New Tools. Bigger Impact. Same Purpose.

I’m not usually one to make a fuss, but I hit a bit of a milestone this month.

After 25 years of working with regional councils, water corporations, and not-for-profits on strategy and funding, I’ve officially been accredited by the Victorian Department of Treasury and Finance (DTF) as an Investment Management Standard (IMS) Facilitator. Check out my DTF profile here.

And while it might sound like a new certification, it’s really more of an endorsement of what I’ve already been doing: helping public organisations make clear, fundable investment decisions that actually solve problems.

“We’re unashamedly focused on regional impact, the kind that creates long-term value, not just short-term wins.”

So, Why Get Accredited?

I didn’t do it for the title. I did it because funding is getting more competitive, and the bar for defensible, strategic decisions keeps rising.

State and federal funders increasingly expect proposals to show clear logic:
→ What problem are you solving?
→ Who benefits?
→ Why this approach?

That’s what the IMS framework is designed to help clarify. It’s been used by Treasury for years to test big decisions. And if it’s good enough for them, it’s worth understanding and applying in a way that works beyond bureaucracy.

The irony is, IMS was created to simplify decision-making, but to many, it feels rigid or overly technical, especially for smaller or non-government projects. I got accredited not just to meet the standard, but to help clients use the tools that funders respect, without getting tangled in the jargon.

Yes, I had to complete training, facilitate three real workshops, pay my fees and be assessed on how I think, align a room, and bring clarity to messy ideas. But more importantly, I can now bring that structure to your strategy in a way that feels grounded, not bureaucratic.

But Here’s the Thing…

I’ve been doing this kind of work since 2007.

In fact, I’ve independently developed over 200 funding submissions, helping clients secure more than $440 million in competitive government grants. In every one of those, I used the same thinking:
→ What’s the problem?
→ Who benefits?
→ What are the alternatives?
→ What makes this defensible?

This accreditation isn’t a change of direction. It’s the next logical step for Grantus, and a formal recognition of the kind of thinking I’ve always brought to the table.