If what you get a few weeks after submitting a grant proposal in your mailbox is “thank you for…,” instead of “congratulations”, this blog post is for you. It's a well-established fact that grant funding is a lifeline for NGOs and startups in Africa, enabling them to address pressing community needs and transform visionary ideas into impactful realities. Despite this, a significant number of organizations have yet to tap into this invaluable source of purposeful funding. Why is that?

‍

In many instances, the rejection of a proposal signifies that something is amiss. It might not necessarily be a fundamental flaw in the project concept but could be as inconspicuous as a few typographical errors. Unfortunately, not all grant seekers are aware that seemingly trivial mistakes, such as poor grammar, can jeopardize the merit and credibility of a proposal. This, in turn, leads to rejection, depriving a startup or NGO of its rightful share of grant funding. This blog post will explore the common and crucial grant proposal errors prone to applicants and how to avoid them. 

‍

1. Not Reading the RFP Thoroughly

Are you surprised? Not many funding opportunities are available and in the excitement of finding a grant opportunity, it is not uncommon for NGOs and startups to skim over details. One of the cardinal sins of grant writing is embarking on the process with incomplete or blurred information. Something as trivial as submitting a Word document where a PDF document is required can be the first step in the wrong direction for the applicant. Another shocking reality is it could even be the overlooked or skipped instructions that ended up earning the submitted proposal a rejection. 

‍

Solution 

• Invest time in comprehending the nuances of the potential funder. 
• Study guidelines, eligibility criteria, deadlines, and required documents carefully.
• Pay attention to details. 
• Align your proposal with the funder’s priorities. 
• Adhere to all specifications and instructions. 

‍

2. Weak Need Statement

There is a difference between identifying a problem and letting the reviewers know the problem is a problem. Most applicants are tempted to assume the reviewers are familiar with the problem. Failing to paint a vivid picture of the problem in a compellingly way to justify the problem can be a huge mistake. Simply stating the problem with weak or no local data and on-the-ground insights is similar to a boilerplate problem statement that does not move the reviewer. It instead positions the application for rejection. 

‍

Solution 

• Provide data and statistics from credible sources on the identified problems.  
• Use stories to demonstrate the problem. 
• Explain why and how the need aligns with the funder’s mission so they feel invested. 

‍

3. Blurry Project Objectives/Description

The essence of a grant proposal is in many folds: on one hand, it is to inform the funders of a pressing need, and on the other hand, it is to show how the problem will be solved if given the needed resources. Here is what some applicants do: they spend so much on explaining the problem but fail to lay out or elaborate on their intervention plan or strategy. For some, what buried their winning potential was listing vague activities without targets or timelines.  This leaves too many questions unanswered and since there is no other communication channel between the applicant and reviewers, the proposal ends up in the bin. 

‍

Solution 

• Clearly outline the problem your project aims to address, the solution you propose, and the impact you anticipate. 
• Explain how your approach addresses the root causes of the problem using proven methods tailored to the local context. 
• Structure your project description with clear phases, measurable benchmarks, and logical links between activities and outcomes. 

‍

4. Unreasonable Budget

The illusion that grant funding is free money and the reality that it is nonrefundable clouds the judgment of some applicants and this reflects easily in their proposal’s budget. Many applicants make the mistake of either underestimating or overestimating their budgetary needs. Overestimating expenses puts a question mark on the integrity of the applicant while underestimating expenses raises doubts about the ability to execute the project. Funders are not aliens, they have access to the same cost of input information as the applicants.  

‍

Solution 

• Craft your budget carefully to avoid appearing careless. 
• Show the funder you know how to maximize impact with limited funding. 

• Estimate reasonable costs for staff, facilities, equipment, travel, and other needs.
• Justify every expenditure with short narratives. 
• Demonstrate how the funds will be utilized to achieve tangible outcomes.

‍

5. Zero or Inadequate Monitoring and Evaluation Plans

Omitting monitoring and evaluation plans or not going heavy on them is a red flag to funders. Yes, funders do not want a refund but the return on investment they desire is impact. Not communicating how this impact will be measured can earn the proposal a rejection. The priority post-funding is seeing their investment yield results. Articulating how you’ll measure impact is crucial. 

‍

Solution 

• Set specific targets aligned to activities so the funder can evaluate progress. 
• Outline how progress will be tracked and how success and impact will be measured.
• Collect data frequently and explain the data collection methods that will be used. 
• Commit to submitting regular reports. 

‍

6. Failure to Demonstrate Capacity

Many applicants are jostling for the limited funds. Funders are faced with the tough decision of choosing the best project idea with a low cost-to-benefit ratio. An applicant can stand out based on capacity to execute or track record of executing similar projects, especially at a minimal budget per beneficiary. Funders need assurance that an applicant can deliver if funded. Not showcasing your expertise adequately can limit the chance of winning. Omitting information about your team and track record raises doubts.

‍

Solution 

• Present staff/leadership profiles highlighting experience and qualifications. 
• Include case studies from past projects demonstrating your execution capabilities. 
• Include the weakness of the team (if any) and how the weakness will be made up for. 
• Highlight the anticipated risk and include the mitigation strategies. 
• Ensure your project has a low (or reasonable) cost-to-benefit ratio.

‍

7. Grammatical Errors and Typos

Nothing diminishes professionalism faster than obvious writing errors. Another pitfall that applicants might overlook is the incorrect spelling of the funder’s name. Writing Billy Gates instead of Bill Gates or writing Ford Foundation as Ford Organization is a simple but terrible typo error to make in a proposal. A strong and compelling narrative is important, but frequent mistakes indicate carelessness and undermine the organization’s reputation. 

‍

Solution

• After the first draft of the proposal, set it aside and come back to it with fresh eyes. 
• Have others proofread it carefully to catch any errors. 
• Invest time to polish the proposal based on feedback from proofreaders. 
• Play safe by subjecting the proposal to a professional review. 

‍

8. Lack of Sustainability Plan

Not being asked for a sustainability plan is not an excuse not to talk about it in the proposal. A common pitfall that exposes a proposal to rejection is focusing solely on the anticipated funding or subsequent funding to keep the project alive without considering its long-term sustainability. Funders are interested in initiatives that can thrive beyond the grant period. Afterall, no funder wants to fund a project forever. 

‍

Solution 

• Clearly articulate how your organization plans to sustain the project's impact and leverage it for future growth.
• Discuss long-term sustainability—how positive change will continue post-grant. 

‍

Conclusion 

Several NGOs and startups lack funding despite the incredible work they do. Their chances of securing grant funding are hindered by simple and professional but avoidable mistakes. Avoiding these common missteps can be time-consuming, but can help your proposals stand out. NGOs and startups can increase their chances of securing funding and, ultimately, amplify their impact in the communities they serve. Adopting and refining these strategies will empower your organization to succeed in grant pursuits. Now, go ye into the world, and win grant funding.

‍