I believe artificial intelligence should be used ethically and with careful consideration of its evolving impact on society and the environment. In my own practice, that means using it sparingly and only where it genuinely enhances my work. 

As someone with ADHD, I use AI to reduce administrative friction and streamline tasks that can otherwise consume valuable time and mental energy: organizing information and ideas, summarizing research, flagging redundancy, or brainstorming early-stage workflows. By taking these tasks off my plate when needed, AI creates more space for the work I value most—listening deeply, asking intentional questions, thinking critically, uncovering patterns, and developing meaningful narratives that win support for important initiatives.

I believe exceptional writing requires tuning into the thread beneath a message.  AI can generate words, but it cannot develop the depth of understanding that comes from genuine partnership with an organization. It can't identify the insight that reframes project strategy, discern which details are most meaningful, or fully capture the perspective, values, and lived experience that fuel clients’ missions. Those are deeply human skills—and they're the foundation of everything I produce.

That's why AI never writes my final deliverables. Every proposal, report, and communication I create is researched, written, refined, and thoughtfully edited by me. While AI may occasionally support my process behind the scenes, I don't publish AI-generated writing as finished work. My clients hire me for my voice, my judgment, my ability to weave together complex information, and my commitment to crafting writing that is authentic and precise.

To me, AI is a productivity tool—not a substitute for expertise. It helps me work more efficiently at specific points throughout the grant development process, but it will never replace the curiosity, synthesis, and human connection at the heart of my practice.