GrantLens reads your EU grant draft against the published evaluation criteria and marks the passages that lose traction — while you can still change them.
Evaluators score against Excellence, Impact and Implementation, each with sub-criteria and thresholds, and falling below a threshold on any single one sinks the whole application. Their Evaluation Summary Report arrives after the decision. This arrives before it.
Our platform will significantly improve outcomes for European SMEs through the application of advanced methods. The consortium brings together complementary expertise across four member states.
The market opportunity is substantial and growing rapidly, and our approach is well positioned to capture a meaningful share of it within the project period.
Work Package 3 will deliver the integration layer. Risks will be managed through regular consortium meetings and an agreed escalation path.
Illustrative draft paragraph. Marks show the kind of thing GrantLens flags and why.
Get it when it opens
One email when GrantLens opens. No spam.
Anchored to the sub-criterion the passage has to satisfy — not general writing advice.
Each section is read against the criterion it is being judged on, and divergence is flagged where a reviewer would find it. You see which section is weakest, not an overall grade you can do nothing with.
Missing evidence chains — a claim with no mechanism, a market with no figure, a risk with no owner — surfaced as the specific gap rather than as a low score.
Suggestions tied to the exact sub-criterion the paragraph needs to satisfy, so the rewrite has a target instead of a tone.