+61 487 923 693

Grant programs behave as designed

I advise on and design grant programs that
can answer the question: What actually changed?

Founder & Principal Consultant, Geoffrey Clow

Expert Grant Program Advisory (EGA)

Request a consultation >
Discover my services >

What if your grant program could tell you what actually changed?

Most grant programs can tell you how much money went out the door. They can tell you how many applications were received, how many projects were funded, how many acquittals came in on time.

What they can’t tell you is whether any of it mattered.

That’s not a reporting problem. It’s a design problem. And it starts long before the grant round opens.

Discover my services >

The shift that's already begun

The best funders in Australia and internationally are moving away from compliance-heavy, output-counting grant programs. They’re building something different: programs designed around outcomes from the start, with learning built into every stage of the lifecycle.

This isn’t theory. It’s already happening across Commonwealth, state and local government, and in leading philanthropic practice. The question is whether your program will be ahead of that curve or scrambling to catch up.

I’m Geoffrey Clow. I design grant programs for outcomes and systems, not just compliance and acquittal.

Request a consultation >

Services

Tier 1: What I Design

Outcomes-First Grant Programs. Most grant programs are designed to be defensible. The good ones are designed to be effective. I help funders build programs that can be both.
Explore more >

Tier 2: How I Design Them

The design components below are not services in isolation. Each one addresses a point where grant programs typically fail. Together, they deliver the outcomes-first approach in practice.
Explore now >

Guidelines Development

If your guidelines read like policy documents, applicants won't know what the grant program is for. I develop grant guidelines from scratch or redesign existing ones, translating policy intent into clear operational guidance so applicants self-select properly and assessors can do their job.
Explore now >

Eligibility Design

If your staff are debating who's eligible, the criteria weren't precise enough. I design eligibility rules that are genuinely binary, in or out, so decisions are consistent, explainable, and defensible under audit or scrutiny.
Explore now >

Application & Evidence Design

If your staff are debating who's eligible, the criteria weren't precise enough. I design eligibility rules that are genuinely binary, in or out, so decisions are consistent, explainable, and defensible under audit or scrutiny.
Explore now >

Assessment Design

If your decisions can't be reconstructed from the record, they can't be defended. I design assessment frameworks for consistent, defensible decisions: criteria, scoring, panel processes, and documentation that hold up under scrutiny.
Explore now >

Outcomes Architecture & Learning Frameworks

If your grant program can't demonstrate impact, outcomes weren't built into the design. I design outcomes and evaluation frameworks at the outset, so whatever system you use produces data that is meaningful, defensible, and usable.
Explore more >

Tier 3: When the Stakes Are High

Assurance & Edge Capabilities. These capabilities activate when money is large, scrutiny is public, or failure has consequences. This is where senior decision-makers lean in.
Explore now >

AI‑Augmented Grantmaking

If you can't explain how AI influenced a decision, accountability doesn't sit with the system. It sits with you. I design AI-augmented grantmaking end-to-end. Governance and decision architecture are rebuilt first. AI comes in only where it strengthens quality, integrity and outcomes.
Explore more >

Fraud, Risk, & Probity

If your controls weren't designed into the grant program architecture, they're documenting problems, not preventing them. I design fraud, risk and probity controls at the architecture stage, before vulnerabilities become incidents.
Explore now >

