Do not submit this draft
- The budget lines sum to £10,600, not the stated £9,800.
- The request is £9,800 against a published maximum of £8,000.
- Sessions are already running, against a published exclusion.
- The figure of 2,000 unique beneficiaries is specific and unchecked.
Hard-gate check
Problems serious enough that they are never averaged into a score.
Confirmed disqualification
- Request above the published maximum
£9,800 against a maximum of £8,000.
- Activity already under way
Sessions have been running since January. The funder excludes activity that has already started.
Correctable submission blocker
- The budget does not add up
Stated total £9,800. Lines add to £10,600. The coordinator narrative implies £15,600.
- Word limit not assessable on this extract
Several answers would exceed the 150-word limit in a full draft. This extract is short, so that limit is not assessable here.
Unresolved mandatory check
- Official register not checked
Companies House was not attempted in this teaching file.
Non-blocking improvement
None in this extract.
This funder's criteria
Green: met as the application standsAmber: addressed, with a gap an assessor would noticeRed: not met, or a material weakness
Need
Library cafe closure is concrete. Scale of need is asserted.
Involvement of people affected
Listening is not the same as shaping the design.
Realistic delivery
Already started, broken budget, CIC a few months old.
Who this funder has supported
No published list
Northbridge Community Fund is invented for this example.
None
No organisations were guessed.
No change
No change recommended from this check.
Independent quality
0 does not meet1 strong reservations2 some reservations3 meets adequately4 strong5 exceptional
Each application answer
| Question | Count | Keep | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 What you want to do | short extract | Clear activity and venue. | Already-started claim. Rewrite around work that has not begun, or choose a different funder. |
| 2 Who will benefit | short extract | Named groups. | 2,000 unique people needs a source or a smaller, checkable figure. |
| 3 How people have shaped the work | short extract | A reason for starting. | Involvement is asserted, not described. |
| 4 Why this organisation | short extract | Incorporation date is stated. | Track record is a director's catering background, not kitchen sessions. |
| 5 Budget | table | Line names are clear. | Arithmetic and coordinator rate do not hold. Request exceeds the published maximum. |
Work in this order
- Bring the request inside the published range, or stop£2,000 to £8,000.
- Recast already-started activityThe funder excludes activity that has already begun.
- Make the budget add upThen replace or source the 2,000 figure, and describe how people affected shaped the design.
Find the full report
The evidence register, the method statement and any knowledge diagnostic live only in the markdown file.
Mill Lane Community Kitchen CIC - Application Review (20 September 2026).md