Dear Programme Sponsor / Approvals Lead,
Many early-stage projects donβt fail because the misson is weak, they fail because governance is weak. In projects related to social improvement, typically run by governments or other institutional organisations, the importance of Governance cannot be overstated!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£19,000. includes not only PHC Consultant cost but an allowance for some computer costs, training and founder payments during the 6-month term.
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: confirm readiness and create an evidence-led start plan
You receive: a βGo / No-Goβ report, baseline concerns/risk register, simple plan and budget structure
Purpose: establish operating rhythm, tracking, reporting, and early delivery proof
You receive: month 1β2 reports showing activity, spend evidence, and beneficiaries reached (appropriately safeguarded)
Purpose: complete the pilot and produce a funder-grade evidence pack for scale
You receive: monthly reporting + a final evidence/learning pack + scale recommendations
(Any of these options can be funded as a standalone decision, or combined as a phased pathway.)
Because governance prevents beneficiary funding being eaten later by unmanaged admin and retroactive reporting β and it makes delivery fundable earlier.
It is delivered at 50% of commercial cost, and replaces fragmented consultancy/tools with a single accountable framework and repeatable outputs.
That is exactly the point: it fails early, visibly and cheaply, with full records, lessons captured, and controlled spend.
Local leadership and trainee roles are built in so capability transfers to the team and dependency is avoided. This proposal is being submitted as a serious and practical offer of improvement, not as a speculative idea sent in the hope of a polite acknowledgement. If the Department is unwilling to engage with it, then I ask that position to be stated clearly and explicitly, with the reasons set out in writing. Given the scale of claimant hardship and system frustration, silence or vague deflection would not be an adequate response.
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.