I'm Val. I do two things for organizations that need funding: I find the money, and I write the applications that go after it.
Finding it means a funding map — which programs a specific organization is actually eligible for, with the award range, the deadline, the conditions and the source behind every line. Writing it means the full application package: narrative, eligibility analysis, budget, federal forms and exhibits, assembled the way a funded application reads.
Below are three pieces of work. The first was done for a real organization and is confirmed by them in writing. The other two are complete samples, built to be read in full.
1 · Selected work
Federal Application Sample · Need & Budget ArchitectureDemonstration
USDA Community Facilities — Complete Fire Station Proposal Package
Full turnkey narrative: Census ACS demographic need indicators, 2 CFR 200 line-item program budgeting, environmental records (NEPA), applicant capacity, and project implementation timeline.
Open the full proposal sample →
Institutional Practice · 501(c)(3) & Public Programs
Nonprofit Funder Mapping & Fractional Grant Pipeline Management
Detailed methodology: multi-tier foundation landscape mapping, tailored Letters of Inquiry (LOI), and submission packages across regional philanthropic foundations, state initiatives, and federal agencies.
Explore nonprofit practice models →
Data sample
Minnesota grant-eligibility database — 804 communities scored
A 16-row public slice: population, income, CF score and maximum grant share for towns from 353 to 5,795 people. Contacts withheld.
See the database sample →
2 · How I build a funding map
Anyone can produce a list of funders. The work is in removing the ones that do not apply, and in being honest about the ones that are a long shot.
- Profile first. Legal status, state of registration, annual budget and reporting form, what the money is actually for. Half of all funders are ruled out by these four facts alone.
- Verify on the funder's own site. Aggregator databases go stale; program pages do not. Every entry carries the source it was checked against, with the date.
- Date every deadline. Not "annual" or "rolling" — the actual date, and whether this year's cycle has opened.
- Rate the confidence. Verified fit, competitive but plausible, or long shot. A map that calls everything a good match is useless for planning.
- Remove the dead entries. Closed cycles and impossible match requirements come out, and I say which ones I removed and why.
- Sequence it. What to send this month, what costs nothing to try, what to calendar for next year — and what the organization needs to build before the large applications are credible.
The same discipline runs the other way for towns: I maintain a scored database of eligible Minnesota communities, so a project's funding tier is established before a single page is written. Selecting the right project for the right town is arithmetic, not guesswork.
3 · How Community Facilities applications are scored
A CF application is not judged on prose — it is scored against the criteria in 7 CFR Part 3570. Knowing the formula is what separates a fundable application from a hopeful one. The grant percentage a town can receive is set by two numbers: population and median household income (MHI) against the state's non-metro median.
| Community profile | Max grant share |
| Population ≤ 5,000 and MHI ≤ 60% of state non-metro median | up to 75% |
| Population ≤ 12,000 and MHI ≤ 70% | up to 55% |
| Population ≤ 20,000 and MHI ≤ 80% | up to 35% |
| Population ≤ 20,000 and MHI ≤ 90% | up to 15% |
On top of the grant share, applications earn priority points for being small, low-income, and for projects that protect public health and safety — fire, ambulance, water, and health facilities score highest. I read every application backward from these points: I confirm a town's tier first, then write each section to claim the points it actually qualifies for. Nothing is left to chance or to flattering language.
4 · What a complete package contains
A CF application is a package of exhibits, not one document. Here is the honest division of labor — what I produce, and what comes from the town's own people.
| Application exhibit | Prepared by |
| Project narrative & statement of need | Me |
| Census demographics & eligibility analysis | Me |
| Budget & funding request | Me, built from your cost estimate |
| Federal forms (SF-424 family) | Me |
| Environmental record (NEPA / RD 1970) | Me — assembled; specialist studies as needed |
| Letters of support | Me — drafted; partners sign |
| Preliminary Architectural Report & cost estimate | Your architect / engineer |
| Audited financials & council resolution | Your city |
| SAM.gov registration & UEI number | Your city — I guide you step by step |
5 · Who I work with
- Small towns and rural districts — USDA Community Facilities (fire stations, clinics, town halls, libraries, public-safety equipment), USDA Water & Waste Disposal, Rural Business Development Grants, FEMA AFG for fire departments, Minnesota DEED and the Small Cities Development Program.
- Small nonprofits — funding maps and prospect research: state humanities and arts councils, community and family foundations, local microgrants, and the federal museum, library and humanities programs once capacity is there.
- Engineering and architecture firms — the funding side of projects you are already designing, so the grant application does not become your problem. See how that works →
🤝 Plain and honest: I'm an independent specialist working remotely, not a large firm — that is exactly why the work is affordable and fast. The client always submits the final application itself, the fee is flat and agreed up front, and it is never a percentage of your grant. I work in writing rather than on calls, which keeps everything documented and reviewable.