DIRECT ANSWER / 06
How are requested funds, other funds and in-kind match kept apart?
Each budget row carries the requested amount, other funds and in-kind match as separate fields, and the rollup reports all three plus the total project cost. Narrative claims about any of them are mapped to the row and field they describe.
Why this review exists
Mixing funding sources is one of the few errors that changes the number a funder cares about most, and it is easy to make when a paragraph mentions two amounts in one sentence.
Three fields, one rollup
In the sample, row B-0001 requests 24,000 and records 6,000 in other organisational funds. No row records in-kind match. The rollup therefore reads 46,500 requested, 6,000 other funds, zero in-kind and 52,500 total project cost, and each of those four figures is traceable to the rows that produced it.
The personnel paragraph mentions both amounts in one sentence: 24,000 requested for a coordinator alongside 6,000 in other organisational funds. Two separate claims are extracted, C-0002 and C-0003, and a reviewer maps each to the field it describes rather than letting the larger number stand for the row.
Keeping the fields apart is what makes the total project cost meaningful. A budget where match has been folded into the request looks balanced and asks for the wrong amount.
Method and limits
Every classification is yours. The tool has no rule about what counts as match, no knowledge of cost sharing requirements, and no way to check whether a contributed service was valued reasonably.
Where a paragraph does not say which source an amount belongs to, the honest outcome is a finding rather than a guess, and the tool leaves the claim pending until a person decides.
Practical sequence
- Record requested, other funds and in-kind match in separate columns
- Map each narrative amount to the field it actually describes
- Read the rollup for all three figures and the project total
- Record a finding where the prose does not say which source it means
What remains outside the app
Grantweft performs arithmetic and textual cross-reference on user-supplied material. It does not write proposals or determine eligibility, allowability, accounting treatment, compliance, completeness, accuracy, submission readiness or funding outcome.
The private desk keeps exact source labels, stable budget row identities, paragraph-based claims, confirmed mappings, visible arithmetic, findings, human decisions, review freezes and passive handoff files connected without an account or remote application database.