Grant review, LOI, or full application: which do you need?

The right starting point depends on what already exists. This guide helps you choose a bounded next step for one identified opportunity. “Full application” here means a short foundation application of up to 2,000 narrative words with an attachment list. It does not mean a federal application, a complex budget, or new program design.

Start with the decision

Choose	Price	When it fits	What you receive
Existing application review	$295 upfront	You already have a draft for one funder and need a clear edit, rubric check, and missing-items list.	Review of up to 2,000 narrative words, tracked edits, and a missing-items checklist. One existing application; first draft within 3 business days after complete inputs and access.
Letter of inquiry	$350 upfront	The funder asks for a short introduction before a full request, and the program and budget already exist.	A letter of up to two pages for one identified funder, using the existing program and budget, with one revision. First draft within 3 business days after complete inputs and access.
Short foundation application	$750 total ($375 + $375)	You have an identified short foundation application and approved program facts, budget, and attachments to assemble.	Up to 2,000 narrative words, an attachment checklist, and one consolidated revision. $375 to begin and $375 when the agreed submission-ready package is delivered; first draft within 5–7 business days after complete inputs and access.

Choose a review when the words already exist

Review is the best fit when the organization has a current draft and wants an outside pass against one controlling rubric or instruction set. It is useful when the main questions are:

Does each section answer what the funder asks?
Are the population, activities, timing, outcomes, and measures specific enough?
Do the narrative, budget, names, and dates agree?
Which facts, attachments, or approvals are still missing?

Send the current instructions, the draft, and the approved facts that may be edited. A review can identify a gap; it cannot supply an unverified result, eligibility decision, or client approval.

See the application review service for the review inputs, process, and sample deliverables described above.

Choose an LOI when the funder wants a concise first conversation

An LOI is appropriate when one funder has a letter-of-inquiry process or accepts a short introductory letter before inviting an application. It should use an existing program and budget. The letter can explain the need, proposed activity, amount or range, fit, and next step without turning into a new program plan.

Before starting, have the funder’s instructions or stated request, an approved program description, a current budget, the intended request amount, and a person who can approve organizational facts. One revision is included. The funder decides whether to invite a full application; the letter does not create an award expectation.

See the letter-of-inquiry writing service for LOI inputs, timing, and an example.

Choose the short application when the opportunity is defined and the package is short

The short foundation application is the right fit when the organization has one identified opportunity and the application is a bounded narrative package. It includes the narrative, an attachment checklist, and one consolidated revision. The client still owns the final facts, approvals, and submission.

This package is not a fit for a federal application, a complex or multi-period budget, a new program that needs design work, multiple funders, or a submission requiring extensive portal administration. Those needs require a separate scope decision.

See the one-time foundation grant writing service for the application inputs, payment milestones, and a fictional response excerpt. All three services are available remotely to nonprofits throughout the United States; no monthly retainer is required.

Inputs that make a package ready to start

For any option, gather the controlling instructions, deadline and time zone, submission method, approved organization description, program facts, current budget, request amount, relevant attachments, and the name of the final approver. Label committed, planned, and unsecured support separately. Confirm who will submit.

If those inputs are incomplete, the package is not ready for submission. We can identify unresolved inputs in a review or draft, but we do not turn assumptions into client facts or submit on the client’s behalf. Timing starts after complete materials and access; late inputs move the working deadline.

Next step

Choose the smallest package that answers the immediate question: prepare a review inquiry, prepare an LOI inquiry, or prepare a short-application inquiry. Include the funder, deadline, instructions, current draft or program materials, and what is still unresolved. For examples, read the fictional grant review and fictional letter of inquiry.

Wellridge does not guarantee an award, write federal applications, design a new program, or build complex budgets under these bounded offers. The client approves the facts and submits the final package.

This guide is part of the Wellridge Group resource library. Adapt it to the controlling funder instructions and accountable human review.