception-and-development",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/inception-and-development/definition-maturity",
      "question": "Does the estimate state the class it was produced at, and does that class match the scope definition actually achieved?",
      "why": "An estimate class is a statement about how much was known, not about how hard anyone worked. When a number produced at low definition is carried forward into a sanction paper without its range, the organisation commits to a figure that was never a commitment. The overrun that follows is then investigated as a delivery failure, which it is not.",
      "tests": [
        "Find the declared estimate class. An estimate with no declared class cannot be assured, only re-performed.",
        "Test the declared class against the definition deliverables actually complete at the time, since deliverable maturity is the sole primary determinant of class.",
        "Confirm the correct industry addendum was applied. The building and general construction ranges do not apply to transport infrastructure, tunnels, dams, or one-of-a-kind assets such as stadiums and health facilities.",
        "Check the accuracy range travelled with the number into the sanction paper, and whether the board saw a range or a point.",
        "Establish whether contingency was set at a stated confidence level, and whether anyone senior understands that a P50 estimate is designed to be exceeded about half the time."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "AACE International Recommended Practice 56R-08, cost estimate classification for the building and general construction industries, revision of 7 August 2020.",
        "AACE International Recommended Practice 18R-97, the process industries equivalent, 2 February 2005.",
        "PMBOK Guide, Eighth Edition, November 2025, which carries finance as one of its seven performance domains."
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/an-estimate-is-a-measure-of-scope-definition",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/the-largest-cause-of-optimism-bias-is-the-business-case"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "whole-life-cost",
      "number": "01.4",
      "name": "Whole-life cost and the operating consequence",
      "stage": "inception-and-development",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/inception-and-development/whole-life-cost",
      "question": "Has the cost of owning this asset been estimated by, or at least shown to, the people who will have to pay it?",
      "why": "Where capital and operating budgets sit in different organisations with different reporting lines, the design decisions that fix operating cost are taken entirely inside the first. The operator inherits a cost they did not forecast and cannot now avoid. That is a transfer of unpriced obligation, and it happens without anyone breaching a control.",
      "tests": [
        "Ask whether an operating cost estimate exists at all. If it does not, that is the finding.",
        "Identify who produced it. An operating estimate produced by the delivery team, with no operator involvement, is a delivery assumption rather than a forecast.",
        "Check whether any design decision has been reversed or altered on operating cost grounds. If none ever has, whole-life costing is presentational.",
        "Confirm the financial and technical views of the asset use the same asset breakdown, since alignment between them is the subject of its own standard."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 6.2.1, requiring a strategic asset management plan documenting the role of the asset management system in achieving the asset management objectives.",
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 8.1, which in the second edition makes explicit that operational planning and control includes life cycle management.",
        "ISO/TS 55010, guidance on the alignment of the financial and non-financial functions of the organisation in asset management.",
        "ISO 55000:2024, which states alignment among its principles: asset management aligns financial, technical and operational decisions with the organizational objectives."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        },
        {
          "label": "ISO 55000:2024, vocabulary, overview and principles",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83053.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the full text."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/operations-takes-part-in-the-business-case-nobody-asks-it-to-sign",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/a-lifecycle-ratio-nobody-can-check",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/outcome-contracts-and-the-asset-management-system",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/operational-control-now-says-life-cycle-management"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "information-requirements-set-early",
      "number": "01.5",
      "name": "Information requirements, set before design",
      "stage": "inception-and-development",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/inception-and-development/information-requirements-set-early",
      "question": "Has the owner stated what it will need to know in order to run this asset, before the design that produces the information begins?",
      "why": "Handover specifications can be written the other way round: someone lists what a contractor can readily produce and hopes it turns out to be useful. The standard asks the harder question first, and the harder question is the easier one to skip. Information requirements set after design has started cannot change what is captured, only what is compiled.",
      "tests": [
        "Find the organizational information requirements. Then check the asset information requirements derive from them rather than from a document schedule.",
