Advancement · Grants & Funding

Nothing rejected
for a fixable reason.

Good projects lose grants for mechanical reasons: a narrative over the limit, a budget that does not match the narrative, a missing letter. Run each application through three passes before it is submitted. The checklist compares length with the limit and the two budget totals with each other, and flags what is still open as the deadline closes in.

Review an applicationWhat you get
$5one-time · every device you sign in on
Buy · $5

Included with Caveat Classroom and Whole-school licenses. Or get it in the Grant writer’s desk, $49 for 55 items.

Applications

The worked example is made up: a foundation proposal 140 words over, a state grant whose narrative and budget form disagree by $2,400 and a clean application due in two days. Saved on this device only.

Loading the application form. If nothing appears, turn on JavaScript.

What you get

Advancement · Grants & Funding$5 · included with Classroom and Whole-school licenses

What you finish with
A record per application: funder, program, due date, who reviewed it, the narrative limit and current length, the total requested in the narrative and on the budget form, and twelve checks in three passes. Works out length over or under the limit, the gap between budget totals and days to the deadline; counts applications ready to submit; flags a narrative over its limit, totals that disagree, an imminent deadline with checks open and a writer-only review.
Who it is for
Grant writers, development staff and program leads who prepare grant applications for schools and nonprofits.
Format
Browser checklist with a saved record per application. Prints one review, every application in a table or a blank review sheet; downloads a spreadsheet (.csv); exports and imports a file.
Access
$5 one-time, yours on every device you sign in on; the tool opens once you are signed in with it. Included with Caveat Classroom and Whole-school licenses. Also in the Grant writer’s desk ($49) and the Advancement Suite pass ($99), and 1 more bundle. Everything you type stays in this browser; nothing is sent to Caveat.
Where it lives
The Grants & Funding space in Caveat Advancement.
Support
Questions about access, an order or a correction: team@caveatacademic.com.

How to use it

  1. Start the review three days before the deadline.
  2. Enter the limit and the current length.
  3. Copy both budget totals.
  4. Work the three passes in order.
  5. Hand it to someone outside the project last.

Review an application

The review, pass by pass

Three passes before you submitInstructionsFunder’s order andheadings.Format, file type,length.Scored against therubric.The caseNeed with local data.Objectives with a numberand a date.Every budget line tiedto an activity.The packageEvery attachment, namedright.Letters signed andcurrent.Read on paper or aloud.Three passes before you submitInstructionsFunder’s order and headings.Format, file type, length.Scored against the rubric.The caseNeed with local data.Objectives with a number and a date.Every budget line tied to an activity.The packageEvery attachment, named right.Letters signed and current.Read on paper or aloud.
Most rejected proposals are rejected for something on the first pass, before anyone reads the case.

The budget must match

The total in the narrative, the budget form and the budget justification are read side by side. A gap, even a small one, tells a reviewer the application was assembled in a hurry. In the worked example the state application says $118,000 in the narrative and $120,400 on the form.

Measurable objectives

“Improve reading” is a goal. “80 percent of tutored students gain at least one reading level on the spring benchmark” is an objective: a number, a measure and a date. Reviewers score the second kind higher, and the evaluation plan has something to measure.

Sources

  1. Grant Professionals Association. Grant writing standards and the Grant Professional Certification competencies (grantprofessionals.org).
  2. U.S. Department of Education. Discretionary grant application guidance: selection criteria and peer review (ed.gov).
  3. Candid. Proposal writing short course (learning.candid.org).
  4. Doran, G. T. (1981). There’s a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management’s goals and objectives. Management Review, 70(11).

The worked example is made up. Always follow the funder’s own instructions over any checklist. Nothing you type is sent to Caveat. Support: team@caveatacademic.com.