ProposalOS for NGOs and development organizations
Funders do not only assess your programme. They assess whether your organization can be trusted to hold their money — governance, safeguarding, financial systems, audit history, partner vetting. That institutional dossier is requested constantly, in a different form each time, and it is usually assembled by the person with the least capacity to spare. ProposalOS keeps it as approved, owned, review-dated content so each application draws on it instead of rebuilding it.
The situation
Programme design is the part the team wants to spend time on. In practice, a large share of application effort goes to the institutional annexes: constitution and registration, board composition, financial policies and audited accounts, safeguarding and PSEA policy, anti-fraud and whistleblowing arrangements, data protection, partner due diligence. Each funder asks for the same substance in its own structure, and small organizations pay this cost disproportionately because the same one or two people carry it every time.
The problem
Safeguarding, anti-fraud, procurement, data protection, code of conduct. Approved versions exist, but on a shared drive with several near-identical files and no way to tell which one the board actually signed off.
Audited accounts, turnover thresholds, reserves policy, cost-recovery arrangements and prior grant sizes. Assembling this per application is routine, and a mismatch between what two applications state is a serious credibility problem.
Local partners' registration, policies, accounts and capacity statements are needed early, from organizations that may have less documentation capacity than you do.
Beneficiary numbers, results against indicators and lessons learned from a project closed two years ago are exactly what the next application needs, and exactly what leaves with the programme manager.
Method
Eligibility rules, required policies, financial thresholds, partner requirements and submission deadlines extracted as items traceable to the guideline paragraph.
Governance, safeguarding, financial and policy text held once with an owner, a version and a review date, so what goes out is what the board approved.
Past projects with funders, values, beneficiaries, results and lessons kept as organizational knowledge rather than in a departed colleague's folder.
Partner documents assigned with owners and due dates, so what is missing is visible early enough to help a partner produce it.
Every required document matched to what satisfies it. Funder portals close on the minute, and a missing signed policy is a rejected application regardless of the programme's quality.
Where it applies
Full applications requiring a programme design plus a complete institutional dossier and partner documentation.
Standalone assessments of governance, finance and safeguarding, often on short notice and drawing on the same content as an application.
Where eligibility depends on partner composition and each member's documentation must be complete and consistent.
Where the call is in Arabic and internal working documents are in English, and both versions must agree.
Fit
Honest limits
Questions
The commercial model is shaped around proposal volume and team size rather than a fixed rate card, and it is worth discussing a pilot before committing. We would rather scope it with you than quote a number here.
Each item carries an owner, a version and a review date, so the board-approved version is identifiable and a superseded draft is not attached by accident.
That is much of the point. Programme results and lessons recorded as organizational knowledge stay available to the next application rather than leaving with the person.
Arabic is a working language of the product with full right-to-left behaviour, and content, search and review operate in both languages.
Other sectors
Go deeper
Govern approved experience, methods, policies and company facts with owners and versions.
Organizational knowledge repositorySurface missing responses, evidence, attachments and approvals before they become submission risk.
Compliance and completeness checksCoordinate section owners, tasks, comments and versions in one accountable workspace.
Collaboration and review workflowFind relevant evidence by words and meaning, narrowed by type, tag, language and approval state.
Search across company knowledgeA clearer proposal operating model
Tell us how your organization handles opportunities, evidence and review. We’ll tailor the conversation to that context.