Delivery & claims playbook
Evidence follows the work.
A delivery playbook for the middle of the project: scope, knowledge, records, acceptance, realised benefit and a claim packet the applicant can reconcile.
The operating loop
- 01Before submissionApplicant, scope, route and quote
- 02After agreed startConfigure, test, train and pilot
- 03At acceptanceReconcile actual deliverables and benefit
- 04At claimInvoice, full payment and applicant submission
Recommended decision
One evidence trail should connect the client’s problem, deployed record and paid invoice.
Resolve the funding boundary before delivery
| Check | Evidence | Consequence |
|---|---|---|
| Applicant | Exact legal entity/UEN, ultimate ownership, SME group size, location and funding capacity | Business name alone does not prove eligibility. |
| Prior activity | Existing implementation, deposits, contracts, prior supported solution | Do not retrospectively claim an already-started project. |
| Vendor route | Exact approved package or evidenced other-vendor ERP gap | A preferred supplier is insufficient justification. |
| Quote | Software entitlement, implementation, training, usage, maintenance, GST and exclusions | Do not rename labour/maintenance as software. |
| Independence | Declared relationships and verified activity restrictions | CyberG7 cannot invoice itself or submit on the SME’s behalf. |
| Timing | Submission record, award/project dates, client risk decision | After submission before approval is at applicant risk; this plan waits for approval unless explicitly chosen otherwise. |
Source: EDGE FAQ ↗ · Integrated ERP activity ↗
Build the production middle
| Workstream | Definition of ready | Accountable owner |
|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Signed facts, source/version, expiry/change owner, unknown-answer policy | SME business owner |
| Intake | Multi-turn fields persist; one request ID; incomplete details remain visible | CyberG7 delivery lead |
| Handover | Operator receives and acknowledges; backup route and staffed SLA; truthful customer status | SME operations lead |
| Records | One authoritative customer, appointment/job/case and invoice record | SME system/process owner |
| Actions | Policy-approved routine reply; transaction approval bound to final price, document or payment | SME commercial/finance owner |
| Observability | Delivery/acknowledgement receipts, queue age, error reasons and export | CyberG7 support owner |
| Governance | Tenant boundaries, processing terms, retention, role access and incident plan | Joint accountable owners |
| Adoption | Role practice and competency test, not only training attendance | SME team lead |
The evidence chain
RequirementNamed business need
Award / scopeApproved line and period
DeploymentTenant / entitlement ID
AcceptanceUAT and owner sign-off
ExpenseInvoice and full payment
| Evidence object | Minimum trace | Why it helps |
|---|---|---|
| Conversation / request | Tenant, source version, request ID, policy and handover state | Explains what the bot did and whether a person could act. |
| Transaction | Customer → quote → order → job/completion → invoice IDs | Proves connected operating functions, not screenshots of unrelated apps. |
| Acceptance | Scenario, observed result, approver, date and remediation | Keeps proposed targets distinct from achieved outcomes. |
| Benefit | Baseline cohort, new labour, rework, volume and realisation basis | Supports honest projections and subsequent business impact. |
| Commercial document | Quote line → award line → invoice → payment/reference | Allows supportable and excluded costs to be reconciled. |
| Change record | Request, approved final values, actor and receipt | Prevents a changed action from inheriting a stale approval. |
Use IDs and aggregated evidence where possible; do not place customer conversations, identity documents or personal details in a public demonstration. Capture evidence during delivery instead of reconstructing it at claim time.
Acceptance has three separate signatures
| Sign-off | Question | Required result |
|---|---|---|
| Technical | Does the configured system follow the agreed boundaries? | Critical scenarios, tenant/role tests, retries, rollback and exports pass. |
| Operational | Can staff complete the workflow without reconstruction? | Real representative transactions, queue ownership and training competence. |
| Commercial / financial | Is the ongoing service worth paying for? | Net labour, realisation, all-in cost and renewal scenario accepted. |
Funding compliance is an additional reconciliation, not a substitute for any of those signatures. A commercially useful self-funded project can be ineligible for a grant; a formally complete grant project can still be a poor investment.
Prepare one final claim
- SME confirms every awarded deliverable is complete and all project expenses are paid in full; preserve applicant payment evidence.
- Retain unique deployment identifiers, deployed-system evidence, invoice lines, dates, UAT and applicable training/impact reports.
- For ERP, follow the exact activity and Letter of Offer. Do not assume a vendor/scope change can be handled as a routine date extension.
- For large-scale transformation, arrange the required panel auditor. Its activity page requires a signed engagement before the claim and submission within 14 working days of signing; schedule from a ready packet.
- Applicant’s authorised personnel submit and respond to requests. Vendor/third party cannot apply or manage the grant on their behalf.
- Claim opening dates are November 1 for single-function/ERP/pre-scoped equipment, December 1 for other activities. Payment comes after assessment/approval, not on the opening date.
Source: EDGE FAQ ↗ · Integrated ERP activity ↗ · Large-scale digital transformation ↗
Use this as a preparation checklist
0 of 7 preparation items checked. This is not grant approval.
Checklist selections stay in this page session and are not submitted anywhere.