Reusable requirement sets
the grantor previews exactly what they'll share before consenting| Set | Items | Applied to | Fulfilment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arable 2026 · policy renewals | 4 | 38 policies | 126 of 152 items received |
| Green facility 2026 · lending | 5 | 11 facilities | 42 of 55 items received · drawdown-gating |
| Storm event evidence · claims | 3 | per event workspace | 2 of 3 items on the open claim |
One definition, applied across the book — the farmer or customer answers from existing records instead of building a bespoke pack each time. That reuse is what slashes cost-to-serve.
Arable 2026 · fulfilment tracker
n=38 policies · outstanding items are the worklist| Evidence item | Received | Outstanding | Oldest gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cropping and rotation record | 38 | 0 | — |
| Actual operations log (season) | 33 | 5 | 24 days · Mereside Farm |
| Storage and machinery evidence | 31 | 7 | 18 days |
| Outcome measures (where due) | 24 | 9 | seasonal — most at harvest, shown as not yet measurable |
An outstanding item is named precisely and chased within scope — never assumed negative, never converted into a rating.
What the grantor sees · the consent preview
the requester's auditable receiptBefore granting
the farmer sees each requirement item, exactly which records would satisfy it, and what the derivative excludes (identity, location, economics)
On granting
a dated, purpose-limited receipt is kept on both sides — "you never told us" disputes end at that receipt
Afterwards
access renews, narrows, expires or ends at the grantor's choice · every view is logged
Requirement rules: the requester inspects fulfilment status, never unauthorised private data. Requirements are
purpose-limited and reusable; answers come from existing records; missing items are chased, not scored.