[Introduction to the Template

Description: The Milestone Review Report summarizes the observations and findings of the project’s Milestone Review. This process is undertaken at transition points throughout the project to ensure quality and make necessary adjustments. A Milestone Review allows the project team to assess two aspects of the project: how it is being conducted and the quality of the project’s output. It provides an opportunity to learn from the project work that has transpired to date and to use that learning to improve the project.

The Milestone Review Process examines the current project status, identifies what has been successful to that point, pinpoints any problems or quality issues, determines the lessons learned, and makes specific recommendations on how to proceed.

Milestone Reviews should occur at each point where the team and customer must agree to proceed, thus signaling a transition from one phase into the next. These points are typically identified as Major Milestones. Additionally, doing reviews at interim and internal milestones serve as checkpoints for the project teams. The Project Post-Mortem, the final milestone review, rolls up a full assessment at the project’s conclusion.]

Summary

[Description: The Summary section presents the report’s key elements in a brief paragraph and describes the method(s) used to conduct the Milestone Review (meetings, conference calls, surveys, etc.).]

<<Begin text here>>

Status of Milestone Deliverables

[Description: The Status of Milestone Deliverables section lists the deliverables that should be complete at the point of the Milestone Review and identifies their status. If this is the project’s first Milestone Review, list all deliverables to that point. If it is a subsequent Milestone Review, list all deliverables created since the last review. Status conditions include “complete,” “in progress,” “deleted,” and so on. For deliverables still in progress, a more granular metric that describes either “percent complete” or the sub-deliverables that are complete is useful.

Justification: This communication enables the customer, the project team, and other stakeholders to make informed decisions about the project and other related activities.]

<<Begin text here>>

Summary of Actuals versus Planned

[Description: The Summary of Actuals versus Planned section documents for each deliverable the estimated time and resources and the actual time and resources used to date. This section also shows the calculated differences between the estimates and actuals.

Justification: These comparisons identify potential problems as well as those areas that may be ahead of schedule and enable the project team to adjust the project plan.

This data is also valuable to help quantify assessments on equivalent tasks later in the project or when bidding on similar projects in the future.]

<<Begin text here>>

Ratings by Category

[Description: The Ratings by Category section reports the quantitative measurements taken on the important dimensions (categories) of the project. Both the project team and the customer can provide these ratings.

A category rating is an indication of two factors:

·         Assessment – how well a category is working for the project

·         Impact – the importance and effect the category will have on the project’s success/failure

The categories include project processes (risk management, communication, quality assurance, etc.), technical documentation, technical processes (interface development, testing, etc.), project structure, project documentation (project plans, progress reports, etc.), methods and tools, and product.

Each indicator (assessment and impact) has a ratings scale. The ratings for each indicator are multiplied to determine each category’s overall rating.

For example:

Assessment	Not going well		Going well
	-2	-1	1	2
Impact	Low		High
	1	2	3	4

Category	Assessment	Impact	Rating (A*I)
Risk Management Process	1	3	3
Communication Process	-2	3	-6
Interface Development	1	2	2
Quality Assurance Process	2	1	2

Justification: The team evaluates these category ratings to determine source causes and to make improvement recommendations. This information also provides input to the ongoing risk management process. Categories with low ratings tend to have associated risks needing identification.]

<<Begin text here>>

Lessons Learned

[Description: The Lessons Learned section identifies three main items:

·         Things that are working well and should continue as elements of the project

·         Things that need changing, either because they are not working or could be improved

·         Things that should not be repeated or should be discontinued

This section is developed by examining the Deliverables’ status, Planned versus Actuals comparison, and Category ratings and then determining:

·         Why were we successful? What contributed to that success?

·         Could we improve on that success as we continue with the project?

·         What risks did we successfully manage? How?

·         Why was there a problem? What went wrong?

·         What were the signs that should have warned us? Are there new risk factors we should identify for future projects?

·         What should we have done differently?]

<<Begin text here>>

Review of IP Used and Generated

[Description: The Review of IP Used and Generated section lists the existing intellectual property leveraged to create the customer’s solution and any new intellectual property that may have future value to this and other projects.

Justification: This information may be useful to other projects and should be shared with Microsoft staff and partners.]

<<Begin text here>>

Readiness for Next Milestone

[Description: The Readiness for Next Milestone section describes how well the project is positioned to achieve the next milestone By analyzing the Deliverables’ status, Planned versus Actuals comparisons, Category ratings, and Lessons learned, the team can assess how much adjustment needs to be made to the project in order to reach the next milestone. Examples of this assessment include:

·         If the current deliverables are late, can resource adjustments be made to meet deadlines?

·         If the project processes (communication, change management, etc.) are not working effectively, can they be amended in time to facilitate efficiencies?

Justification: This information ensures that the project team identifies the necessary success factors and actions required to achieve the next milestone.]

<<Begin text here>>

Recommendations and Actions Items

[Description: The Recommendations and Actions Items section makes specific recommendations (derived from the lessons learned section) on how the project should be adjusted. These recommendations are prioritized based on their relative value to achieving the project’s goals. The recommendations should focus only on high priority issues and be connected to the rated categories.

Recommendations may include alternative methods for performing work, best practices to apply to project protocols (risk management, communication, etc.), adjustments to project plans and structure, feature trade-offs, and so on.

Justification: Action items are derived from the recommendations; they identify the specific individual/group responsible for taking the action and the time target for completing the action. Action items should be those things that have the greatest positive impact on the project. One of the action items should be to update the risks and issues document with new or changed items that fall out of the milestone review process.]

<<Begin text here>>