Funding is secured in the delivery, not the application

Book a 20-minute eligibility call Contact us for a compliance review

Attention almost always sits with the application. But the value of the funding is decided afterwards.
In day-to-day delivery, in drawdowns, changes, cost delimitation and evidence. The audit often comes considerably later, and by then only what is traceable and documented counts.

The problem: risks arise after the award

Costs are allocated incorrectly, changes go unreported, documents are missing or reporting duties are recognised too late. These are rarely deliberate. They happen when no one has clear ownership between the application, the project team and finance.

Authorities look closely. Audits of funded projects are routine across Europe, and R&D tax credits such as the Forschungszulage in Germany and WBSO in the Netherlands are checked against the substance of the work claimed. Where the eligibility of the work is unclear or the documentation is thin, the result is a repayment demand, often long after the cash has been spent.

It is this risk that keeps finance leaders away from public funding altogether: the letter from the authority after a failed audit, and the subsequent repayment demand. It is a real risk. It is also a manageable one, and managing it is a different discipline from winning the funding in the first place.

What is at stake

Clawback reclaims funds you have already committed and spent. Depending on the programme and the finding, the authority can reclaim the share that cannot be evidenced or the full amount, and can add interest on top.

A repayment demand usually comes after the project is closed, when no further outflow is expected. By then the budget is spent and the project team has often moved on, so the repayment lands in a cash plan that has no room for it.

Reporting irregularities can count against your next application. Funding bodies look at how earlier projects were delivered, and a record of late reports or disputed costs makes the next award harder to secure.

How audit-readiness turns a funding award into capital you keep

Compliance is often treated as administration, something to get through once the funding is in. That view is where the losses start. Handled properly, compliance is what makes the funding hold: through delivery, through the audit and into your financial plan. It does that in three concrete ways.

It protects the value that most companies lose after the award.

A share of funding value is routinely lost after the award, to compliance failures and clawback. An audit-ready structure established from day one, rather than assembled when an audit is announced, ensures that value remains on your side.

It removes the surprise of a clawback.

When the eligibility of each claim is documented as the work is carried out, the necessary evidence is in place before it is required. A later audit simply confirms what is already in place.

It makes funding safe to plan around.

Funding that might have to be repaid is not reliable capital for a CFO . Funding that holds up under audit is reliable. Compliance is what turns a claim into a dependable part of the financial budget and plan.

Audit readiness is built in every phase

Cost structure, work packages and funded scope, against which everything is measured later

Conditions and deadlines attached to the award, translated into day-to-day work.

Time recording, allocation of documents, drawdowns and reporting of changes

In longer projects, checks during the funded period are common, in some programmes at regular intervals

A narrative report and a financial statement, with further annexes depending on the programme

Retaining documents, contracts and procurement files for later audits

What has to be evidenced, to whom and for how long is set by the programme and, for national schemes, by national law. For EU programmes such as Horizon Europe, the grant agreement sets the rules.

How we work

A 99% compliance rate in government audits does not come from a final check. It comes from treating compliance as part of the funding strategy from day one, as a standing corporate standard that runs the same way around every deadline. That keeps it repeatable and low-risk year after year, scalable across business units and countries, and light on your team’s time.

We record every success, every rejection and every audit outcome, so we know the patterns that trigger clawback and design them out before they occur. Technology keeps the documentation in order, tracks obligations and deadlines, and flags gaps early. It does not decide what is defensible. That judgement is made by our specialists, and it is what carries the result.

In practice, it comes down to four steps.

Classify the work correctly.

During the process costs are allocated cleanly and work packages structured so they can be traced. That has more impact on whether a claim survives an audit than anything else.

Translate the award into tasks.

Once approved, we convert conditions, deadlines and reporting obligations into specific tasks for the project team, finance and controlling.

Document the work as it happens.

During the funded period we handle drawdowns, cost separation and change reporting so that any gaps can be closed while they are still small.

Support the claim during an audit.

When an authority reviews a claim, it is defended with the documentation already in place.

What this means across your leadership team

A clawback risk in the balance sheet creates a weak foundation for strategy.

Audit-ready compliance makes public funding a reliable part of the capital structure that can be planned around and presented to a board or investor.

Time recording is where compliance reaches the engineering team.

We set up recording that maps cleanly to the funded work packages and fits how your team already works, so the evidence is captured without slowing development. Your engineers describe the work. We make sure it stands up as a claim.

Time recording is where compliance reaches the engineering team.

The result is fewer surprises and far less manual effort across every funded project.

Die Menschen hinter Ihrem Antrag

Dr. ChristophSandhöfer

Consultant

What sets us apart

500^Million

funding realized in 2025

Start your Funding Scan

FAQs about funding advisory

Every cost claimed can later be allocated unambiguously to an approved cost position, a project period and the funded purpose, with matching documents, time records and evidence. Continuously during delivery, not through reconstruction at the end.

More than most teams expect, typically a significant part of funding value . The award is not the finish line, and treating it as such is where most of that value disappears.

Audits can be routine, carried out as part of the final report, or conducted later by the funding body or audit authorities. In longer projects, interim audits during the funded period are common.

Clawback is most likely where funds were not used for the designated purpose, conditions were not met, or evidence is missing.

Not if the claim holds up, which is the entire point of an audit-ready structure. A well-documented, correctly classified claim turns an audit into a confirmation rather than a threat.

That depends on the programme, the award decision and the applicable provisions. Retention often extends several years beyond the submission or audit of the final report. The award decision is always the authoritative source.

No. The earlier we get involved, the less has to be reconstructed, but documentation can also be reset mid-project. What matters is that costs, changes and documents are recorded continuously from that point on.

Programme rules and audit practice do change, and part of managing a funded portfolio is tracking those changes and adjusting before they become a problem. We monitor the conditions across every programme you are in, so a change in the rules is something we manage rather than something that catches you out.

Usually three functions: the project team for content and time recording, finance for documents and cost allocation, and management for changes to the project. Coordinating those three is what we do.

As little as possible. We take on the documentation, the obligation tracking and the audit preparation, and we set clear roles so the process does not rely on one person. Your team gives us the substance of the work; we handle the discipline around it.

Many customers come to us alongside their existing advisers. The difference lies in our specialisation: we understand how funding programmes work, and we manage the full lifecycle through to audit.

Funding is secured in the delivery, not the application

The problem: risks arise after the award

What is at stake

How audit-readiness turns a funding award into capital you keep