Topics
What you actually buy from a Förderberater isn't time-saving - it's experience. And experience is worth less than 10% of your grant, especially when you can borrow it from your network for free.

Nobody will write the application for you. You'll still deliver the material, co-write the document, proofread it ten times, and run the meetings. What you're really buying is the consultant's experience - and experience shouldn't cost 10% of a six-figure grant.
Founders rightly delegate as much as possible. Your time is better spent on the work only you can do - sales, strategy, hiring the first key people. Most operational tasks should be handed off as soon as you can afford to. Grant applications look like a textbook delegation candidate: forms, jargon, deadlines, regulatory wording. The natural instinct is to hand the whole thing to a specialist.
But there's a hard rule for what stays with founders: anything that requires deep business knowledge or that helps you understand your business better. Sales is at the top of that list - it's the very last thing founders should outsource. Grant writing belongs on that list too. The application is a structured argument for why your business is real, and the act of writing it is the act of forcing yourself to articulate that argument cleanly. No consultant can do that work for you.
Honest accounting of the consultant's time on a typical Antrag: filing the application itself - maybe 1 hour. Pulling together what you need to provide - maybe another hour. During the writing? You're fully involved either way; the consultant adds review comments, not paragraphs. So time-saving is not really the offer. What is the offer? Knowledge of how this kind of application is written, how deep it needs to go, what reviewers actually look for in this specific programme. You're buying experience.
Here's the catch: you only find out how good that experience actually is after you get the approval or rejection letter. The consultant needs to understand not just the programme but also your industry, your technology, and any recent changes in evaluation criteria - and to feel whether the programme is actually a fit for your specific business model. That's hard to assess up front. Many consultants are great at programme mechanics and weak at your sector; the difference shows up months later in the result.
Given the consultant's actual time spent (~2-4 hours filing + ~10-20 hours of reviews / calls / final polish), the minimum 10% success fee that most consultants quote translates to several thousand euros per hour. That's overpriced even for senior partners at top consulting firms. The 10% is a market convention, not a fair-value calculation.
Even worse: consultants who charge both an Aufwandsentschädigung (effort fee, paid regardless of outcome) and a Success Fee. Walk away. The Aufwandsfee is a fixed bet that the consultant will recoup their time even on a rejection - which means their incentive to actually deliver an approval drops sharply. A pure Success Fee is the only structure that aligns incentives: you only pay for experience that worked.
Red flag: Aufwandsfee + Success Fee combined
Any consultant whose offer includes both a fixed effort fee and a percentage success fee is structurally aligned to get paid on rejections too. Pure success-fee structures are the only ones where the consultant has skin in the game. If they won't accept that, walk away.
Many consultants offer extra % to handle the post-approval administration. This is almost always a low-value upsell. Here's why: once you have employees, you already have to run Gehaltsabrechnung and have your team fill in Stundenzettel. That same data is the bulk of what every Mittelabruf and Zwischenbericht needs.
If you're unsure how to claim a tranche, call the Projektträger directly. Five minutes on the phone, and it'll be the same routine every three months. The Zwischenbericht itself is genuinely modest work: sum up actual hours per team member (you already have these from the Gehaltsabrechnung) and write a paragraph or two on what you've done and what's still planned. Done. Paying another 5-15% of your grant (which can easily be €20,000) for what amounts to maybe a week of work per year is bad arithmetic.
There are real situations where buying expertise pays off: a focused 1-hour 'logic check' on your draft, where a senior consultant tells you whether the argumentation holds together or where the gaps are. That might cost €500 and save you a €50,000 rejection. Or a 1-hour walkthrough at submission time where you tap-tap-tap through the EASY-Online form together. Or asking ad-hoc questions at an agreed hourly rate when you actually hit a wall.
Many accelerators offer this kind of cross-reading for free. Look for a mentor. Best of all: find startups in your network who already secured the same grant. Ask if someone will read your draft. This is the same expertise that consultants would charge you €50,000 for. Borrowing it from the network keeps the cash and - more importantly - the learning with you. Knowing how to write these applications is gold for your startup later, because most grants and competitions share criteria and submission patterns. Take the time to learn it.
Free alternatives that actually work
Accelerator cross-reading, founder mentors, and senior founders in your network who got the same grant. The Gründungsbüro of any German university with an EXIST track usually reads drafts for free. These are the same people whose time you'd otherwise be paying €50k for.
If your reality is 'I have zero time and I have to delegate', that's fair. But don't take the first quote. Use these four lines to negotiate:
FAQ
Free plan, no credit card. We host in Germany. You can export and delete everything self-serve.
Read next
Behind the scenes: how Grants reviews your EXIST application
An inside look at our four review dimensions.
Read
EXIST Ideenpapier: structure, length, and the seven sections that decide your application
Section-by-section template with what reviewers expect.
Read
Grants vs hiring a Förderberatung
When the percentage cut is the deal-breaker.
Read