Give every declined applicant a reason from their own application

A reason tied to the criterion it failed

Each decline reason names the rubric criterion and quotes the passage the finding came from. The applicant sees where their submission fell short, in their own words. No vague feedback. No black-box score to defend.

Where the criterion wasn't addressed, the gap is flagged

If an application never speaks to a criterion, Cemented AI flags the gap rather than guessing a reason. A declined applicant gets an honest answer. The rubric asked for something the submission didn't address. That holds up when they ask for specifics.

Every judgment call carries a person's recorded rationale

Subjective criteria don't get decided by a model alone. Any judgment call routes to a reviewer with the criterion and the quoted application text attached. The reviewer's rationale is recorded next to the finding. So the decline reason for a subjective call is a named person's reasoning, written down at the time. Not an after-the-fact reconstruction.

The board sees why each application advanced

When leadership asks why one application moved forward and another didn't, the trail is already there. Each criterion shows the quote it was scored against. For judgment calls, it shows who decided and why. The defense for a funding decision is the record itself.

Deterministic checks run the same for everyone

Eligibility, completeness, required attachments, and budget arithmetic run identically for every applicant. No applicant gets a different bar by accident. When two submissions are treated differently, the record shows the criterion and the quote behind it.

How a review runs

1. Step 1

   Load your rubric

   Bring the criteria you already use. Cemented AI checks each application against them, criterion by criterion, the same way every time.

2. Step 2

   Findings quote the application

   Each finding names the criterion and quotes the passage it came from. Quotes are verified against the source before they appear.

3. Step 3

   People decide the judgment calls

   Subjective criteria route to a reviewer with the criterion and quoted text attached. The reviewer's rationale is recorded with the finding.

4. Step 4

   The decline reason writes itself

   Pull the criterion, the quote, and any reviewer rationale into a reason the applicant can read and the board can defend.

Common questions

How is this different from sending applicants a score?

A score tells an applicant they lost without telling them why. Cemented AI gives the named criterion and the quote from their own submission that the finding rests on. For subjective criteria, it adds the reviewer's recorded rationale. That reason an applicant can act on, and a board can defend.

What if the application never addressed a criterion at all?

That gap is flagged, not guessed. The applicant's reason states plainly that the rubric asked for something the submission didn't address. Cemented AI won't invent a justification where the source is silent.

Who makes the subjective calls, the model or a person?

A person. Every non-deterministic decision routes to a reviewer with the criterion and the quoted application text attached. The model never settles a judgment call on its own. The reviewer's rationale is recorded with the finding.

Can the quotes in a decline reason be wrong or made up?

Every quote is checked against the source application before it appears in a finding. A decline reason cites text that's actually in the submission. An applicant who reads it back finds it word for word.

Is uploaded application content used to train AI models?

No. Data stays scoped to your account, and uploaded content isn't used to train frontier models. Findings draw only from the applications you submit for review.

How do you get started, and does this connect to your grants system?

Sign in to try a review, or schedule a demo to walk through your rubric. For connectors into systems like Submittable, Fluxx, or Foundant, ask about Enterprise at [email protected].