PM Surya Ghar Proposal Software: Audit-Safe Selection

PM Surya Ghar proposal software should communicate a controlled estimate. It cannot decide whether a household will receive Central Financial Assistance, called CFA.

Current authority documents define the expected result. Software should reproduce that result, show its basis, and preserve evidence. The National Portal, MNRE, the applicable DISCOM, and other authorities retain their roles.

This buyer guide provides:

• A software category map
• A rule and capacity data model
• A proposal approval workflow
• Fractional, boundary, and exception tests
• State-support conflict handling
• Integration, security, support, cost, and exit checks
• A related-party disclosure for QuickEstimate

PM Surya Ghar Proposal Software Starts With Authority

Software estimates and communicates. It does not become a scheme authority because it displays an official logo, rate, or portal link.

Proposal software cannot:

• Determine final consumer eligibility
• Register an EPC as a scheme vendor
• Approve technical feasibility
• Approve modules, inverters, or DCR evidence
• Inspect an installation
• Install or approve a meter
• Approve a CFA claim
• Sanction a bank loan
• Control government, DISCOM, or bank timing

Put that boundary beside every CFA estimate. Avoid hiding it in generic terms at the end of a PDF.

The PM Surya Ghar National Portal is the official consumer route. The proposal should direct the customer there without implying that a software record is a portal application.

Use the PM Surya Ghar EPC guide for operational steps. This page focuses on selecting and controlling proposal software.

Choose the Right Software Category

Start with workflow fit, then test control quality. A long feature list does not prove correct CFA logic.

Controlled spreadsheet and document template

This route can work for a small team when one owner manages rule versions, protected formulas, approvals, and PDF retention. It is inexpensive to start but becomes fragile with many editors.

Test cell protection, change logs, input validation, template versions, access, backups, and formula review. A copied workbook can keep an obsolete rule indefinitely.

General CRM with configured quoting

A general CRM may manage leads and approvals well. Scheme logic usually needs configuration, extensions, or a separate calculation service.

Test who owns formulas, how a rule update is deployed, and whether old proposals remain reproducible. Do not assume a CRM administrator is qualified to interpret a scheme amendment.

Solar proposal platform

A solar platform may connect equipment, yield, pricing, and a customer PDF. Its scheme coverage can still be incomplete.

Test whether it separates technical design from CFA eligibility. A persuasive production estimate does not establish subsidy entitlement.

India scheme-oriented proposal platform

This category may include state, DISCOM, proposal, and sales workflows. Greater coverage creates a larger rule-maintenance burden.

Require source dates, regression evidence, and a correction process. A vendor statement such as “all current” remains first-party until tested.

See the solar proposal software features guide for general requirements. Add this article’s authority and calculation gates for PM Surya Ghar.

Build a Rule Ledger Before Testing Products

Your expected result must come from authority documents, not the software under review.

Create one controlled record for each rule:

The MNRE rooftop programme index links operational material and later clarifications. Do not treat one saved PDF as the entire rule set.

Store a copy or hash where your records policy allows it. Preserve the source URL and access date even when a page changes.

Keep Every Capacity Field Separate

The word capacity can refer to different project facts. Combining them creates false results.

Store at least:

• Proposed module DC capacity in kWp
• Proposed inverter AC capacity in kW or kVA
• Existing installed module DC capacity
• Prior subsidised capacity
• Proposed enhancement capacity
• Eligible incremental capacity under the reviewed rule
• Sanctioned load
• DISCOM feasibility or approved capacity
• Actual installed and inspected capacity
• Capacity recorded on the National Portal

The June 2024 operational guidelines say CFA is based on rated module DC capacity, not inverter size. That statement is tied to those guidelines and later amendments.

Do not use inverter capacity as a proxy. Do not overwrite proposed capacity with approved or installed capacity. Each field needs a source and status.

The sales proposal can display the proposed module capacity. The audit export should preserve every relevant capacity and the reason for the one used in the estimate.

Capture Residential Eligibility Before Showing CFA

The cited operational guidelines address eligible residential consumers under the capex component. They state that non-residential segments do not receive CFA under that component.

Require these fields before calculation:

• Consumer or connection category
• Consumer account and DISCOM
• Installation address
• Ownership and application route
• Existing rooftop system
• Prior programme and application date
• Prior CFA received
• Proposed project mode
• Proposed module DC capacity
• State or UT and special-category status
• Give It Up or no-CFA choice

A commercial or industrial lead should not inherit a residential default. The system should return not applicable under this residential component, not a zero that looks like a failed household application.

Group housing and RWA cases have distinct capacity and common-facility rules. Route them to a separate test set. Do not treat one household and one society as the same calculation.

Use the installation guide for consumer steps and the vendor selection guide for installer checks.

