Something else that might help
I did some sums based on an aerodrome with the following specifications :-
MSA : 3000 Ft
Landing THR Elev : 98 Ft
DER THR Elev : 101 Ft
RWY Length : 2 NM, including stopway/clearway.
There is a SID for departure from this RWY.
There is also a non-precision approach with MDA 700 feet, aligned with the runway and based on a VOR situated 1 NM prior to the landing THR. Missed approach point at the VOR.
I then assumed that a missed approach would be initiated 2 NM beyond the missed approach point at 500 Ft AMSL.
To climb away safely in this situation, a minimum nett gradient of 2.85% will keep you above the climb plane for the SID. Note that this gradient is based on no delay between decision to go, application of thrust and aircraft climb. Taking the delays associated with those factors into account, the actual climb gradient required will be considerably greater than that.
But, in any event, even at 2.85%, you're aircraft must be able to climb more steeply than the missed approach (2.5%) gradient. So, if you have a performance limitation imposed by, say, an engine inoperative, you must be sure that your residual climb performance is much better than 2.5%.
This will probably be the case with FAR 25 aircraft, especially if the landing weight has been significantly reduced by fuel burnoff enroute. But, as with all such things, it's a really good idea to consult the AFM to determine the climb performance that you can expect with OEI at the appropriate weight, with the existing environmental conditions.
Thus, this comes under the heading of "Contingency Procedures" or "Emergency Procedures", depending on which term your company uses. That means that they need to work out such a procedure for themselves, or by hiring a performance engineer to work it out for them. This is not the sort of thing that you can, or should, try to work out on the fly, at the time when you are in such a serious situation.