The Lauzier Foundation has a record in the OpenGrants index with a hard date on it: April 15, 2027. It names a portal, lists eight things the submission must contain, and explains what to do if you need more time.
You cannot apply to it. Per the Lauzier Foundation Charitable Grant Completion Report record, it is the Washington funder’s completion report — what a grantee files after the money is spent. That date is not an application deadline. It belongs to organizations that already won.
Six current records work this way. They sit in the index alongside solicitations, they are marked open, and none is something to apply to: they are the obligations attached to money already awarded. What makes them worth reading together is not that reporting exists — everyone knows that. It is that on five of the six, the date you owe is one the funder never published, because it is computed from your award rather than from the funder’s calendar.
The Short Answer
Post-award reporting deadlines are mostly derived rather than published: one month after your project’s end date, sixty days after your grant ends, or whatever date sits in your own agreement. No filter or funding alert can fire on a date that exists only in your award letter, which is why the obligation calendar is built by hand.
Anschutz States the Consequence Out Loud
Most funders leave the stakes of a late report implied. One record says it in a sentence.
Per the Anschutz Family Foundation’s grant reporting page, the page describes a post-award reporting process for existing grantees rather than a new funding opportunity, and current grantees must submit a final report on grant outcomes to remain eligible for future funding. The record carries no amount and no deadline, which is accurate — there is no public date, because the date depends on whose grant it is.
Now put that beside the same foundation’s application record. Per the Anschutz Family Foundation Grant Program record, the program runs two annual deadlines, January 15 and July 1, both by 5 p.m., applied for through an online portal that opens with an eligibility quiz, after required templates — a narrative, a sources of income table, a major contributors list. Review takes about four months, with board decisions communicated by mail in late May or late November depending on the cycle.
Read the two records as one process and the sequencing problem appears. A grantee aiming at the January 15 cycle is not working to a January deadline. They are working to a report that has to be filed before the eligibility quiz can be answered honestly — and that quiz is the first screen of the application. The last act of one grant is a prerequisite of the next, and only one of those facts has a date attached.
Four months of review is the part worth planning against. A cycle closing January 15 produces a decision in late May. Miss it because a report was outstanding and the next decision is not two weeks later — it is the following November.
Pulaski County: One Month After a Date Only You Hold
The clearest example of a derived deadline is also the plainest record.
Per the Community Foundation of Pulaski County’s final grant report requirements, the obligation is an IRS-mandated reporting requirement applying to all competitive grants awarded by the foundation, and final grant reports are typically due about one month after the project’s stated End Date, submitted through the grant portal.
Notice what that sentence does not contain. There is no date in it, and there cannot be: the foundation is describing a rule that resolves to a different day for every grantee, because the input is your project’s end date, which lives in your award documents and nowhere else. The record’s deadline field is correctly empty.
Two consequences follow for anyone running more than one grant. The rule applies across the board rather than per program, so a small grant and a large one generate the same obligation on different days. And the trigger is the stated end date, not the date the work actually finished: a project that wraps up early still reports a month after the date in the agreement, and one that runs long has an obligation that does not wait for it.
This is also why reporting rules are worth reading at the funder level rather than the program level: a rule like this one is published once and applies to everything the foundation awards. The OpenGrants funder directory is the faster route to those standing policies.
Irvine: The Date Is in a Document Only You Have
One record takes the same idea further and declines to generalize at all.
Per The James Irvine Foundation’s current grantees page, grantees submit all reports through the foundation’s portal, and reports are due on or before the reporting dates listed in each individual agreement. The page supplies two separate financial report templates — one for Project Support and Regranting, one for Flexible Project and General Operating Support — plus Reporting Guidelines and Communications Guidelines for Grantees. The record states plainly that this is not a solicitation and that no deadlines, amounts or eligibility for new funding are provided.
The two templates are the detail to carry away. Which one you owe depends on the kind of support you received, so the reporting burden is a property of the award type, settled when the agreement was signed. An organization holding two Irvine grants of different types owes two forms against two dates, and no public page holds either.
RCSA Runs Two Clocks Off the Same Date
The most instructive record in the group prices every deadline twice, in opposite directions.
Per the Research Corporation for Science Advancement’s Managing Your Grant guidance, the page covers active awards across the Cottrell Scholar, Cottrell SEED and Scialog Collaborative Award programs, with all grant management actions processed through RCSA’s PRISM system. The dates:
- Annual reports are due 30 days after the anniversary date.
- The final report is due 60 days after the grant ends.
- A no-cost extension must be requested 60 days before the award end date.
Set the last two side by side. One end date generates an obligation 60 days after it and an opportunity 60 days before it, and the second closes while the project is still running. An organization that discovers in its final month that it needs more time has already passed the only window in which more time was available. The extension is not denied on the merits; the request is out of time.
Other terms change what “finishing” means. Refunds are not required for unspent amounts under $300. Transfers to a new institution have their own process, which matters in programs built around investigators who move. And the unallowable cost list is specific: certain fringe benefits, faculty salaries beyond stated limits, publication costs over $5,000, visa costs, construction, administrative and support staff costs, and indirect costs on Cottrell Scholar awards. A cost ruled out there does not become allowable because it appeared in a budget, and the reconciliation happens at report time.
The award-management mechanics these rules fall under are covered more broadly in the OpenGrants knowledge base.
Lauzier Would Rather You Keep the Money
Back to the record that opened this, which answers a question the others leave hanging: what happens to money you did not spend.
