Advisory Services

We advise, oversee, and strengthen the governance and delivery conditions that determine whether large social investments deliver on their commitments.

Our advisors have held direct responsibility within the institutions they now assess independently, and have worked inside the delivery environments they review.

Every engagement is led at senior level from first conversation to final output. We return to assess whether findings held.

Request a confidential conversation See our services

Investment Lifecycle

Where we engage

Clients engage Sustenra at three distinct points.

Phase 1

Before commitment

A significant funding decision is approaching and the governance and partner conditions need independent assessment.

Phase 2

During delivery

A programme is live and the funder needs independent visibility over whether delivery conditions are holding.

Phase 3

When delivery is at risk

Performance or governance has weakened and the institution needs a clear picture of what has changed and what to do next.

Observed Across Portfolios

What tends to go wrong in well-funded programmes

Across many portfolios the same structural weaknesses appear.

Governance design is often underweighted at the point of commitment

Most structural weaknesses are visible before implementation begins. They are rarely acted on.

Partner accountability is frequently assumed rather than tested

Contracts and self-reporting rarely provide enough visibility into delivery conditions.

Performance signals arrive later than governance signals

By the time problems appear in output data, the structural conditions causing them have been in place for months.

Credibility risk is usually built into the structure

Weak oversight, blurred authority, and misaligned incentives create conditions where credibility failures become inevitable.

Independent review changes what leaders are willing to act on

Boards act differently when findings come from someone with no stake in the programme and no relationship to protect.

Where We Are Most Useful

Situations where independent advisory adds the most value

Clients usually engage when a decision carries governance or credibility risk that internal teams are too close to assess objectively.

Ahead of capital deployment, when governance structures are still open to challenge and adjustment
When partner funding or operating conditions have shifted and original governance assumptions may no longer hold
When performance signals are unclear and reporting is describing activity rather than structural health
Ahead of board or investment renewal, before continuation is approved rather than after concern has hardened
When partner relationships are under strain and the underlying structural causes have not been independently assessed
When institutional scrutiny is increasing and the people asking questions need more than the programme's own account of itself
When major funding reductions have disrupted delivery arrangements and the institution needs independent advice on what remains viable, what needs restructuring, and how to protect outcomes

Our role is to act before pressure makes the structural conditions harder to change.

Institutional Experience Behind The Work

Judgement shaped inside the systems we now review

Sustenra's founding advisors have held direct responsibility within the kinds of institutions they now assess independently: public research funders, multilateral health bodies, and complex delivery environments. That inside knowledge shapes how we identify structural risk, what we notice before it surfaces in reporting, and what we are prepared to say when a decision matters.

Selected institutional experience is available on our About and Experience pages

Meet the team View experience

Our Services

Where we work in the investment lifecycle

Every engagement is scoped to a specific decision. There is no open-ended retainer that starts before the question is clear. Work begins once the decision at stake, the risk around it, and the appropriate level of involvement have been established.

Before Commitment

Partner Identification and Due Diligence

Independent assessment of implementation partners before capital is committed.

Governance readiness and operational credibility
Mandate alignment and partner track record
Accountability conditions for a workable relationship
Clear recommendation, not a longlist

Portfolio Triage and Restructuring Advisory

Decision support for portfolios disrupted by donor withdrawal or shifting priorities.

Rapid structured review across the full portfolio
Four-category decision matrix: sustain, transition, restructure, or wind down
Independent assessment of which programmes retain the conditions to remain viable after funding contraction
Protecting outcomes where delivery capacity remains strong but funding structures have changed
Designed for leadership, not programme teams
Delivered under time pressure

Investment Due Diligence and Governance Design

Independent review of an investment's structure and governance before funds are deployed.

Governance design and oversight arrangements
Authority, incentives, and accountability flows
Whether the structure will hold under real delivery conditions
Written assessment with clear findings and recommendations

During Delivery

Governance Strengthening

Strengthening oversight and accountability in a programme that is operating but undergoverned.

Reporting systems and accountability arrangements
Oversight gaps and where authority is unclear
Practical recommendations the existing team can act on

Programme Stabilisation

Resetting governance where a programme is drifting from its mandate.

Clarity around authority, accountability, and reporting
Stakeholder realignment
Restored coherence between funder intent and delivery

Recovery and Realignment

Structural diagnosis and rebuild where governance has broken down.

Root cause of the structural failure
Accountability rebuild between funders, partners, and governance bodies
Realignment plan with clear ownership

When the Picture Is No Longer Clear

Implementation Oversight Mandate

Ongoing independent visibility into governance health and reported performance.

External layer of judgement for boards, funders, or investors
Mandate alignment and credibility of reported performance
Structured findings, not periodic check-ins

Sustainability and Follow-Through Review

A structured return 6 to 18 months after an initial engagement to assess whether findings held.

Whether outcomes are holding under real conditions
Whether governance structures are functioning independently
Risks that have emerged since the original work
Same accountability standard we apply to any delivery partner

How Engagements Are Scoped

Each engagement begins with a specific decision, not a standard package.

There are no standard packages. The starting point is always a confidential conversation about the decision in front of you, the risk around it, and the level of involvement required to make that decision with confidence.

What we assess

The governance and oversight structure of the programme or investment
Partner accountability arrangements and mandate alignment
The adequacy of performance oversight and reporting systems
The structural conditions affecting credibility and long term sustainability

What clients receive

A written assessment, diagnostic report, or governance framework specific to the engagement
Clear findings that support decisions, not broad observations that require interpretation
Direct access to the same senior advisor from first conversation to final output, with no handoff to a junior team
Follow-on support where further testing or refinement is needed

Work with us when the stakes are high and internal visibility is not sufficient.

If you are approving, renewing, restructuring, or overseeing a significant social investment commitment and need independent senior advisory support, start with a confidential conversation.

Request a confidential conversation