Master Programme Plan
Programme dashboard › Master programme plan
Master plan: milestone-led delivery
- Plan Working v0.1
- Next checkpoint 23 October 2026 · proposed
- Baseline Not approved
- Hierarchy Milestone → work package → tasks
P1 and P3 can start with bounded desk-based work once their work packages are authorised. P2 continues urgent Welsh recovery in parallel. P4 remains a standby gate, not a delivery stream.
Stage plan
Separate project authorisation at each boundary
| Stage | Products | Gate / acceptance | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| S0 — Set up | Master mandate, project briefs, starter work-package/task baselines, common source and status rules. | Executive records scope, authority, tolerances and reporting rule. | Working draft. |
| S1 — Parallel discovery and preservation | P1 source grading; P2 inventory, retrieval and witness preservation; P3 mapped Parcel A route and source-confidence layer. | Each work package has owner, outputs, acceptance test and spend boundary. | P2 active; P1/P3 bounded work awaiting authorisation. |
| S2 — Design and reconstruction | P1 room/landscape schedule and concept; P3 source-backed wireframe specifications, route storyboard and prototype; P2 reconciliation. | All historic depictions carry source and confidence; low-confidence content stays contextual or hypothetical. | Not yet delivered beyond existing inputs. |
| S3 — Feasibility and pilot | P1 Argentine land/permission/cost options; P3 route, device and visitor pilot; P2 disposition and closure matrix. | Separate proceed/revise/stop gate per project. | Not started. |
| S4 — Delivery and close | Only separately approved products: museum build if funded/permissioned; AR tour release if tested; evidence end-stage/retention report. | Acceptance evidence, benefits review, lessons and end-project report. | No delivery baseline or dates approved. |
The inherited P2 plan's G0 date of 18 December 2026 relates to its prior evidence-recovery initiation stage. It is not authority to build a museum, release an AR product or start legal proceedings. Updated gates must be explicitly recorded per project.
Master milestones and task groupings
Each line must expand to authorised work-package tasks
| Milestone | Work packages | Task group | Acceptance measure |
|---|---|---|---|
| PGM-0 — Baseline | WP-PGM-01 governance; WP-PGM-02 progress/reporting rules | Approve structure; assign role authority; accept initial tasks and measures. | Written decision and versioned baseline. |
| PGM-1 — P1/P3 independent start | WP-P1-01 source/visitor brief; WP-P3-01 spatial/source control | Source-confidence matrix; museum product schedule; parcel route and confidence map. | Accepted products and package descriptions. |
| PGM-2 — Preservation/recovery | WP-P2-01 inventory; WP-P2-02 disclosure; WP-P2-03 witness accounts; WP-P2-04 parcel/chronology; WP-P2-05 verification | Capture, route, follow-up, testimony privacy, provenance, reconcile and close. | Per-source status and action trail; separate missed reply from loss/destruction. |
| PGM-3 — Concepts/demonstrators | WP-P1-02 design; WP-P1-03 feasibility; WP-P3-02 wireframe layers; WP-P3-03 prototype | Evidence-linked concept and cost/option pack; testable AR wireframe journey. | Reviewable product pack, source checks and assumptions register. |
| PGM-4 — Project gates | WP-P1-04 business case; WP-P3-04 pilot; P2 end-stage package | Cost/benefit test; permission and usability check; source closure report. | Written, separate proceed/revise/stop decision. |
| PGM-5 — Conditional P4 gate | WP-P4-GATE standby only | Preserve source; define materiality; obtain written independent legal assessment; prepare business case. | Pass every condition and obtain explicit Executive go decision. |
Dependencies and critical path
Do not create false blocking dependencies
- P1 and P2: start research and concept now; P2 source recovery later updates a versioned reconstruction.
- P3 and P2: start route mapping and source checks now; exact-location wireframes wait for locational evidence, not for all unrelated retrieval to finish.
- P1 and P3: share source IDs, provenance and confidence conventions; each project has its own products and acceptance gate.
- P4 from P2: a potentially relevant lead is preserved under P2, but P4 needs independent legal review and written authority before any delivery work.
Work-package minimum fields and reporting
Unit of execution
Every authorised work package must state ID, milestone, purpose, outputs/product description, accountable owner, task IDs and states, planned dates/checkpoint, dependencies, tolerances, risks/issues, source links, acceptance test and approver. A task list without an acceptance criterion is not a complete work package.
At agreed intervals: checkpoint update and project highlight report. Forecast tolerance breach: exception report. At stage boundary: end-stage report plus next-stage plan. At closure: end-project report, product acceptance and benefits review. Dates and budget limits are proposed until the Executive records a decision.
P1 detailed plan · P2 detailed plan · P3 detailed plan · P4 gate.
Cross-cutting digital-quality work package
WP-DIG-NOM-01 · CR-DIG-2026-10-29-01
Nomenclature citation integrity. This work package supports P1, P2, P3 and the conditional P4 gate without creating a new top-level project or changing their task denominators. The cited nomenclature route has been changed from a five-form dictionary entry into a searchable, source-aware register of 148 wording entries across 25 groups, based on lexicon 1.0.1 (24 October 2026). Five rows have no direct source URL in the current lexicon; those are not presented as source-linked.
PRINCE2 control: Product description and acceptance criteria are recorded in the control sheet, with the change history in PR #53. Stage gates are separate: (G1) source merge, (G2) production deployment and assembled build, (G3) verify the final public route and Project Office page. The hotfix deployment is successful; the standard assembled build remains in progress. Do not mark final acceptance solely from a merge or deployment response.
Tolerances: £0 external spend; no title/parcel conclusions, fresh evidence harvest or legal merits opinion in scope. A source count change, broken route, failed build, external cost or unsupported identity claim triggers a recorded exception. The post-21 October nomenclature re-harvest remains a separate task.