Treat Current CFA Figures as Versioned Rules

As checked on 10 August 2026, the June 2024 guidelines and 7 July 2025 amendment support this standard household test formula:

Estimated CFA = min(DC kWp, 2) × ₹30,000 + min(max(DC kWp - 2, 0), 1) × ₹18,000

That produces no additional central amount above 3 kWp. It is an expected test result for this dated authority set, not a permanent promise.

The same guidelines publish different rates for named special-category States and UTs. Store the qualifying geography list with the rule version. Do not ask a salesperson to select a higher rate manually.

The June 2024 operational guidelines include fractional examples. A 1.5 kWp standard case yields ₹45,000 in that document. A 2.5 kWp case yields ₹69,000.

Display:

• Authority and rule date
• Module DC capacity used
• Standard or special-category basis
• Formula and estimated amount
• Prior-capacity treatment
• State support as a separate line
• Approval and payment caveat

Do not label the estimate approved subsidy. Do not subtract it from a customer payment schedule as if cash has already arrived.

Route Prior Capacity and CFA to Review

An enhancement case is not a fresh system. Capture what already exists before calculating the addition.

The June 2024 guidelines include an example of a household with 1 kW and prior CFA. When total capacity becomes 4 kW, the example allows additional support only for 2 kW up to the 3 kW overall threshold.

Use that published example as a test. Do not invent a universal formula for every prior programme, date, fractional capacity, relocation, or undocumented installation.

The software should ask:

• Was a rooftop system previously installed?
• Which programme and application date applied?
• Was CFA received, waived, rejected, or unknown?
• What module DC capacity was recorded?
• What total capacity is proposed now?
• Is the system staying at the same eligible location?
• Which authority document governs the enhancement?

Return manual authority review required when an answer is unknown. A forced estimate creates a sales risk and an audit gap.

Separate Price, Support, and Customer Contribution

The proposal needs a money bridge that a customer can follow.

Show these as different fields:

1. Gross contract price
2. Taxes and included scope
3. Estimated central CFA
4. Verified State or UT support estimate
5. Other rebates or finance, each separately sourced
6. Expected customer contribution
7. Payment schedule before any disbursement
8. Approved and disbursed CFA, only after authority evidence exists

The central estimate is not a discount funded by the EPC. It should not reduce the invoice value silently.

Use the gross price for contract acceptance. Explain who pays each instalment and how later CFA receipt affects the customer or loan account.

Do not combine a state incentive with central CFA under one label. State programmes can use different eligibility, calculation, timing, and payment routes.

The subsidy calculator guide covers consumer-facing arithmetic. The installer calculator guide covers wider operational controls.

Turn Official-Source Conflicts Into a Hold

A proposal engine needs a conflict state. It should not choose the larger, newer-looking, or easier number.

On 10 August 2026, Delhi provided a useful test. Its official policy summary displayed one residential capital-support figure. Its consolidated policy file with amendment displayed another.

That conflict does not authorize an EPC or software vendor to decide the current entitlement. The expected software result is:

• State amount suppressed
• Conflict banner shown
• Both official sources retained
• Accountable reviewer assigned
• Authority confirmation requested
• Resolution and effective date logged
• Affected proposals identified for reissue

This is why a generic “state subsidy current” badge is weak evidence. Test the exact amount, geography, consumer category, source, and date.

The July 2025 MNRE amendment says additional State or UT subsidy should be updated on the National Portal. The official amendment notice should be part of the rule chain.

Keep DCR, Equipment, and Vendor Evidence Visible

The June 2024 guidelines make DCR a condition for CFA in the cited route. They also define minimum technical specifications and registered-vendor requirements.

Proposal software should record evidence, not merely show a green tick.

For modules, retain manufacturer, exact model, wattage, quantity, DC total, list evidence, DCR evidence, evidence date, and reviewer. For the inverter, retain the exact model, AC rating, technical evidence, and compatibility review.

Keep quoted, ordered, installed, and portal-recorded equipment separate. A product substitution can change DC capacity, price, calculations, compliance evidence, and proposal validity.

The July 2025 amendment allows MNRE to amend technical specifications prospectively through the stated approval. Therefore, a fixed equipment library is not permanent proof.

Vendor registration also needs a current record for the relevant territory and project. A software vendor is not the installing vendor. A proposal badge does not register an EPC.

Show DISCOM and Portal Caveats by Stage

Avoid one broad line saying “subject to DISCOM approval.” Show the dependency near the affected claim.

The proposal can identify these stages without predicting their outcome:

• Consumer and application data
• Vendor selection or registration evidence
• Feasibility route where applicable
• Equipment and project documents
• Installation and portal update
• DISCOM inspection
• Meter and agreement route
• Correction or rejection path
• CFA approval and processing
• Bank or loan treatment where relevant

The applicable State regulations and DISCOM process can change the required documents, metering, and approvals. Store the territory and source date.