        "Confirm the requirements name decisions, not deliverables. \"Everything the contractor produces\" is not a requirement.",
        "Check the date. Requirements issued after detailed design has begun are a compilation exercise.",
        "Establish whether operations were consulted, and whether anyone in operations can name the requirement."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 19650-3, information management during the operational phase of assets, under which asset information requirements derive from organizational information requirements.",
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 7.6, data and information, revised in the second edition; ISO/TC 251’s guidance says the revision clarifies how data and information differ and makes the requirements clearer and more concise."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/what-handover-costs-the-people-who-inherit-it",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/nothing-tells-you-when-a-record-stopped-being-true",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/the-ground-was-always-there-the-record-was-not"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "sanction-governance",
      "number": "01.6",
      "name": "Sanction and the authority to stop",
      "stage": "inception-and-development",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/inception-and-development/sanction-governance",
      "question": "Who is entitled to stop this, and have they ever been given information that would let them?",
      "why": "Capital governance can be well equipped to approve and poorly equipped to halt. Stage gates that cannot realistically return a negative answer are reporting events wearing the clothes of a control. The test of a gate is not whether it exists but whether anything has ever failed one.",
      "tests": [
        "Ask how many gates have been failed, deferred with conditions, or passed with conditions never subsequently closed. The last category is the most informative.",
        "Check whether the body approving the gate receives the estimate range or the estimate point.",
        "Establish whether the person chairing the gate carries delivery accountability. Where they do, note that the control and the thing being controlled share an owner.",
        "Confirm the gate criteria were set before the submission was prepared."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 21502:2020, Clause 6, on the project governance framework and managing the delivery of a project.",
        "PMBOK Guide, Eighth Edition, November 2025, governance performance domain.",
        "Global Internal Audit Standards, Institute of Internal Auditors, effective 9 January 2025, on governance of the internal audit function and the role of the board."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 21502:2020, guidance on project management",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/74947.html",
          "note": "The link carries the abstract and publication details, not the guidance text."
        },
        {
          "label": "Global Internal Audit Standards, Institute of Internal Auditors",
          "url": "https://www.theiia.org/en/standards/2024-standards/global-internal-audit-standards/"
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/a-gate-that-has-never-been-failed-is-not-a-control",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/the-largest-cause-of-optimism-bias-is-the-business-case"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "baseline-integrity",
      "number": "02.1",
      "name": "Baseline integrity",
      "stage": "delivery-and-controls",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/delivery-and-controls/baseline-integrity",
      "question": "Is the baseline currently being reported against the one that was sanctioned, and if not, is every step between the two documented?",
      "why": "Performance reporting is only meaningful relative to a baseline, so a baseline that has quietly moved makes every subsequent report defensible and useless. A programme need not lose the baseline in one visible event. It can go in a series of small re-baselines, each individually reasonable, none of which is wrong on its own terms. No single report shows the cumulative movement, so it can go unexamined.",
      "tests": [
        "Reconcile the current baseline to the sanctioned baseline in one continuous chain. The inability to do this is the finding.",
        "Count the re-baselines and read the approval for each. Check who approved them and whether that person also owned the performance being re-based.",
        "Compare current forecast against the original sanction figure, not against the most recent baseline. That comparison carries the cumulative movement.",
        "Check whether scope was removed to hold cost. Descoping presented as underspend is a quiet failure: it reads as success."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 21502:2020, Clause 7, management practices covering planning, scope, schedule, cost and change control.",
        "PMBOK Guide, Eighth Edition, November 2025, scope, schedule and finance performance domains."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 21502:2020, guidance on project management",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/74947.html",
          "note": "The link carries the abstract and publication details, not the guidance text."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/every-programme-performs-well-against-a-baseline-it-can-move",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/the-critical-path-cannot-show-a-delay-nobody-scheduled",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/a-forecast-that-never-moves-is-not-stable-it-is-unexamined",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/moving-a-date-is-not-the-same-as-re-planning"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "change-control",
