Grant discovery platform
Eligibility-first matching for a specific nonprofit segment.
- For
- Nonprofit development teams
- Solves
- Funding searches consume time on ineligible opportunities.
- Delivers
- Funding shortlist and eligibility evidence
- Built in
- about 5 weeks of creation time, MVP in 6 days
- Investment
- $11,000 for the MVP, $46,000 for the full product
- Run it
- Inside your business, or as part of your offer to clients
What it does
For nonprofit development teams, turn published grant calls and organizational profiles into funding shortlist and eligibility evidence.
- Match project themes.
- Extract eligibility.
- Compare funding limits.
- Flag geographic restrictions.
- Track call updates.
- Save pursuit decisions.
What goes in, what comes out
- Published grant calls
- Organizational profiles
AI drafts, people review. Transparent opportunity matching and shortlist platform.
- Funding shortlist
- Eligibility evidence
How it works
The workflow
- InStart with
Published grant calls and organizational profiles
- 1
Define buyer-selected criteria
- 2
Gather authorized opportunity information
- 3
Apply explicit eligibility rules
- 4
Propose matches with evidence
- 5
Let the user review uncertain conditions
- 6
Save a shortlist and track the resulting conversations or applications
- OutFinish with
Funding shortlist and eligibility evidence
AI does the heavy lifting, people stay in charge
Extract criteria, normalize opportunity descriptions and explain possible fit. Use explicit rules for hard requirements. Do not invent missing eligibility facts or represent a suggested match as a verified qualification.
What your team sees
Key screens: Funding feed, eligibility matrix, deadline planner. Open with a filterable opportunity feed and clear fit explanations. Each profile shows source evidence, eligibility conditions and missing information. Keep saved, rejected and needs-review states. Include a deadline or next-action view without hiding the basis of recommendations. In this product, the first view is funding feed, followed by eligibility matrix and deadline planner.
Accounts and administration
Editable criteria, dated sources, eligibility evidence, missing-data flags, saved shortlists, rejection reasons, deadline alerts and owner follow-up.
Integrations and data access
Official publications, agency document stores and approved service workflows. Permitted opportunity feeds, customer profiles, calendars and CRM exports. Keep initial outreach or applications as user-reviewed drafts. These are candidate integration categories, not verified supported connectors.
How we build it
We build with our own AI software development factory, so most implementations take days to a few weeks of creation time, not months. You see working software at every step, and exact timing depends on availability.
- 1
Scoping call
Day 1Thirty minutes on your process, your data and how you want to run it: for your own team, or for your clients. You get a fixed scope and price for the MVP.
- 2
MVP
6 daysOne buyer segment, one recurring use case; first modules: match project themes; extract eligibility. Manual review in the loop. Built by our AI software factory.
- 3
Paid pilot
7 daysAccounts, roles, review states, audit trail and the first integration, hardened for two to three paying pilot customers.
- 4
Full product
3 weeksRemaining modules: flag geographic restrictions; track call updates; save pursuit decisions. Self-serve onboarding, billing, monitoring and the wider integration set.
- 5
Run and improve
MonthlyWe host, monitor and improve it for a fixed monthly fee, or hand it over to your team. How the retainer works.
Why we start with an MVP
An MVP, or minimum viable product, is the smallest version that your users can actually work with. It is not a cheap version of the full solution. It is a test, built to answer the questions that decide whether the rest is worth building.
- Pick the riskiest assumption. Here: will nonprofit development teams use it to solve "funding searches consume time on ineligible opportunities"?
- Build only what tests it. One team, one use case, a few core modules. People do the rest by hand for now.
- Run a paid pilot. Produce a small shortlist and ask the buyer to verify fit independently.
- Measure, then decide. Track eligible match rate and paid renewals. Then expand, change course or stop, with evidence instead of opinions.
MVP scope for this solution. Begin with nonprofit development teams and one recurring use case. Build the first two modules: match project themes; extract eligibility. Provide operator assistance for the third module: compare funding limits. Deliver funding shortlist and eligibility evidence through a manual review queue. Perform other necessary full-scope functions manually during the pilot. Include all applicable access, accuracy and professional-review controls from the start.
After the MVP. After paid pilots establish value, automate the remaining modules: flag geographic restrictions; track call updates; save pursuit decisions. Add one validated source integration, reusable customer configuration and recurring delivery. Expand to additional teams, document formats or languages only after testing the new scope.
