Client stories

Evidence from the fieldwork, not star ratings

These accounts name the grant pressure, the documents reviewed, and what changed after the findings letter landed.

They caught that our travel reimbursements followed our internal policy but not the Ministry line-item caps. Fixing that before the site visit saved us from a much longer correspondence chain.

Mei-Ling Chen — Finance manager, environmental education NGO, Taipei · Grant compliance financial audit

The sampling felt thorough, though I wished we had started the voucher pull two weeks earlier — our archive room was not as organised as we believed. Still, the draft findings gave us time to locate the missing contracts.

James Wu — Programme controller, multi-year research consortium · Mid-grant expenditure sampling

Close-out used to mean three sleepless weeks. This time the reconciliation schedule and narrative template matched what our programme officer had asked for in the award letter.

Aisha Rahman — Operations lead, public-health project office · Grant close-out review

We had questioned consultancy fees from an earlier review. API Integration Lab rebuilt the timesheets against deliverables and helped us write a management response that did not over-promise.

Kenji Sato — Deputy director, cultural exchange foundation · Findings remediation

The readiness review was blunt about our procurement log. That honesty was useful; we postponed the full audit by a month and came back with a cleaner file.

Helena Vos — Grants coordinator, social enterprise · Pre-award readiness review

Extended story: three-year STEM outreach award

A Taipei education NGO approached us eight weeks before a foundation site visit covering years two and three of a STEM outreach grant. Sub-awards to two partner schools had created payroll allocations that never appeared in a single ledger view.

Fieldwork spanned four on-site days: voucher sampling across workshop materials, coach stipends, and venue hire; interviews with the programme lead on cost transfers; and a walkthrough of the partner schools’ stamped receipts. We identified twelve exceptions — mostly missing dual-language invoices and one reclassified catering cost that belonged under hospitality caps.

Management cleared nine items before the funder arrived. The remaining three were disclosed with a remediation plan. The site visit closed without a questioned-cost demand, and the organisation retained us for the eventual close-out package.

Extended story: remediation after a harsh letter

A research institute received a findings letter questioning nearly NT$900,000 in consultant fees. Our remediation engagement reconstructed engagement letters, deliverable logs, and bank proofs, then mapped each fee to the approved budget line.

Two invoices could not be substantiated and were repaid to the grant. The rest were accepted after a clarified cost narrative. The institute’s finance board later asked for a mid-grant sampling cadence so the next award would not accumulate similar gaps.

Ready to put your grant file in front of independent eyes?

Tell us which award is under review and when the funder expects a response.

Request a scoping call