Rejection and resubmission
Use the rejection. Do not merely polish the same bid.
Matt analyses the previous application, decision and feedback, then identifies what should stay, what must change and which route makes sense next.
Personally handled by Matt.
Working artist and fundraiser.
Co-director of an ACE-funded theatre company.
What you receive
- Decision and feedback analysis
- Weak-link diagnosis
- What to keep
- What must change
- Resubmission route and timing
- A rebuilding plan or revised draft where commissioned
Scope and responsibility: A stronger resubmission can improve clarity and fit, but it cannot promise a different funding decision.
Diagnosis before rewriting
The useful question is not only how to polish the old text. It is what the funder still could not understand, believe or assess.
Inspect the writing before you enquire
Read genuine redacted extracts before choosing human support. Identifying information is replaced with [redacted], while the underlying wording is retained.
- Project overview: A short community-photography overview connecting the activity, people and public exhibition.
- Why now: An earlier theatre application links changing conditions to specific development work.
- Outcomes and evaluation: The supplied reference separates artistic quality, participant experience and decisions about continuing.
- Environment: The supplied reference connects design and touring choices to information the company can record.
- Match funding: The supplied reference separates confirmed and expected income, in-kind value and a fallback plan.
Clear responsibilities
Matt checks current assistance rules before accepting writing work. You check every fact, figure, budget line and commitment before submitting. No funding result is guaranteed.
Send the fund, deadline and rough idea
Matt will assess the brief personally and confirm the scope and fixed price before work starts.