Natural rewrites for
Grant writers.
If you draft grant proposals with an assistant, you've probably noticed the output reads formulaic — the same hedged phrasing reviewers see in a hundred other applications. For grants, the real risk isn't a detector; it's a proposal that sounds generic when funders want specificity and a credible voice. This page is the honest version of what a humanizer does for grant writers, and where the line is.
The problem
- AI-assisted proposals read generic, formulaic, and interchangeable
- Reviewers and program officers notice a flat, machine-like tone
- Funders increasingly ask applicants to disclose AI use
How Humanizer helps
Humanizer rewrites text for natural rhythm and less mechanical word choice, so a draft reads like a real organization wrote it rather than a template. Its "Sound like me" personas learn from a few samples of your own proposals, helping the output carry your program's actual voice instead of stock nonprofit phrasing. Every rewrite shows a Sapling-based detector score for transparency. It still can't supply the specifics — your outcomes, budget logic, and evidence are what make a proposal credible, and those have to come from you.
Humanize your text.
Right here, right now.
Paste up to 1,500 characters, pick a mode, and get a real rewrite with an AI-detector score. No account, no card.
Your rewrite will appear here.
Free tool runs Claude Haiku, one pass. Pro (app & web) uses the stronger model with a detector-guided retry loop, longer text, and unlimited rewrites.
Humanize free — then get the app
Try the rewriter right here, no signup. Get the native Mac & iPhone app for unlimited rewrites, longer text, and the stronger model.