Evidence Gap Assessment
A targeted audit of claims versus supporting documents — where assertions in the narrative lack annexes, data sources, or letters that a reviewer will expect.
Tamarind Scope Advisory
Applications read as the reviewer will read them
We audit grant packs, funding proposals, and institutional submissions for gaps in evidence, inconsistent claims, and missing annexes — before the deadline, not after the rejection letter.
Flagship engagement
Full Application Audit
A structured review of your complete submission pack: narrative sections, budgets, letters of support, eligibility checklists, and annex indexing. You receive a written findings memo, a prioritised fix list, and a short briefing call with the auditor who read every page.
Built for programme teams, NGO directors, university research offices, and applicants preparing competitive funding rounds in Thailand and the wider region.
Review the flagship audit
Related audits
When a full pack review is more than you need, these focused audits address a single risk before submission.
Pre-Submission Checklist Review
A disciplined pass against the funder’s mandatory checklist — forms, signatures, page limits, file naming, and required annexes — without a full narrative rewrite.
Resubmission Coaching Session
A structured working session for teams revising an application after reviewer comments, clarification questions, or an unsuccessful round.
How clients use us
A second pair of eyes before the stamp
Most of our work arrives two to four weeks before a funder deadline. Teams send the near-final pack; we return annotated findings and a briefing so you can still revise without rewriting from scratch.
We do not ghostwrite applications or guarantee awards. We mark what a careful reviewer is likely to question — and what you can still repair in time.
Read client storiesFrom recent engagements
“They caught that our budget narrative still described a three-province pilot while the spreadsheet only funded two. That mismatch would have sunk the clarification round.”Nalinee W., programme director, Bangkok civil society consortium
“The findings memo was blunt in places — our partnership letter lacked a signature date — but the fix list was ordered by risk, so we knew what to touch first.”Marcus T., research office coordinator, Nakhon Ratchasima
Field notes
When the budget and the narrative describe different projects
How application auditors spot budget–narrative drift in grant packs, and what programme teams can reconcile before filing.
Letters of support that fail a dating check
Signature dates, letterhead mismatches, and recycled partnership language — small letter defects that application audits catch before submission portals close.
Building an evidence shelf before you write the claim
Why application writers should inventory annexes before drafting impact claims — a practice drawn from evidence gap assessments.