Grant Case Studies | Tobbie Capital Advisory
Competitive grant engagements from the practice — the rubric, the evidence, the outcome. Names withheld for client confidentiality.
Case Study 1
Fabricator — equipment modernisation grant
A family metal-fabrication business applied for a state modernisation grant covering half the cost of a new CNC line ($620,000 total). The work: benefit narrative mapped to the rubric's jobs and energy criteria, three supplier quotes, energy-modelling letter, board-ready budget.
Outcome: approved at $310,000 — the application scored in the fundable range on all four rubric axes.
Timeline: 5 weeks from engagement to submission, fixed fee agreed upfront.
Case Study 2
Food processor — expansion grant, first attempt rejected
A food processor self-lodged an expansion grant application and was rejected. The second round: we rebuilt the application around the rubric — the original had described the equipment; the program was buying economic outcomes. New narrative: 12 regional jobs quantified, export contracts attached, throughput modelled.
Outcome: approved at $420,000 in the following round — a rubric problem, not a project problem.
The lesson: rejected applications often win the next round with better evidence, not better projects.
Case Study 3
Builder — innovation voucher for digital site system
A mid-tier builder wanted to pilot a digital site-compliance system. An innovation voucher program covered 50% of the pilot cost with an approved research partner. Our work: scoping the trial against program rules, partner agreement structure, and the application.
Outcome: voucher awarded (~$25,000 toward the pilot) — pilot completed, and the trials generated eligible R&D activity we registered the following year.
The discipline: programs interact — the voucher pilot fed next year's R&D claim.
Case Study 4
Renewables installer — feasibility grant application
A renewables installation business sought funding for a microgrid feasibility study across three regional properties. Our work: eligibility triage (the federal program fit; the state program didn't), partner quotes on letterhead, benefit narrative mapped to emissions-reduction criteria, budget justification.
Outcome: approved at $58,000 covering 60% of the study — the application led with quantified emissions and payback modelling.
The trap avoided: the initial project plan mixed residential and commercial sites — ineligibility drafted out before submission.
"The best grant applications read like a plan the assessor could defend funding — because every line answers a question the rubric asked."
Next Step
Have a target program?
Send the program name — an honest read on fit and chance, before you invest the effort.
