3.4: Submission Checklist

Submission Checklist

This version is structured for student use and mirrors real-world consulting quality assurance before submitting a planning package to a client or project sponsor.

Title: Project Scope, Architecture, Approach, Deliverables, and Structure

Purpose of This Checklist

This checklist is your final quality control step before submission. It ensures that your planning package is:

• Complete and logically structured
• Professionally written and client-facing
• Consistent with the Project Charter
• Ready to be reviewed and approved by decision-makers

Use this checklist as if you are a consultant delivering a document to an executive who expects precision, clarity, and strategic rigor.

Project Scope

Project Scope Review Checklist

✔	Criteria
☐	Scope is broken down clearly by project phase (e.g., Planning, Design, Implementation)
☐	All included activities are specific and easy to understand
☐	At least 3–5 items are clearly marked as “Out of Scope”
☐	All key assumptions are listed explicitly
☐	Dependencies are identified and realistically explained
☐	Tone is objective and professional—free of vague phrasing

Architecture Overview

Architecture Overview Review Checklist

✔	Criteria
☐	Overview begins with a clear purpose statement (what the system/solution is for)
☐	At least 4–6 functional components or modules are described
☐	Interactions between components are explained in logical language
☐	User roles and access points are defined (no technical detail needed)
☐	Integrations and assumptions are identified
☐	Content is accessible to technical and non-technical readers alike

Project Approach

Project Approach Review Checklist

✔	Criteria
☐	Delivery model is clearly stated and justified (e.g., phased, hybrid, agile)
☐	The rationale reflects the client's environment and constraints
☐	Project phases are defined with goals and major activities per phase
☐	Governance structure and stakeholder involvement are described
☐	A fallback or contingency approach is included and thoughtfully explained
☐	Transitions between phases are realistic and clearly documented

Project Deliverables

Project Deliverables Review Checklist

✔	Criteria
☐	Deliverables are grouped by project phase
☐	Each deliverable includes a clear name and short description
☐	Responsibility for creation and approval is mentioned or implied
☐	The sequence or milestone timing of deliverables is logical
☐	Deliverables align with what was promised in the Project Charter

Project Organizational Structure

Project Organizational Structure Review Checklist

✔	Criteria
☐	Key roles and responsibilities are listed clearly
☐	Reporting and escalation paths are defined (including who approves what)
☐	Coordination between internal team, client, and external partners is explained
☐	Communication flows (meetings, updates, reviews) are described
☐	If applicable, governance boards or committees are named with authority defined

Overall Formatting and Completeness

Document Formatting and Completeness Checklist

✔	Criteria
☐	All 5 required sections are present and in the correct order
☐	Each section begins with a clear heading
☐	Subheadings or bullet points are used to organize content
☐	Tone is clear, professional, and client-facing
☐	Grammar and spelling are clean throughout
☐	No placeholder text or vague filler (“TBD”, “stuff,” “things”)
☐	File is named correctly (e.g., Milestone2_ProjectStructure_LastName.docx)
☐	Final document is saved in Word or PDF format as required

Final Self-Review Prompts

Before submitting, ask yourself:

• Would I be confident presenting this to a senior executive or project sponsor?
• Does each section communicate clarity, structure, and leadership?
• Are the parts connected in a way that shows unified planning?
• Have I anticipated the reader’s questions—and answered them proactively?

If the answer is yes, your work is truly submission-ready