      "number": "02.2",
      "name": "Change, planned and unplanned",
      "stage": "delivery-and-controls",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/delivery-and-controls/change-control",
      "question": "Are changes assessed before they are made, and does anyone examine changes that were made without being assessed?",
      "why": "Change control functions well on changes that enter it. Its weakness is definitional: it can only govern what somebody classified as a change. The consequential ones can be reclassified as clarifications, design development, or site instructions, and they are then invisible to the register that was built to catch them. Asset management now treats planned change as a requirement in its own right, separately from change control.",
      "tests": [
        "Sample instructions, technical queries and site decisions that did not enter the change register, and test whether any altered cost, programme or operating characteristics.",
        "Check whether the change assessment considers operating consequence, or only capital cost and time.",
        "Establish whether changes are assessed before implementation or ratified afterwards. Retrospective approval rates tell you what the control actually is.",
        "Confirm planned changes to the asset management system itself are assessed for risk and carried out in a planned manner, which the second edition requires separately."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 6.3, planning of changes, new in the second edition.",
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 8.2, control of change.",
        "ISO 21502:2020, Clause 7, change control practice."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/auditing-a-capital-programme-while-it-runs",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/an-extension-of-time-is-tested-against-records-made-during-the-delay"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "forecast-credibility",
      "number": "02.3",
      "name": "Forecast credibility",
      "stage": "delivery-and-controls",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/delivery-and-controls/forecast-credibility",
      "question": "Does the forecast reflect what is now known, or does it reflect what was committed?",
      "why": "A forecast that never moves is not stable, it is unexamined. A programme can hold a forecast at the approved figure until the evidence becomes undeniable, at which point the whole variance appears in one period and is reported as a sudden deterioration. It was not sudden. The information existed and the forecast was not permitted to carry it.",
      "tests": [
        "Plot the forecast over time. A flat line followed by a step is the signature of a suppressed forecast, not a well-controlled one.",
        "Check whether known risks that have already materialised are in the forecast or still in the risk register.",
        "Establish who is permitted to move the forecast, and whether that person reports to whoever is accountable for the number.",
        "Test contingency drawdown against progress. Contingency consumed faster than scope completed is an early and legible warning."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "AACE International Recommended Practice 56R-08 and 18R-97 on estimate classification and expected accuracy.",
        "PMBOK Guide, Eighth Edition, November 2025, finance performance domain.",
        "ISO 21502:2020, Clause 7, cost management practice."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "AACE International RP 56R-08, cost estimate classification for building and general construction, rev. 7 August 2020",
          "url": "https://web.aacei.org/docs/default-source/toc/toc_56r-08.pdf",
          "note": "A five-page sample of the 21-page RP, published free. It carries Table 1 (the classification matrix with the accuracy ranges) and the paragraphs that qualify it. The deliverables maturity matrix that determines the class, Table 3, is not among the sample pages. Until 5 September 2026 this entry called the sample a table of contents, which it is not."
        },
        {
          "label": "ISO 21502:2020, guidance on project management",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/74947.html",
          "note": "The link carries the abstract and publication details, not the guidance text."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/a-forecast-that-never-moves-is-not-stable-it-is-unexamined",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/your-contingency-and-their-contingency-are-different-money",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/private-projects-overrun-too-the-difference-is-who-counts",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/a-dashboard-computed-from-your-own-beliefs-is-not-information"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "externally-provided",
      "number": "02.4",
      "name": "Externally provided processes and services",
      "stage": "delivery-and-controls",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/delivery-and-controls/externally-provided",
      "question": "Where activities that affect the asset have been placed outside the organisation, has the organisation retained the ability to know whether they were done?",
      "why": "Outsourcing transfers activity, not accountability, and the gap between the two is where assurance quietly stops. The 2024 edition retitled the requirement from outsourcing to externally provided processes, products, technologies and services. ISO/TC 251 says the requirements did not substantially change; on this publication’s reading, the four nouns describe arrangements an organisation may never have treated as outsourcing: platforms, data services, proprietary systems whose behaviour the owner cannot inspect.",
