Dear Programme Sponsor / Approvals Lead,
Many early-stage Government projects donβt fail because the public value case is weak β they fail because governance is weak. The result is predictable: avoidable admin overload, unclear priorities, weak documentation, and reporting that becomes painfully retroactive. That uncertainty increases approving body risk and slows good projects down.The initiative focuses on service improvement and social betterment, including:
We are seeking approval for a 6-month PHC Starter Pack, delivered by Order Efficiency Ltd at a public sector rate (50% of standard commercial PHC Consultant rates). Total required funding is approximately Β£20,000. This includes PHC Consultant delivery for the 6-month term, plus any agreed allowances (e.g. tools, training, limited founder support).
The Starter Pack prevents the project being forced into slow, phone-based administrative burden and retroactive reporting. It provides reliable remote structure and support from an office-based delivery team.By sponsoring this Starter Pack, you receive:
Stage 1 β 7-Day Review (Go / No-Go): rapid viability + governance check producing an evidence-led snapshot (critical concerns, immediate actions, baseline plan, reporting format).
Stage 2 β Setup Phase (first ~2 months): implement PHC data structures and operating rhythm.
Stage 3 β Continuation Phase (renewable 3-month periods): day-to-day PHC Service work keeping SCALPED lists current, linking evidence, and providing reporting.
Why the Review exists (two reasons): (1) to enable fail-fast β if the project is going to fail, it should fail early, visibly and cheaply, preventing wasted funding; and (2) to provide stakeholders practical by-example assurance that PHC will be beneficial in ways that are often new to teams.
Support can be provided as monthly tranches or stage funding aligned to outputs and reporting (whichever you prefer).
Purpose: Review scope, ownership, evidence gaps and conditions for mobilisation; agree a separate scoped price before commissioning.
You receive: Readiness advisory note, initial concerns and assumptions, proposed real owners, and a proceed, revise or stop recommendation.
Purpose: Build and test the fictional demonstrator, cost delivery and decide whether a separate real pilot is justified.
You receive: Day 30 baseline, Day 60 tested pack, Day 90 demonstration assurance cycle and documented pilot decision.
Purpose: Support an authorised local pilot or specifically agreed maintenance period, within available resources.
You receive: Monthly reviewed reporting, checked improvement actions, expenditure and workload review, and a Month 6 renewal, revision or closure recommendation.
(Any of these options can be funded as a standalone decision, or combined as a phased pathway.)
Yes. PHC produces factual, contextual evidence of what happened, what was decided, what was attempted, and what remains unresolved. It does not impose ideology or spin.
The aim is minimum viable structure: enough to be reviewable and useful, not enough to slow delivery. It reduces rework by making decisions and evidence easier to locate.
PHC complements boards and assurance by providing structured evidence and a live concerns/actions view. It doesnβt replace your governance model; it makes it work better.
Then the Review surfaces it early, with a clear record of blockers and risks β enabling a controlled stop decision and protecting public funds.
If you are open to a short call, we would welcome 15β20 minutes to confirm:
Thank you for considering an approach that makes delivery credible, accountable, and reviewable β while keeping the delivery team focused on outcomes.