Resources
Practical tools for making better grant decisions and running stronger grant operations.
Use these guides, templates, scorecards, and examples to improve opportunity selection, requirements, proposal coordination, human review, reporting, and renewal—even before you adopt AutoGrant.
Featured resources
Start with the decision, then the artifact behind it.
Grant Go/No-Go Scorecard
A practical framework for eligibility, mission fit, capacity, competition, strategic value, and readiness.
Sample AI Judge Artifact
See how a transparent pursuit recommendation presents scores, evidence, assumptions, risks, and required conditions.
Solicitation Requirements Matrix
Turn a funding notice into questions, attachments, limits, dependencies, owners, reviews, and deadlines.
Grant Operating Model Guide
Define who owns strategy, relationships, program design, facts, budget, review, submission, reporting, and renewal.
Human + AI Review Checklist
Use AI for volume while preserving factual verification, professional judgment, disclosure, and final authorization.
Featured framework
The Grant Go/No-Go Scorecard
A practical framework for eligibility, mission fit, capacity, competition, strategic value, and readiness. Six dimensions, weighed before the first word is written.
01
Eligibility
Applicant type, geography, registration, size rules, partnership, match, program exclusions, deadlines, and other threshold requirements.
02
Mission alignment
The relationship between the funder's intent and the organization's actual programs, populations, outcomes, geography, and strategic priorities.
03
Capacity fit
Staffing, partnerships, data, delivery model, financial administration, reporting, timeline, facilities, systems, and leadership attention.
04
Competitive position
Differentiators, track record, prior awards, geographic relevance, partnerships, evidence quality, incumbent strength, and visible field conditions.
05
Strategic value
Mission advancement, long-term funding path, relationship value, evidence-building potential, restrictions, opportunity cost, and obligations.
06
Evidence confidence
What is known, inferred, missing, stale, or dependent on human confirmation.
Every scorecard ends with a documented verdict.
A no-go is a valuable outcome, not a failure: every weak pursuit consumes capacity that could have strengthened a better one.
The result is not a guarantee. It is a transparent, defensible decision your team can inspect, challenge, and improve.
Pursue
The evidence supports committing capacity to a full application now.
Pursue with conditions
Worth pursuing once named conditions are resolved and documented.
Hold for readiness
A promising opportunity the organization is not yet positioned to win.
Do not pursue
The capacity is better invested in a stronger opportunity.
Ineligible
A threshold requirement rules it out before any writing begins.
Featured sample
Sample AI Judge artifact
See how a transparent pursuit recommendation presents scores, evidence, assumptions, risks, and required conditions.
Regional Youth Workforce Innovation Initiative
Eligibility: Confirmed — Applicant type and geography meet the published criteria.
- Mission alignment
- 91/100
- Capacity fit
- 72/100
- Competitive position
- 58/100
- Strategic value
- 86/100
The funder's youth-workforce priority maps directly to the organization's core program and outcomes.
Delivery is credible, but quarterly reporting needs a named data owner.
Strong local partnerships, with a field likely to include larger prior grantees.
A win would establish evidence and funder history for a larger multi-year opportunity.
Verdict: Pursue with conditions
Proceed after confirming the data owner, strengthening the employer partnership, and documenting the required match.
What every scorecard keeps visible
- Final verdict and eligibility status
- Dimension scores and rationale
- Sources and assumptions
- Missing information
- Risks and disqualifiers
- Conditions required before pursuit
- Human decision and decision owner
A team member can challenge the analysis, add relationship context, correct facts, and record a different final decision with rationale.
The scorecard is one of five artifacts the system produces.
AI Judge scorecard
A documented pursuit decision with eligibility, fit, readiness, competition, strategic value, risks, and required conditions.
Requirements matrix
Every question, attachment, page limit, budget element, dependency, owner, and deadline extracted from the solicitation.
Funding roadmap
A prioritized view of opportunities, readiness work, relationship actions, and expected application windows.
Human review record
A visible record of who reviewed facts, narrative, budget, compliance, and final authorization.
Award-obligation calendar
Reporting dates, deliverables, owners, outcome measures, financial requirements, and renewal milestones created from the award.
Resource categories
What the library covers, from first decision to renewal.
Decide
- Grant go/no-go framework
- Eligibility review checklist
- Opportunity-cost questions
- Funder-fit assessment
- Readiness checklist
Build
- Requirements matrix
- Evidence inventory
- Narrative review checklist
- Budget coordination checklist
- Submission-readiness checklist
Steward
- Award-obligation register
- Reporting calendar
- Funder communication log
- Renewal readiness plan
Lead
- Grant portfolio dashboard
- Team responsibility map
- AI governance for grant work
- Consultant client-operating model
- Enterprise value-assessment worksheet
Apply the framework to a real opportunity.
Bring a public solicitation and see how AutoGrant turns the same decision framework into a complete operating workflow.