Maximizing Grant Writing Success: A Roadmap for Nonprofits January 29, 2026

Before investing time in an application, it’s important to ensure that the organization meets all eligibility criteria for the grant (e.g., location, sector focus, etc.). 

There are sometimes grant opportunities that arise unexpectedly but, in most cases, the organization should give itself ample time to prepare for, draft, review, and edit the applications, in addition to gathering necessary documents to be submitted with the application. Rushing to compile application materials before the submission deadline often leads to mistakes. 

It’s crucial to read the Request for Proposals (RFP) or application guidelines thoroughly, paying close attention to deadlines, length requirements (i.e., page, word, or character counts), formatting (i.e., font size, margins, spacing), and required attachments (e.g., audited financials, letters of incorporation, list of board members). Nonprofits that follow the instructions precisely are best positioned to secure funding. 

Research the funder’s mission, priorities, and past awards to gain a better understanding of how to frame the organization’s grant proposal. The proposal should clearly align with the funder’s interests and speak directly to their priorities, using their key terminology where appropriate.

Grant writing is storytelling. Successful proposals typically use data, statistics, and anecdotal information to tell a well-researched story about a real community need, while also inspiring the funder with the organization’s plan to address it. Using asset-based language that highlights the strengths of the community while contextualizing the challenges is often the most effective way to tell the story. 

The most compelling proposals are written clearly and professionally, using short sentences, active voice, headings, and bulleted/numbered lists to make the proposal easy to read. It’s always preferable to explain things in the proposal than to imply them, and it’s best to avoid jargon or acronyms without defining them first. Proposals with ideas organized around the RFP structure are generally most effective.

Be mindful of using AI while developing the application/proposal. While it can be a helpful tool, it’s not a substitute for a human being with an understanding of the underlying topics who can communicate their ideas in a compelling way. If AI is used to supplement any of the writing in the proposal, it’s crucial to double check and reformat any information/language generated by the AI platform being used. This both eliminates the possibility of plagiarism and ensures that the application has a cohesive “voice.”

The budget submitted to the grant maker should include necessary and allowable costs only, and line items should be as specific as possible. Determine whether indirect costs are allowable and include administrative costs when possible.

Typos, grammatical errors, and messy formatting detract from the credibility of the grant request. It can be helpful to have someone who is unfamiliar with the application/proposal read it to provide feedback about clarity and flow. As the grant writer, it’s also a good idea to take a day or two between the completion of the application and the final proofread. With fresh eyes, the final review is likely to uncover anything missed while writing the proposal.  

Grant deadlines are often hard ones; that is, once a deadline has passed, applications are no longer accepted. Because technical issues can arise with online submission portals, it’s ideal to be ready to submit the application/proposal several days early so that there’s a cushion if complications arise. A funder is more likely to help solve the problem then than they are several hours before the deadline. 

It’s often more effective to conduct in-depth research and apply for a handful of grants that are a good fit for the organizations vs. casting a wide net and applying for more grants that aren’t as well aligned with the organization’s work.  

Tip: Identify three funders that have focus areas that align with the nonprofit’s vision and mission, and then concentrate resources on securing funding from those organizations. 

Funders are focused on impact and require applicants to provide specific, measurable goals and concrete timelines. Vague proposals that lack measurable outcomes are unlikely to be funded. 

Tip: Reassess the organization’s theory of change and refine the organization’s goals, and how it plans to accomplish them. Online toolkits can be a helpful way to get started.  

Common errors like failing to follow explicit instructions, submitting a generic proposal, using an unrealistic budget, or missing deadlines are frequent reasons for rejection. 

Tip: Identify a peer reviewer who can help identify potential red flags or errors before submission.  

When a grant maker is open to unsolicited applications, they’re still likely to prioritize proposals from organizations they already know. If the organization applied for the grant and has had no interaction with the funder, the lack of a relationship may be one reason for the rejection.    

Tip: Join nonprofit associations, philanthropy groups, and other relevant networks where funders are also present. Some foundations make contact information available or have ways to facilitate pre-application conversations or online inquiries. Leverage any opportunities available to build a relationship with the funder before the next application cycle.   

Foundations typically fund between 15 to 30 percent of applicants. This translates to about one in seven or one in three proposals, which includes both solicited and unsolicited requests. A great application may not have resulted in funding during a particularly competitive cycle, but that doesn’t mean the funder won’t consider the organization in the future.  

Tip: Rejection is a part of applying for grants. Try to gain an understanding of why the application was unsuccessful by asking the funder for feedback on your proposal and then try applying again when the next funding opportunity arises.