On Monday, New York and the other four 2012 Olympic bid hopefuls will finally get feedback from the International Olympic Committee on the preparations they have been making for the last 12 months. The last milestone of the campaign will be marked by the release of the Technical Evaluation Report, a document written by the evaluation committee in response to the bid books submitted by the candidates last November and visits to the potential sites made earlier this year.

Remember those days in February, when the IOC was in town and the city seemed to stand still as the 13-member committee enjoyed all the hospitality New York could offer? The evaluation report was written shortly thereafter to provide IOC members with the information they’ll need to cast their ballot. Since then, the document has been hidden somewhere in the IOC’s Swiss headquarters for no apparent reason other than to create last minute suspense.

But, by the end of March there were already leaked reports suggesting that Paris, London, and New York were identified as leaders in the race – an interesting piece of information since the IOC claims they do not rank the bids on the report.

When I receive a copy of the report, the first thing I’ll do is flip to the last page of the summary for each bid and read the final few paragraphs. That’s where the evaluation commission gives its thumbs-up or thumbs-down on the bid and provides backup for their choice in the most diplomatic way possible. They probably know, as I suspect, that IOC members just don’t take the time to read the entire report and are just seeking general guidance before making up their own minds.

Recent bid history shows that the evaluation report has a limited effect on the outcome of the final vote. Cities chosen to be the hosts of the Games are usually “good enough,” but not necessarily the best in the field, and while the report often effectively trims poor bids from the list, it doesn’t usually identify the eventual winner.

For 2008, the IOC’s evaluation divided the field of five into two groups. Osaka and Istanbul were designated also-rans after severe deficiencies were noted, while Toronto, Paris, and Beijing were considered top contenders with only minor problems. In reality Toronto and Paris had superior bids but the politics of the day required that Beijing be given special handling, so the summary was carefully worded to show Beijing in third – without making it obvious. Beijing won the bid.

For the 2010 winter bid, the three cities being evaluated weren’t ranked, but it was clear from the summary that the bid from Pyeongchang was considered a distant third. The Korean city went on to win the first ballot of the host city election before narrowly losing on the final ballot.

While the bid committees from Paris and Madrid have both announced national celebrations in advance of the report, New York seems to be taking a more low-key approach – perhaps looking to a Jets Stadium approval as better reason to celebrate.

NYC2012 will be most interested in two sections of the report.

They are already aware of IOC concerns about the unapproved Olympic stadium, but the bid committee will want to examine any further comments regarding the matter to determine how to deal with it if the stadium remains an outstanding issue.

More interesting to New Yorkers will be the IOC’s reaction to NYC2012’s financial plan, which includes a $250 million cost overrun guarantee and a $200 million contingency fund. While bid executives claim that a $450 million margin is more than sufficient for managing the organization of the Olympics in America, the plan doesn’t match the unlimited guarantees proposed by the other four bids and required by the IOC. Should this be raised as a significant roadblock, NYC2012 will have a lot of explaining to do – and not much time to do it.

With the delays and skyrocketing costs associated with the Athens 2004 Games still fresh in their memories, the IOC probably won’t want to take any unnecessary risks. If the costs of a New York 2012 Games were to exceed budget by more than the guaranteed amount, who would pay? The IOC will not assume liability for this, so NYC2012 may have to come up with a better solution if it hopes to be elected.

NYC2012 will have the opportunity to respond, in writing, to questions or deficiencies raised by the report. The response will be due about two weeks after the report’s release; shortly after, the NYC2012 team will make final preparations for its trip to Singapore and the host city election.

Ignore the countdown clocks at Union Square and Times Square. NYC2012 will run out of time long before then.

Mr. Livingstone is the producer of GamesBids.com.