What should grant software connect?
It should connect the funder's approved requirements to the program's truthful service, workforce, outcome, financial, and reporting evidence while keeping each record's owner and purpose clear.
Federal awards have record-retention rules in 2 CFR 200.334, with exceptions and possible additional award terms. Other public and private grants have different requirements. The software should not apply one universal retention or eligibility rule.[1][2]
Which grant elements should be structured?
Translate the executed award and approved changes into a versioned program map. Preserve the original terms and name the person authorized to interpret ambiguity.
| Criterion | How to evaluate it |
|---|---|
| Award | Funder, agreement, identifier, period, amount, approved use, population, geography, restrictions, contacts, and amendments. |
| Budget | Category, amount, match, indirect cost, allocation, approval, revision, and financial-system reference. |
| Work plan | Activity, deliverable, owner, partner, milestone, due date, evidence, status, dependency, and approved change. |
| Service and workforce | Program, site, peer, participant or aggregate population, activity, time, training, supervision, and source record. |
| Measurement | Output, outcome, target, numerator, denominator, method, instrument, collection date, missingness, and limitation. |
| Reporting and closeout | Submission, narrative, financial reconciliation, approvals, receipt, corrections, property or data duties, and retention. |
How should the product handle mixed funding?
The service record should describe what happened. Funding classification should then apply approved rules and human review without changing the underlying service or claiming the same cost or output twice.
| Workflow moment | What good looks like | Evidence to request |
|---|---|---|
| One service, one funding decision | Program classifies the truthful service under an eligible source | Rule, reviewer, amount or activity, and source are visible |
| Shared cost | Approved allocation method divides an eligible cost across sources | Basis, period, calculation, approval, and accounting reconciliation |
| Ineligible activity | System routes to another appropriate source or records nonfunded work | No deletion or false reclassification |
| Award change | Approved amendment changes future budget, deliverable, or measure | Past reporting retains prior definitions |
| Closeout | Final deliverables, spending, adjustments, records, access, and retention are controlled | No loss when grant staff leave |
What should grant-funded programs ask vendors?
Test the executed award rather than a generic grant demo. Include an amendment, staff turnover, late entry, missing follow-up, shared cost, corrected report, and closeout.
- Can award terms, budget versions, measures, deadlines, approvals, source documents, and amendments remain connected and historical?
- How are participant-level records minimized and protected while still supporting aggregate deliverables?
- Can the system prevent or flag duplicate allocation, duplicate participant counts, overlapping funding, and inconsistent reporting periods?
- Can finance and program totals be reconciled without giving every user access to sensitive participant or payroll details?
- Can the organization retain usable records, definitions, evidence, approvals, and report history after closeout and vendor termination?
What should determine the purchase?
Choose the product that supports ordinary peer work first and produces the required grant evidence from that work with less re-entry, stronger control, and acceptable full cost.
Do not let a time-limited grant create an unsupported permanent system. Plan who owns administration, subscriptions, support, exports, integrations, and records after funding ends. Confirm allowability and procurement under the specific award before charging software costs.
Frequently asked questions
Can a grant pay the software subscription?
Possibly, if the cost is allowed under the specific award, approved budget, cost principles, procurement rules, timing, and allocation method. Confirm with the authorized grant and finance owners.
Can one participant count toward two grants?
It depends on each measure and award. The organization must prevent unsupported duplicate reporting and clearly define whether a participant, service, or outcome can be included in each denominator.
Should the system keep every grant record forever?
No universal period applies. Follow the award, applicable law, litigation or audit holds, organization policy, and authorized disposition process. Preserve the rule and date behind each decision.
Is a grant dashboard enough for an audit?
Usually not by itself. The organization may need source records, definitions, calculations, approvals, financial reconciliation, access history, submitted versions, and corrective-action evidence.
Sources and product pages
Government sources establish the legal and program requirements covered here. Official vendor pages document the product capabilities and positioning used in this guide.
- 2 CFR 200.334: Retention Requirements for Records: Electronic Code of Federal Regulations. Federal award record-retention baseline. Award terms and other laws may impose additional rules.
- Understanding Confidentiality of Substance Use Disorder Records: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Official federal overview of 42 CFR Part 2 applicability, consent, use, disclosure, and breach obligations.
- The HIPAA Security Rule: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Official federal overview of safeguards for electronic protected health information.
- Understand: Dashboards, Outcomes, and Reporting: Peerakeet. Peerakeet dashboards, outcome measures, exports, and funder reporting.