Find it while you still have choices
I challenge readiness evidence before weaknesses become rework, delay or failed implementation.
Independent programme assurance · AI governance
Everyone says the programme is ready. Someone has to be sure.
I independently challenge the evidence behind critical readiness decisions for government and other consequential organisations, so leaders know what is proven, what remains uncertain and what needs to change before they commit.
The executive risk
The cost is rarely the problem. It is finding it late.
Dashboards, stage gates and status reports can all be green while important assumptions remain untested.
Once commitments harden into dates and public expectations, choices narrow and the cost of correction rises.
Know what the evidence can support
Separate demonstrated readiness from assumption, expose material gaps and establish whether the decision has a defensible basis.
Protect the investment
Earlier challenge preserves options, reduces avoidable disruption and protects the value the programme was meant to create.
Independent challenge
Confidence is not the same as assurance.
At 31 March 2026, the Government Major Projects Portfolio contained 189 projects with a combined whole life cost of £924.2 billion.
Senior Responsible Owners provide NISTA with an updated delivery confidence rating each quarter. Where a project received active NISTA support or independent NISTA assurance within the previous six months, NISTA supplied an independent rating instead. Otherwise, the published rating was the SRO's self-reported assessment. Government guidance makes the SRO accountable for the project's success.
Sources, with dates: National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority, Major Projects Annual Report 2025–26, published 13 July 2026, portfolio snapshot at 31 March 2026; Government Project Delivery, Role of the senior responsible owner, updated 23 February 2026.
What makes the work different
I came to AI governance from the testing floor.
Does it actually work?
For more than two decades, my work has started with that question. Long before AI governance became an executive concern, I was testing complex systems where assumptions could not substitute for evidence.
I bring the same discipline to programme readiness and AI governance today: testing not just whether technology works, but whether the confidence placed in it is justified.
Selected institutions
Experience applied where the consequences matter.
Across government and complex public and private organisations.
Selected experienceView institutions and sectors
Financial services, insurance and regulation
Financial Conduct Authority · Lloyd’s of London · Hansard Global
Government and public services
HM Revenue & Customs · London Borough of Waltham Forest · London Borough of Newham · London Borough of Havering · Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council
Infrastructure, transport, energy and health
National Highways · Network Rail · British Gas · Genomics England · Energy Saving Trust
Technology and professional services
Microsoft · Fujitsu · Capgemini · Yell
Retail, consumer, travel and leisure
Marks & Spencer · Sodexo · The AA · Argos · William Hill · Saga · The Travel Corporation · The National Lottery
Education
Solent University
Membership and charitable organisations
The Scouts Association
Selected organisations, sectors and professional roles are named where disclosure is appropriate. Detailed programme information, assurance findings, commercial terms and client-confidential material remain private.
Three areas of work
Clearer decisions. Stronger evidence. Capability that lasts.
Each route begins with the decision or risk that needs confidence.
Programme Testing and Assurance
Test leadership, readiness, governance and decision-grade evidence for complex transformation.
Explore assurance
AI Governance and Intelligence Sovereignty
Govern dependence on intelligent systems while retaining judgement, control and continuity.
Explore the frameworkProfessional and Institutional Capability
Training, operating models and institutional development that leave usable capability behind.
Explore capability buildingFeatured publications
Original doctrine and practical assurance leadership.
Foundational paper · ISF-PAP-001
From Digital Trust to Intelligence Sovereignty
A formal account of the progression from software testing and quality assurance to Intelligence Assurance and Intelligence Sovereignty.
Cereark playbook · CEREARK-PUB-2026-001
Testing Leadership for Project and Programme Managers
A practical playbook for making adequate provision, asking better questions and governing evidence throughout delivery.
A useful first conversation