In short
The Arts in Society page says AI use is the applicant's choice and should complement, not replace, the applicant's own voice. It says the Foundation does not use AI to review applications. The guidance appears on the page for one program, Arts in Society, which RedLine administers. The pages state no disclosure requirement and no rule for peer reviewers or panelists.
Varies by program. The rule is set in each program's guidelines, so check the one you are applying to.
For applicants
- For Arts in Society, using AI for grant writing is the applicant's choice. The page calls AI a helpful tool. [1]
- AI should complement your expertise and perspective, not replace them entirely. The page warns that AI can compromise your authentic voice and says your story is best told in your own words. [1]
- The page states no limit on how much AI may write and no disclosure requirement. [1]
For reviewers
- The page says Bonfils-Stanton Foundation does not use AI to review applications. It gives no rules for panelists or outside reviewers on using AI. [1]
Sources
Arts in Society (opens in a new tab)
AI can be a helpful tool to assist with grant writing and it is the applicant’s choice whether or not to use it.
However, using AI should complement your expertise and perspective, not replace them entirely.
Using AI can compromise your authentic voice and personal response to application questions.
Your story is best told through your own words.
Bonfils-Stanton Foundation does not use AI to review applications.
See Bonfils-Stanton Foundation's 3 open programs
This page summarizes what the funder has published and is not legal advice. Policies change, and one solicitation can add its own rules. Confirm against the funding announcement before you apply.