On grant bid rejections. Is it my bids? Or something more?
Bob had just had his annual rejection from Tudor Trust.
I’ve spent a good 20+ years raising income for charities. That includes as a CEO and Director of Partnerships (which always just means fundraising), and latterly consultant.
And now I’m going to say something which may be bad for business. When people come to me and say, ‘We keep getting rejected’, I have to say: ‘Don’t we all?’
I mean, don’t get me wrong, I get a lot of cash in. [Sweating, backtracking, loosens collar]. But much like sales in the private sector, part of the income-generation job is putting the best possible proposal in front of as many properly qualified opportunities as you can, and keeping going when things get turned down.
In any situation, 50-90% of the organisations who applied for a grant will have been turned down. Some will have made terrible applications, and some will have been not-great organisations, but some will just have not been lucky today. (And of course, sometimes bad bids from bad charities are successful. Yes, it’s unfair. But go on we must.)
So that raises questions. How do you know when the problem is with your bids? What if you weren’t just unlucky? What if your fundraising just isn’t good enough?
Working out the problem: health-checking your bids
First thing, you shouldn’t make rash decisions on fundraising, or the fundability of your delivery, based on one rejection. But if it happens repeatedly, it’s worth a ponder. And even if you’re super-successful, well, we all want to keep improving, right?
So then there remains another big question.
Did you do your research and on the real ‘what makes this funder tick’ part of the process? Not just prospecting, but really understanding the funder?
Was this funder a good fit or did you know all along it was a long-shot? Did you spend the right amount of time working out what they like, and what has the best chance of success?
Do you have enough capacity? Were you able to spend enough time on it to make it good?
Okay, no-one in this sector has enough capacity, I know. But many small charities rely on their Director, or delivery staff alone to fundraise. I speak from experience: that is exhausting, leads to burnout, and leaves them unable to focus on other vital parts of the job. Or the fundraising. It’s only sensible to ask for help with this time-consuming part of the job.
Is your case for support water-tight? For the organisation as a whole, as well as for the project?
Often we just assume that what we do will speak for itself. But your bids need to focus on the why as well as the what. They need to inspire as well as inform. And often they need to speak about the whole organisation, not just a single project.
Do you have a good system for planning, pipelining, and managing your applications?
How many bids for this piece of work have been rejected? Is that within your average hit-rate? What’s your system for deciding what to go for, and what happens then? Is the team being managed properly?
Have you had feedback and guidance on your bids from someone experienced?
Has someone you trust (not a direct competitor!) looked at the bid and told you what they think? Were they just being nice? (Or mean?!)
Did the funder give you any feedback? You can always ask if the bid was a problem, because you need to know. They’re often very willing to say either way. Of course, you need to use that feedback to consider…
Is the same feedback coming back repeatedly?
If two funders say it’s not good value for money, that’s not the same as one who says it’s not good value for money, and another who says it should have had pictures of aeroplanes in it. (If someone says the latter, I can’t stress enough that you really need to think again about your funder research.)Are my bids really compelling?
Sometimes writing bids can feel mechanical. And there has to be an aspect of that. But as often as possible, they need to inspire and compel, as well as inform and request. A good bid will set out the problem, make the funder want to solve it, and show them how you do that. It will give a picture of the world as it is, and the world when it is changed – and make your funder feel that you, and your work, more than anything else, can make a difference to the problem you’ve set out. That word, compelling, is important: do people feel compelled to help?This is easier said than done, but it really comes down to having the very best possible case for support - for the whole organisation, as well as the project. Why you? Why this? Why now? Why should we care? And it comes down to speaking the language of the funder - what do they value, and can they see you offer that?
‘Dude, the bid’s great. But it’s your programmes.’
Whisper It: ‘Is it our Programmes?’
You’re doing all that? Awesome. So what if it’s not your bids, but your ‘product’ – your delivery and programmes? This is the thing that people often refuse to even consider: is what we actually deliver as good as it can be? ‘This is what we do best,’ we all say. Well, yes, hopefully it is. But it can always be better.
The shape of your programmes, services, and projects is hugely important - but not just to your effectiveness and your impact, but also to your funding sustainability. Finding the right balance between what delivery is fundable (eg. in terms of evidence, funder priorities, and strength of case) and what delivery best achieves your mission, is the absolute key to being a successful and sustainable charity.
The most successful and impactful programmes possible are vital for your fundraising as well as your mission - and vice versa. And the best bid in the world is unlikely to get money for programmes that just aren’t quite hitting the mark.
So you have to make sure you are spending the time looking at your programmes, and their impact, as well as thinking about what you write about them, and the case you make for support. Grant-makers see a lot of bids, but they also see a lot of programmes, projects, and charities. Contrary to what people often think, they do often have a very good nose for what works, what doesn’t, and who has really thought about it. The best grantmakers (although sadly not all) know when someone is telling a good story but has nothing to back it up. Remember, some grant-makers (like me, on and off) have just as much experience in delivery as pen-pushing.
Good fundraising, and good programmes: the key to sustainability
Fundraising/ bid-writing, and the efficacy of what you offer, are the absolute key to achieving your charitable mission – it’s important, therefore, to consider them as a piece. If you’re not doing both, you’re only considering half of the equation.
That’s why my focus, as the leader of organisations, and as a consultant, has always been both on programmes, and on fundraising - even if I often work on the two separately, depending on the support the organisation needs. The more the two are put together, the more successful and sustainable your charity will become, and the better you will be able to keep delivering on that all-important mission.
Of course, when you bring these things together, you start to head towards the crux of it all: strategy. That’s for another blog.
Can I help?
So whichever it is - or if you need help to work it out - you could always talk to an outside voice with a lot of experience of fundraising and delivery - and both sides of the fundraising desk. I’ve spent the last two decades creating compelling cases for support, writing bids, and helping to develop impactful programmes across the voluntary and public sectors, as well as supporting grantmakers to understsand what makes their grantees tick.
If I can help you think through some of the above, why not drop me a line for a coffee and a chat?