Check your programme can deliver. Decide how to proceed.
Independent digital programme assurance
Before investing further, moving your project into a new phase, or approving a launch, we help you assess whether the programme is ready for that next step. We examine its technical foundations and test whether the delivery plan is achievable.
Assurance can often be useful when a programme appears to be progressing well, giving you time to address weaknesses before they become critical or other work depends on them.
For CTOs, transformation directors, programme sponsors, and senior leadership.
When digital programme assurance helps
A major commitment is approaching
A new programme or its next phase would mean committing significant time and money. You want to know whether the proposed work, delivery plan, and any work already completed give you a sound basis to proceed.
The foundations need a second look
Architecture and platform choices are taking shape. We help you test whether they support what the business needs and allow the platform to scale in the future, before more work depends on them.
A launch decision needs evidence
A release date is approaching, and progress reports are encouraging. You want to understand what is ready in practice and what still needs to be resolved before launch.
A real engagement
Reviewing a retailer’s replatform plans
A large high street retailer was considering a replatforming programme and wanted an independent second opinion before approving the work. The plans included substantial changes to the customer-facing experience. John reviewed the proposal and the existing platform with the client’s engineers and stakeholders to establish which parts of the proposed work were needed.
Deciding what to retain
Whilst the front end clearly needed work to support the redesign aspirations, the existing integrations were still doing the job required of them and could scale to meet the programme’s needs. The review found no reason to replace them to deliver those changes; doing so would have added unnecessary work and cost.
Narrowing the scope
We helped the client narrow the programme’s scope, retaining the working integrations whilst keeping the planned customer-facing changes. This reduced costs by removing unnecessary replacement work from the plan and gave the client a clearer basis for deciding what to approve.
What we examine
We agree the scope, depth, and access with you before work begins.
Architecture and implementation
We look at how the architecture supports the business requirements and how it has been implemented in the code. Platform choices and technical debt can make later work harder, so we examine what they mean for the work still to do.
Content, integrations, and migration
A migration depends on content and connected systems working together. We examine the content models, content management system architecture, data flows, and external dependencies to see whether the migration plan accounts for them.
Delivery and operational readiness
We look at the working software alongside testing, deployment, and release practices to understand how ready it is for use. Performance, accessibility, resilience, and technical SEO can also be examined where they affect your plans.
The route to completion
A credible plan needs to account for the remaining work and the people available to do it. We discuss expectations with leadership and work through the technical dependencies, team capability, and assumptions with engineering, design, and product teams.
How we work with you
Understand the commitment ahead
We start with what you are about to approve and the questions you need answered. Your deadline helps us agree the scope, the evidence needed, and who should be involved.
Examine the work so far
We speak with those funding and leading the programme as well as the people delivering it. Their accounts give context to our examination of the architecture, code, and working software.
Check the plan against the work
We compare reported progress with what is ready in practice. Unresolved dependencies or different expectations across the team may affect whether the next phase is achievable, even when individual pieces of work are progressing well.
Discuss what needs attention
We work through the findings with you, explaining which issues affect the decision ahead and what could address them. You can ask questions about the trade-offs before deciding how to proceed.
Your report and briefing
Findings you can refer back to
The written report brings together what is working, what needs attention, and the evidence behind our findings. It explains how those findings affect the investment, phase, or launch you are considering.
Priorities before you proceed
You can see which issues need resolving before you commit and which can be managed as work continues. We explain the reasoning behind our recommendation, including any assumptions that still need checking.
A conversation about the findings
Your sponsor briefing is a conversation with John about the report. There is time to question the findings and discuss what they mean for your plans. We can also agree briefings for the people who need to act on them, from engineers and suppliers to senior leadership and the C-suite.
Further experience
Planning shared foundations across brands
A business operating several brands wanted to bring its separate websites and monolithic systems together under a shared design system and monorepo: a single repository for the related codebases. During a short planning engagement, John mapped the existing online estate and worked with product to establish what the brands could share and where they needed to differ. This became a detailed architecture and delivery plan.
Preparing the team to deliver
John also helped recruit a principal developer and brought them up to speed on the existing systems and the reasoning behind the plan. The principal developer went on to build a team of nearly twenty to put the plan into production over the following year.
Practical questions
Does the programme need to be in trouble?
No. We can help you check the technical foundations early, assess readiness for the next phase, or review the evidence behind a launch decision. This gives you time to address weaknesses before they become harder to resolve.
What does an assurance review establish?
It gives you an independent assessment of whether the technical evidence supports proceeding. The review covers the scope agreed with you and does not guarantee delivery or certify every aspect of the platform. If something important cannot be checked, we explain how that affects the recommendation.
Can a review fit an approaching decision deadline?
The time needed depends on the platform’s complexity, the questions you need answered, and how readily we can access the software, supporting material, and people involved. We discuss your deadline and our availability before agreeing the scope, so you know what we can realistically examine in the time available.
How are scope and fees agreed?
We start by discussing what you need to decide, your deadline, and the platform involved. We can then establish whether the work is a good fit and confirm our availability. Before investigation begins, we agree the scope, fees, and access with you, including who needs to be involved and the arrangements for your written report and sponsor briefing.
What access does a review need?
Usually, we need access to repositories, architecture material, a working environment, and delivery records, plus time with the people involved. We agree the access and handling arrangements with you before investigation begins. If something or someone is unavailable, we explain what that prevents us from establishing.
Is the review automated?
No. John conducts the core investigation and is responsible for the judgement and recommendation. AI-assisted analysis is only used with your approval and suitable security controls; it does not replace his examination of the evidence.
Who does John interview?
John speaks with the people funding and sponsoring the work, business stakeholders, and those designing, building, and delivering it. We agree who needs to take part and the access required. Comparing their experience with the software and delivery evidence helps us understand expectations, constraints, and what needs attention, without apportioning blame.
About Kavanagh Digital
Engineering experience behind the judgement.
John Kavanagh, founder of Kavanagh Digital, brings more than two decades of experience in hands-on development, front-end architecture, and engineering leadership. He leads every review and takes responsibility for its conclusions.
That experience extends beyond assurance to building platforms, guiding migrations, and supporting delivery teams. It helps John assess whether technical choices, implementation, and delivery plans fit together before your next commitment.
Discuss digital programme assurance
What decision is approaching?
Tell us about the programme, the commitment you are considering, and your deadline. We’ll discuss where a review could help, what it would involve, and our availability.
Email us