I reduce a tangled case to the point where the person with authority only has to choose.

Illustrative cases. The scenarios are constructed; the method is drawn from real program work.

The question I was handed

"Can we claim this AI subscription?"

Ten monthly invoices. No matching line in the approved budget. Two charges outside the project period. No one certain who had authority to decide.

I reduced the case to one decision the funding agency could rule on in a single reply.

What I produced

The decision required

Should the NT$9,600 in-period portion be submitted under an existing category now, or after a budget adjustment?

A — Submit under an existing categoryAllows the NT$9,600 in-period portion to be submitted now, subject to written confirmation that the category applies without prior adjustment.
B — Seek a budget adjustment firstLower procedural risk, but submission moves to the next adjustment cycle.

Preliminary reading — A, given the current facts. Proceed with A if the funding agency confirms the category in writing. Otherwise, follow B.

What you need in order to rule

Use is directly tied to program delivery — written statement on file
Invoices issued to the organisation; paid by personal card, with the reimbursement trail complete
No explicit line in the approved budget; the closest category is information services
The two out-of-period charges are already excluded from this figure

Decision owner — funding agency case officer, with the organisation's accountant

System prepares. Human decides.

How it was ruled

Option A, under information services, with a statement of use attached. Ruled without a further round of questions.

Method in practice

This method came out of running procurement and reimbursement on a 16-month government-funded program — planning backward from the closeout date, with zero reimbursement items rejected at the mid-term review.

Read the case study