Practical software guides
A grant decision log can explain a decision; it cannot guarantee fairness. Eligibility rules, reviewer conflicts and an approved correction or appeal route must be designed independently.
| Stage | Control |
|---|---|
| Intake | Only required evidence; restricted storage |
| Eligibility | Published criteria version and human decision |
| Review | Conflict declaration; exclude conflicted reviewer |
| Decision | Reason code and approved explanation |
| Correction | Applicant can report wrong facts through an approved route |
| Board report | Aggregate totals; no public sensitive attachments |
A synthetic application missing one required document should show the correction request and its approved deadline, not disappear. Do not infer eligibility from an AI summary or treat a score as a legal entitlement.
Where applicants include minors, have safeguarding and privacy specialists approve collection, access and retention. Test an unauthorised reviewer and a corrected application after scoring. Use an existing grant-management product when it supports the process; a custom public status view may be the only missing component.