Government Advisory

Federal Grant Review & Development

Federal peer-review experience applied to strengthen your application and sustain compliance post-award.

NAICS 541611
Overview

What this engagement delivers.

We have sat on the federal review panels. The same scoring rubrics that decide funding are the lenses we apply before you submit. Authorship, peer review, and post-award compliance in one engagement.

Who It's For

Built for organizations that need defensible outcomes.

LEAs and charter networks pursuing competitive federal education grants
Nonprofits and CBOs applying for Department of Education, DOJ, or HHS funding
State and local agencies needing pre-submission peer review for major proposals
Post-award grantees facing compliance, reporting, or reallocation questions
Scope of Work

Four streams. One integrated engagement.

Every engagement is scoped to your setting, but the structure below is the baseline we deliver against.

Opportunity Assessment

NOFO review, eligibility screening, priority-alignment analysis, and competitive positioning against the funder's published selection criteria.

Grant Authorship

Narrative development aligned to federal priorities, logic model construction, evidence-base integration, budget narrative, and attachments. Collaborative process with your program staff.

Pre-Submission Peer Review

Simulated federal peer review against the published rubric,scored reviews, narrative comments, and consensus-style deliberation. Delivered in time for meaningful revision.

Post-Award Compliance Advisory

Drawdown procedures, time-and-effort, allowable cost review, sub-recipient monitoring, and reporting advisory,aligned to 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.

Deliverables

What you receive.

  • NOFO summary and go/no-go recommendation
  • Full application package (narrative, logic model, budget, attachments)
  • Scored peer-review report with reviewer comments and consensus summary
  • Revision memo keyed to rubric dimensions
  • Post-award compliance framework and reporting calendar
  • Ongoing advisory retainer available
How We Work

Four phases. No surprises.

01

Intake & Scoping

NOFO review, eligibility confirmation, internal capacity scan, and go/no-go recommendation. We only engage where the application is competitive.

02

Development

Narrative drafting or pre-submission review against the federal rubric. Iterative work with program staff, evidence-base integration, and logic model construction.

03

Peer Review

Simulated federal peer review,scored reviews, narrative comments, and consensus deliberation,timed to allow meaningful revision before submission.

04

Post-Award Transition

Optional post-award compliance framework setup,drawdown, time-and-effort, sub-recipient monitoring, and reporting calendar aligned to 2 CFR 200.

Why C II C

Practitioners who have done the work.

  • Federal peer reviewer for school funding applications
  • Direct experience scoring applications against federal priorities and budget reasonableness
  • SAM.gov registered for federal contracts
  • Cross-sector experience spanning education, justice, and nonprofit funding
Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about this engagement.

What federal programs do you work with?+
Primarily U.S. Department of Education (Title programs, discretionary competitive grants, Charter Schools Program), DOJ (OJJDP programs), and HHS where applicable. We engage where our reviewer experience and sector expertise apply.
How far in advance should we engage you?+
For grant authorship, we recommend 8,12 weeks before the submission deadline. For pre-submission peer review only, 3,4 weeks is usually sufficient. Rush timelines are possible but compress the revision window.
Do you guarantee funding?+
No reputable firm guarantees federal funding,the decision rests with federal peer reviewers and program officers. What we guarantee is that your application reflects the rubric, priorities, and evidence base the federal reviewers actually use.
Can you help after we are awarded?+
Yes. Post-award compliance advisory is a distinct scope: drawdown procedures, time-and-effort, allowable-cost review, sub-recipient monitoring, and reporting,all aligned to 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Strong Systems Create Strong Outcomes.

Ready to scope this engagement?

A 20-minute call is enough to determine fit, timeline, and the right starting point.