Maevena

Research standards

How Maevena builds grant intelligence

The methodology is designed to keep useful analysis close to authoritative evidence, make uncertainty visible, and prevent incomplete records from becoming confident claims.

Source hierarchy

Maevena prefers first-party sources: official funder notices, government APIs, agency funding pages, program documents, and authoritative application systems. Curated directories may establish that a program exists, but they do not automatically establish every deadline, award, or eligibility condition.

Historical awards and funder profiles can provide context. They are not presented as open opportunities unless an authoritative source supports a current, actionable program.

From source record to public page

  1. Step 1

    Ingest and retain provenance

    Capture the source, external identifier, source URL, timestamps, and material fields needed to trace the record.

  2. Step 2

    Normalize and deduplicate

    Standardize comparable fields and prevent the same underlying opportunity from appearing as multiple grants.

  3. Step 3

    Verify and classify

    Evaluate lifecycle state, applicant evidence, geography, categories, freshness, and whether an authoritative next step exists.

  4. Step 4

    Apply publication gates

    Only records meeting page-quality and evidence requirements become indexable; ambiguous records remain qualified or withheld.

  5. Step 5

    Refresh connected pages

    Material changes update the canonical grant page, relevant directories, sitemap signals, and publication events.

  6. Step 6

    Monitor failures

    Retries handle transient failures; terminal quality problems are isolated for review rather than silently published.

Evidence labels and derived analysis

Confirmed means the captured source directly supports the statement. Inferred means a bounded rule or analysis derives a useful conclusion from source text, but the source does not state it in the same terms. Unclear means the available evidence is insufficient or conflicting.

AI-assisted editorial analysis must remain evidence-bound. It may organize and explain captured facts, identify questions, or summarize application work; it may not manufacture missing program terms or convert ambiguity into certainty.

Freshness, closures, and corrections

Sources have different expected refresh cadences. Maevena records when source information was checked and treats materially stale records as a quality risk. Closed opportunities may remain available for historical research, but they are excluded from open discovery and clearly labeled.

Deadlines and program terms can change between refreshes. Applicants should always confirm final details with the official funder. Corrections can be sent to corrections@maevena.com.

Public catalog measures

New in the last seven days counts distinct, currently actionable grants whose earliest durable publication event falls in the trailing seven 24-hour periods. A later update does not make an older grant new. If publication telemetry is unavailable, Maevena reports the measure as unavailable rather than substituting a database creation date.

Editorially reviewed counts current grants with evidence-gated Tier 2 analysis. “Reviewed this week” uses each grant’s first durable editorial-review publication event; routine source refreshes and later copy edits do not reset that date.

Active opportunities counts posted, open, or forecasted grants that are not past deadline and pass verification, official-link, and source-freshness publication gates.

Authoritative sources counts distinct authoritative opportunity-source identifiers represented by active grants. It is not a count of individual funders, websites, or every registered dataset.

Latest successful catalog sync is the newest completed successful synchronization for an authoritative opportunity source. It does not mean every source or every grant was refreshed at that moment.

All metric boundaries and displayed calculation times use UTC. Missing telemetry remains visibly unavailable, and refresh telemetry older than seven days is labeled stale.

Directories and search visibility

Maevena does not publish a directory merely because a keyword or taxonomy combination exists. A directory must have sufficient verified inventory, an original explanation of who it serves, reliable classification evidence, and measured review precision. Filtered or thin states are kept out of search indexes.

Important limitations

Maevena does not guarantee eligibility, competitiveness, funding availability, or award outcomes. Application-effort estimates are directional. Geographic source fields can be incomplete. Funder amendments may appear after the most recent check.

The authoritative notice, program instructions, and funder communications always control.