What the build depends on. Current source information, explicit eligibility rules, entity identity checks and inspectable fit reasoning. Sparse evidence limits match quality.
Investment
A planning range to start the conversation, not a quote. You pay per phase, so you can stop after the MVP.
- Phase 1
MVP
One buyer segment, one recurring use case; first modules: match project themes; extract eligibility. Manual review in the loop.
- Phase 2
Paid pilot
Accounts, roles, review states, audit trail and the first integration, hardened for two to three paying pilot customers.
- Phase 3
Full product
Remaining modules: flag geographic restrictions; track call updates; save pursuit decisions. Self-serve onboarding, billing, monitoring and the wider integration set.
Indicative total, MVP to full product$46,000about 5 weeks of creation time · start with the MVP from $11,000
Running costs per month
A rough indication of monthly hosting and AI model costs once it is live, not tested. Real costs depend on usage, file sizes and the models chosen.
| Stage | Hosting and infrastructure | AI usage | Total per month |
|---|---|---|---|
| MVP and paid pilotabout 3 customers | $50–$100 | $40–$90 | $90–$190 |
| Full productabout 50 customers | $190–$380 | $280–$560 | $470–$940 |
Run it or resell it
For your own team
Nonprofit development teams run it inside the business: published grant calls and organizational profiles in, funding shortlist and eligibility evidence out, reviewed by your people.
As part of your offer
Agencies, consultancies and software companies can offer it to their own clients under their brand. We build and maintain it; you sell and deliver it.
Your brand, or this one
Run it under your own brand, or start from this concept style.
- primary
#419127 - accent
#c954c1 - surface
#e8f1e4 - ink
#22201e
- Headings
- Space Grotesk
- Text
- Inter
- Voice
- Plain-spoken, neutral, accountable
Selling it to your own clients: the go-to-market playbook
Pricing to test
Test USD 150-600 monthly for one narrow opportunity feed, or USD 750-2,500 for a bespoke researched shortlist. Price manual verification and custom research explicitly. These are pricing hypotheses.
Message to test
Grant discovery platform for nonprofit development teams. Eligibility-first matching for a specific nonprofit segment. Demonstrate the claim through a short list of documented eligible opportunities.
Where to find buyers
Nonprofit support organizations
Lead magnet
A short list of documented eligible opportunities
The first 30 days
- Week 1: interview five prospective buyers in this segment: nonprofit development teams. Ask to see a recent example of the problem and their current process.
- Week 2: prepare this demonstration using authorized or synthetic material: a short list of documented eligible opportunities.
- Week 3: present it through nonprofit support organizations and seek one narrowly scoped paid pilot.
- Week 4: review eligible match rate, paid renewals, total delivery effort and a concrete renewal decision before increasing scope.
Paid pilot
Produce a small shortlist and ask the buyer to verify fit independently. Record why each option is accepted or rejected and whether it leads to a useful next step. Review missed eligible options too. For this solution, use published grant calls and organizational profiles and evaluate funding shortlist and eligibility evidence. Agree success thresholds with the buyer before starting; collect a baseline for eligible match rate, paid renewals. A positive signal is payment and repeat use with acceptable quality and delivery cost, not a favorable demo reaction alone.
Success metrics
Eligible match rate, paid renewals
Retention and expansion
Refresh opportunity profiles, improve criteria from accepted and rejected matches, and offer deeper verification for shortlisted options.
Why clients would pick it
A maintained niche opportunity dataset and documented relevance feedback, supported by relationships with the intended buyer community. For this solution, build around eligibility-first matching for a specific nonprofit segment. This advantage requires execution and accumulated customer trust; the base model alone is not a defensible asset.
Alternatives and positioning
Manual research, directories, generic databases, referrals and existing opportunity marketplaces. Differentiate on this specific proposed advantage: eligibility-first matching for a specific nonprofit segment. Test it against the buyer's current method on the same task. Competitor coverage and uniqueness have not been established.
Main delivery costs
Source collection, profile updates, entity resolution, eligibility verification, analyst research and customer feedback review.
Safeguards
Preserve official source versions, accessibility and audit records. Confirm agency-specific procurement, records and data handling requirements during discovery. Validate source access and reviewer availability during the pilot. Maintain customer-level access, data deletion controls and a record of final approvals.