Funding follows a program that was designed to be funded
We design the program model, then write the submission that carries it. Government grants, tenders and bids, philanthropic proposals and corporate partnerships, written by a practitioner who has delivered inside the systems the funding is meant to serve.
Designed, written, and won
Program model designed and successful submission led for a national trial supporting adolescent boys. Multi million dollar contract, now moving into delivery.
Scope of that engagement: cohort and evidence review, service model and delivery design, full program logic and theory of change, outcome and measurement framework, budget narrative, and the written submission itself.
Most submissions are not lost on writing. They are lost on design. Assessors read hundreds of applications that are competently written and still unfundable. The need is asserted rather than evidenced. The model is described in the organisation's internal language rather than the funder's. The outcomes are aspirations rather than measures. The budget tells a different story from the narrative above it. Fixing the prose does not fix any of that.
So we work at two levels: the program model underneath, and the application on top. Where the model is already strong, we write. Where it is not yet legible to a funder, we design it with you first, and the writing becomes straightforward.
Where the work sits in a clinical, disability, youth justice, education or child wellbeing space, it is written by a practitioner who has delivered inside those systems. That difference shows up immediately in how the need, the risk and the theory of change are argued.
Two funding engagements, start to finish
A program model designed to be funded, then the submission that carried it
Cohort evidence review, service model, program logic and outcome framework designed first. The written submission came second, and was straightforward because the model underneath was sound.
A first successful state grant after three unsuccessful attempts
The applications were well written. The program underneath was not legible to a funder. We fixed the second problem and the first stopped mattering.
Three bodies of work, commissioned together or separately
Grant writing
End to end applications across government, philanthropic and corporate rounds, written to the criteria and weighted to the marking scheme.
- Funding search and eligibility screen
- Full written application
- Evidence and literature sections
- Budget and budget narrative
- Supporting letters and attachments
- Reporting, acquittal and renewal
Tender and bid writing
Responses to tenders, requests for proposal, requests for quote and panel applications, structured to the evaluation weighting rather than to a template.
- Tender analysis and bid or no bid advice
- Response strategy and win themes
- Capability and past performance statements
- Methodology and delivery model
- Risk, quality and compliance schedules
- Pricing narrative and value for money case
Program model and logic design
The program itself, designed so that it is deliverable, evaluable and fundable. This is the work that makes the writing easy.
- Cohort, need and evidence review
- Service model and delivery design
- Program logic and theory of change
- Outcome framework and measurement plan
- Fidelity, data collection and reporting design
- Costing model and scale pathway
Four pathways, four different readers
Each pathway has its own logic, evidence expectations and assessor. We write to the pathway rather than to a template, which is usually the whole difference.
Government grants and tenders
Federal, state and local program grants, tenders and service agreements. Highly structured, heavily weighted to demonstrated capability, compliance and value for money. Written to the criteria and evidenced at every claim.
Human services and justice
Diversion, early intervention, out of home care, family support, disability and community safety funding. These assessors want a credible theory of change and a model that survives contact with a real cohort.
Corporate and shared value
Partnership proposals, sponsorship and shared value cases. A different reader again: this one wants alignment, reach, reporting and a reason the partnership is worth defending internally.
Philanthropic and trusts
Concept notes, expressions of interest and full proposals for foundations and trusts. Relationship led, narrative heavy, and unforgiving of a weak outcomes framework.
Five steps, from opportunity to submission
Opportunity and fit assessment
We read the guidelines or the tender documents against what you actually do and tell you plainly whether it is worth pursuing. A clear no early is worth more than a weak submission late.
Model and evidence session
A working session with your team to surface the model that is already in your heads, the cohort you actually serve, and the evidence that supports it. This is where most of the value is created.
Design and logic build
Program logic, theory of change, outcome framework and measurement plan. You keep these regardless of the funding decision, and they carry into the next application.
Drafting and review
Full draft written to the criteria and the weighting, with a budget narrative that matches the written model. One structured review round with your team, then a final compliance check against every requirement.
Submission and what follows
Lodgement support, then whatever comes next: clarification responses, interviews or presentations, contract negotiation support, and the reporting and acquittal structure if you win.
Quoted per submission, after we have read the guidelines
Grant and tender work is priced against the size and complexity of the opportunity, how much design sits underneath it, and the deadline. We quote in writing before any work starts.
Single submission
One application or tender response, written end to end. Suits organisations with a defined opportunity and a working model already in place.
Design plus submission
Program model, logic and outcome framework designed first, then the submission written on top. The strongest position for a competitive round.
Retained funding partner
An ongoing arrangement across a funding calendar: opportunity monitoring, a planned pipeline of submissions, and reporting and acquittal support through the year.
Tell us what you are applying for
Send the guidelines, the tender documents or just the idea. We will tell you whether it is worth pursuing, what the submission needs, and what it would cost, before you commit to anything.
Book the discovery conversation →