Prove · baseline BL-047

Security Engineering

Security Engineering, all regions, as run before the agents were switched on. Owner at the time of measurement: Director, Security Engineering.

Baseline register

Status

Locked and signed

confidence 0.83

Cost per unit

$47.09

98,410 units in the window

Cycle time

18.8 hrs

pre-agent, measured end to end

Quality

92.4%

defect escape rate, inverted

Claimed on this baseline

$10.91m

$3.34m independently verified

Posted to the ledger

2 of 5

cash lines with a journal reference

How it was measured

Invoice reconstruction

Method

Invoice reconstruction

Method note

Vendor invoices, contractor timesheets and purchase orders re-added for the window and tied back to the posted ledger balance.

Window

FY24 Q3, thirteen weeks

Sample

2,952

Confidence in the method

0.83

Sign-off

Who accepted this as the number to beat

Status

Locked and signed

Signed by

Helena Marsh

Role

VP Financial Planning and Analysis

Signed

21.4 months ago

Caveat carried with the number

Locked and signed. The window is a full quarter and the method leaves an audit trail that can be re-performed.

Where the benefit lands

Account and cost center this baseline reconciles to

General ledger account

6500 · Outsourced services, shared centers

Managed-service fees for the shared towers. Volume-priced, so a throughput change moves this account within one billing cycle.

Corporate GL · Third party · owner Sofia Lindqvist, Finance Business Partner, Operations

Cost center

CC-3010 · Engineering

Global · owner Daniel Okoye · annual budget $38.11m

Engineeringfunction view EV-BL-047evidence chain

Benefit lines resting on this baseline

5 lines · $10.91m claimed · $7.99m realized · $3.34m verified

Period	Category	Claimed	Realized	Verified	Status	Variance	Journal
FY25 Q3	Outsourced cost	$1.41m	$871.8k	not verified	Not verified	Unexplained Internal audit could not trace part of the realized figure to a driver. The untraced amount stays in the variance column.	not posted
FY25 Q4	Outsourced cost	$2.04m	$1.43m	$1.24m	Partly verified	Method mismatch The baseline was measured by survey and the realized figure by system extract. The two are not comparable without a bridge, and no bridge has been built.	JV-2025Q4-0097
FY26 Q1	Outsourced cost	$2.61m	$1.62m	not verified	Not verified	Timing Benefit landed one period later than claimed. The run rate is intact; the period attribution was wrong.	not posted
FY26 Q2	Outsourced cost	$3.11m	$2.52m	$2.09m	Partly verified	Volume Seasonal volume ran ahead of baseline, which flatters the realized figure rather than the claim.	JV-2026Q2-0098
FY26 Q3	Outsourced cost	$1.74m	$1.55m	not verified	Period open	Period open The period is not closed. The realized figure is a run rate, not a result, and nothing in it has been verified.	not posted

What this record is, and what it is not

A benefit realization ledger reconciled to a general ledger needs the customer’s actual baseline figures and account structure. Modeled numbers demonstrate the instrument and prove nothing about the business case.

The measurement window ran FY24 Q3, thirteen weeks over a sample of 2,952. That sample size is on the page because a baseline drawn from twelve cases and one drawn from forty thousand are not the same instrument, and averaging them into a single confidence figure would hide which one you are looking at.

2 of 5 cash lines resting on this baseline carry a journal reference. A benefit line with no journal reference has not touched the general ledger, so it is shown as claimed rather than counted as realized cash.