Referral tracking
Referrals tracked as records with real states — pending, in progress, no objection, conditions, objected — inside the application workflows Engis runs for authority tenants.
Your network is on every site plan. Now it is in the delivery system too.
Every subdivision crosses somebody’s network — water, sewer, drainage, power. That makes utility authorities referral authorities on projects they did not initiate and cannot see into. Engis structures that relationship: the developments touching your assets, the referrals and consents you own within them, and your network rendered live on the same map the delivery team works from.
The referral authority’s seat at the delivery table
On the delivery side, Engis tracks every authority on a project as a structured record: what has been submitted to whom, which consent is outstanding, which permit condition names your authority as the responsible party, and what that condition blocks downstream. For the authority, that discipline cuts both ways — the developments touching your network arrive as structured submissions with context, not cold emails with attachments.
On the map, Engis streams authority asset data from the public services utilities already publish — mains, assets and hydrants from authorities including Yarra Valley Water, South East Water, Barwon Water and TasWater, alongside Melbourne Water drainage and flood layers. Your network is not an abstraction in the delivery conversation; it is a live layer everyone is looking at.
Referrals arrive without context and leave without a record.
The referral workload is structurally awkward: high volume, externally triggered, spread across projects whose delivery state you cannot see. Responses go out by letter or portal, conditions are issued, and then the trail goes quiet until the next submission — or the next problem. Meanwhile the delivery team’s picture of your requirements is a folder of correspondence, interpreted differently by every consultant.
- Referral requests handled in inboxes and tracked in spreadsheets
- No visibility of where a development actually is in delivery
- Conditions you issued tracked by other people, other ways
- Your asset data consulted as stale PDF extracts, not live layers
- As-constructed information arriving unstructured at handover
- The same questions answered per project, per consultant, forever
What Engis structures for the authority
The same record discipline the delivery network runs on, applied to the referral relationship.
Conditions you own
Permit conditions carry a responsible party. The conditions your authority issued are tracked by the delivery team to close-out — with evidence attached — instead of living in one consultant’s interpretation of your letter.
Structured authority coordination
Delivery teams using Engis keep a structured record of every submission to your authority — what was sent, when, and what is awaited — so both sides reference the same state of the conversation.
Your network, live on the map
Engis renders utility mains, assets and hydrants from the public data services authorities publish, beside parcels, zoning, overlays and flood extents — the servicing picture in the same workspace as the project.
As-constructed capture
For authority tenants, as-constructed sewer, water and drainage assets can be captured spatially and exported as GeoJSON — structured data toward the asset register, not drawings to re-digitise.
Inspections and defects
Where the authority oversees construction, inspections and defects are recorded as structured outcomes — pre-start to final acceptance — rather than filed correspondence.
Who this serves inside the authority
Referral and development services teams
The incoming pipeline of developments touching the network, with each referral’s state and history in one place.
Asset and network teams
Network context live in the delivery conversation, and as-constructed data arriving structured instead of scanned.
The delivery network opposite you
Developers and consultants track your consents and conditions in the same system they run delivery in — which is why the chase list gets shorter.
Why this beats the correspondence model
A referral is a workflow, not a letter
It has a state, an owner, a due response and consequences downstream. Modelling it that way — on both sides of the relationship — is what removes the chasing.
The network belongs in the workspace
Your published asset data is already the best description of your constraints. Engis puts it where delivery decisions are made, live, instead of leaving it to be screenshotted out of a portal.
One platform, every seat
Developers, consultants, councils and utilities work from differently-scoped views of the same record discipline. The authority is a participant in delivery, not a mailbox at the edge of it.
Frequently asked questions
Does Engis connect to our internal GIS or asset system?
Engis reads the public data services your authority already publishes to render network layers live on the map — no integration into internal systems is required for that. As-constructed capture exports standard GeoJSON your GIS and asset tooling can ingest.
How does a utility authority get access?
Access is provisioned per authority, with the authority-side workflows enabled as part of onboarding and role-based access for the teams involved. Contact the team for a walkthrough.
What do we see of a developer’s project?
Tenancies are isolated per firm — you see your own records, not another firm’s. The shared benefit is structural: delivery teams using Engis track your referrals, conditions and submissions in a structured way, so what reaches you is complete and what returns to them is unambiguous.
Where is the data hosted?
In Australia. Engis runs on Australian-region infrastructure with per-tenant data isolation enforced at the database level, verified by automated tests on every release.
Put the network in the delivery conversation.
Book a walkthrough of the authority-side workflows and the live network layers — or request sandbox access.
Australian Hosted · Australian Data Residency