The question this answers
How do you design a grant program so data is collected once and used everywhere?
What the problem looks like without a reusable data architecture
Your application form asks for the project location. Your contract template asks for it again. Your reporting form asks for it a third time. Sometimes the answers don’t match, and nobody notices until audit.
It’s not just location. It’s organisation details, project timelines, budget figures, contact information. Every stage of the grant lifecycle has its own form, built in isolation, collecting its own version of the same data.
The result: grant applicants repeat themselves, staff re-enter data, errors creep in, and when someone asks “how many projects did we fund in regional areas?”, you have three different numbers depending on which form you pull from.
The problem isn’t that you’re collecting too much data. It’s that you’re collecting the same data multiple times and it doesn’t connect.
What I design
A mapped data architecture that shows how every field flows through the grant lifecycle:
- Which questions support eligibility decisions
- Which questions feed assessment criteria
- Which fields carry through to contracts
- Which data points are needed for reporting
- Which metrics enable evaluation and cross-program analysis
Each piece of information is collected once, in the right format, at the right stage, and reused wherever it’s needed.
What good looks like vs what bad looks like
Bad:
| Stage | What you ask | What happens |
|---|---|---|
| Application | “Project location” (free text) | Applicant writes “North-West Queensland” |
| Contract | “Project address” (free text) | Staff copy-paste, add a street address |
| Report | “Where was the project delivered?” (free text) | Recipient writes “Mount Isa and surrounds” |
| Evaluation | “How many regional projects?” | Three different answers in three different formats |
Good:
| Field | Collected at | Format | Reused for |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary delivery location | Application | Structured address + LGA dropdown | Eligibility check, contract schedule, reporting pre-fill, regional analysis |
| Organisation ABN | Application | Validated ABN lookup | Eligibility, contract party, ATO verification, duplicate detection |
| Project start date | Application | Date field with validation | Milestone scheduling, contract dates, reporting triggers, timeliness analysis |
| Total project cost | Application | Itemised budget table | Assessment scoring, contract budget, variation tracking, cost benchmarking |
One field, one format, multiple uses. No re-keying. No conflicting versions. No reconciliation at reporting time.
Why it matters
Grant programs generate a lot of data. Most of it gets trapped in forms, spreadsheets, and disconnected systems. When someone needs to report on outcomes, analyse patterns, or answer a ministerial question, staff spend days pulling numbers together and hoping they match.
A reusable data architecture fixes this at design stage. You decide upfront what you need to know, when you need to collect it, and how it flows through the system. Applicants aren’t asked the same question three times. Staff aren’t re-entering data. Reports pull from a single source of truth.
The smartest grant programs don’t just collect data. They design it to be used.
