A grant programme connects several decisions over time. Keeping the history usable matters even when different tools support each stage. This is a workflow design discussion, not a description of Scout's available features.
Connect the stages through records
Programme configuration defines the criteria and requested information. Intake associates a submission with those rules. Evaluation records the review, and the decision stage records its outcome. Later monitoring needs to identify which approved submission it concerns.
A change in criteria or a revised submission should remain distinguishable from the version previously reviewed. Decide which information each role needs without assuming that every participant should see the full record.
Test continuity with a changed application
Use an illustrative case in which an applicant supplies a correction after initial review. Follow how the change reaches reviewers and whether the earlier decision requires reconsideration. Specify what must appear in a later report.
The important requirement is continuity of identity and explanation. A single interface is not enough if staff still reconcile those relationships outside it.
Separate discovery from programme administration
HATT Scout matches grants and tenders to organisation profiles. It should not be evaluated as a programme administration system on the basis of that capability.
For a custom intake, evaluation or reporting process, start with the actual requirements and discuss the workflow with HATT.