Charitable Grant Making Best Practice
We use our survey and other data to identify charitable grant making best practice. There isn't enough charitable funding and there isn't going to be but there are a range of steps that grant makers could take, either individually or collectively that could make a significant difference, particularly to small charities.
These offer grant makers simple steps that could be taken, often at little or no cost and which would collectively have a significant impact in helping not only charities but also themselves. Sone are little more than common sense.
Charitable Grant Making - What Charities Want Most
We need more unrestricted core funding opportunities!
| Action |
Average |
| More core funding |
9.2 |
| More multi year funding |
9.1 |
| More funders providing feedback on submitted applications |
8.7 |
| Sector standards to provide consistent, simple, clear application information |
8.5 |
| More funders willing to discuss applications |
8.4 |
| Shorter wait times between applications to a funder |
8.2 |
| Limit information required to minimum necessary |
8.1 |
| Funders more open in publishing grant making data |
8.0 |
| Greater willingness to innovate and take risks |
7.7 |
| Focus more on quality of proposals, less on existing relationships. |
7.4 |
| More funding for small infrastructure (support) charities |
7.3 |
| Able to submit multiple applications to a funder |
7.1 |
| Eligibility more open to other non profits - eg CICs, community groups |
6.2 |
We still need to see a shift towards longer term and unrestricted funding. This is possible if funders invest in their pre-application process to ensure effective governance is in place.
Grant Making Standards in Application Information
Just wish the process was simpler & less stressful
Why it Matters
Presenting key information simply and clearly is always good practice but essential in grant making. Many infrastructure charities like ours and charities searching for grants are very small and hard pressed. Moreover, many of those searching may have little if any fundraising experience, English may be a 2nd language, or they may have low educational attainment, or learning difficulties or face accessibility challenges.
....funders that pay out after your have finished the project - do they think we have money in the bank to fund ourselves?
The Impact
The big charities with full-time professional fundraisers often know this information and not making it easily accessible significantly tilts the playing field against small and marginalised charities. Having key information clearly and simply presented in a standard way by all grant makers would help to counter this and would make everyone's life easier.
Final point is the length of time funders take to make a decision, I have one pending for 12 months, our beneficiaries can't wait 12 months for support 🙁 Apologies for the moan - it's been a tough few months and we do work with some wonderful funders.
Making Your Grant Guidance Simple and Accessible
I wish we had some more positive examples to share with you.
Make your guidance succinct, simple, clear and easy to find.
Site Navigation - ensure your website is accessible and the navigation is clear and simple.
Bid writers need more opportunity to share the barriers funders create to charitable services. E.g. changing critieria to follow trends, eccentric forms and refusal to give feedback.
Language - ensure your text content is succinct, uses clear, plain simple English and avoids jargon.
- Do say - 4 rounds annually, or better still include dates.
- Don't say, we fund.
- The priorities as laid out in detail in our our FY25/26 strategic plan and supporting theory of change, page 43, but rather.
- Health and education work and prioritise applications from the BAME community.
- Don't say 'we welcome applications from .......' unless you then prioritise such applications.
- Leave virtue washing to dodgy corporates.
- Don't say.
- Grant details are in our Grant Guidance - somewhere amongst the 43 pages of narrative and graphs.
- Instead, say, here is the key grant information. You'll find full details for your application in the attached guidance (of 4 pages).
- Do be precise.
- Not Small Charities but income under £1m pa, and.
- Not Spring but 1 March.
- Do be clear.
- Not trustees meet on ...... and applications must be submitted by the last Friday of the proceeding month but.
- The last day of Jan, Apr, Jul and Oct.
- Don't ever say - check back on our website for the dates of future rounds.
Whilst I accept that due diligence and scrutiny of applicants is important, I don’t think larger funders appreciate the effect of time-consuming processes on very small charities e.g.?setting up accounts on complex platforms
Including All the Grant Information Grantees Need
Here's what really helps when providing grant detail.
- Eligibility - what groups, locations and levels of income, or other criteria are eligible for your grants.
- Priority - if you prioritise certain groups, such as the BAME community of small charities, include this.
- Funding Rounds - how many funding rounds each year and when?
- Types of funding - project, core (unrestricted) and/or capital (buildings and equipment) and multi-year.
- Amounts - it may seem surprising but some grants makers don't include the size of grants they make.
- Causes - which causes do you support?
- Exclusions - anything that you don't fund.
- Decisions - when applicants will be notified, whether (or not) unsuccessful applicants will be notified and the date.
- If you don't notify unsuccessful applicants, you must include the date, so they will know.
Please could you start a campaign to persuade all funders of the importance of core funding - we'd all sign up to that!
Going the Extra Mile in Grant Making
You'll be really popular if you are able to:
- Provide Feedback. Either discussing potential projects and/or feedback on unsuccessful ones.
- Include Grant Making Data. Details of the grants you've made, even if only the total number, average size and amount of total funding annually.
- Including likely success rates and a breakdown of funding by cause are also very helpful, if you have the time.
- And maybe join 360 Giving?
- Deadlines. Have the same grant deadlines every year or at least publish these as soon as possible.
