AI Proposal Assessment

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. Focus Area: [The general issue or domain this work addresses, e.g. "education access" or "climate change"] Specific Problem: [The particular problem within that area the AI solution is designed to solve, e.g. "low-income students lack access to college counseling"] Clearly Stated: [YES / PARTIALLY / NO] Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, note whether the problem statement is evidence-backed or just asserted, and whether the proposal explains why AI is the right approach to this problem versus other interventions. If the problem is vague, buried, or conflated with mission, flag that. Avoid summarizing what the proposal says — the funder has already read it.

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly regarding the solution's expected outcomes and the role of AI in achieving them. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. Stated Outcomes: [The specific positive change(s) this AI solution claims to achieve, in one sentence] Outcomes Are Measurable: [YES / PARTIALLY / NO] AI Role Is Clear: [YES / PARTIALLY / NO — does the proposal explain how AI specifically enables these outcomes, or is AI mentioned without a clear causal connection?] Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, note whether the outcomes are specific and measurable or rely on vague impact language (e.g., "improve lives," "help communities"). Note whether the proposal clearly explains how AI drives those outcomes or whether AI appears to be tacked on. Avoid summarizing what the proposal says — the funder has already read it. If either element is weak or absent, note that this is worth exploring in follow-up.

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. Direct Beneficiaries: [Who immediately benefits from the solution, e.g. "plant researchers and breeders"] Ultimate Beneficiaries: [Who benefits downstream, e.g. "smallholder farmers and food-insecure populations globally"] Connection to Direct Beneficiaries Explained: [YES / PARTIALLY / NO] Connection to Ultimate Beneficiaries Explained: [YES / PARTIALLY / NO] Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, note whether the connection between the AI solution and its benefit to each beneficiary group is clear, or whether the pathway from direct to ultimate beneficiaries is asserted rather than explained. Avoid summarizing what the proposal says — the funder has already read it. If either connection is vague or absent, note that this is worth exploring in follow-up.

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly regarding the solution's plans to expand beyond its initial audience and timeline. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. Broader Audience: [Describe any broader audience the proposal mentions eventually reaching, in a few words. If not mentioned, enter "Not mentioned"] Continues Beyond Grant Period: [YES / NO / UNCLEAR — meaning the organization's own work continues, not just adoption of outputs by others] Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, note what the proposal says about reaching a wider audience and sustaining the work after the grant ends. If continuation depends on a follow-on project or future funding that isn't described, flag that as a sustainability gap. Avoid summarizing what the proposal says — the funder has already read it. If either is not addressed, note that this may be worth exploring in follow-up.

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly regarding the nonprofit's plans to share data or learnings beyond the project. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. Data Sharing Plan: [In a few words, name the publication, database, or method through which data or findings will be shared, e.g. "open-access journal," "public GitHub repository." If not mentioned, enter "Not mentioned"] Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, note whether the sharing plan is concrete (named venues, timelines, access terms) or vague (general statements of intent). Flag whether there's a governance or maintenance plan for shared assets after the grant ends. Avoid summarizing what the proposal says — the funder has already read it. If not addressed, note that this may be worth exploring in follow-up.

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly regarding the team's technical and AI staffing. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. Technical staffing (general software/engineering): [IN PLACE / PARTIALLY IN PLACE / NOT AT ALL IN PLACE / NOT MENTIONED] AI-specific staffing: [IN PLACE / PARTIALLY IN PLACE / NOT AT ALL IN PLACE / NOT MENTIONED] Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, note any gaps between what the proposal claims and what would be needed to execute the described AI work. Focus on what's unconfirmed, unqualified, or missing — not on what's present. If staffing appears unconfirmed or thin for the scope described, flag that as worth exploring in follow-up.

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly regarding the solution's current stage of development. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. Is there a working system in active use today, prior to this funding? [YES / PARTIALLY / NO / UNCLEAR] What does the proposal aim to deliver with this funding? [IMPROVED PRODUCT / NEW PRODUCT / PROTOTYPE / RESEARCH / UNCLEAR] Does the proposal provide concrete evidence of the current stage — e.g., prior deployments, user numbers, published results, or existing technical components? [YES / PARTIALLY / NO] Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, note any gap between the claimed current stage and the evidence provided. Flag what information is missing that would help a funder understand the solution's current state of development. Avoid summarizing what the proposal says — the funder has already read it.

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly regarding the data that powers the solution. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. Does the proposal address where the data that powers their solution will come from? [YES / NO] [If NO, enter N/A for all remaining fields] Briefly describe where the data is coming from (e.g. "public domain data set", "existing database owned by the organization", ...): [your description] Does the proposal indicate that the data already exists? [EXISTS / PARTIALLY EXISTS / DOES NOT EXIST / NO INDICATION] Does the proposal describe how any needed new data will be obtained? [YES / NO / UNNECESSARY] Does the proposal demonstrate that they have thought through how their data will be prepared and structured for AI ingestion? [YES / PARTIALLY / NO / UNNECESSARY] Does the proposal describe how the AI model will be maintained, retrained, or versioned after initial development? [YES / NO / UNNECESSARY] Does the proposal describe how the underlying dataset will be updated or governed over time? [YES / NO / UNNECESSARY] Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, note what is missing regarding data robustness and maturity. Avoid summarizing what the proposal says — the funder has already read it.

