Secure Public Funding.
Facilities Management Grant Applications in Australia.

The Lucius Grant Application Methodology

Grant evaluators score against a specific impact rubric — outputs, outcomes, theory-of-change, value-for-money. Generic project descriptions score in the bottom quartile regardless of project merit. Lucius drafts to the rubric, not around it.

1. 01

   Eligibility validation

   Before any drafting effort begins, Lucius checks your organisation type (charity, CIC, SME, university, public body), geography of operation, project type, and stage of work against the funder's eligibility schedule. Ineligibility is surfaced with the exact clause that disqualifies — so you can request a clarification, adjust scope, or skip the call before investing forty hours.

2. 02

   Theory-of-change construction

   Activities → outputs → outcomes → impact, mapped explicitly to the funder's stated priorities and any required impact framework (e.g. UK Treasury Green Book five-case model for public funding, OECD-DAC criteria for development-sector grants). The narrative is structured so each box has its own measurement plan — not a vague "we will achieve positive change" paragraph.

3. 03

   Evidence-of-impact library

   Lucius pulls from your past project documentation to populate each evaluation criterion with concrete examples — beneficiary numbers, outcome metrics, third-party validation, longitudinal indicators where available. Evaluators score evidence weight, so Lucius weights each example by the funder's stated evidence hierarchy (peer-reviewed > evaluated > self-reported).

4. 04

   Budget justification engine

   Line-item rationale with benchmark anchoring — staff costs cross-referenced to sector salary surveys, equipment costs against published procurement frameworks, indirect costs proportionate to the funder's overhead cap. Each line item gets a one-sentence justification with a citable benchmark. Value-for-money commentary is generated against the funder's specific VFM test (4Es, cost-per-outcome, social return on investment).

5. 05

   Submission readiness check

   Final sweep verifies match-funding documentation, board approval evidence, monitoring and evaluation plan, due-diligence pack, and any sector-specific compliance attachments (safeguarding policy, GDPR DPIA, governance handbook). Lucius generates the cover-letter narrative tying the application back to the funder's call priorities — the part most applicants treat as boilerplate and lose marks on.