A few months ago, I was approached by a nonprofit organization.
They wanted a grant professional to develop a strategy and grant calendar and apply for a few grants each month.
I was skeptical. The grants available for their mission would be limited.
I agreed to sign a 6-month contract to see what could be done. I explained that if we didn’t have significant grant success after six months, we would part ways, and they should reconsider whether grants are a proper fundraising strategy for them.
This may be unpopular, but it’s important:
Not every nonprofit is a strong candidate for grant funding.
That doesn’t mean the mission isn’t worthy.
It doesn’t mean the leadership isn’t capable.
It means the funding model may not align.
Grant funding tends to favor:
- Clearly defined, program-based work
- Measurable outcomes
- Stable leadership and governance
- Documented financial systems
- Demonstrated community need
Organizations that are brand new, highly informal, advocacy-only without defined programs, or heavily dependent on unrestricted cash flow may find grants challenging — at least initially.
Sponsored Content
There’s also the reality that grants are restricted. They rarely fund “keep the lights on” expenses without a clear program structure attached.
If an organization lacks:
Outcome tracking systems
Basic financial documentation
Board engagement
Program clarity
Grant writing won’t fix that.
In fact, applying too early can waste time and damage funder relationships.
Sometimes the most strategic move is to pause and strengthen infrastructure first:
Clarify program models
Build data systems
Formalize financial processes
Diversify revenue streams
Grant funding works best as part of a broader strategy — not as the starting point for organizational survival.
Grants amplify readiness. They don’t create it.
And knowing whether your organization is truly grant-ready or will ever be is a form of leadership.
Until next time,
Write Epic Grants