This resource is for small charity fundraisers who need a practical, repeatable way to write stronger bids. It focuses on what funders look for, how to structure your case, and how to avoid common reasons bids fail.

Estimated reading time: 8 minutes

A quick note on wording

People use ‘bid’, ‘grant application’, and ‘proposal’ interchangeably. Sailfin uses these terms more precisely:

• Grant application: an application to a grant-giving trust, foundation, or charitable funder.
• Tender bid: a bid submitted against a tender (usually commissioned services, often with procurement rules and scoring).

You may still hear people talk about “charity funding bid” or “charity bid writing”, even when they mean a grant application. To keep this resource findable, we use that broader language in places, but the guidance below is primarily about grant applications.

If you are writing a tender bid, treat it as a different job. The core disciplines still apply (clarity, evidence, delivery detail, budget logic), but tender bids often require tighter compliance with specification, method statements, risk, TUPE, and scored responses. If useful, we can publish a separate tender-bid guide.

Quick start (if your deadline is close)

If you only have a few days to prepare and write your charity bid or grant application, do these in order:

1. Write the two-sentence case for support (who you help, what changes, why you are credible).
2. Answer the funder’s question in their language (mirror the fund’s priorities and outcomes).
3. Be specific about delivery (what happens, by whom, how many people, for how long).
4. Make outcomes measurable (what will change and how you will know).
5. Build a realistic budget and explain the unit costs.
6. Ask someone uninvolved to read it and highlight anything unclear, vague, or unproven.

What makes a bid “winning”

Writing a strong charity bid/grant application does three things at once:

• Fit: it clearly matches the fund’s priorities and eligibility.
• Confidence: it makes the funder confident you can deliver and manage risk.
• Clarity: it is easy to understand, easy to assess, and easy to say yes to.

Most bids fail because one of those is missing.

Before writing the charity bid or grant application

Get the right inputs for your charity and programme

Collect these first so you are not writing blind:

• The fund’s criteria, priorities, and assessment questions (copy them into your working doc).
• The grant size, duration, and any restrictions (capital, revenue, core costs, overhead limits).
• Your project summary in one paragraph (what you will do, for whom, where, when).
• Evidence you can use (need data, outcomes, evaluations, feedback, waiting list, partner letters).
• Delivery details (staffing, volunteer roles, partners, safeguarding, referral routes).
• Budget assumptions (unit costs, salary on-costs, inflation, supervision, travel, overhead allocation).
• Your “organisation basics” (mission, governance, policies, accounts, reserves position, risk controls).

Most rushed bids fail because the project is not defined clearly enough. If you cannot describe delivery in plain terms, you do not have a bid problem. You have a project definition problem.

For a useful background on budgets and support costs: see NCVO’s guidance on full cost recovery. It explains the difference between direct costs and support costs, and why some funders cap them.

Core structure for writing charity grant applications

Always adapt your writing to the funder’s form and questions. Use this structure as a behind-the-scenes checklist to gather the right information and keep your application coherent, then map the content into the funder’s format so assessors can score it easily. It’s a process that will work for most funders or can be adapted to their specific needs.

1) One-paragraph summary (the ‘yes/no’ paragraph)

In 5 to 7 lines, cover:

• the need and who it affects
• what you will do
• the change you expect to achieve (outcomes)
• how many people you will reach, and where
• how much you are asking for, and what it will fund

If the assessor only reads this paragraph and the budget, they should still understand the proposal.

2) The need (be specific, not dramatic)

Good need sections:

• use local data where possible (and name the source)
• describe what is happening now and why it matters
• show who is most affected, and why your service is targeted appropriately
• clearly align with the funder’s objectives

Avoid:

• generic statistics you could paste into any bid
• crisis language without precision
• implying your service is the only solution

A simple pattern:

• What is happening?
• Who is affected?
• What happens if nothing changes?
• Why is this the right intervention?

3) Your approach (what you will actually do)

This is where funders decide whether they trust you.

Include:

• activities and delivery model (what happens week to week)
• eligibility and referral routes
• staffing and roles (including supervision)
• safeguarding and risk management (where relevant)
• partnerships (what partners will do, and what you will do)

Be concrete. Replace vague phrases like “provide support” with real actions:

• “weekly 1:1 sessions”
• “structured group programme”
• “triage call within 5 working days”
• “casework and advocacy with set review points”

4) Outcomes and measurement (what will change)

Funders want two things:

• that you have clear outcomes, and
• that you can evidence progress without over-claiming.