Do not promise an inspection, meter, sanction, payment, or financing date. Measure actual project stages separately from vendor marketing.

For state-support planning, the related Heaven Green Energy subsidy-stacking article can help teams frame questions. It is not a scheme authority and must be checked against current official sources.

Define the Proposal Field Schema

Require a data dictionary before a demo. A polished PDF can hide missing evidence.

Customer and authority fields

Store customer name, connection category, address, consumer identifier, State or UT, DISCOM, application route, consent status, and authority sources.

Minimize copied personal data. Proposal software may not need bank records or portal credentials. Define prohibited fields.

Technical fields

Store module DC capacity, inverter capacity, sanctioned load, proposed capacity, prior capacity, installed capacity, equipment models, survey status, design status, and open assumptions.

Commercial fields

Store gross price, taxes, inclusions, exclusions, validity, payment stages, central estimate, state estimate, finance illustration, and customer contribution.

Control fields

Store proposal ID, version, rule version, template version, preparer, technical reviewer, scheme reviewer, commercial approver, issue date, expiry date, status, and superseded version.

Every exported PDF should carry enough identifiers to reproduce its calculation later.

Use Approval Gates and Change Logs

Separate preparation from approval. A salesperson should not silently change rule tables or publish an unreviewed state amount.

Suggested gates:

1. Lead qualification
2. Site and capacity review
3. Scheme and authority review
4. Equipment and price review
5. Proposal approval
6. Customer issue and consent record
7. Revision or expiry

Log old value, new value, user, timestamp, reason, source, affected calculation, and approving person. Preserve the prior PDF.

When equipment, capacity, price, tax, rule, or customer category changes, create a new version. Do not edit the issued record in place.

Record how customer acceptance occurred. Test any electronic signature or WhatsApp claim with legal and privacy reviewers before relying on it.

Run a Calculation Regression Pack

Test expected results before signing a contract and after every rule release. Use exact decimals instead of only round 1, 2, and 3 kW examples.

For every run, record input, expected output, actual output, pass or fail, authority source, source date, app version, rule version, tester, and retained PDF.

Test invalid values too. Negative capacity, zero modules, missing consumer category, impossible dates, and text in numeric fields should fail clearly.

Test Integrations With Real Failure Cases

A logo wall is not integration evidence. Test each connection within the plan you may buy.

For CRM or lead imports, check field mapping, duplicate rules, consent, owner assignment, errors, retries, deletions, and timestamps. For pricing, verify taxes, units, rounding, equipment versions, and approval gates.

For WhatsApp or electronic acceptance, verify the provider, template route, consent, opt-out, delivery evidence, access, retention, and failure handling. Do not infer legal validity from a sent message.

For APIs, request current documentation, authentication, rate limits, audit logs, test environment, versioning, errors, support, and export endpoints. A future integration promise has no score.

Test a partial outage. Confirm whether users can see stale rules, create drafts, issue PDFs, or overwrite data when a connection returns.

SurgePV can provide design, shading, generation, and financial inputs through solar design software. It is not PM Surya Ghar authority or a CRM. Define the handoff and review inputs before importing results.

Verify Access, Security, and Recovery

Treat every security statement as a claim until evidenced and tested. The data set can include customer identity, address, electricity information, pricing, documents, and communications.

Ask for:

• Role and permission matrix
• Multifactor-authentication availability
• User joiner and leaver process
• Encryption evidence and key responsibilities
• Audit logs and their retention
• Backup schedule and tested restoration
• Incident notification terms
• Subprocessor list and data locations
• Data retention and deletion controls
• Privacy and security contract terms
• Independent assessment evidence where claimed

Run a lost-device and departed-user drill. Remove access, revoke sessions, preserve required records, and confirm mobile data behavior.

Request a restore test for one customer and all related proposal versions. A backup claim is incomplete without recovery evidence.

Use qualified privacy, security, and legal reviewers. Software selection is not a substitute for those reviews.

Normalize Support, Cost, and Exit

Compare total delivered cost, not the headline fee.

Include:

• Subscription and minimum seats
• Setup and migration
• Template and rule configuration
• Integrations and usage fees
• Messaging and signature costs
• Storage and extra environments
• Training and support
• Security or audit features
• Data export and exit work
• Internal rule owner and reviewer time

Define support severity, hours, channels, response, escalation, status communication, and service credits in the contract. A chat button does not establish resolution quality.

The exit test should export customers, activities, consents, equipment, prices, rule versions, calculations, PDFs, approvals, change logs, attachments, and user history. Test relationships and identifiers, not only CSV row counts.

