
Three jobs a nonprofit has to do before writing anything: read the eligibility section properly, work out what a match would actually cost, and build a calendar backwards from the deadline.


Research funding runs on rules that are invisible in a listing: who may hold an award, what an indirect cost rate is applied to, and how long the gap between submission and money actually is.


Ownership tests, the difference between a grant and a loan programme, and the one field that decides whether a small business can actually use an award it wins.


Tribal governments and tribally designated organisations face an eligibility landscape nobody else does: dedicated set-asides, a recognition test that is binary, and listing vocabularies that flatten the distinctions.


A match requirement is one of the few clauses that can disqualify an applicant after the work is done. Most grant databases store it as yes or no. There is a third state, and it is the common one.


The headline number on a funding announcement is usually the programme pool — the total shared across every award. The most one applicant can receive is a different field, and on a real record in our catalogue it is not published at all.
