Stacy Chin, who has helped startups secure over $50 million in federal grants, says founders must use AI for grant writing or fall behind. The NIH now prohibits applications substantially developed by AI, and agencies can withdraw funding if they detect misuse. AI works best as a speed tool that extends your expertise, not replaces it.
If this is your first time joining us, I'm Stacy Chin, a professional federal grants and contracting consultant who's helped to raise over $50 million of non-diluted funding for startups developing innovations in healthcare, climate, and defense. So here's my hot take: founders today must learn to use AI for grant writing, and if you don't, you're going to get left behind. I've been experimenting with AI tools for the past few years, and honestly, it has transformed my way of the entire grant strategy. Yes, it took a lot of trial and error to figure out a formula, to learn what worked, what didn't work, and how to strike that balance between speed and the precision that reviewers are looking for. And then it hit me. AI will not replace expertise. Rather, it would extend it. But that's only if you use it the right way. AI rather won't be your competitor, but rather it should be your co-pilot. But with every great tool also comes with its dark side. Use AI the wrong way and it can backfire really bad, leading to weak proposals, messy outputs, and even some cases, trouble with the feds, and we don't want that. For example, NIH recently put out a policy they will not accept any applications substantially developed by AI, and if they detect post-award misuse, they may withdraw your application completely. That means hours and weeks and months of wasted time on your end.
Applying for NIH SBIR in Jan 5, 2027? You Should Be Starting NOW. Here's why...
How to Get Invited to Apply for $305K in NSF SBIR Funding || Step-by-Step Guide