      "tests": [
        "List what has been externally provided, including technologies and data services, not only contracted works and consultancy.",
        "For each, identify what the organisation retains that lets it verify performance independently of the provider.",
        "Check whether the owner holds more or less programme information than its tier one contractors. Where the imbalance is wide, note it as a transfer risk crystallising at handover rather than as a delivery issue.",
        "Confirm the contract requires the information the owner will need to operate, and not merely the information the provider finds convenient to produce."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 8.3, externally provided processes, products, technologies and services, retitled from Outsourcing in the 2014 edition. ISO/TC 251 states the change follows the ISO Harmonized Structure and does not substantially change the requirements.",
        "PMBOK Guide, Eighth Edition, November 2025, which expands coverage of procurement.",
        "FIDIC Conditions of Contract, 2017 edition, Sub-Clause 10.1."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/you-can-place-the-activity-outside-not-the-accountability",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/outcome-contracts-and-the-asset-management-system",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/reliability-can-be-specified-like-mass",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/the-payment-chain-is-a-loan-and-the-contractor-is-the-lender",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/every-award-rule-makes-you-publish-the-weighting"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "interface-coverage",
      "number": "02.5",
      "name": "Interfaces between packages and functions",
      "stage": "delivery-and-controls",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/delivery-and-controls/interface-coverage",
      "question": "Has anyone examined the seams, as distinct from examining each of the things the seams join?",
      "why": "Assurance is bought by function and by package, and each buyer receives a report on their own scope. The arithmetic error is to assume that adding those reports produces coverage of the programme. It does not, because programme risk is not additive across functions: the interactions between packages generate exposures that no single package review is scoped to see, and the failure appears in whichever package is least able to absorb it.",
      "tests": [
        "Draw the interfaces. Then ask whose assurance scope each one falls inside. The ones falling inside nobody are the finding.",
        "Check whether any review has been scoped across two packages rather than within one.",
        "Test the schedule logic between packages, in particular where one package holds float that another package is relying on.",
        "Establish who owns interface risk in the contract structure, and whether that party has the information to manage it."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "Global Internal Audit Standards, Institute of Internal Auditors, effective 9 January 2025, on risk-based planning.",
        "ISO 21502:2020, Clause 6, integrated project management practices."
      ],
      "inference": "The standards require risk-based planning and integrated practice. Neither states that coverage is non-additive across functions, or that interfaces generate exposures invisible to package-level review. That reading is this publication’s, argued from how assurance is procured on large programmes rather than from any clause.",
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/auditing-a-capital-programme-while-it-runs"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "assurance-competence",
      "number": "02.6",
      "name": "Competence of whoever is assuring",
      "stage": "delivery-and-controls",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/delivery-and-controls/assurance-competence",
      "question": "Do the people performing this assurance understand the thing they are examining, and where they do not, is the gap covered by someone who does?",
      "why": "A reviewer who cannot read a programme, price a variation or interpret a technical query will examine the controls surrounding those activities and report on the controls. That is a real finding about a real control environment, and it is not a finding about the programme. Where the report does not draw that distinction, the reader concludes the programme was examined when the paperwork around it was.",
      "tests": [
        "Read the team composition against the subject matter. Then read the conclusions and ask which of them required knowledge the team did not have.",
        "Where a specialist was used, check the reviewer retained responsibility for the conclusion rather than adopting the specialist opinion wholesale.",
        "Establish whether competence requirements were determined and documented before the work was scoped.",
        "Check whether the assurance provider has ever declined a scope on competence grounds. A provider that never has may not be assessing it."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 7.2, competence, requiring the organisation to determine necessary competence and retain documented information as evidence.",
        "ISO 55012, people involvement and competence in asset management.",
        "Global Internal Audit Standards, Institute of Internal Auditors, effective 9 January 2025, on proficiency and due professional care.",
        "ISA 620, using the work of an auditor’s expert, and ISA 610, using the work of internal auditors."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/competence-on-a-capital-programme-audit",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/the-competence-you-need-is-not-in-the-asset-management-function"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "information-transfer",
