Programme portals often ask for a summary budget on the cover form and detailed annexes underneath. During a financial audit of applications, the first reconciliation pass almost always finds drift between those two layers.
Headcount that changes by annex
Personnel costs are the usual culprit. The cover form lists three project staff; Annex B lists four because a part-time coordinator was added mid-draft. Totals may still look plausible if rates were quietly adjusted. A reviewer reading both pages will notice.
Before you commission an audit — or before you file — print both layers and highlight every headcount and FTE figure. They should match without mental arithmetic.
Venue lines that appear twice
Venue hire sometimes sits in “project costs” on the cover and again under “community engagement” in an annex. Teams rarely intend to double-count; copy-paste from an earlier year is enough. Budget-table reconciliation exists for this exact pattern.
Matching funds that float
Matching contributions declared as cash on the cover but as in-kind in the annex create threshold risk. Eligibility schedule checks catch the conflict when programme rules treat cash and in-kind differently.
A short discipline helps: one owner for the cover form totals, and a freeze date after which annexes cannot change without updating the cover.