Check your application before you submit
An application is judged against the criteria of a specific call, and those differ from call to call. We check it exactly the way a reviewer will: formal requirements, scored criteria and preferences.
We will check an application from Writer or your PDF
Application from Writer
The session moves to Validator in one click. We know the field structure, so remarks can point to specific form fields.
Uploaded PDF
An application written outside GrantBot is uploaded as a PDF up to 20 MB. We recognize the call number in the document and suggest the right call. Available in the Pro plan.
Exactly the way a reviewer will check it
Each category yields a different kind of conclusion: what blocks submission, what lowers the score and what can still be added.
Formal requirements
We check everything the rulebook sets as a condition of submission. Every requirement gets a verdict, and submission-blocking issues are flagged separately.
Scored criteria
Criteria where the application falls short make it into the report with a grade, a rationale and a list of detected gaps.
Preferences
Elements the call rewards but does not require. Absent ones are flagged with a ready-made suggestion on how to add them.
Three possible outcomes, no single percentage
We do not reduce your application to a number. You get a verdict and a breakdown of issues by weight.
Ready to submit
No blocking issues and no high-weight remarks. At most cosmetic suggestions remain.
With reservations
It can be submitted, but there are remarks that will lower the score. You see which ones to fix first.
Needs work
At least one issue blocks submission. You fix it and run the check again.
A content proposal, not just a remark
With each remark you get ready-made new field content with a preview of the changes against the original. You apply them one by one or in bulk, and the changes go straight into the application in Writer. AI corrections are available in the Pro plan.
Scored criteria, grade sufficient. Detected gap: no baseline value and no indicator measurement method.
Scored criteria, grade good. Detected gap: no reference to market prices or supplier selection method.
Preferences: absent. The call rewards projects reducing energy consumption, the application does not describe this.
From application to report in five stages
You can repeat the check after every fix - every report stays in the validation history.
You point to an application
A session from Writer or a PDF up to 20 MB. For scans without a text layer we tell you right away.
We determine the call
We recognize the call number in the document and suggest the right set of criteria.
We check three categories
Formal requirements, scored criteria and preferences of that specific call.
You get a verdict
Ready to submit, with reservations or needs work, with a breakdown of issues by weight.
You apply the corrections
Applied content proposals go straight into the application fields in Writer.
Remarks you can act on
The criteria of this call
Not generic best practices, but the criteria set from the documentation of the specific competition.
Blockers shown separately
Formal issues that block submission are flagged and always at the top of the report.
Original and proposal side by side
You see the current content and the proposed correction with new fragments highlighted, not a new version of the field with no explanation.
Three categories, not one score
Formal, scored and preferences kept separate, so you know what is a condition and what is an edge.
Rationale and detected gaps
For every scored criterion you see what is missing in the content, not just a grade.
A check you can repeat
After fixes you run the validation again, and previous reports stay in the history.
Who checks applications before submission
SMEs before their first application
You check formal gaps before the call deadline closes on a rejected application.
Agencies and advisors
A second pair of eyes on every client application, with a clear report of issues by weight.
R&D project teams
Verification of indicators, gaps in the rationale and consistency across application sections.
Local governments, NGOs and hospitals
Applications written by several people, where an annex or declaration is easy to miss.
Frequently asked questions
Will I get a percentage score?
No. A single percentage does not tell you what to fix. You get a verdict: ready to submit, with reservations or needs work, plus a breakdown of issues by high, medium and low weight, with the submission-blocking ones flagged separately.
Can I check an application written outside GrantBot?
Yes, in the Pro plan. You upload a PDF up to 20 MB, we recognize the call number in the document and suggest the right set of criteria. If the file is a scan without a text layer, we tell you instead of validating an image.
What exactly do you check?
Three categories. Formal requirements, with a blocks-submission flag. Scored criteria - the ones graded lower make it into the report, with a rationale and detected gaps. Preferences, i.e. elements the call rewards, flagged as absent with a ready-made improvement suggestion.
How do AI corrections work?
With each remark you get a proposal of new field content with a preview of the changes against the original. You apply them one by one or in bulk, and applied corrections are saved straight into the application fields in Writer. AI corrections are available in the Pro plan and work for applications written in Writer - a report for an uploaded PDF points out issues without ready-made corrections.
Does validation replace an advisor?
Validator catches formal gaps and gaps against the criteria - what can be checked from the application content. Substantive decisions and project strategy stay on your side, and for tough calls you can use the support of our advisors.