When faced with conflicting grant guidelines, I’d take a structured approach to resolve the discrepancies. First, I’d thoroughly analyze the guidelines, identifying the specific conflicts and prioritizing based on funding requirements, legal considerations, and organizational goals. If ambiguity remains, I’d consult the granting agency or relevant stakeholders for clarification—proactive communication prevents costly missteps. Additionally, I’d document the decision-making process to ensure transparency and compliance. By balancing strategic alignment, risk assessment, and clear communication, I’d determine the best course of action that maximizes funding potential while maintaining integrity and adherence to grant regulations.

In my experience, I would consult with the sponsor to discuss these guidelines and share how they affect the project. By doing so, we will then amend or submit an addendum to clear the conflicting guidelines.

Depends on the situation. If it's conflicting guidelines within a single program (it happens) and you're in the proposal stage, get in touch with your Program Officer and just ask what they want. Guidelines are trying to produce an outcome - get in sync so you're both clear on the intention. If it's two funders with different stipulations on how a program should be managed post-award - get in touch with both and make the conflict clear. That said, start from what you know will ensure project success and try to communicate how that's the way to proceed. You are the program expert. They are the funder. Help outline how the best work will happen. Everyone wants the project to succeed.

Analyze both guidelines, seek clarification from the grant provider, prioritize compliance, consult experts, document decisions, and ensure alignment with objectives.