A review point exists to produce decisions. The progress summary is the input; the output is a short record of what was decided, by whom, with an owner and a date. The five verbs from the governance course apply: fund, stop, reassign, escalate or close. The first item on every review agenda is the list of decisions from the last review and whether each was carried out. A review that does not begin there is a fresh presentation each time, and nothing accumulates.
Corrective action is what the decisions produce when an indicator is red: a barrier reassigned to someone with authority, a launch held, a budget line increased, a vendor put on notice, a template locked. Record it in plain terms so the steering committee and the next review can see it. Where the review decides not to act, record that too, with the reason, so the decision can be revisited rather than forgotten.
Sustainment is where most accessibility improvements fail. A project remediates the forms, trains the staff, fixes the platform, and then closes; a year later a reorganization, a software update or a new template quietly undoes it. Before any improvement project closes, name the operating owner who will maintain the change as part of their ordinary work, remove the old way from circulation where possible, and put a sustainment indicator on the progress summary: is the improvement still operating as designed? The governance category in your progress summary exists for exactly this.
Report progress honestly. The public-facing progress report, where appropriate, tells communities what changed, what is still open and what was decided. Its credibility rests on naming the open items. A report that only lists successes is read as marketing by the people who still meet the barriers every day.
