DMD-2026-015
Digital twin of the headquarters and qualification centres
EvaluationDevelopment proposal
- Priority score
- 72
- Estimated cost
- SAR 18.5M
- Net present value
- SAR 5.6M
- Internal rate of return
- 16.4%
- Payback period
- 3.6 years
- Rank in the 2027 plan
- #5
Preliminary score from screening — confirmed after evaluation
of 9 candidates
- Gate into «Submitted»DecisionGoDate27 May 2026DraftComplete
- Gate into «Initial review»DecisionGoDate5 July 2026SubmittedComplete
- Gate into «Feasibility»DecisionGoDate14 August 2026Initial reviewComplete
- Gate into «Evaluation»DecisionGoDate22 September 2026FeasibilityComplete
- Gate into «Committee review»DecisionNot held yetEvaluationCurrent stageCurrent stage
- Gate into «Approved»DecisionNot held yet6Committee reviewNot started
- Gate into «Prioritized»DecisionNot held yet7ApprovedNot started
- Gate into «Converted to project»DecisionNot held yet8PrioritizedNot started
- 9Converted to projectNot started
P2P2 · High priority — score 72 of 100
Priority class
High priority
Computed from the score and the approved model’s thresholds; may be changed with a reason kept in the history
By the model: P2 (score 72)
Class thresholds
P175–100P260–74P345–59P40–44
The approved model (version 4) with the eleven criteria; the score is the weighted mean of the ratings scaled to 100. You are evaluating: change a criterion’s rating and the score updates at once.
Evaluation against the priority model
| Criterion | Weight | Rating (1–5) | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Value | |||
| Fit with the SCA strategyHow far the proposal moves the objectives, initiatives and KPIs of the SCA strategy, “Building the Future with Confidence”.Raises priority | 20% | 1 · Very weak2 · Weak3 · Average4 · Good5 · Excellent | 20.0 |
| Value added to the contracting sectorThe value it adds to the sector and the authority: clearer regulation, higher quality or a new capability.Raises priority | 12% | 1 · Very weak2 · Weak3 · Average4 · Good5 · Excellent | 12.0 |
| Financial return & sustainabilityThe return in the feasibility study, and its contribution to a sustainable financial base from service and programme fees.Raises priority | 8% | 1 · Very weak2 · Weak3 · Average4 · Good5 · Excellent | 4.8 |
| Urgency & compliance | |||
| UrgencyThe cost of delay: what the authority and its member contractors lose if work does not start this year.Raises priority | 10% | 1 · Very weak2 · Weak3 · Average4 · Good5 · Excellent | 7.5 |
| Regulatory requirementIs it required by law, regulation, an SCA board decision or a supervising body’s directive (Ministry of Municipalities and Housing, NCA, the National Data Management Office)?Raises priority | 10% | 1 · Very weak2 · Weak3 · Average4 · Good5 · Excellent | 1.0 |
| Impact | |||
| Impact on contractors & beneficiariesIts direct effect on member contractors, project owners and sector workers: time, effort and satisfaction.Raises priority | 14% | 1 · Very weak2 · Weak3 · Average4 · Good5 · Excellent | 7.7 |
| Sustainability impactIts contribution to energy and water efficiency in SCA buildings and centres, and lower emissions.Raises priority | 3% | 1 · Very weak2 · Weak3 · Average4 · Good5 · Excellent | 0.6 |
| Digital transformation impactIts contribution to digital contractor services, SCA processes and the use of sector data.Raises priority | 5% | 1 · Very weak2 · Weak3 · Average4 · Good5 · Excellent | 5.0 |
| Effort & risk | |||
| RiskDelivery, technical and contractual risk — the higher it is, the lower the priority.Lowers priority | 7% | 1 · Very weak2 · Weak3 · Average4 · Good5 · Excellent | 5.4 |
| ComplexityThe number of parties, branches, systems, integrations and procedure changes involved.Lowers priority | 6% | 1 · Very weak2 · Weak3 · Average4 · Good5 · Excellent | 3.4 |
| Resource requirementThe team, budget and scarce skills it draws from the portfolio’s capacity.Lowers priority | 5% | 1 · Very weak2 · Weak3 · Average4 · Good5 · Excellent | 4.1 |
| Priority scorePreliminary score from screening — confirmed after evaluation | 72 / 100 | ||
Evaluation profile
This request’s ratings against the average approved request
- This request
- Approved average
| Category | This request | Approved average |
|---|---|---|
| Alignment | 100 | 94 |
| Value | 100 | 91 |
| Return | 60 | 77 |
| Urgency | 75 | 79 |
| Regulatory | 10 | 27 |
| Risk | 78 | 89 |
| Complexity | 57 | 79 |
| Resources | 83 | 91 |
| Beneficiary | 55 | 63 |
| Sustainability | 20 | 30 |
| Digital | 100 | 58 |
Evaluation panel
The request goes to committee only when everyone has signed
Karim Haddad
Senior Digital Delivery Consultant — PMO
High digital impact, high complexity
Signed 2026-10-01Eng. Asma S. Al-Hamdan
Enterprise Architect
Needs a shared data standard with the unified operations centre
Signed 2026-10-09Haifa S. Al-Ruwaili
Senior Financial Analyst
Pending a review of the savings assumptions
Awaiting signature
The remaining evaluators sign and the current ratings are fixed