      "number": "03.1",
      "name": "Information transfer against stated requirements",
      "stage": "handover-and-transition",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/handover-and-transition/information-transfer",
      "question": "Was what was delivered tested against what was asked for, by someone who will have to use it?",
      "why": "Document acceptance and information transfer are different events, and only the first has a procedure attached. A pack can be complete against its register, accepted by the party who commissioned it, and still not answer the questions operations will ask in its first year. The cost of the difference can land after everyone responsible has left, and it is then not felt as a cost by anybody with authority to prevent it.",
      "tests": [
        "Compare the delivered information against the asset information requirements, not against the document register.",
        "Have a competent person who was not involved attempt to answer three operating questions using only what was supplied. This test is cheap.",
        "Check whether the accepting signature belongs to the receiving organisation or to the delivering one.",
        "Sample as-built records against physical reality in a small number of locations. Late substitutions and field modifications are where gaps can arise."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 19650-3, information management during the operational phase of assets.",
        "FIDIC Conditions of Contract, 2017 edition, Sub-Clause 10.1, which makes supply of as-built records and operation and maintenance manuals, where the contract calls for them, an express requirement of taking over.",
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 7.6, data and information."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/contractual-delivery-fails-operational-baseline",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/what-handover-costs-the-people-who-inherit-it",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/nothing-tells-you-when-a-record-stopped-being-true"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "knowledge-transfer",
      "number": "03.2",
      "name": "Knowledge, as distinct from information",
      "stage": "handover-and-transition",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/handover-and-transition/knowledge-transfer",
      "question": "Has anyone captured why the asset is the way it is, and what was accepted rather than resolved?",
      "why": "Design intent is part of what an owner inherits, and it may not be recorded at all. An operator who does not know why a system was configured a particular way cannot safely change it, and will eventually either leave a defect alone or introduce one while fixing it. A large project can also end with a private list of things accepted rather than resolved, held in people’s heads and in email. That list can be what operations most needs, and it is not a deliverable unless someone makes it one.",
      "tests": [
        "Ask, in writing and before demobilisation, what was accepted rather than resolved.",
        "Check whether design intent is recorded anywhere other than in the drawings.",
        "Identify which individuals hold undocumented knowledge and whether any mechanism exists to transfer it before they leave. If the only mechanism is a leaving date, record that.",
        "Test whether the organisation has determined what knowledge is necessary for the operation of its assets, which the second edition now requires explicitly."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 7.7, knowledge, new in the second edition and listed by ISO among the main changes from the 2014 edition.",
        "ISO 19650-3, information management during the operational phase of assets."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/knowledge-has-a-departure-date",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/what-handover-costs-the-people-who-inherit-it"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "taking-over-conditions",
      "number": "03.3",
      "name": "Taking over, and what was waived to achieve it",
      "stage": "handover-and-transition",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/handover-and-transition/taking-over-conditions",
      "question": "Were the contractual conditions for taking over actually met, and where they were not, who agreed to proceed and on what record?",
      "why": "Completion dates are visible, politically weighted and reported upwards. Information conditions are none of those things. When the two conflict, the information condition can give way, through a mechanism that is entirely legitimate and entirely undocumented in its consequence. The waiver is granted to protect a date and the cost of it appears years later in a different budget.",
      "tests": [
        "Read the taking-over certificate against the conditions in the contract. List what was outstanding at the date of issue.",
        "For each outstanding item, find who accepted it and what was recorded about the consequence.",
        "Check whether the required Notice of No-objection on the as-built records and the manuals was given or deemed given, where the contract requires it.",
        "Establish whether any route to deemed taking over was relied on, and if so whether the information obligations were satisfied by another means."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "FIDIC Conditions of Contract, 2017 edition, Sub-Clause 10.1, taking over the works, and Sub-Clause 10.3, interference with tests on completion.",
        "ISO 21502:2020, Clause 6, covering project closure and transition."