Require a deletion process after accepted migration, subject to legal retention. Obtain evidence and preserve what the EPC must retain.

Run a Paid Pilot With Identical Gates

Choose representative users and cases. Include sales, scheme operations, engineering, finance, management, privacy, security, and IT reviewers.

Score mandatory gates first:

Reject a product that fails a mandatory authority or calculation gate. Do not average that failure away with attractive templates.

After the gates pass, compare user effort, proposal clarity, administration, reporting, measured support, and total cost.

Apply the Same Tests to QuickEstimate

QuickEstimate’s public site makes product claims. They cover proposals, PM Surya Ghar calculations, state and DISCOM data, CRM, mobile use, integrations, roles, exports, support, and pricing.

Those are vendor statements. Test the exact account, paid plan, mobile operating system, app version, rule version, territory, integration, output, and contract.

Use the QuickEstimate review for product-specific due diligence and QuickEstimate pricing for quote normalization. Recheck live terms before purchase.

Set a Recurring Rule-Release Process

Assign one rule owner and one independent approver. Monitor MNRE, the National Portal, relevant State or UT sources, regulators, and DISCOMs.

For every possible change:

1. Capture the source and publication date.
2. Determine effective date and affected cases.
3. Record open interpretation questions.
4. Obtain qualified approval.
5. Update the controlled rule table.
6. Run the full regression pack.
7. Review PDF wording and caveats.
8. Deploy with a version and rollback plan.
9. Identify active proposals that need reissue.
10. Retain results and approval evidence.

Do not let software update a financial rule invisibly. Ask vendors how clients are notified and how previous calculations remain reproducible.

Run the pack monthly and after every material notice. Recheck state support more often when official pages conflict.

Final Selection Checklist

Before contracting:

• Define authority and software boundaries.
• Build the rule ledger independently.
• Separate all capacity fields.
• Test residential, prior-capacity, non-residential, and no-CFA cases.
• Test fractional and boundary calculations.
• Require state-support conflict handling.
• Verify DCR, equipment, vendor, portal, and DISCOM caveats.
• Test approvals, versions, consent, and change logs.
• Test integrations, security, recovery, and support.
• Normalize total cost and prove exit.
• Apply identical gates to related and unrelated vendors.

Use the India solar CRM guide when the purchase also covers sales operations. Use solar proposal tools when the need is broader than one scheme.

Request a SurgePV demo for design workflow evaluation. Keep scheme calculations, CRM control, and official approvals in their correct systems.

Conclusion

The safest PM Surya Ghar proposal software does not promise the largest support number. It shows exactly why an estimate exists and when it must stop.

Choose a product that can reproduce dated authority rules, separate capacities and money, block ambiguous cases, and retain every approval. Then prove its integrations, security, support, cost, and exit through a paid pilot.

Frequently Asked Questions

What should PM Surya Ghar proposal software calculate?

It should separate gross contract price, a dated CFA estimate, verified state support, and expected customer contribution. It should expose the capacity, rule, inputs, assumptions, exclusions, and approval caveat behind each result.

Which capacity should a PM Surya Ghar CFA estimate use?

The June 2024 residential guidelines calculate CFA from rated solar-module DC capacity, not inverter capacity. Software should still store inverter, sanctioned, approved, proposed, installed, and prior capacity separately.

How should software handle an existing subsidised system?

It should capture prior installed capacity, programme, application date, CFA received, and proposed enhancement. Route the case through current authority rules instead of applying the new-system formula automatically.

Can proposal software guarantee PM Surya Ghar CFA?

No. Software cannot establish eligibility, register a vendor, approve feasibility, verify equipment, inspect installation, install a meter, approve a claim, sanction finance, or control disbursement.

Can a commercial lead receive residential CFA?

Not under the cited residential capex CFA component. The software should block residential support when the connection or consumer category is non-residential and route the lead to the correct commercial workflow.

How should state solar support appear in a proposal?

Show it separately with programme name, authority URL, effective date, access date, eligibility basis, calculation, status, and payment route. Suppress the amount when official sources conflict or applicability is unclear.

What must a proposal rule version contain?

Store the authority, document title, issue date, effective date, amendment chain, accessed date, calculation version, reviewer, approval date, and proposals affected by the rule.

How should an EPC test proposal software before buying?

Run a paid pilot using known boundary, fractional, prior-capacity, non-residential, state-support, and rule-change cases. Compare expected and actual PDFs, logs, permissions, integrations, exports, support, cost, and deletion evidence.

Is QuickEstimate automatically the best option?

No. SurgePV and QuickEstimate have a related-party relationship, so disclosure is required. Test QuickEstimate and every alternative with the same cases, evidence gates, contract checks, and exit requirements.