GrantHero

Submit the strongest version. Know where it stands.

Two layers of review between the draft and the portal: an expert who knows what assessors look for, and an AI check built on applications that won. No one can promise the outcome, but nothing avoidable will cost you marks.

1 Drafting

Your bid-writer writes draft v1, you wait, not work

Once the gaps are filled, your bid-writer takes it from here. You see exactly where things are and when the draft is due, and anything you upload in the meantime goes straight to them. Nothing to do until it lands.

Mark is writing draft v1
Due back Fri 12 Sep
Scoping call
2 Sep
Your answers
by 5 Sep
Draft v1
due 12 Sep
Your review
by 16 Sep

The draft lands here as Draft v1 and you’ll be notified. Nothing to do until then, add documents any time and Mark sees them immediately.

2 Layer one · the expert

A bid-writer who knows what gets funded

Draft v1 opens with the passages that need you highlighted. Your bid-writer tells you what an assessor will push on, your team answers in the thread, and v2 follows. Someone who’s been on the other side is telling you, straight.

Innovate UK · Innovation Loans Future Economy: Round 13 · Draft v1 · Mark, 12 Sep
Q3 · Team & resources
310 / 400 · needs you

The founding team combines grant-domain expertise with applied AI experience. We will recruit two ML engineers during the projectDelivery is led by our CTO and two senior engineers, funded from the loan and supported by our advisory board.

Comments · Q3
MarkNeeds you
Can you confirm the advisory board names and one-line credentials? CVs go in the appendix.
T
You
Sarah Chen plus the two IUK alumni, sending credentials today.
P
Priyaco-founder
Can we say “retained recruiter” rather than naming them? Contract isn’t signed yet.
Reply…
Done
3 Layer two · the check

Scored the way the funder scores it

GrantHero scores the whole application against the funder’s criteria and a corpus of applications that were funded, so it knows a winning answer, not just a complete one. You see the result and the reasons. Then each section is ready to copy into the portal.

Assessor review
Scored against the funder’s criteria and applications that won
7 criteria · 2 flagged for Mark
Q1 · Need or challenge
Clear, evidenced, sourced
9 / 10Strong
Q2 · Approach & innovation
Strong on novelty; TRL claim unsupported
6 / 10Needs Mark
Q3 · Team & resources
Named partner, clear roles
8 / 10Strong
Q4 · Market & commercialisation
Route to revenue reads as assertion
5 / 10Needs Mark
Q5 · Outcomes & impact
Quantified, within word limit
8 / 10Solid
Mark is reviewing the two flagged criteria before anything goes to the portal.