Features
Part of Industry grants: the questions worth answering before you apply
Industry Grant Calculator: Manual Fit Scoring Guide
This manual industry grant calculator guide shows how to score fit against a program's purpose, eligibility gates, evidence, and capacity before writing.
This industry grant calculator is a paper-based scoring pass, not a software tool that computes an outcome. Run it in twenty minutes to assess whether a sector program is worth writing for and where your case is weak enough to fix first.
The value is in being honest with the inputs. Scoring yourself generously produces a number that tells you nothing.
What to take away
- Fit is the variable that decides outcomes, and it can be assessed before you write a word.
- Score against the funder's published purpose, not against how much you want the money.
- A low score is a useful result. It saves the weeks that a hopeful application consumes.
- No score changes the one fixed ruleapplying is free, and nobody can promise you an award.
The seven dimensions
Score each from zero to three, where zero means no and three means clearly yes. Write the evidence for each score in a sentence. If you cannot write the sentence, the score is lower than you think.
Seven fit dimensions to score
- Purposeoutcome the money buys
- Applicant typeeligible applicant, not partner
- Geographylocation inside defined area
- Sector definitionfunder's classification includes you
- Evidencerecords exist and are current
- Capacitynamed people, time allocated
- Cashmatch and reimbursement float
| Dimension | The question | Three looks like |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose | Does my project produce the outcome this money exists to buy? | The notice's own words describe what I already do |
| Applicant type | Am I an eligible applicant, not a partner to one? | My organization form is named in the eligibility section |
| Geography | Is my location inside the defined area? | The address qualifies, checked against the funder's own map or list |
| Sector definition | Does the funder's classification of my industry include me? | My classification matches the one the notice uses |
| Evidence | Do I already hold what the criteria ask me to demonstrate? | Records exist and are current |
| Capacity | Can I do the funded work and the reporting? | Named people, with time allocated |
| Cash | Can I fund any match and float any reimbursement? | The money exists without new borrowing |
Reading the score
The total is less informative than the pattern. Three rules apply to the shape rather than the sum.
How to read your score pattern
Zero on purpose, applicant type, geography, or sector definition?
gate closed, ends it
continue to cash
Any zero on purpose, applicant type, geography, or sector definition ends it. Those four are gates, not weights, and a strong showing elsewhere does not compensate. This is the most common error in sector applications: an operator scores well on capacity and evidence, feels ready, and applies to a program whose definition of the industry never included them.
A zero on cash is different. It does not disqualify you from applying, but it disqualifies you from using an award, which is worse. Sort that before writing rather than after winning.
Zeros on evidence and capacity are the ones worth fixing. Both are buildable, and both make every later application cheaper.
Where the sector definition trips people
Funders classify industries formally, and their classification is the one that counts. A business that describes itself one way in its marketing may sit somewhere else entirely in a program's definition, and the notice will not flag the difference.
Check the classification the notice uses and confirm where you fall inside it. Where a program routes through a national body rather than direct, that body often sets the definition, as with the manufacturing extension network at the NIST manufacturing extension partnership.
Research-focused sector money is defined differently again. The framing at the small business innovation research program overview shows how narrow a purpose statement can be.
What the score does not measure
It does not measure competition, and you cannot know it in advance. A high fit score with many equally strong applicants is still a competitive process.
It does not measure the value of the award to you either, which is a separate calculation involving the reporting burden and the timing of the money. That arithmetic is set out in the cash timing questions to answer first.
And it does not measure whether the money is a grant at all. Sector announcements use the same vocabulary for grants, forgivable loans, credits, and vouchers, and the distinctions come from the government's glossary of grant terms.
What to do with each result
- Strong on the four gates, weak on evidence.Spend the cycle building records, and apply next time with something to point at.
- Strong throughout.Write, and write to the criteria in their own order and their own wording, since reviewers score against a form rather than against a story.
- Weak on applicant type.Look at whether you belong in somebody else's application as a partner, which is a real and often better route.
- Weak on geography.Check the state and local layers instead, where the boundaries are drawn differently: see the state offices worth calling and the bodies that fund things near you.
- Weak everywhere.Stop. Most organizations are not eligible for most programs, and reaching that conclusion in an afternoon is the best return this exercise offers.
Whatever the score, one thing is fixed. Applying for a government grant costs nothing, being considered costs nothing, and receiving an award costs nothing. Any fee at those points, and any guarantee of a result, is the marker of the fraud that follows people looking for funding, described in the FTC's account of government grant scams.
Common questions
Should I weight the dimensions differently?
You can, but the four gates stay gates. Weighting only helps you choose between programs you are genuinely eligible for.
What if the notice does not say enough to score against?
Then ask the program officer. A notice you cannot score is a notice you cannot write to either, and the questions are the same ones.
Does a high score mean I will win?
No. It means the application is worth writing. Outcomes depend on the field, which nobody can see in advance, and on what reviewers weigh: see the assessment your application faces.
Can I run this on a program I found through an aggregator?
Only after opening the funder's own page. A secondhand copy is not a specification, and scoring against one produces a confident answer to the wrong question.
