A programme of this size stands or falls on its governance: what each initiative has committed to, whether it is on track, and what evidence sits behind each step. The alliance needed one environment to run all of that from, and its static trackers could not hold it.
Static trackers, such as the spreadsheets most programmes start with, cope with a short list of tasks. They struggle when many initiatives move at once, when progress is measured against milestones rather than activity, and when the people with the facts are spread across 36 states instead of sitting at the centre.
Reporting raised the bar again. The programme had to report at three levels: the activity under way, how well initiatives were executing, and the outcomes they were producing. Each level builds on the one below, so a gap in the field data weakens every report above it.
To govern itself well, the programme needed:
- Many initiatives, champions and workstreams tracked side by side
- Progress measured against each initiative's milestones and roadmap
- Field-level data captured across 36 states, not just at the centre
- Reporting on activity, execution and outcomes from the same source