Your programme board is reporting green.
That isn't the same as delivery confidence.
Independent, evidence-based assurance for council, NHS and wider public sector ERP, finance and payroll programmes. For the s151 officer or finance director, the SRO and the audit committee.
You're getting highlight reports. Not the full picture.
Large public sector programmes report progress, but:
- –The systems integrator owns the delivery narrative
- –RAG ratings are self-assessed by the people delivering
- –Internal audit tests controls, not whether go-live is achievable
- –Issues reach members once they are already in the budget
- ✓It isn't what the highlight report says
- ✓It's what the highlight report leaves out
- ✓A green RAG rating isn't evidence of delivery
- ✓When it surfaces, it's already a pressure on the medium-term financial plan
What every s151 officer and SRO actually needs answered
Can we go live safely?
Will staff and suppliers still be paid on day one, or are we absorbing slippage that hasn't been declared?
Is the business case still holding?
Are the savings in the financial plan still deliverable, or quietly moving to next year?
Can we evidence our oversight?
If the auditors or members ask, could we show we tested what we were told?
An independent view of delivery confidence
No reliance on programme reporting. No stake in the delivery.
Whether go-live is achievable
On the current trajectory, not the baselined plan.
Where the programme is most exposed
The risks that haven't reached the programme board yet.
What your SI isn't surfacing
An independent view, not the delivery partner's own account.
What needs to change, and when
Specific, prioritised actions, not a list of observations.
Where hidden exposure sits
Outcome: evidence you can take to the programme board, the audit committee and members.
Assurance scaled to your programme
The Signal Check
- Targeted survey
- Rapid analysis
- Clear summary of issues and watch-outs
The Full Assurance Report
- Stakeholder interviews
- Root-cause analysis
- Leadership read-out with clear priorities
Full Assurance at Scale
- Tailored, cross-programme coverage
- Independent challenge and escalation throughout
04 — Portfolio
“Which of these programmes should I worry about first?”
The Portfolio Screen
20% off
any of Lite, Standard or XL · minimum four programmes
Every programme scored on the same framework, ranked
A portfolio heat map, not separate reports in separate formats
£16,000, £40,000 and £80,000 per programme at Lite, Standard and XL depth
Fixed price on a one-page scope, plus VAT. We start within 5 working days of your call.
We work from the documents you already have, so your PMO isn't building anything new. Your SI is told it's an independent review and interviewed like any other stakeholder.
Same rigour. A fraction of the cost and time.
| Traditional assurance | Performance Radar | |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | £200k–£400k engagements | From £20k |
| Timeline | 8–12 weeks | 1–8 weeks |
| Team | Large teams | Lean, focused |
| Reporting | Extensive reporting | Executive-level output |
| Delivery stance | Embedded in delivery | Fully independent |
| Orientation | Retrospective reporting | Early signal, forward-looking |
Designed for rapid approval
Fixed price on a one-page scope
Agreed before we start. No day rates, no extensions, no follow-on work to sell you.
Below the procurement thresholds
Lite, Standard and XL each sit below the Procurement Act 2023 thresholds for services, so they can be bought under your own contract procedure rules.
Registered on the Central Digital Platform
Agile Foundry Limited, trading as Performance Radar. An SME supplier, registered on Find a Tender.
Policies and paperwork ready
Our Carbon Reduction Plan and Modern Slavery Statement are published. Insurance certificates and our supplier pack are available on request.
Independent by design
We sell no software, no implementation and no follow-on work, so our findings have nothing to protect.
Assessed across large-scale ERP and finance transformations
Including benefits realisation and portfolio governance for a government-owned European energy company.
"I now have a clear picture of where we are."CIO, European Commodity Trader
Questions s151 officers and SROs ask
How is this different from internal audit?
Internal audit gives assurance on governance, risk management and controls across the whole organisation. We look at one programme's delivery: whether go-live is achievable, whether the plan and the numbers hold up, and what the systems integrator isn't surfacing. The two work well together, and our findings can feed the audit plan and the audit committee.
How is this different from a gateway review?
The purpose is similar: a short, independent assessment of delivery confidence at a key decision point. Central government's major projects are reviewed through NISTA's gateway process. Most councils, NHS bodies and universities have nothing equivalent for their own programmes. We give them that independent view, at a fixed price, starting within 5 working days.
How is this different from our systems integrator's or software vendor's own health checks?
Those reviews are run by firms with a stake in the programme continuing as planned. They are useful, but they are not independent. Performance Radar has no implementation arm, sells no software and takes on no delivery work afterwards, so the only thing we are paid for is an accurate answer.
Who commissions the review, and who sees the findings?
Usually the s151 officer or finance director, the SRO or the chief executive, sometimes at the request of the audit committee. Findings go to whoever commissions the review, written so they can go to the programme board, the audit committee or members.
When should we commission an independent review?
Before a decision that is hard to reverse: a go-live or cutover decision, a request to Cabinet or the board for more budget or a re-baselined date, a change of systems integrator, or a reorganisation deadline such as vesting day. Also when reporting has stayed green while milestones move.
How do we buy from you?
Lite, Standard and XL each sit below the Procurement Act 2023 thresholds for services, so most organisations can buy under their own contract procedure rules. Your procurement team will confirm the route. We are registered on the Central Digital Platform, and our supplier pack, insurance certificates and policies are available on request.
How much does an independent review cost, and how long does it take?
Every engagement is fixed price on a one-page scope, plus VAT, and starts within 5 working days of the first call.
Lite, £20,000, 1–2 weeks: an objective snapshot of where the programme stands.
Standard, £50,000, 3–4 weeks: root causes and a prioritised set of actions.
XL, £100,000, 6–8 weeks: for programmes spending more than £15m a year, or multi-country and multi-integrator programmes.
Portfolio Screen, 20% off any tier: four or more programmes, ranked on comparable evidence.
Traditional assurance engagements typically cost £200,000–£400,000 and take 8–12 weeks.
Do you only review ERP programmes?
No. The same approach applies to any large technology or transformation programme: finance, HR and payroll, revenues and benefits, case management or shared service platforms. ERP and finance programmes are where most of our experience sits.
Know where your programme really stands, before the audit committee asks.
No obligation, no sales pitch — just a conversation about whether it's the right moment to bring in an independent view.