Client Perspectives

“What mattered was not just technical compliance, but judgement. The advice we received recognised the political and policy pressures around the grant program, and helped us put design constraints in place that made defensible decisions possible, before scrutiny arrived.”
Deputy Secretary, Commonwealth Department
“The value was in forcing clarity early. Design decisions that would normally have been deferred were tested upfront, which saved us from downstream fixes and reduced risk at the approval stage.”
Executive Director, Grant Program Owner
“The work cut through competing guidance and gave us a clear structure we could actually operate. Assessment, approvals and reporting finally lined up instead of pulling in different directions.”
Director, Grants Management
“Having an external, experienced view meant we could stand behind our decisions with confidence. The grant program was clear to applicants, fair to assess, and defensible when questions were asked.”
Manager, Local Government
“This work reflected a level of commercial and political understanding that is rare in grant design. The advice was grounded in real-world decision-making, not theory, and anticipated scrutiny well beyond the program team. It was clear this came from senior experience outside government as well as within it.”
Deputy Secretary, Commonwealth Government
“What stood out was the ability to bridge policy intent, ministerial expectations and delivery reality. The design choices were disciplined, defensible and clearly informed by experience operating in high-visibility, high-risk environments.”
Senior Executive , Australian Government Agency
“This was not conventional grants advice. The approach brought commercial discipline, risk literacy and a clear understanding of how decisions are examined after the fact. It materially improved the quality of the decision record.”
Director, Grants and Assurance State Government
“Having someone who understands how decisions look from the outside, media, audit, parliament, was invaluable. The design held up because it had been thought through by someone who has worked at that level of exposure.”
Grant Program Owner, High-profile Grant Program
“The advice translated complex policy intent into something we could actually administer and defend. The commercial perspective was especially valuable for a council environment where scrutiny is immediate and unforgiving.”
Manager, Economic Development Local Government
“There was a noticeable difference in how risk, reputation and accountability were handled. This felt informed by international and commercial experience, not just public-sector process.”
Executive Sponsor Multi-jurisdictional Program

Discretion is central to my work. Testimonials are therefore anonymised and attributed by seniority and sector, not by name.

Not starting from scratch?

Sometimes grant programs need rescue, not redesign. If your team is drowning in triage, if assessments won’t survive scrutiny, if complaints and reviews are eating months of work, that’s not a delivery problem. That’s a design failure showing up downstream. I know where programs break and how to shore them up.

Talk to me early >

Latest
White Papers

Person in steampunk-style goggles reading a book in a train carriage, used as a case study image for expert grant program advisory.

Grant Standardisation Done Right

16 May 2026

The reason is almost never discussed: most grant standardisation starts at the wrong end of the grant program. It starts at the form, the workflow, the reporting template. These are downstream consequences of design decisions that were made, or not made, much earlier.

Grant program standardisation amplifies what is already in the design. If the design is clear, standardisation makes clarity consistent. If the design is ambiguous, standardisation makes ambiguity consistent. A cleaner form does not fix a confused grant program. It just gives the confusion better stationery.

This white paper makes the case for a different sequence: design first, then standardise.

Read more >
Person in steampunk-style goggles reading a book in a train carriage, used as a case study image for expert grant program advisory.

The AI Assesssor Is the Wrong Idea

30 March 2026

The grant sector built AI tools that process applications. It should have built tools that improve decisions. Those are not the same thing, and the difference is where most of the money, time, and genuine potential in AI for grantmaking is currently being lost.
The tools on offer operate almost entirely at the application layer: eligibility checking, document summarisation, preliminary scoring. This is first-generation thinking. It solves a workflow problem while leaving the integrity, equity, and intelligence problems in grantmaking completely untouched.
This white paper argues that the AI assessor is not the destination. It is a distraction. The real opportunity lies across five distinct layers of the grantmaking system, and almost no current product addresses more than the first. This paper names all five, and gives you the questions to put to a vendor before you sign anything.

Read more >
Person in steampunk-style goggles reading a book in a train carriage, used as a case study image for expert grant program advisory.

The Better Best Practice Grantmaking Lifecycle

18 February 2026

Somewhere in a government department, a grant program manager is sitting in a post-round debrief explaining why the grant program did not work the way anyone expected. The applications were inconsistent. The assessment panel could not agree on what good looked like. The minister’s office is asking what the program actually achieved, and the data does not answer the question.

The room agrees that lessons learned should feed into the next round. It is also the same conversation that happened after the last round, and the round before that.
Grant programs behave exactly as they are designed. When they are not deliberately designed, they behave exactly as they did last time.

This white paper argues that the sector’s lifecycle models describe administration in detail and treat design as a preliminary note. That is the gap this paper closes.

Read more >

Deliverables Glimpse

Latest
case studies

Most grant problems show up too late

If you want to test your grant program design while there’s still room to move, I can help

Get in touch here>