Sample report | Existing U.S. office

What does useful funding and buyer research look like?

It should help you decide where to spend your time. These excerpts show how a funding screen and a State, Local, Education and District (SLED) buyer note separate evidence from unanswered questions.

Illustrative excerpts, reviewed 20 October 2026. The company profile is fictional. The public sources are real. This is not a full paid report, an eligibility decision or a list of open tenders.

What is the scope of a screening report?

A screening report helps you decide which routes deserve further work. It records the supplied company facts, puts the strongest supported options first and gives each option a reason, an evidence status and a next action. Options that fail a stated requirement should be ruled out, not padded into a shortlist.

Screening does not include filing an application, a legal eligibility opinion, introductions or a guaranteed funded pilot. Unresolved checks stay visible.

What comes first in this example?

  1. Verify the applicant before pursuing a grant. Confirm the legal entity and ownership, then read a suitable current notice. Until that gate is passed, hold application work.
  2. Test the documented buyer need. Review the utility plan against the actual product and identify the operating team and buying process. Keep it as a research lead until those checks support a next step.
  3. Choose an action or stop. Request the missing eligibility answer, agree a buyer discussion or rule the route out. A list of names without that decision is not enough.

This is an order for investigation, not an award probability or a claim that one buyer will buy.

Which company are we screening?

A fictional Israeli wildfire-protection technology company has an existing U.S. office. It wants a paid evaluation with a public customer and wants to know whether funding could support the work. No ownership records, product approvals or buyer commitments have been supplied.

Initial decision: research the buyer and funding routes separately. The U.S. office is a starting fact, not proof of grant eligibility or permission to deploy the product.

What would the funding screen tell us?

Status: eligibility unresolved. No matched award claimed.

Route being checked
A Federal grant application by the company, distinct from selling equipment to an agency or to a grant recipient.
Evidence
Grants.gov’s eligibility guide directs applicants to the eligibility terms of each funding notice. The guide lists for-profit and foreign applicants, but does not make every opportunity available to them. Source checked 20 October 2026.
Missing facts
The applicant entity and ownership, where the work will occur, the current funding notice and its permitted costs. Without these, there is no defensible company-specific match.
Next action
Read the selected notice against the actual entity and proposed work. Record eligible, ineligible or unresolved, with the supporting clause and review date. Stop if the applicant cannot qualify.
Decision for this example
Do not count an award value or application deadline until a suitable current notice has been checked. If the public customer would apply, assess its eligibility and purchasing route separately.

For the full search process, read how to find State and local grants and the Federal and State eligibility guide.

What would a SLED buyer note tell us?

Status: documented need for research. No open purchase verified.

Potential account
Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP), a public utility. This example does not imply a relationship or an invitation from LADWP.
Evidence
The utility’s Wildfire Mitigation Plan page describes reducing ignition threats from electrical equipment and improving grid resilience. The page links its 2026 plan. Source checked 20 October 2026.
Why investigate
The published need is relevant to wildfire technology. The company must still show that its particular product addresses an asset and operating problem the utility needs to solve.
What is not established
No matching tender, evaluation budget, product fit or buying timetable has been verified. No contact is presented as a willing buyer.
Next action
Review the plan for a relevant use case, then check the utility’s vendor and procurement process. Ask which operating team owns the problem, whether an evaluation is possible and who would pay. Record the answer before treating the account as qualified.
Decision for this example
Keep as a research lead. Advance only after evidence of product fit and a purchasing path. A public plan alone is not a sales opportunity.

Federal contracting is a separate channel. SAM.gov includes several kinds of notices, including awards and solicitations, so a search result needs checking before it becomes a bid target. Read the public-sector pilot guide for the commercial next step.

Which report fits your question?

Grant Fit Score Report: 450 NIS. Choose this for research into funding programs and their fit with your company’s U.S. footprint. Review the current scope and delivery terms before payment.

SLED Opportunity Brief: 450 NIS. Choose this for potential public buyers and the evidence behind their relevance. A buyer-research lead should be distinguished from a verified current purchasing opportunity.

These excerpts explain the research format. They do not promise a minimum number of eligible grants, tenders or introductions. IsraeliLeads does not file grant applications or guarantee an award or sale.

Compare the reports and delivery terms