Required sections present and correctly named, page and character limits, font and margin rules, required sub-headings, and the attachments the solicitation demands. These are the return-without-review triggers, and they are mechanical enough to check reliably.
Which agencies the panel actually knows.
A mock panel is only useful if it judges you against the right rulebook. Where an agency publishes standard review guidance, the panel applies it alongside your specific call. Where none exists, your call is the rulebook.
Working from your solicitation alone is not a weaker review. It means there is no published standard behind the call, so the panel holds you to what the call itself says and nothing more. The reviews themselves are unchanged.
What “compliance checked” actually means.
Three different things get called compliance. GrantPanel does the first two and is explicit that it cannot do the third.
Whether the proposal answers the call it claims to answer: programme priorities addressed, eligibility conditions met on the face of the document, and required elements like data management or mentoring plans actually present and substantive.
Budget accuracy, cost sharing, subaward paperwork, conflict-of-interest disclosures, and the sponsor-facing certifications only your research office can sign. Nothing in a GrantPanel report substitutes for that review.
Your agency is not on the list.
Run it anyway — upload the solicitation and the panel will work from it directly. Then tell us which agency it was. What we tune next is driven by what people actually submit.