CHIPS and IRA screen
Construction timing, qualified property, facility activity, registration, and controlled-entity questions surfaced early.
Learn moreFor CFOs and tax directors
GrantStack turns rough project specs into a source-backed incentive diligence memo: likely incentive paths, missing facts, ROI scenarios, and the review steps required before anyone relies on the numbers.
Built for one high-value capital project at a time. The pilot is diligence preparation, not final tax, legal, grant, lobbying, or site-selection advice.
Services
Federal credits, state grants, local abatements, workforce funds, utility support, and infrastructure programs are evaluated in separate silos. That fragmentation makes it easy to miss value or carry weak assumptions into the board case.
Construction timing, qualified property, facility activity, registration, and controlled-entity questions surfaced early.
Learn moreEconomic-development grants, tax credits, site-readiness, workforce, and utility programs compared against your project facts.
Learn moreLocal tax abatements, enterprise zones, training support, infrastructure constraints, and approval dependencies called out.
Learn moreTiming, reporting, job-count, wage, FEOC, ownership, and post-award obligations separated from simple program discovery.
Learn moreA cited diligence packet turns source findings, assumptions, missing facts, and ROI scenarios into a review-ready memo.
Learn moreGrantStack keeps automated screening separate from qualified tax, legal, grants, or agency validation before reliance.
Learn moreSend rough location, capex, jobs, facility type, and timeline. GrantStack returns the source-backed first pass your finance, tax, and outside-advisor teams can challenge.
Request pilot termsSpecific source coverage
GrantStack does not ask a chatbot for a broad list of grants. The pilot maps project facts against a maintained source catalog, then exposes citations, open questions, and unsupported assumptions.
Screens timing, qualified property, facility activity, ownership, and registration questions for expert review.
Checks job creation, payroll, fixed-asset investment, industry fit, and whether the project is still competitive.
Flags local approvals, school-board notice, infrastructure constraints, training support, and post-award monitoring.
Separates likely paths from issues that need qualified tax, legal, grants, or agency validation before reliance.
Representative sources include IRS 48D guidance, eCFR construction-timing rules, state economic-development portals, JobsOhio guidance, and local enterprise-zone materials. Program coverage varies by jurisdiction and must be validated against current agency rules before use.
Use cases
GrantStack is built for the messy early window before a company knows whether to escalate to outside advisors, agency conversations, or a formal application track.
A semiconductor supplier is choosing between two Midwest sites and needs to know which incentive stack is credible before the board narrows the location list.
Screen a site decisionA data-center developer has capex, utility, and local-infrastructure exposure, but the team does not yet know which programs justify formal advisor spend.
Triage a buildoutA tax director needs a source index, missing-fact list, and reliance guardrails before briefing internal stakeholders on CHIPS, IRA, state, and local paths.
View sample packetSemiconductor supplier expansion · Columbus, OH · $420M capex · 180 net-new jobs
Construction start before 2027, facility activity, qualified investment, and controlled-entity questions need tax validation.
Fixed-asset investment, job creation, infrastructure needs, and wage facts justify agency diligence if the site remains competitive.
Local approvals, notice requirements, training partners, and infrastructure constraints determine what can actually be negotiated.
Site control, qualified-basis split, supplier ownership, construction timeline, and agency-discretion assumptions remain unresolved.
Believable sample report
The report is designed for the first executive conversation: what looks promising, what could break eligibility, what facts are missing, which sources were checked, and what needs expert validation before anyone relies on the numbers.
Cost comparison
Consulting firms are valuable when a project is ready for formal review, negotiation, applications, and compliance. GrantStack is for the earlier question: is this expansion worth taking to that level yet?
GrantStack is not a substitute for legal, tax, grants, or economic-development advice. It is a lower-friction first screen that helps teams decide when outside specialists are worth bringing in.
Modeled ROI example
If diligence identifies or de-risks incremental incentive value equal to just 0.5% of project capex, the opportunity is $2.1M before advisory, legal, tax, negotiation, and compliance costs. A $15k pilot breaks even if it changes the outcome by less than 0.004% of capex.
Illustrative math only. GrantStack does not guarantee incentive amounts, approvals, or savings. Actual value depends on project facts, agency discretion, tax position, timing, negotiations, and compliance.
Major applications are often quoted around $10k-$25k+ when scope moves beyond basic research.
Senior public-sector grant advisory roles commonly price above ordinary grant-writing rates.
Modeled multi-week advisory-team cost using public grant-consulting rate cards.
Concrete paid pilot offer
One facility, one primary jurisdiction, up to two competing jurisdictions, delivered as a source-backed memo and readout. Payment is not collected on this page; fit, scope, confidentiality, and review path are confirmed before the pilot starts.
*Directional benchmark, not a quote. Public State of Michigan grant-consulting procurement listed Deloitte roles from $125/hr to $400/hr. A separate public Michigan McKinsey operational-consulting contract lists role rates from $143/hr to $1,250/hr and project prices of $249,000 and $925,812. Grant-writing fee guides commonly cite $150-$300/hr or $10k-$25k+ for major applications. The $200k-$500k+ engagement estimate is modeled from public hourly role rates and a multi-week diligence scope, not a published quote. Actual fees vary by scope, timeline, travel, negotiation support, compliance work, and whether pricing is fixed-fee, hourly, milestone-based, or success-aligned. Percentage-based grant compensation can create ethics or compliance problems and needs program-specific review. Sources: Michigan procurement, Michigan McKinsey contract, GrantSights fee guide, GPA ethics code.
Advisory guardrails
GrantStack helps your team prepare. It should make advisor conversations sharper, not replace qualified review when money, applications, compliance obligations, or public commitments are involved.
Do not use an automated packet for tax filings, grant applications, public claims, board forecasts, or agency negotiations until project facts, official source material, and current agency guidance have been reviewed by qualified professionals.
Capture project inputs and generate a source-backed memo with fit signals, risk flags, and assumptions.
Use the memo to decide whether the opportunity is large and credible enough for expert review.
A qualified economic-development, legal, tax, or grants advisor reviews program fit and application risk.
Final eligibility, award amount, timing, and compliance requirements are confirmed with the issuing agency.
FAQ
No. GrantStack prepares the incentive diligence packet and review workflow so expensive advisory time starts from a stronger fact base. Final tax, legal, grant, or agency advice still requires qualified professionals.
A fixed-fee source-backed screen for one project: cited program paths, missing facts, ROI scenario, risk flags, source index, and a 60-minute executive readout. Expert review, applications, and negotiation are separate scopes.
No. The pilot memo is diligence preparation. It should be reviewed by qualified tax, legal, grants, or economic-development professionals before use in filings, forecasts, public claims, or agency negotiations.
No. Incentives depend on project facts, timing, agency discretion, negotiation, and compliance. GrantStack improves discovery, documentation, and review discipline.
Capital-intensive expansions with meaningful investment, hiring, site selection, or facility buildout decisions, especially semiconductor, data center, advanced manufacturing, and energy projects.
The workflow is designed to screen CHIPS, IRA, state, local, workforce, infrastructure, and utility incentive paths. Specific eligibility must be validated by qualified experts.
Chat tools can brainstorm. GrantStack structures intake, citations, repeatable rule checks, partner routing, expert review status, and audit history.