Governance Assurance Review
Check whether governance is strong enough to carry the programme you are trying to deliver.
Check whether governance is strong enough to carry the programme you are trying to deliver.
Delivery can exist without governance being fit for purpose. Scope creep, weak sponsor engagement, inconsistent reporting, and poor change control accumulate quietly. By the time they become visible delivery failures, the cost of correction is significantly higher than the cost of this review.
An independent governance assurance review looks at what is actually in place - not what the programme documents say is in place - and provides leadership with a prioritised, honest assessment of where governance is strong and where it is not.
Review of governance arrangements, decision authority, and escalation protocols against what the programme actually requires.
How scope is defined, how change is controlled, and whether the change control process is actually being followed.
Quality of the RAID log, whether risks are being actively managed, and whether assumptions are being tracked and tested.
Whether the sponsor is genuinely engaged, whether stakeholder communication is timely, and where gaps exist.
Review of the delivery rhythm - whether milestones are meaningful, reporting is accurate, and the board is getting a true picture.
Prioritised recommendations across all governance areas reviewed, with suggested remedial actions
10-slide summary of governance findings suitable for board or sponsor presentation
One-hour session presenting findings to senior leadership with Q&A and challenge
Bespoke scope · Independent · Board-ready output
An independent view of where governance is working, where it is not, and what needs to change.
Evidence-based assurance for boards, investors, and sponsors that the programme is on track - or what to do if it is not.
A prioritised set of governance improvements with named owners and clear timelines.
A governance review often identifies the right next intervention.
| Product | Fee | Duration | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Embedded PMO | Bespoke | 3-12 months | Learn more → |
| Programme Recovery | Bespoke | Rapid triage | Learn more → |
| Implementation (Delivery) | Bespoke | 60 days | Learn more → |
| Leadership (Interim / Fractional) | Bespoke | As required | Learn more → |
An independent assurance review delivered by senior practitioners with operating-level programme experience.
A Governance Assurance Review is an independent examination of a programme's governance health - its structures, decision-making processes, risk and issue management, financial controls, and stakeholder management. It produces an honest assessment of whether the governance is fit for purpose and specific recommendations for improvement.
Boards, audit committees, investors, and senior executives who want an independent view of whether a major programme is being governed effectively. It is also commissioned by programme sponsors who want to identify governance gaps before they become failures.
A programme health check typically covers delivery status - whether the programme is on time, on budget, and on scope. A Governance Assurance Review focuses specifically on the governance mechanisms - whether the right decisions are being made by the right people with the right information, and whether risks and issues are being managed appropriately.
It examines: governance structure and decision rights, the quality and frequency of programme reporting, risk and issue management processes, financial governance and budget management, dependency and interdependency management, stakeholder engagement and escalation paths, and the programme leadership's ability to make difficult calls.
Two to four weeks for most programmes. Larger or more complex programmes may take up to six weeks. We calibrate the timeline to the size and urgency of the review.
We present findings directly and accurately. Our obligation is to the commissioning party - typically the board or investor - not to the programme team. We are constructive about improvement recommendations but do not soften findings to manage sensitivities.
Yes - in fact a mid-programme review is often more valuable than a post-delivery review. Identifying governance gaps while the programme is still running allows them to be fixed before they contribute to failure.
Common outcomes include: restructuring of the steering committee or governance hierarchy, improvement of risk and issue escalation processes, introduction of more rigorous financial governance, changes to reporting format and frequency, and - occasionally - changes to programme leadership.
Yes. We can transition from assessment to implementation - helping to redesign the governance framework, embed the new processes, and support the programme team in operating the improved governance model.
Fixed fee, calibrated to the size and complexity of the programme. It is typically a modest investment relative to the scale of the programme being reviewed. Contact us for a specific indication.