A growing non-profit · Proposals and reporting
How we turned a seven-step approval process, and a report that ran six months late, into one clear route to sign-off.
What they asked for
Help getting proposals and reports out on time. Every piece went through its own set of reviewers, often seven or eight, and one annual report had come out six months late. They wanted to know who needed to see what, and who had the final say.
What was actually going on
Nobody had ever agreed the route to sign-off, so it was renegotiated every time. Drafts went round again after every edit, people reviewed documents they'd written themselves, and contractors chased approval on text that had already been approved. How long a review really took lived in one person's head, so colleagues supplying content often got two or three days' notice for work that needed a month.
What we built
First, four types of proposal and report, from a quick update to a major bid, each with a realistic lead time. Then, for each type, one agreed route: who writes, who contributes, who reviews, how long they have, and who signs off, by role rather than by name. Finally, every deadline planned backwards on the team's project board, so review dates go into diaries weeks ahead, with a template and a short brief to start each piece.
What changed
Everyone can see who decides what, and when. Each proposal and report sits on one board with its owner, its deadline and its review dates booked from the start. On the biggest bid of the year, the team tried a new split: fundraising set the structure and direction, and the programme team wrote the core content. It worked, and it's now how they plan to approach major bids.