Write outcomes at the right level:

• Output: what you deliver (sessions, places, hours).
• Outcome: what changes for people (skills, stability, wellbeing, safety, income).
• Impact: broader change (often long-term and shared across systems).

For each main outcome, add:

• how you will measure it (tool, method, timing)
• what ‘good’ looks like in plain terms

If the funder has their own outcomes framework, map to it explicitly.

5) Why you? (credibility and track record)

This is not a biography. It is evidence that you can deliver and manage the grant well.

Include:

• a short track record (what you have delivered, for whom, and what happened)
• relevant experience in the team
• governance and oversight (who is accountable)
• learning and improvement (how you use feedback and data)

If you are new or piloting, be honest and manage risk:

• start small, prototype, and iterate
• show partner support
• show how you will manage quality and safeguarding

6) Budget (make it legible)

A good bid budget is:

• realistic (not under-costed)
• explainable (assessor can see what it buys)
• aligned to delivery (numbers match the plan)

Include:

• staff costs (salary, on-costs, supervision proportion where relevant)
• sessional / freelance costs (if used)
• volunteer expenses (if relevant)
• delivery costs (venue, materials, travel, refreshments if justified)
• central support costs (be transparent and consistent)

Add a short narrative:

• explain any unit costs that might be challenged
• explain why costs are necessary for safe, quality delivery

Central support costs (overheads) in grant applications

In principle, charities should pursue full cost recovery, including the central support costs that make delivery safe and effective. In practice, funders vary:

• some allow a percentage contribution to central support costs
• some allow only specific lines
• some do not allow these costs at all

Treat this case by case. When it is permitted, Sailfin’s charity sector benchmarking suggests 15% is a sensible maximum to include as a central support cost contribution.

When you describe central support costs, make them concrete and imply or explain why they are relevant costs associated with the delivery of the service, programme, or project. Examples include:

• safeguarding and quality assurance
• management oversight and supervision
• impact and evaluation
• communications and supporter care (where relevant)
• finance, HR, IT, and governance support

7) Risks and mitigation (show you are serious)

A short risk section builds confidence and shows that you are aware of the potential risk and have considered how to mitigate those risks. Keep it practical:

• demand higher than capacity
• staff recruitment / turnover
• referral routes not working as expected
• safeguarding / clinical escalation (if relevant)
• partner dependency

For each risk: what you will do, and who owns it.

8) Sustainability (what happens after the grant)

Avoid wishful thinking. Give a credible plan about what will happen with the programme or project after the end of the funded period:

• how you will use evidence from the grant period
• what income streams you will pursue next
• what you will stop if funding ends
• what you can sustain at a smaller scale

Common failure points when writing charity bids or grant applications

Reason	Risk/impact	Fix
The application does not match the fund	Assessor cannot see fit, so the application is screened out quickly.	Mirror funder language, map outcomes, and remove anything outside scope.
The project is vague	Funder cannot tell what will happen in practice, so confidence drops.	Add a delivery model. If it cannot be described as a timetable, it is not defined.
Outcomes are unclear or over-claimed	The application reads as unrealistic or unmeasurable, so the proposal feels risky.	Separate outputs and outcomes, and keep claims proportionate.
The budget does not match the story	Numbers do not add up, which creates doubt about planning, governance, and value for money.	Cross-check every budget line against the delivery description.
The organisation feels risky	Even a good idea gets declined if the funder is unsure you can deliver safely and manage money well.	Name governance, controls, and how you manage quality, safeguarding, and finances.
The writing is hard to assess	Assessors miss key points, or score you down because answers are not explicit.	Use headings, short paragraphs, and explicit answers. Do not bury key numbers.

A simple pre-submission checklist

• [ ] Does the summary paragraph include who, what, how many, where, cost, and outcomes?
• [ ] Can a stranger describe your delivery model after reading one section?
• [ ] Are outcomes specific, measurable, and mapped to funder priorities?
• [ ] Are you clear about who is accountable for delivery and oversight?
• [ ] Does the budget clearly match the delivery plan?
• [ ] Have you removed anything not directly relevant to this fund?
• [ ] Have you answered every question directly, in order?
• [ ] Have you checked tone and clarity (no jargon, no vague phrases)?

Non-negotiable: never invent numbers. If you do not know, say what you do know, explain your assumptions, and show how you will validate them.

How Sailfin can help with writing charity bids or grant applications

If you want support with bid writing and grant applications, we can help you:

• shape the project so it is fundable and deliverable
• tighten the narrative and evidence
• stress-test outcomes and budgets
• improve clarity and structure so assessors can say yes quickly

See our fundraising & income generation support for more information.