Course template
Is This Program Worth Pursuing? — One-Page Decision Worksheet
Course: Non-Dilutive: The Founder’s Playbook for Grant and Contract Capital · Lessons 1, 6 and 7
Fill in one per opportunity. Numbers can be rough; the point is to compare opportunities with each other and with the equity alternative. This worksheet helps you decide whether to spend your time. It does not determine eligibility or predict an outcome. The funder decides both.
Opportunity: ______________________________ Funder / agency: ______________ Solicitation / notice number: ______________ Link: ______________ Instrument: ☐ Grant ☐ Cooperative agreement ☐ Contract ☐ Other transaction ☐ Prize ☐ State program ☐ Corporate/foundation Deadline (with time zone): ______________ Pre-submission gate and date: ______________ Award ceiling in the current solicitation: $__________ Amount you’d actually request: $__________
1. Pass-1 screen (from the solicitation-reading worksheet)
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Does any published eligibility criterion clearly exclude us? | ☐ No ☐ Yes → stop ☐ Unclear → asked funder on ____ |
| Can every pre-submission gate be met before the deadline? | ☐ Yes ☐ No → next cycle |
| Are the required registrations active, or can they be by the gate date? | ☐ Yes ☐ No → next cycle |
| Does this submission fit under the agency’s FY proposal limit? | ☐ Yes (count: __ of __) ☐ No |
2. The five costs
| Cost | Your estimate | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Proposal cost (hours × people) | ___ hours | Include founder hours taken from product and sales |
| Calendar cost (submission → earliest cash) | ___ months | Use the funder’s published cycle; add a resubmission cycle as a scenario |
| Scope cost (what we commit to that we wouldn’t do anyway) | ☐ None ☐ Some ☐ Major | Describe the detour: |
| Compliance/reporting cost (hours/month; new systems needed) | ___ hrs/mo | Accounting system? Cyber requirements? |
| Terms cost (data rights, patent rights, equity, IP license, exclusivity, location) | ☐ Standard ☐ Needs counsel | Get legal review for anything non-standard |
Runway check: Months of runway today: ___ Calendar cost: ___ → ☐ Decides inside runway ☐ Decides after runway (cannot be the bridge)
3. Fit and evidence
| Question | Score 0–2 | Evidence (not claims) |
|---|---|---|
| Could we have written the problem statement ourselves? | ||
| Do we have evidence for each evaluation criterion? | ||
| Is there a named customer for the result? | ||
| Does the work advance our roadmap? | ||
| Do we have the team the solicitation requires (PI, partner, key personnel)? | ||
| Total (0–10) |
A low total isn’t a verdict. It tells you where the proposal would be weak and what evidence to gather first.
4. Compared with the alternative
What would the same amount cost in equity at our current terms? ___% of the company. What else would the same proposal hours buy (customer calls, product work, fundraising)? ______________________
5. Decision
☐ Go — place on the map as: ☐ Anchor ☐ Contracts track ☐ Conditional ☐ Opportunistic ☐ Later — revisit at: ______ (reason: ______________________) ☐ No — reason: ______________________
If conditional, the trigger is: “If ______________________, then ______________________ by ______.”
Owner: ______________ Internal draft due: ______________ Reviewed on: ______________
Reminders
- The maximum award is a ceiling, not a quote. Budget what the work needs and the solicitation allows.
- Pending proposals are not runway. The plan must work if this one is declined.
- A match score is a relevance signal, not a determination. Don’t enter it in section 3 as evidence.
- This worksheet is not legal, tax or financial advice. For data rights, IP, indirect costs or ownership questions, talk to the right professional.