Federal RFPs, foundation applications, and nonprofit proposals — drafted against the funder's section structure, audited against their scoring rubric, and shipped in the format they require. You bring the work. We bring the discipline.
A proposal that reads like AI wrote it loses on the first reviewer pass.
Funders rate proposals against a published rubric. Most submissions don't address the rubric — they address the topic. Reviewers score what's in front of them, not what the writer hoped they'd infer.
The result: well-funded organizations submit thoughtful proposals that get marked down on technical grounds. Missing sections. Off-rubric narratives. Budget lines without justification. Logic models that don't trace to outcomes.
QS Grants doesn't write proposals. It builds them — to a rubric. Before a word of narrative gets drafted, we map the funder's scoring criteria, published priorities, and compliance requirements into a structured profile.
Each application section gets built against that map. Budget lines carry justification columns traceable to program requirements. The pre-submission pass catches what drafting misses. Reviewers find traceable logic, not assertions.
Adapted from the Quantum Tool-Belt 8-atom Master Sequence. Two human gates. Four AI-augmented production stages. Nothing ships until the final stage clears.
Structured form captures the funder, the program, prior reports, financials, and your team's track record. 30-minute scoping call confirms feasibility before the timer starts.
AI digests prior reports, impact data, and program documentation into a structured evidence base — the foundation every section will cite back to.
Funder's scoring criteria, published priorities, and section structure are extracted into a coverage map. Every required element is named and assigned before drafting.
Each section is drafted against its mapped criteria. Budget narrative carries line-item justifications. Logic model traces inputs to outcomes against the funder's framework.
A skeptical-reviewer pass surfaces objection points before the real reviewers see them. Rubric gaps, unstated assumptions, and compliance oversights get flagged and closed.
Final consolidation in the funder's required format — Word, PDF, online-portal-ready text blocks. Plus rubric-match audit and modular reuse pack for your next cycle.
The narrative is yours. The rubric-match audit is yours. The reuse pack is yours. The funder-profile template is yours. After delivery, nothing in QS Grants depends on a continued retainer to remain useful to your organization.
The next time the same funder opens a cycle — or a similar funder publishes a similar rubric — you start from a template, not a blank document.
Each tier is rubric-mapped before scoping. If your application doesn't fit cleanly into a tier, we name the gap and price it on the intake call. No surprises after the timer starts.
A nonprofit advocacy organization applied to 3–4 federal grants per quarter. Each application consumed 60+ staff hours — spread across program staff, a grant writer, and a compliance reviewer — with no reusable structure between grants. The process started from scratch every cycle.
The pipeline runs every stage with structured handoffs. Human review is gated at intake and at the final package. The compliance review stage caught a previously-missed eligibility documentation requirement on the first cycle alone — a failure mode that would have rejected the submission on technical grounds before a reviewer read a word of narrative.
Reusable evidence base. Each grant cycle now improves the next: the funder profile, the rubric map, the budget structure, and the impact narratives compound across submissions.
Submit the form below. You'll get a calendar link for a 30-minute scoping call within 24 hours — usually within 4 — and a feasibility read on whether the application fits in the 48-hour window before any money changes hands.