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/for-a-year-you-operate-an-asset-you-have-not-accepted",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/what-handover-costs-the-people-who-inherit-it",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/at-handover-every-review-arrives-after-the-leverage-has-gone",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/the-only-test-the-building-ever-gets"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "asset-register-creation",
      "number": "03.4",
      "name": "Recognition onto the asset register",
      "stage": "handover-and-transition",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/handover-and-transition/asset-register-creation",
      "question": "Can the thing that was built be traced to the thing that appears on the balance sheet, in both directions?",
      "why": "The financial and technical records of an asset can be created by different people, at different times, from different sources, at different levels of breakdown. Neither is wrong. Where they do not reconcile, the gap may not be discovered until something has to be revalued, impaired, insured or replaced. In jurisdictions converting from cash to accrual accounting the problem stops being an inconvenience and becomes a reporting obligation with a date attached.",
      "tests": [
        "Take ten assets from the financial register and locate them physically. Then take ten physical assets and locate them in the register.",
        "Compare the componentisation used for depreciation against the breakdown used for maintenance. Where they differ, establish which one anybody actually manages the asset by.",
        "Check the valuation basis and whether it is supportable from the delivery record or was derived by apportionment.",
        "Confirm that data can be traced between financial and non-financial sources."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 7.6, data and information, revised in the second edition; ISO/TC 251’s guidance says the revision clarifies how data and information differ and makes the requirements clearer and more concise. ISO/TS 55010 on aligning financial and non-financial functions.",
        "ISO/TS 55010, alignment of the financial and non-financial functions of the organisation in asset management.",
        "IPSAS 33, first-time adoption of accrual basis IPSAS."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/accrual-conversion-and-the-asset-register",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/the-date-a-project-becomes-an-asset",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/how-many-asset-registers-does-an-entity-need",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/counting-desks-while-the-useful-life-goes-unexamined",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/the-evidence-finance-needs-is-in-a-file-finance-never-sees",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/the-project-crosswalk-ends-at-turnover-the-asset-does-not"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "operational-readiness",
      "number": "03.5",
      "name": "Operational readiness of the organisation",
      "stage": "handover-and-transition",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/handover-and-transition/operational-readiness",
      "question": "Does an organisation exist that is capable of operating this asset on the day it is handed over, with people in post?",
      "why": "Where readiness is assessed as a property of the asset, the asset may be the part that is ready. What is missing is then the organisation: the roles, the trained staff, the spares, the systems, the contracts and the authority to spend. These have long lead times and no contractor is responsible for any of them, so they can sit on no one’s critical path until the week they become urgent.",
      "tests": [
        "Check whether the operating roles are filled, not whether they are defined. A structure chart is not readiness.",
        "Establish the lead time on the longest operational dependency, for example a systems implementation or a term maintenance contract, and compare it to the handover date.",
        "Confirm training was delivered to the people who will do the work rather than to whoever was available.",
        "Test whether the operator can raise, approve and pay for a corrective work order on day one."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 7.1, resources, and Clause 7.2, competence.",
        "ISO 55012, people involvement and competence in asset management.",
        "ISO 21502:2020, Clause 6, on transition and the realisation of benefits after closure."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/operational-readiness-has-seven-conditions",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/completion-describes-the-asset-readiness-describes-the-owner",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/at-handover-every-review-arrives-after-the-leverage-has-gone"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "system-exists-and-is-scoped",
      "number": "04.1",
      "name": "An asset management system that is scoped",
      "stage": "operations-and-asset-management",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/operations-and-asset-management/system-exists-and-is-scoped",
      "question": "Is there a defined asset management system, and is it written down which assets it covers and which it does not?",
      "why": "An organisation under compliance pressure can establish an asset management function before establishing what it is responsible for. The function may then spend its first years discovering its own boundaries by finding assets nobody had allocated to anyone. Scope is the cheapest thing to define at the start and the most expensive thing to reconstruct later.",
      "tests": [
        "Ask for the documented scope of the asset management system and the boundaries and applicability used to set it.",
        "Identify asset classes falling outside it and establish whether that exclusion was decided or merely happened.",
        "Check the scope is available as documented information, which the standard requires.",
