Useful resources
Illustrative Outputs
See the shape of an action plan, a service review and a delivery dashboard before discussing your commission.
See how useful outputs can be organised.
These three layouts show ways to organise actions, review findings and delivery information. They are blank examples for discussion and adaptation. They do not describe client work, findings or measured results.
A market improvement action plan
A short action plan links the work to a responsible person, a date and the information needed to review progress. Replace every bracketed field before using this layout.
Service / market: [Name] Plan owner: [Name / role] Review date: [Date]
| Work to organise | Owner | Target / review date | Evidence or output |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bring together the current performance baseline. | [Named lead] | [Date] | [Sources, reporting period and gaps] |
| Review trader and visitor feedback. | [Named lead] | [Date] | [Feedback source, date and limitations] |
| Review operating issues and possible improvements. | [Named lead] | [Date] | [Issue list, options and supporting information] |
| Agree priorities and the next delivery steps. | [Decision owner] | [Date] | [Decision record, resources and next review] |
Add an action status and explain any change to the target date. Keep evidence separate from assumptions, and record decisions that still need to be made.
A focused service-review outline
A useful review explains the question, how it was examined, what the evidence supports and the decisions that follow. This contents outline can help define the report you want to commission.
| Section | What it should help the reader understand |
|---|---|
| 1. Question and agreed scope | The issue to resolve, intended users, included work and exclusions. |
| 2. Methods and material reviewed | Documents, data, discussions and the period covered. |
| 3. Evidence and limitations | Sources, gaps, assumptions and matters that could not be verified. |
| 4. Current arrangements | How the service operates and who is responsible. |
| 5. Findings | What the available evidence shows, with a clear link to its source. |
| 6. Options and implications | The choices, trade-offs, dependencies and further work needed. |
| 7. Recommended next steps | Priorities, reasons, proposed owners and review points. |
| 8. Decisions and implementation | Decisions required, delivery responsibilities and unresolved questions. |
| 9. Supporting material | An evidence index and relevant appendices, as agreed. |
The methods and level of detail must fit the agreed question. A document review does not establish facts that have not been checked, and missing evidence should be visible in the findings.
A delivery dashboard with the next decision in view
This layout keeps status, evidence and the next decision together. Every status below is Not yet assessed; the table contains no project performance data.
Programme: [Name] Reporting period: [Dates] Prepared by: [Name / role]
| Area of work | Status | Evidence / latest position | Next decision and owner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Programme priorities | Not yet assessed | [Agreed priorities / information gap] | [Decision, owner and date] |
| Partner contributions | Not yet assessed | [Confirmed contributions / assumptions] | [Decision, owner and date] |
| Funding and delivery capacity | Not yet assessed | [Available resources / unresolved gap] | [Decision, owner and date] |
| Priority projects and milestones | Not yet assessed | [Milestone evidence / dependency] | [Decision, owner and date] |
| Progress review | Not yet assessed | [Current measures / next review] | [Decision, owner and date] |
Suggested status words: Not yet assessed · On track · Needs attention · Awaiting decision. Agree what each means for your programme and explain the evidence behind each status. Use words alongside any colour.
Choose the next step that fits your work.
Organise the question
Use a short check to identify priorities, then turn them into a project brief.
Prepare the instruction
The commissioning pack brings together company information, scoping questions and the route to a discussion.