Granteye
A pre-submission grant review workspace that versions the authoritative opportunity package, extracts requirement candidates for human confirmation, maps each approved requirement to cited narrative passages and attachments, and proposes revisions for gaps without scoring fundability or submitting on the applicant's behalf.
Grant writers finish a narrative under deadline, then manually verify that every instruction, eligibility condition, attachment, page limit, evaluation criterion and certification is covered. The supplied research confirms a full-lifecycle grant product whose users identified a pre-submission compliance-matrix gap, plus adjacent intelligence products at $299 and $499 monthly annual-plan equivalents and $29 monthly; all are observed market references, not fixed product pricing. It found no standalone compliance-matrix checker. The original scoring stage verified zero interfaces, while subsequent research confirms a free public federal grant interface. Granteye begins with the exact opportunity package and amendments selected by the applicant, not a generic program template. Extracted requirements remain candidates until a reviewer confirms type, source, applicability and priority. Each matrix row stores the requirement text, source page or section, narrative and attachment citations, coverage status, contradiction, reviewer and correction. A coverage score is a review aid, not a prediction of award, legal compliance, eligibility or evaluator acceptance. Suggested revisions cannot invent organizational history, partnerships, outcomes, budgets, evidence or certifications. Requirement extraction, applicability decision, narrative mapping, revision draft, author acceptance, final package approval, portal upload, submission acknowledgment and funder disposition remain distinct. The product never sends a grant, signs a certification or presents a complete matrix as a guaranteed compliant application.
A solo grant writer, nonprofit development lead, public-sector program team or consultant reviewing a finished application against a complex opportunity package.
A recent launch and direct user comment identify a timely workflow gap.
Requirement extraction, citation mapping and revision packets scale through software across repeated programs.
Three cross-references and four inbound connections provide moderate convergence.
A confirmed user-identified gap, later-confirmed public grant interface, three cross-references, four inbound connections and a narrowly testable matrix workflow support the product.
The original stage verified zero interfaces, buyer economics are incomplete, opportunity packages vary, extraction errors are consequential and no structural incumbent cost is established.
Discussion
No comments yet — be the first to weigh in.