        "Test whether the system covers non-physical assets where the organisation depends on them."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 4.3, determining the scope of the asset management system, and Clause 4.4, asset management system.",
        "ISO 55000:2024, asset management vocabulary and overview."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        },
        {
          "label": "ISO 55000:2024, vocabulary, overview and principles",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83053.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the full text."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/iso-55001-will-not-tell-you-what-to-build-first",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/the-competence-you-need-is-not-in-the-asset-management-function"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "samp-and-objectives",
      "number": "04.2",
      "name": "The SAMP and the line back to organisational objectives",
      "stage": "operations-and-asset-management",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/operations-and-asset-management/samp-and-objectives",
      "question": "Can any asset management objective be traced upwards to an organisational objective, and downwards to something someone is doing this year?",
      "why": "The strategic asset management plan is the document that makes asset management strategic rather than administrative, and it can be produced to satisfy an assessor and then not referred to again. Where the line to organisational objectives is missing, maintenance budgets are set by last year plus a percentage, and no argument for investment can be made in terms the board recognises.",
      "tests": [
        "Trace one asset management objective up to an organisational objective and down to a funded activity. Record where the chain breaks.",
        "Check the SAMP documents the role of the asset management system in meeting the objectives, which is what the clause asks for.",
        "Establish when it was last revised, and whether it changed anything.",
        "Confirm objectives are measurable and monitored, rather than aspirational statements."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 6.2.1, strategic asset management plan, given its own subclause in the second edition and listed by ISO among the main changes.",
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 6.2.2, asset management objectives, and 6.2.3, planning to achieve them.",
        "ISO 55011, guidance on the development of public policy to enable asset management."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/a-plan-that-has-never-stopped-anything-is-a-description",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/every-organisation-has-a-risk-register-ask-for-the-other-one"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "data-quality",
      "number": "04.3",
      "name": "Asset data and its quality",
      "stage": "operations-and-asset-management",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/operations-and-asset-management/data-quality",
      "question": "Is the data the organisation makes decisions from of a quality anyone has determined, and does anyone know when it was last true?",
      "why": "Asset data degrades continuously and silently. Nothing announces that a record has stopped matching reality, so confidence in a register can rise with its age while its accuracy falls. The second edition responded by separating data and information from documented information and requiring that attributes, quality and sources be determined rather than assumed.",
      "tests": [
        "Ask what data quality standard has been determined. The absence of one is now a nonconformity rather than a maturity observation.",
        "Check when each significant data set was last verified against the physical asset, and by whom.",
        "Establish whether data requirements were derived from the decisions the data supports, or from what the system happened to have fields for.",
        "Test alignment of terminology between financial and non-financial data, which the clause requires explicitly."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 7.6, data and information, revised in the second edition; ISO/TC 251’s guidance says the revision clarifies how data and information differ and makes the requirements clearer and more concise.",
        "ISO 55013, guidance on the management of asset data.",
        "ISO/TS 55010, alignment of financial and non-financial functions."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/nothing-tells-you-when-a-record-stopped-being-true",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/accrual-conversion-and-the-asset-register",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/the-land-is-on-the-books-its-location-is-held-elsewhere"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "performance-evaluation",
      "number": "04.4",
      "name": "Performance evaluation and internal audit of the system",
      "stage": "operations-and-asset-management",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/operations-and-asset-management/performance-evaluation",
      "question": "Is the asset management system itself audited, by people competent to audit it, on a programme derived from risk?",
      "why": "Where an internal audit function exists, its asset management coverage may be limited to maintenance spend and procurement compliance, because those are the parts that look like the rest of the audit universe. The system itself, meaning the decision-making framework, the SAMP, the data, goes unexamined. The organisation is then assured about its transactions and unassured about the basis on which it spends billions.",
      "tests": [
        "Read the internal audit plan and identify what proportion of assurance effort is directed at the asset base relative to its share of the balance sheet.",
        "Check whether the audit programme considers the importance of the processes concerned and the results of previous audits, which the clause requires.",
        "Establish whether the auditors are competent in asset management, or competent in audit and reading across.",
