Engagement
Scholarship & grant pack review
Editorial and structural audit of scholarship, fellowship, and small-grant applications — narrative clarity, evidence mapping, and budget alignment.
Who it is for
Students, early-career researchers, and community organisers preparing competitive funding packs who want feedback before the deadline.
What you receive
Annotated comments on statements and budgets, a gap list against the funder’s criteria, and practical suggestions for strengthening evidence — without ghostwriting the submission.
- Criteria mapping against the funder’s published rubric
- Narrative clarity and redundancy notes
- Budget line consistency with the written proposal
- One revision cycle on marked sections
Outside this engagement
- Full rewriting or ghostwriting of essays
- Letter-of-recommendation drafting
- Guarantees of award
How the audit unfolds
-
0
Criteria map
We extract scored criteria from the call and align each section of your pack to those points.
-
0
Close reading
Statements, CVs, and budgets are read for clarity, repetition, and unsupported claims.
-
0
Markup return
You receive margin notes and a one-page summary of high-impact fixes.
-
0
Revision pass
After you edit, we re-read marked sections once to confirm improvements land.
Preparation
Share the call for applications, draft narratives, CV, and budget worksheet in editable formats where possible.
Constraints
Deadlines under five business days require a rush fee and may limit revision cycles.
Ready to move forward? Send your dossier outline and we reply within two business days.