Grant & Funding Proposals
A fundable proposal is a clear idea, a credible plan and a budget that matches it, written to the criteria reviewers actually score. We work alongside principal investigators and organizations to shape, draft, edit and stress-test proposals, while you remain the applicant and author of every word you submit.
Overview
Grant writing is less about eloquence than about alignment. Each funder publishes how proposals will be judged: NSF reviewers weigh Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts, NIH study sections now score Importance of the Research and Rigor and Feasibility under the simplified review framework, ERC panels judge the project and the principal investigator on excellence alone, and Horizon Europe evaluators score Excellence, Impact and Quality and efficiency of the implementation. Foundations usually state their priorities in a strategy page and a letter-of-intent form. Most rejected proposals are not bad science; they answer a question the reviewer was not asking, or leave a gap between aims, methods, timeline and budget.
This pillar is organized around three kinds of help. Research grants covers whole-proposal support for national research councils, Horizon Europe collaborative projects and foundation or private funders. Proposal components covers the sections that most often weaken a bid when they are handled separately: specific aims and significance, methodology and work plans, budgets and justifications, impact and dissemination plans, and logframes or theories of change. Grant process covers the work around the proposal: finding suitable funders, letters of intent, mock review against published criteria, resubmission after rejection, and interim and final reporting once you are funded.
In every case the applicant — the principal investigator, the consortium or the organization — owns the idea, the data and the final text. We ask questions, draft sections from your material, edit and review, and explain why a change helps a reviewer. We never invent preliminary data, partners, letters of support or track record, and we cannot promise that any proposal will be funded: success rates are set by budgets and competition, not by writing alone.
Who this is for
- Early-career researchers preparing a first independent grant, fellowship or ERC Starting Grant
- Established principal investigators who need a structured second reader before a council or NIH deadline
- Consortium coordinators and work-package leaders assembling a Horizon Europe Part B
- Research development offices that want extra drafting, editing or mock-review capacity during peak call periods
- Nonprofits, NGOs and community organizations applying to foundations or development funders
- Researchers writing in English as an additional language who want the science to read as clearly as it deserves
Where to start
Pick the situation that sounds most like yours.
- I am applying to NSF, NIH, ERC or UKRI and want help across the whole proposalResearch council grants
- Our consortium is preparing a Horizon Europe collaborative proposalHorizon Europe proposals
- Our organization is applying to a private or community foundationFoundation grants
- I cannot get my aims or objectives onto one convincing pageSpecific aims & objectives
- I need a work plan, work packages and a Gantt chart that reviewers will believeMethods & work plan
- I have to build a budget and explain every cost lineBudget & justification
- The call asks for impact, dissemination or knowledge-exchange plansImpact & dissemination
- A development funder wants a logframe or theory of changeLogframes & theory of change
- I do not know which funders would support my projectFunder identification
- I have a full draft and want an independent review before submittingProposal review & editing
- My proposal was rejected and I want to resubmit a stronger versionGrant resubmission
- I am funded and my interim or final report is dueGrant reports
Services by area
Research Grants
Whole-proposal support from first outline to submission-ready draft, adapted to how each type of funder reads and scores applications.
- Research Council Grant Proposals (NSF, NIH, ERC, UKRI) “Help putting together a strong NSF, NIH, ERC or UKRI application before the deadline”
- Horizon Europe Proposal Support “Help writing our part of a Horizon Europe consortium proposal so it scores well”
- Foundation & Private Grant Proposals “Help applying to a charitable foundation or trust for our project or program”
Proposal Components
Targeted support for a single section of a proposal — the part you are stuck on, or the part reviewers criticized last time.
- Specific Aims & Objectives Development “Help making my aims page or objectives and significance section clear and convincing”
- Methodology & Work Plan (Gantt) Development “Help turning my project plan into work packages, a timeline and a Gantt chart reviewers believe”
- Grant Budget & Budget Justification “Help building my grant budget and explaining why each cost is needed”
- Impact & Dissemination Plans “Help explaining who will benefit from my research and how results will reach them”
- Logframes & Theory of Change “Help building the logframe or theory of change diagram our funder asks for”
Grant Process Support
Support for the stages around the proposal itself: before you write, before you submit, after a rejection and after you are funded.
- Funder Identification & Funding Search “Help finding which funders and grant schemes fit my research or project”
- Letters of Intent & Pre-Proposals “Help writing a short letter of intent or concept note that gets us invited to apply”
- Grant Proposal Review & Editing “An independent read and edit of my grant proposal before I submit it”
- Grant Resubmission Support “Help understanding my rejection feedback and resubmitting a stronger grant proposal”
- Interim & Final Grant Reports “Help writing the progress or final report our funder needs”
How we approach this work
Write to the scoring criteria
We start from the call text, the funder's review criteria and any reviewer guidance, and map every section to what will be scored, so nothing important is buried or missing.
One logic from aims to budget
Objectives, methods, milestones, deliverables, staff effort and costs should tell the same story. We check that each aim has activities, time, people and money behind it.
Honest feasibility over ambition
Reviewers reward realistic scope, named risks and fallback plans. We will tell you when a plan is too large for the duration or budget, even close to a deadline.
The applicant is the author
We co-develop and draft from your ideas and data, and you approve every sentence. We do not fabricate data, letters, partners or outputs, and we follow each funder's rules on assistance and AI use.
Official guidance prevails
Page limits, templates and eligibility change between calls. We work from the current solicitation or work programme you are applying to and flag anything you should confirm with the funder or your research office.
Frequently asked questions
Is it acceptable to get outside help with a grant proposal?
Generally yes. Many universities employ research development staff for exactly this purpose, and professional editing and proposal consulting are common. What matters is that the ideas, data and commitments are genuinely yours, and that you follow the funder's rules. Some funders now restrict how generative AI may be used in applications; NIH, for example, has stated it will not treat applications substantially developed by AI as the applicant's original ideas. We draft with you from your material and tell you where a funder's policy needs checking.
How far ahead of the deadline should we start?
For a large council, ERC or Horizon Europe proposal, starting two to three months before the internal deadline gives time for funder search, a structured outline, two drafting rounds and a mock review. Your research office usually sets an internal deadline several days before the funder's. Shorter timelines are possible for editing or review of an existing draft, but not for building a consortium or a budget from scratch.
Can you increase our chances of being funded?
We can make a proposal clearer, better aligned with the criteria and more internally consistent, and we can identify weaknesses before reviewers do. We cannot promise funding: outcomes depend on the idea, the team, the competition in that round and the funder's budget, which no consultant controls.
Do you work with research offices and institutions as well as individuals?
Yes. Research development offices sometimes use us for overflow drafting, mock review panels or training for a cohort of applicants. We work within the institution's own processes for approval, costing and submission, which remain with the office.
Which funders and disciplines do you cover?
We regularly work with national research councils, European programmes, foundations and development funders across the health, social, natural and engineering sciences and the humanities. For highly specialized science we focus on structure, logic and alignment, and we rely on you and your collaborators for technical accuracy.
How is confidentiality handled for unpublished ideas?
Proposals contain unpublished ideas and preliminary data, so we treat them as confidential, use them only for your project, and are happy to work under your institution's non-disclosure agreement. We do not reuse your content in other clients' work.
Tell us what you need help with
Describe your project, stage and deadline. We’ll reply with the right service, what we need from you and a quote — no obligation.