        "Confirm management review inputs include what the standard specifies, and that outputs changed something."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 9.1, monitoring, measurement, analysis and evaluation, Clause 9.2, internal audit, and Clause 9.3, management review.",
        "Global Internal Audit Standards, Institute of Internal Auditors, effective 9 January 2025.",
        "The Three Lines Model, Institute of Internal Auditors, as revised in the Statement of Position of 8 July 2026."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/auditing-a-capital-programme-while-it-runs",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/audited-on-the-transactions-unaudited-on-the-basis",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/whether-it-was-worth-doing-is-the-least-evaluated-question"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "predictive-action",
      "number": "04.5",
      "name": "Predictive action",
      "stage": "operations-and-asset-management",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/operations-and-asset-management/predictive-action",
      "question": "Does the organisation act on what it expects to happen, or only on what has already happened?",
      "why": "This publication reads this as the clearest signal of intent in the 2024 revision. Preventive action, which asked what might go wrong, has been renamed predictive action and rewritten, which shifts the question towards when to intervene rather than whether to. For an asset-owning organisation that is a different discipline: it requires condition data, deterioration modelling and a funding mechanism that can act before failure. An organisation with none of the three may still describe its run-to-failure regime as risk-based.",
      "tests": [
        "Ask for one intervention whose timing was set by predicted condition rather than by failure, calendar or budget availability.",
        "Check whether renewal, replacement and disposal timing is optimised together or handled by separate teams on separate cycles.",
        "Establish whether the data required to predict anything is actually being collected, and at what interval.",
        "Test whether deferred maintenance is quantified and reported anywhere the board sees it."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 10.3, predictive action, renamed from preventive action and fully technically revised, and listed by ISO among the main changes from the 2014 edition.",
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 10.1, continual improvement, and Clause 10.2, nonconformity and corrective action."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/preventive-became-predictive-and-most-cannot-do-the-second",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/operational-control-now-says-life-cycle-management",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/nobody-will-give-you-a-deterioration-curve"
      ]
    },
    {
      "slug": "financial-alignment",
      "number": "04.6",
      "name": "Alignment of the financial and technical view",
      "stage": "operations-and-asset-management",
      "url": "https://projects-advisors.com/framework/operations-and-asset-management/financial-alignment",
      "question": "Do the finance function and the engineering function describe the same asset base in terms that reconcile?",
      "why": "These two functions hold the same assets in different systems, at different breakdowns, for different purposes, and may have no obligation to agree. The consequence is not a reconciliation problem, it is a decision problem: capital allocation happens in the financial view, deterioration happens in the technical one, and nothing translates between them. This problem is the subject of its own technical specification.",
      "tests": [
        "Take the total asset value from the financial statements and the asset population from the maintenance system, and attempt a reconciliation. Record how long it takes and who has to be involved.",
        "Check whether the two functions share an asset hierarchy, or maintain separate ones nobody maps.",
        "Establish whether a proposed renewal can be expressed in both views without manual translation.",
        "Confirm whether accrual conversion, where it applies, produced a register the engineers recognise."
      ],
      "required_by": [
        "ISO/TS 55010, guidance on the alignment of the financial and non-financial functions in asset management.",
        "ISO 55001:2024, Clause 7.6, data and information, revised in the second edition; ISO/TC 251’s guidance says the revision clarifies how data and information differ and makes the requirements clearer and more concise. ISO/TS 55010 on aligning financial and non-financial functions.",
        "ISO 55000:2024, which states alignment among the principles of asset management.",
        "IPSAS 33, first-time adoption of accrual basis IPSAS."
      ],
      "sources": [
        {
          "label": "ISO 55001:2024, asset management system requirements",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83054.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the requirement text. The contents, foreword and introduction cited in this publication are taken from the standard’s preview pages hosted on the ANSI webstore, not from this page."
        },
        {
          "label": "ISO 55000:2024, vocabulary, overview and principles",
          "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/83053.html",
          "note": "ISO’s product page: the publication details and ISO’s own summary of the standard, not the full text."
        }
      ],
      "articles": [
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/accrual-conversion-and-the-asset-register",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/audited-on-the-transactions-unaudited-on-the-basis",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/the-certified-value-and-the-booked-value-are-two-different-records",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/a-lighting-pole-in-the-desert-is-not-an-asset",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/what-capital-figures-record-and-what-they-leave-elsewhere",
        "https://projects-advisors.com/insights/the-land-is-on-the-books-its-location-is-held-elsewhere"
      ]
    }
  ]
}