Module 2: Eligibility analysis

After this module you will be able to take a list of candidate projects from a client, test each one against the definition identified in Module 1 using a written template, draw the boundary of the eligible work in time, scope and people, and record a decision not to claim in a form that protects both the client and your practice.

What this module covers

The order of analysis: exclusions, then the uncertainty, then the systematic work, then the boundary.
An analysis template that indexes the evidence for each element of the definition.
A boundary-drawing method for time, scope and people.
Documenting the decision not to claim.

The order of analysis

Eligibility analysis fails most often because it starts with the most interesting question, whether there was a technical unknown. The first question is whether the activity is excluded: five schemes carry a statutory list of excluded activities and Ireland's are in regulations, and an activity within one of them never reaches the uncertainty test.

Exclusions. Compare the activity with the list for the country.
Baseline. State what was known in the field when the work began and what the client's own people knew. Uncertainty exists only relative to a baseline, and every scheme judges it at the outset.
Uncertainty. State what could not be known or determined from that baseline, in the words of the definition for the country.
Systematic work. Identify the hypotheses, the alternatives considered, the experiments or analysis and the conclusions.
Boundary and decision. Fix the start, the end and the scope, then record whether the project or activity is in, out or in part, and why.

The analysis template

Complete the template once per project in a project based scheme and once per experimental activity in an activity based scheme. Every row asks for evidence by document name and date.

Element	Question to answer	What to record	Evidence to cite
Identification	What is the project or activity, in the name the client's records use?	Name, owner, field, dates	Project register, ticket board, engineering plan
Exclusions	Does any part fall within the exclusions for this country?	Each exclusion considered and the conclusion	The country's exclusion list; the activity description
Baseline	What did a competent professional know at the start, and what had the client already done?	Sources consulted, prior attempts, vendor or literature positions	Design notes, search records, supplier correspondence
Uncertainty	What could not be known or determined from the baseline?	One or two sentences in the words of the definition	Dated statement of the unknown made before the work
Systematic work	What was hypothesised, tried, measured and concluded?	Alternatives, experiments, failures, changes of direction, in date order	Test logs, experiment records, commits, lab notebooks
Supporting work	Which non-experimental work was needed, and does this scheme admit it?	Each item and the experimental work it supports	Plans, build records, data collection records
Location and risk	Where was the work performed, who bore the cost, who owns the results?	Sites, contracts, funding sources	Contracts, grant agreements, intercompany agreements
Boundary	When did the eligible work start and end, and which parts are out?	Start event, end event, excluded workstreams	Kickoff note, milestone or release record
Decision	In, out, or in part?	Decision, reason, decision maker, date	The rows above

Drawing the boundary

Time

This is a useful working rule in every scheme: eligible work begins when work to resolve the uncertainty starts and ends when the uncertainty is resolved or work on it ceases. The United Kingdom guidelines state it explicitly. Fix both to a dated record: the design note that states the unknown, and the test result, milestone or release note that shows it answered.

Scope

Within the period, separate the workstreams that addressed the uncertainty from those that did not. In the United States this is formalised by applying the test to the whole product, process or piece of software and then to successively smaller subsets of its elements; elsewhere the same discipline is applied by listing the workstreams and marking each one. Write the excluded workstreams down; the cost analysis in Module 3 needs the list.

People

The names in the technical record should be the names whose time is claimed. A person who appears in no experiment, test or design record is claimed only where a supervisory or support role is shown and the scheme admits it.

Documenting the decision not to claim

A rejected project is evidence of a careful process, and in a review it is often the first thing that persuades the reviewer that the included projects were tested rather than assumed. For each rejected candidate the file holds a short note with five elements: the project name as the client's records use it, the candidate uncertainty considered, the reason it fails (readily deducible from existing knowledge, an excluded activity, funded or performed for another person, or outside the required location), who decided and when, and the documents relied on. The technical lead signs the note as well as the practitioner. Partial decisions are documented the same way, recording the end event and the excluded workstreams.

Illustrative example

Illustrative example. Harbour Robotics Ltd, a hypothetical company, brings three candidate projects to its advisor, each with costs of 100,000. Project A integrated a purchased vision camera with the robot controller using the vendor's documented interface; the vendor's guide answered every question, so it is documented as out with the technical lead's agreement. Project B developed a gripping algorithm for soft irregular objects; a dated kickoff note states that no published approach met the damage threshold, the test logs show four approaches tried and two abandoned, and a release note in month seven records the target met. Project B is in for seven months; the five months of productionisation after the release note are out. Project C was performed under a customer contract that paid the company regardless of outcome and gave the customer the results; the note records the contract terms and the conclusion for the country concerned. Three notes go on file, and the benefit for Project B is calculated at that country's rate on the costs inside the boundary.

Across the seven countries

Country	Unit of analysis and test	Exclusions to check first
United States	The business component; all four parts of the test in section 41(d) must be met	Research after commercial production begins, adapting or duplicating an existing business component, surveys and routine data collection, and research conducted outside the United States are among the exclusions
United Kingdom	The project; it must seek an advance in science or technology by resolving scientific or technological uncertainty	Market research, cosmetic and aesthetic design, and commercial and financial work do not form part of R&D unless they directly contribute to resolving the uncertainty
Ireland	Qualifying R&D activities; the science test requires a prescribed field, an advancement sought, uncertainty a competent professional could not readily resolve, and systematic, investigative or experimental work	The Regulations exclude routine testing and analysis for quality or quantity control, cosmetic or stylistic alterations, and research in the social sciences, arts or humanities, among others
Canada	Systematic investigation or search by means of experiment or analysis; the guidelines ask why the work was done and how it was done	Market research or sales promotion, quality control or routine testing, style changes and routine data collection, among others
Australia	Each core R&D activity, with supporting R&D activities tied to it; the outcome cannot be known in advance from current knowledge	Market research, management studies or efficiency surveys, complying with statutory requirements or standards, and software for the internal administration of business functions, among others
New Zealand	Each core activity, with supporting activities required for and integral to it; approval comes before the claim	Schedule 21 excludes preproduction activities such as demonstration of commercial viability, tooling up and trial runs, and software for the internal administration of the business
Singapore	The study or project; three requirements: the objective, novelty or technical risk, and a systematic, investigative and experimental study	Quality control or routine testing, routine data collection, efficiency surveys or management studies, market research, routine modifications and cosmetic or stylistic changes