“We obtain a grant for you through humanitarian funds and pay off your mortgage, whether it’s in good standing or not.”
Does this make grammatical sense? If not, how should I change it? Thank you.
It’s grammatically fine, though stylistically a little clunky and possibly confusing. It’s not clear whether the grant is being used to pay off the mortgage, but maybe in context it would be clear. In any case, the grammar’s fine (but you might consider adding a comma and “we” after “funds”, i.e. “. . . humanitarian funds, and we pay . . .”).
The “through humanitarian funds” doesn’t sound idiomatic to me.
What, precisely, is the relationship of the grant to the funds?
You’re making a declarative statement. The subject is ‘we.’ The predicate is compound: ‘obtain’ and ‘pay (off).’ Both predicates take an object (‘grant’ and ‘mortage’). The first predicate is modified by an adverbial clause (‘for you through humanitarian funds’), the second direct object is modified by an adjectival clause (‘whether it’s in good standing or not.’)
And so, while grammatically correct, it’s awkward. Simply stating the two predicates makes it sound as if both will definitely happen. Is there a relationship between the two verbs or are they independent actions? Do you obtain the grant in order to pay off the mortgage? Will you pay off the mortgage if you don’t get the grant or if the grant is not large enough?
Also, what does it mean for a mortgage to be in good standing or not in good standing? Most mortgages in bad standing go into foreclosure, making paying it off a moot point. Do you perhaps mean whether the house is in good standing or not?
When in doubt, change an iffy compound sentence into simpler basic sentences. Such as:
We obtain grants from humanitarian funds on your behalf. We then pay off your mortgate, regardless of its status.
Peace.