A network of women’s charities won funding for a systems-change programme, judged not on client volumes but on whether institutions behaved differently and whether power moved to survivors. The evidence for that lives in commissioning specs, signed agreements, protocols and minutes as much as in outcome numbers.
The problem
Four partner charities each used their own case-management system, so outcomes could not be compared, institutional evidence sat scattered across inboxes and drives, and the funder’s reporting would have had to be assembled by hand from four sources.
What we built
We started from the winning bid and turned it into a measurable indicator framework, covering individual outcomes, equity, institutional change, survivor voice and delivery. From there we produced the full specification and data model for a bespoke platform, with its modules, roles and reporting mapped to those indicators, and a phased roadmap. We then built a working, clickable prototype so the team and the funder could see the reporting before committing to the build, and wrote the operating manual that says who does what and how much time it really takes.
What it makes possible
Four organisations with four different systems now share one agreed way to record and compare outcomes, with reporting built for exactly what the funder asks for. The programme runs for years, so the outcomes themselves are still ahead; what exists now is the capability to prove them.