- Notification. Have a grants newsletter that’ll charities aware of key dates, changes etc.
As a small charity, I feel overwhelmed in writing bids then waiting for a long time for results
Grant Making - Larger Charities Exploiting Small Charities
Larger charities exploiting small charities by treating them as 'bid candy' has been around a long time. However, with competition for funding now so competitive, we decided to ask small charities the extent to which this was occurring.
Partners and Reasons
Most approaches were by charities (58%), then public sector organisations (18%). By far the 2 most common reasons for doing so were We can engage communities/people they struggle to (49%) and We deliver services they don't (42%). Oher reasons were: we're a grass roots organisation (21%), we work in a location they don't (18%), to comply with social value requirements (15%), we're BAME/marginalised (5%) and as part of the Civil Society Covenant (0%).
Experience of Being Included in a Bid
Larger organisations ‘use’ our reach, are not transparent, gain funding to back up their core costs, and provide minimal delivery costs if they include us.
When asked why they were included in bids, small charities most commonly responded as follows:
- 50% said it was because they can reach communities others struggle to reach.
- 42% said it was because they deliver services the larger organisation does not.
- 21% said it was because they are grassroots organisations.
- 15% said it was to meet social value requirements.
Large charities seem to want to use charities to tick boxes. We add value but they don’t believe we have the experience or capability.
How to Make Funding Fairer and More Effective
We were included in bids but never felt completely part of the process – just a box tick.
| What Small Charities Feel Would Really Help |
How Many Rate it As Essential |
| Ensure funding covers small charities’ full costs |
84% |
| Involve small charities in shaping funding programmes |
65% |
| Remove unnecessary thresholds that exclude small charities |
63% |
| Require transparent funding splits between partners |
63% |
| allowing small charities to apply as lead organisations or consortia |
57% |
| Challenge bids where responsibility and funding are misaligned |
55% |
There is exceptionally strong agreement across respondents on what would improve funding effectiveness.
In respect of being essential requirements, other option were rated lower. Reviewing partnership quality during delivery (43%), challenging delivery‑only roles for small charities (35%), requiring evidence that small charities are involved in project design (36%), and requiring clarity on which decisions small charities can influence (31%) as essential requirements.
Partners were often reluctant to acknowledge what we did because they felt it took away from their perceived success.
Grant Maker and AI Bid Writing
“Lottery spoke about using AI at the Impact Summit. They said they are aware that it is being used and were absolutely ok with applications being supported by AI.”
Our analysis found contradictory messaging from grant makers and new urban myths sprouting from grains of truth. Specifically that grant makers can spot AI written bids and that these are driving the surge in applications. The good news is that charities report they are using AI in exactly the sway grant makers would want them to. You can read the report here.
“National Lottery told me they can tell an AI‑influenced bid a mile away – they don't seem to like it!”
What charities need from grant makers is:
- Clear, consistent messaging on AI use and training of their staff to better understand how AI works, to ensure their assessments are accurate and fair.
Find the Funding and Free Help Your Charity Needs
A registered charity ourselves, the CEF works for any non profit, not just charities.
Plus, 60+ policies, 8 online health checks, the Quality Mark and the huge resource base. Our AI Ready programme and Charity Excellence Learning free online AI training courses, give non profits everything they need to make effective use of AI and stay safe.
Find Funding, Free Help & Resources - Everything Is Free.
Charitable Grant Making – Best Practice FAQs
What do charities want most from charitable grant making?
Charities are very clear. They want more unrestricted (core) funding, more multi‑year funding, simpler and clearer application processes, faster decisions and better communication.
Why does simplifying grant making processes matter?
It makes grant application better for everyone but many charities are small, volunteer‑led, or have limited fundraising experience. Some applicants have English as a second language, or learning difficulties, or face accessibility barriers.
What information should charitable grant making guidance always include?
Funders should clearly and simply set out who is eligible, any priority groups, the types and amounts of funding available, application deadlines and decision dates, what is not funded, and ensure all of this information is easy to find and written in plain English.
Why are long decision times a problem in charitable grant making?
Charities often support people in urgent need. Waiting months — or even a year — for a decision can mean services cannot start, staff cannot be retained and beneficiaries go without help. Charities rarely have reserves to wait that long.
Why is paying grants after a project ends an issue?
Many small charities do not have cash reserves. Expecting them to fund work upfront assumes they have money in the bank — which most do not. This approach excludes smaller organisations from charitable grant making.
What does “bid candy” mean in charitable grant making?
“Bid candy” describes small charities being included in bids to strengthen applications but then given little influence, little funding and treated as delivery‑only partners, a practice that is common and deeply damaging to trust and long‑term sustainability.
Why does feedback matter in charitable grant making?
Feedback helps charities improve future applications and avoids repeated wasted effort. Even brief feedback or a short conversation can make a big difference, especially for small organisations.
Why should funders publish charitable grant making data?
Publishing basic grant data helps charities decide whether to apply and reduces wasted time. It also improves transparency and accountability across the funding system.
What is the single biggest improvement funders could make?
A genuine shift towards longer‑term, unrestricted core funding, supported by clearer pre‑application processes, would transform charitable grant making and the sustainability of the sector.
