PLI has disbursed just ₹21,534 crore of a ₹1.97-lakh-crore outlay, and ~70% of incentives go to two sectors. Your state wins some of it; what it hasn't built is the audit spine that captures RAMP gap-funding and the under-served PLI sectors through a sharper Strategic Investment Plan.
The number that should worry an industries secretary isn't the outlay - it's the collapse between a ₹1.97-lakh-crore PLI promise and what your state actually captures. PLI tells the story:
Every under-served PLI sector your state doesn't position for, and every RAMP component left undesigned in the SIP, is industrial capital your neighbour captures. The SIP is the lever - and it is a solvable, recoverable gap.
We grade each department on a four-level scale - Mature, Fragmented, Emerging, Policy-light - because the right intervention depends on where you already are.
State industries departments run cluster and incentive schemes reliably. What's missing is the connective tissue: a RAMP Strategic Investment Plan that captures every gap-funding component, positioning for under-served PLI sectors, and corridor-SPV equity structuring. The right intervention is a positioning upgrade, not capability-building from scratch. We enhance your machinery; we never replace it.
One deliverable, built for your state, that your industries secretary can hand to a deputy secretary and act on the same week. Five components:
Every scheme you can draw on - RAMP, PLI sectors, cluster (MSE-CDP) & corridor schemes - with your released-vs-available position and the share rules that govern each.
Every sanction at risk of lapsing, litigation or re-appropriation this year - ranked by recoverable value and the deadline to act, so nothing quietly slips back to the Centre.
Every recommended action passed through five gates - continuity, instrument & burden, absorption, conditionality & audit-survivability, timing - so you only chase what you can absorb and certify.
The utilisation-certificate and documentation position that unlocks the next tranche - mapped against exactly what a CAG performance audit looks for.
Each recommendation tied to a named source - the district, the scheme line, the pendency figure, the owner and the deadline. Zero generic filler.
From the day a proposal is drafted to the day a CAG auditor asks a question, every transition writes a verifiable record - who decided, on what criteria, against which milestone, with what proof of utilisation. The pipeline becomes auditable end-to-end, not just at the point of release.
The same discipline that governs a well-run grant jury governs every recommendation we make - so the output holds up when it's questioned.
Where official figures differ, the conflict is recorded openly and the lower Tier-1 value adopted; the disputed figure is held back, never quietly used.
An independence firewall and an open conflict register - declared up front, auditable after the fact.
Every figure time-stamped and attributable to a named source; nothing rests on memory or undocumented assertion.
Tier-1 (Parliamentary, budget, CAG) over Tier-2 (dashboards, agency reports). Lower tiers corroborate, never carry a claim.
Cycle times are measured continuously, surfacing the bottleneck instead of estimating it annually.
DPDP Act 2023 aligned, minimal personal data; your data stays yours, and the deliverables are licensed to the Government.
This is how a finding looks - sourced, gated, owner-assigned, and stamped with a release certificate. Sensitive specifics are redacted here; your report carries your department's real figures.
Of the eligible RAMP sub-schemes, are unclaimed in the SIP - a capture gap, with the World-Bank-aligned milestones and state co-funding holding the release.
The state is positioned for of eligible PLI sectors, missing under-served lanes where competition is lower. A sector-positioning plan captures them before …
Illustrative. A real report is customized to your department, district clusters and current-year figures.
We measure auditable process integrity, never sanctioning decisions that sit with the Centre. Four layers, tracked continuously:
DPR completeness · land & clearance readiness · documentation
Eligibility-match accuracy · submission-window timeliness · UC clearance rate
Submitted → shortlisted → sanctioned - tracked as odds, never promised
Release-against-sanction · utilisation % · completion (department-owned)
Before this engine ever recommends chasing a rupee, the opportunity clears five gates. It's why the output survives an audit instead of becoming a liability.
Is the scheme live, funded and continuing - or sunsetting? No chasing money about to disappear.
Grant, loan or incentive? What state share and recurring burden does drawing it actually create?
Can the department spend and certify it in time, given current capacity? Absorption is the real constraint.
What conditions and UCs gate the release - and will the spend survive a CAG review?
What is the window, and the deadline to act, before the money lapses or re-appropriates?
The engine doesn't add to your reporting burden - it converts the burden you already carry into captured funds and a cleaner audit position.
Sanctions at risk of re-appropriation become a ranked, deadline-bound action list - recovered before the year closes.
Every action is pre-mapped to what a CAG performance audit looks for - you act and document in the same motion.
A captured-funds and certified-utilisation story the Chief Minister can see - and your department can stand behind.
Nothing is contingent on a sanction outcome. The Government commits only to a small, fixed first step and decides each subsequent stage on demonstrated value.
A fixed-scope audit of every live industries sanction, the UC-pendency map, and a ranked completion-at-risk list with remediation paths.
Build the evidence-chained DPR template, the eligibility matrix and the submission-sanction-utilisation tracker, piloted on 2-3 priority assets.
Operate a delivery office for the priority cohort - drive completion and UC closure within scheme deadlines.
Extend the operating system across the department's full industries portfolio - only after proof.
We ask for a 25-minute hearing of the concept, and the nomination of an operating owner for a Stage-0 diagnostic should the Government wish to proceed. Because central funds are gated by both the spending department and Finance, two offices are best engaged together - as co-owners, not in sequence.
Gates the RAMP state co-funding, corridor-SPV equity and PFMS fund-flow timing. Engaged first where the budget sits.
Owns the SIP, the cluster schemes and PLI positioning - the office that converts an outlay into captured, certified incentives.
Tier 1 = Parliamentary replies, budget documents, CAG reports, official policy. Tier 2 = ministry dashboards and agency reports. Where sources conflict, the lower Tier-1 value is adopted and the conflict recorded.
| Claim | Value | Source & date | Tier |
|---|---|---|---|
| RAMP total outlay | ₹6,062.45 cr (FY23-FY27) | RAMP scheme / World Bank | 1 |
| PLI total outlay | ₹1.97 lakh cr (14 sectors) | DPIIT | 1 |
| PLI disbursed since inception | ₹21,534 cr | Commerce & Industry Ministry | 1 |
| PLI incentive concentration | ~70% electronics & pharma | DPIIT | 2 |
| PLI investment received | ₹2.16 lakh cr+ | DPIIT | 2 |
| MSME PLI beneficiaries | 176 | DPIIT | 2 |
A blueprint capture report for your state: a per-scheme entitlement and utilisation map across RAMP, PLI sectors, cluster and corridor schemes; a completion-at-risk register; five-gate capture-risk gating; and a utilisation-certificate and audit-readiness pack your officers can act on and defend.
No. We are independent and non-lobbying. We never guarantee a sanction, never charge a fee contingent on a grant, and never claim influence over central decisions. We strengthen the pipeline; your department acts on it.
Yes. The engine is built on the ministry's FY2026-27 figures and documented gaps, sourced to PRS, Union Budget documents, ministry dashboards and CAG reports - the same sources your own staff would cite. The full Evidence Ledger is on this page.
With a 25-minute confidential briefing and the nomination of an operating owner. The only commitment that follows, if you choose, is a fixed-scope 30-day Stage-0 diagnostic. Nothing is contingent on a sanction.
A 25-minute confidential briefing. We'll come back with one specific, sourced industries-fund capture opportunity for your state - no obligation, no slide-ware.