Getting too comfortable with a grant opportunity can backfire.
I know- it just happened to me last week.
I clicked on the familiar link to the grant my client has been awarded for the past three years, and…it wasn’t there.
Funders update guidelines. A familiar program disappears. A new strategy emphasizes a different population, geography, or approach.
It’s frustrating, especially if your organization has spent years cultivating the relationship.
But a change in a funder’s priorities is a signal to reassess, not an invitation to force your work into a new shape.
Start by separating what you know from what you’re assuming. Read the current guidelines. Check whether the change affects eligibility, funding areas, award size, or application timing. If the information is unclear, ask the funder an appropriate, specific question.
Then assess the fit honestly:
- Does the organization’s work genuinely align with the new direction?
- Can you make that case using current programs and evidence?
- Would adapting the proposal require a real program change, or just different language?
- Is the opportunity still worth the staff time?
- Should you maintain the relationship even if you don’t apply this cycle?
Related: A funder’s priorities are not your strategy
Sponsored Content
Subscribe Today for Only $139/year
Sometimes there is a legitimate connection that wasn’t obvious before. In other cases, the right move is to thank the funder, keep the relationship warm, and redirect your effort elsewhere.
A funder’s shift can also reveal a concentration risk. If one organization’s budget depends heavily on a single source, changes in that source’s priorities can have outsized consequences. Use the moment to review the broader funding mix and identify other plausible prospects.
You can’t control a funder’s strategy. You can control whether your response is thoughtful, truthful, and aligned with your organization’s actual work.
Until next time,
Write Epic Grants