A Guide to the Capital Planning Workflow in Capital Command

The real sequence, start to finish

1. Document the Need (`/needs`, `/needs/new`) — a specific capital item (apparatus replacement, a station project, major equipment) with its own description, planning-level cost estimate, and timeline. This is the single on-file record everything downstream connects back to. 2. Research funding (`/funding`) — Capital Command's Funding Intelligence surfaces real, currently-tracked grant and funding programs that may fit the Need, based on your department's own on-file profile — it never fabricates a program or an eligibility match. 3. Apply (`/applications`) — once a real funding opportunity is identified, the Application workspace tracks the actual submission: guided interview, budget worksheet, narrative drafting assistance (always labeled AI-suggested until a human edits it), and the real certification/submission step. 4. Report (`/reports/capital-improvement-plan`) — the Capital Improvement Plan report composes your department's own documented Needs into a multi-year view for a governing board, distinguishing secured funding from a hoped-for source.

Why the order matters

Skipping straight to an application without a documented Need first means the application has nothing real to draft from — the Need record is what every later AI-drafting step in this app reads from, not a separate description you re-type each time.

A department profile that's actually filled in matters more than it looks

Every downstream step — funding matching, narrative drafting, board reports — reads from your department's own on-file profile and apparatus/equipment records. An incomplete profile doesn't cause an error; it causes a Funding Intelligence match or a drafted narrative to be thinner than it should be, honestly reflecting what's actually on file rather than guessing at what's missing.

Related

Start a new capital planning cycle from Needs, and track its full lifecycle through to a board-ready report.