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly regarding external partnerships in the AI field. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. External AI development partnerships — confirmed (agreements or active roles in place): [YES / NO / NOT MENTIONED] External AI development partnerships — proposed or aspirational (mentioned as desired but not yet formalized): [YES / NO / NOT MENTIONED] [If both are NO or NOT MENTIONED, enter N/A for all remaining fields] For each partner, fill in one row: Partner 1 — Name: [name] | Type: [e.g. academic, tech company, nonprofit, government] | Role: [e.g. data sharing, technical support, research] Partner 2 — Name: [name] | Type: [type] | Role: [role] (Add rows as needed) Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, flag any partnerships where the nature or role is vague or unclear. If no partnerships are mentioned, note that this is worth exploring in follow-up. Avoid summarizing what the proposal says — the funder has already read it.

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly regarding whether the solution uses custom-built or existing AI. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. AI solution type: [CUSTOM-BUILT / OFF-THE-SHELF / HYBRID / NOT SPECIFIED] If CUSTOM-BUILT or HYBRID — Justification for custom AI provided: [YES — justification addresses why custom development is needed beyond the off-the-shelf component / NO] Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, if the solution is custom-built or hybrid, flag it as an area the funder may want to explore further. If the proposal uses terms like "custom" but appears to describe prompt engineering or configuration on top of an existing platform, flag that distinction as worth clarifying. Avoid summarizing what the proposal says — the funder has already read it.

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. IMPORTANT: Only mark YES if a specific named open source tool, dataset, or repository is explicitly mentioned in the proposal. Generic AI/ML terminology (e.g. "language model", "neural network") does not count. Using open source tools (e.g. OSS frameworks, libraries, or models — must be explicitly adopted, not just referenced or cited as inspiration): [YES / NOT MENTIONED] Contributing code or models back to open source (e.g. releasing code, models, or workflows publicly): [YES / NOT MENTIONED] Using open data (e.g. public datasets, open-access databases — not proprietary data the org itself owns): [YES / NOT MENTIONED] Contributing data back to open data commons (e.g. releasing datasets, annotations, or benchmarks publicly): [YES / NOT MENTIONED] Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, note what is missing or worth raising regarding the proposal's relationship to open source and open data. Flag if "open access" refers only to a proprietary platform rather than genuine contribution to the commons. Avoid summarizing what the proposal says — the funder has already read it.

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. Budget provided: [YES / NO] Planned use of grant funds described: [YES / NO] AI-specific costs addressed (e.g. compute, data, tooling): [YES / PARTIALLY / NO / NOT APPLICABLE] Budget appears proportionate to the described AI work: [YES / UNCLEAR / NO] Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, flag any line items that seem missing, undersized, or unexplained given the scope of AI work described. If budget or fund use is absent entirely, note that it should be requested. Avoid summarizing what the proposal says — the funder has already read it.

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly regarding the organization's vision for AI. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. Does the proposal describe the organization's broader vision for AI beyond this project? [YES / NO / NOT MENTIONED] Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, if a broader AI vision is present, note whether it includes specific future applications or is limited to general statements. If no broader vision is mentioned, flag that it may be worth exploring in follow-up — whether this project is a one-off or part of a larger institutional direction. Avoid summarizing what the proposal says — the funder has already read it.

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly regarding AI bias. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. Does the proposal acknowledge that AI solutions can reflect or amplify bias, even with diverse or representative training data? [YES / NO] Does the proposal specifically identify sources of bias in the training data (e.g. geographic gaps, underrepresented populations, annotation errors)? [YES / NO] Does the proposal describe a concrete plan to test for, mitigate, or monitor bias in model outputs? [YES / NO] Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, note what's missing from the proposal's treatment of bias — whether that's awareness, sourcing, or a mitigation/monitoring plan. Briefly explain why bias matters in AI systems (e.g., if training data reflects historical inequities, the AI may reproduce or amplify them). Flag anything worth probing in follow-up. Avoid summarizing what the proposal says — the funder has already read it.

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly regarding data privacy and security. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. Does the solution collect or process data that could identify or surveil specific individuals, organizations, or entities? [YES / NOT MENTIONED] Does the proposal describe specific data handling or storage practices? (e.g. retention policy, encryption, security controls — not data sharing arrangements): [YES / NOT MENTIONED] Does the proposal address who has access to the data and how that access is controlled? [YES / NOT MENTIONED] Does the proposal mention compliance with relevant privacy regulations or standards? [YES / NOT MENTIONED] Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, note what's missing from the proposal's treatment of data privacy and security. If the proposal collects sensitive data but is vague about protections, flag that as worth probing in follow-up. Avoid summarizing what the proposal says — the funder has already read it.

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. Does the proposal acknowledge any potential negative ethical impacts of their AI solution? [YES / NO] Does the proposal make the case that its overall benefits outweigh those ethical concerns? [YES / NO / NOT APPLICABLE — no ethical concerns mentioned] Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, note what is missing. If the proposal does not acknowledge any potential negative ethical impacts, note that this is worth exploring in follow-up. Avoid summarizing what the proposal says — the funder has already read it.

From the attached grant proposal, fill in the following template exactly regarding broader societal implications of AI. Do not add explanation or content outside the template. Do not editorialize or make funding judgments. Does the proposal reflect on how the rise of AI is reshaping their mission area — including systemic effects beyond their intended use case (e.g., labor displacement, access to services, equity)? [YES / NO] Does the proposal address the societal effects of using AI in this domain — beyond the intended benefits? [YES / NO] Follow Up: In 2-3 sentences, note whether the proposal looks beyond its immediate use case. If broader implications are not addressed, suggest areas worth exploring in follow-up — for example: labor displacement in the nonprofit's domain, environmental cost of running AI systems, unintended downstream uses of the solution, or how the solution interacts with existing inequities. Avoid summarizing what the proposal says — the funder has already read it.