1,000+ Opportunities
Find the right grant
Search federal, foundation, and corporate grants with AI — or browse by agency, topic, and state.
This listing may be outdated. Verify details at the official source before applying.
Find similar grantsGood Grant Practice (GGP) is sponsored by Science for Africa Foundation. A program offering support for grantees seeking to build their financial capabilities and attain certification to the Good Financial Grant Practice (GFGP) standard.
Get a weekly digest of new grants like this
A free weekly digest of new foundation and federal funding opportunities as they're added to Granted. Unsubscribe anytime.
Or search similar grants →Extracted from the official opportunity page/RFP to help you evaluate fit faster.
Good Grant Practice | Science for Africa Foundation of grant funding across the Research Management and Support | Africa Research Management Capacity Strengthening (REMACS) | Good Grant Practice The Science for Africa Foundation is dedicated to ensuring good governance of grant funding across the grants ecosystem.
Good Grant Practice (GGP), a programme of the SFA Foundation, offers support for grantees seeking to build their financial capabilities and attain certification to the Good Financial Grant Practice (GFGP) standard. This standard assures funders that applicants and grantees meet an internationally recognized and respected level of grants management accountability.
For an organization considering certification to GFGP, a recommended first step is to undertake a GFGP pre-certification assessment to benchmark its capabilities against the GFGP compliance requirements. The output is a roadmap of capacity building that may be required to satisfy the expectations of the GFGP compliance auditors.
The pre-certification assessment can be accessed, free of charge to eligible organizations, via this link: GFGP Pre-certification Assessment About the GFGP (ARS 1651) Standard The GFGP standard was developed under the stewardship of the African Organisation for Standardisation (ARSO), through extensive consultation with grantees from across Africa and some of the world’s largest public- and private- sector grantors.
ARSO published GFGP as a new standard (ARS 1651) in June 2018. and for circa $50, a copy can be downloaded from the following National Standards Bodies: Kenya Bureau of Standards Uganda National Bureau of Standards ARS 1651 can be implemented by any organization globally and is designed for grant givers and receivers of all sizes.
There are four tiers of GFGP compliance -- Bronze, Silver, Gold, and Platinum –- relating to the scale and complexity of funding and the size of the grant receiver. Certification to ARS 1651 is subject to a successful audit being undertaken by an independent GFGP Certification Body.
The key benefits of certification to ARS 1651 are: - the organizations’ financial accountability practices have been independently verified as ethical, trustworthy, and transparent, and hence to promote and reinforce the financial credibility of the organization to existing and potential grantors
According to the current listing, eligibility includes: Organizations seeking certification to the GFGP standard. Confirm the full requirements in the official notice before applying.
Good Grant Practice (GGP) is funded by Science for Africa Foundation. Verify program details on the funder's official page before applying.
Start from the official opportunity page linked in this listing — it carries the sponsor's submission instructions.
On August 26, 2026, NSF named the STC class of 2026: TEMPEST at Michigan State, GENIE at Northwestern, and a human-robot co-adaptation center at UT Austin. $90 million total, $6 million a year each. The 2023 class was four centers and $120 million. The award size is intact; the shelf space shrank 25 percent — and that is the number that should reshape how you plan a center proposal.
Read articleNIH published its 'what we heard' summary on the proposed cap on simultaneous Research Project Grants in August 2026. A four-RPG cap would free $1.3 billion for about 1,900 additional investigators; a two-RPG cap would free roughly $3.5 billion for about 5,200. Respondents overwhelmingly proposed alternatives. Here is what the comment record actually says, what NIH signaled about next steps, and how PIs and research offices should position before a policy notice lands.
Read articleThe White House committed more than $5 billion across 15+ federal agencies to the Genesis Mission, and DOE selected 278 first-cohort projects out of roughly 5,000 applications — the largest response to any DOE funding call ever. Phase I grants run $500,000 to $750,000 over 9 months; Phase II awards reach $6 million to $15 million over 3 years, with one $60 million flagship. Here is the full architecture, the eligibility math, and how to position for the next window.
Read article