Per the Lauzier Foundation record, grantees submit the Charitable Grant Completion Report through the foundation’s online portal by April 15, 2027. The report must include the organization name, contact person, program or project name, a summary of the work funded, an explanation of any variances from the original proposal, a financial report of expenditures, an assessment of how organizational objectives were met, and the impact of the funded program on the organization or the community. Grantees needing an extension, or holding unspent funds, are told to contact the foundation directly — the foundation prefers that funds be used for organizational benefit rather than returned.
Two things are worth separating there.
The variance requirement makes the original proposal the baseline you are measured against — not the project as it evolved, but the document as submitted. That is an argument for writing a proposal whose milestones you can still report against a year later, which is a different discipline from writing one that scores well.
The unspent-funds sentence is the more surprising one, and it pairs with RCSA’s $300 refund floor: two funders, two mechanisms, one underlying position — leftover money is a conversation rather than an automatic clawback. Neither record promises any outcome for any grantee, and both route the question to the funder. But the reflex of quietly returning an underspend, or spending it down to avoid the conversation, is not what either asks for.
Lauzier’s is also the one date here a calendar could hold without derivation — which is why it is the one that appears in a deadline field.
Building the Obligation Calendar
Reporting obligations resist the tooling that works on opportunities. A search narrows on amount, geography, deadline and applicant type — all structured fields, and none of these six records carries a usable value in any of them. So this calendar gets built by hand, once per award, from the award letter rather than the listing.
Four derived dates cover most of it:
- The report date. Compute it from the rule, not the inbox. One month after the stated end date at Pulaski County; 60 days after grant end at RCSA; whatever your individual agreement says at Irvine. Record the computed day, not the rule.
- The anniversary date. Multi-year awards generate interim obligations — RCSA’s annual reports land 30 days after each anniversary, so a three-year grant has three deadlines before the final one.
- The last day to ask for more time. This is the one that gets missed, because it runs backward. RCSA closes extension requests 60 days before the award ends, so “will we finish on time” has to be asked early enough that the answer is still actionable.
- The next application deadline, minus the report. Where a funder links the two, as Anschutz does, the real date is the application deadline less the time a report takes to prepare and clear — against a cycle that comes twice a year and takes four months to decide.
One habit supports all four: file the reporting terms with the award letter the week the money arrives. By the time a project is closing out, the person who signed the agreement may not be the person closing it.
Reading a funder’s standing policies alongside its open programs is part of why the index covers both. OpenGrants holds 43,000+ open opportunities across federal, state, local, foundation and corporate sources (OpenGrants data, verified September 11, 2026), refreshed daily (OpenGrants data, verified August 10, 2026) — and pages like Irvine’s grantee portal and RCSA’s management guidance sit there next to the solicitations, which is why five funders’ reporting rules can be compared without visiting five websites.
Questions People Ask
Is a reporting page worth keeping in my pipeline at all? Keep the terms, not the listing. There is nothing to apply to, but four of these six tell you something you would otherwise learn late: that a report gates your next application, that your report date is computed from your end date, that your extension window closes before your project does, or that unspent funds are a conversation.
What happens if I file the report late? These records do not say, with one exception: Anschutz ties continued eligibility for future funding to submitting the final report. The others describe the obligation without stating a penalty, so treat the consequence as a see-listing item and ask the program.
Does an extension on the project also extend the report? Not automatically, and the two are not the same request. RCSA’s no-cost extension moves the award end date and carries its own 60-day-before-the-end requirement; Lauzier tells grantees needing report extensions to contact the foundation directly. Moving a project date and moving a reporting date are separate asks.
Why would a grant database list a document that has no money in it? Because funders publish reporting rules on their own sites as their own pages, and those pages describe live obligations attached to live programs. Reading them is also cheap research on a funder you are about to approach: one that explains its variance requirements and its position on unspent funds has told you a lot about the relationship after the award.
The Bottom Line
The sector organizes itself around application deadlines because those are the dates that get published, filtered, sorted and alerted on. Every date here is the other kind — derived from an award you already hold, held in a document only you have, and in one case running backward from a date you were watching for a different reason.
The habit takes ten minutes per award: when the money arrives, open the agreement, compute the dates the reporting rules imply, and put them where you keep application deadlines. On any funder you intend to return to, the report is not the end of the last grant. It is the first requirement of the next one.
More of these mechanics sit in the OpenGrants knowledge base, with the rest of this series under tips and resources. Search the full index and read listing detail, including deadlines, at ops.opengrants.io/grants — or subscribe to Funding Friday, our weekly grant digest.
Every figure and date here comes from the grant records as indexed on OpenGrants, read on October 13, 2026: Lauzier’s April 15, 2027 deadline and eight required report elements; Anschutz’s January 15 and July 1 deadlines, 5 p.m. cutoffs, four-month review and late-May or late-November notifications; Pulaski County’s one-month-after-end-date rule; Irvine’s per-agreement dates and two financial templates; and RCSA’s annual reports 30 days after anniversary, final report 60 days after end, extension request 60 days before end, $300 refund floor and $5,000 publication limit. Several items are unstated because the records do not supply them — Anschutz’s reporting page carries no date, Pulaski County’s and Irvine’s carry no date or amount, and none of the records names a penalty for a late report. Nothing here predicts an outcome for any applicant. Confirm each against the official pages linked above.