Research Grant Application Process

What's the secret to securing funding from foundations? This question, in various forms, has been asked of me a lot since I my post about the fundraising component of Mongabay's strategic plan (https://bit.ly/3NVeRd2) a few days ago. To be clear, I don't claim to be an expert in this field. However, I can certainly share insights from my decade-long experience of elevating Mongabay's foundation support from zero to about $5M last year. The right messaging When I initially began seeking funding from foundations, I received no response about 90% of the time. When I did receive a response, it was almost invariably, "no thanks". Despite my belief that my initial outreach was targeted (e.g. foundations that supported areas aligning with Mongabay’s work like journalism and conservation), I soon recognized a need to revise my targeting and messaging. Program officers at philanthropic foundations are usually in the business of giving away money effectively. That last word is important: You might be surprised how many times I’ve been told that it’s hard to give away money effectively. In that initial outreach, I put too much emphasis on what Mongabay is doing rather than how its work could help program officers better accomplish their foundation’s objectives. So I tailored my message to explain the value proposition of Mongabay’s independent journalism. This was a nuanced argument because to many, journalism can feel like a peripheral intervention when compared with establishing a protected area, for example. Know your strengths My job was to explain how objective journalism – distinct from PR and communications – could act as a catalyst in several ways, including informing key decision makers, increasing awareness, and functioning as a due diligence tool. Understand your audience Adapting my message and ensuring it reached the right person required research to understand a foundation’s strategy and objectives, as well as the individuals responsible for granting funds to organizations. Program officers are typically inundated with requests – keeping your message short and clear may help it break through. Build relationships In the fundraising world, it's often said that "People give to people, not causes." This might be less true with institutional foundations, but relationship-building is still critical. Seek intros My success rates with cold outreach have been low – the most common response to my foundation inquiries remains a lack of response. Don't hesitate to ask current donors for appropriate introductions to other funders. Measure impact One reason, I believe, for Mongabay's high renewal rate from foundations is our commitment to gathering evidence of the impact of our work. Providing an example of impact can be a great way to follow up with a donor. _ While everything I’ve shared here is very basic, I confess I've overlooked these points myself at times. Foundations aren't easy, but they can provide a strong base of support.

Make writing a proposal for research funding easy. Here is how. There is a tendency to rapidly begin filling in the parts of the application form as soon as possible. With a deadline looming, I used to ask all the partners in a consortium project to state filling in their work packages right away after the first meeting. I had a sooner the better mentality. My plan would be that once we had work packages written I would piece them together. The result. Frankenstein projects. Work packages that did not align, and objectives that sounded like they were each describing different projects. It was a writing nightmare. I was trying sew different ideas together. Reviewers see stitches. Like a good scientific paper, a funding proposal has to have a good logical flow. I now realize that the panicked approach I took previously to funding proposal development is not how to do it. It is much better to be 100% certain of the concept. Then write. For some projects this happens very quickly. Other projects take much more time. Sometimes what you are aiming to do is just complicated and full of uncertainties. Take that time. For scientific papers an outline works. For funding proposals the first step is to get all those involved aligned on the concept. This is not to say you don't write anything at all. To the contrary writing is a way to think. But you need to build up the layers. 1️⃣ Describe the problem and what you will do on a high level. 2️⃣ Then the impacts, outcomes and outputs you intend to have 3️⃣ Then the methods. ➡️ Methods are where you often uncover subtleties and problems that were not apparent at first. You need to solve those problems and the accompanying doubts before you can really begin to write. 4️⃣ Then you can build a project plan. Not before. "Give me six hours to chop down a tree and I will spend the first four sharpening the axe." -Abraham Lincoln Take the time to get the concept right, then write. 

My first 5 grant applications were rejected. Every single one. Here's how I went from £10k to £10m in research grant funding: I remember opening that fifth rejection email and thinking maybe my research just wasn't good enough. Maybe I wasn't cut out for this. Then a panel reviewer told me something that changed everything. She said: "I stopped reading on page 2." Not because the science was weak. Because the way I presented it was. I had buried the real-world impact on page 3. I led with the literature gap instead of the problem. My methodology was sound but my narrative was invisible. I was writing for academics. I should have been writing for funders. So I rebuilt my entire proposal structure around three principles. I now call it the 3P Proposal Structure. P1: Problem Framing. Lead with the real-world problem and its cost. Not the gap in the literature. Funders don't fund gaps. They fund solutions. "This problem costs the NHS £2.3 billion annually" hits harder than "this area remains under-explored." P2: Path Innovation. Show what you will do differently. Not just what you will study. Every applicant studies something. Very few explain why their approach is the one that will actually work. P3: Projected Impact. Connect your outcomes to the stakeholders who fund research. If the funder can see themselves in your story, you win. Same research question. Completely different proposal structure. The next application secured half a million pounds. Then a million. Then over the course of my career, more than £10 million in research funding. Grant writing is storytelling. Your research is the plot. The funder needs to see themselves in the story. What's the most frustrating feedback you've received on a grant application? Save this framework. Repost for anyone applying for funding. #GrantWriting #AcademicFunding

DAFs are one of the most underrated tools for funding science and startups. Over $250B sits in these funding vehicles, yet most scientists and founders have never heard of them. That needs to change. What are DAFs? Donor-Advised Funds (DAFs) are charitable investment accounts that individuals, families, or organizations set up for charitable giving over time. Funds can be invested and grow tax-free while waiting to be granted out. Donors get the full charitable tax deduction when they contribute, even if grants are made later.  DAF capital is philanthropic by nature, and scientific research is explicitly recognized as a charitable purpose by the IRS. Market-rate returns are not the primary goal of DAFs, making them ideal for filling funding gaps in science. __ Playbook for DAF fundraising 1. Define your scope of work DAF dollars are intended for charitable causes. Scientific projects that align with the intention of DAFs are those that produce public-good outcomes, e.g. ▫️ High-risk, early-stage research that solves global challenges ▫️ Mission-driven translational projects and ventures ▫️ Open science, data, and infrastructure 2. Build relationships with DAF donors DAF donors take a thoughtful, organized approach to philanthropy. They're often interested in getting to know charitable recipients, and care about demonstrated effectiveness. Some organizations that could help you build relationships with DAF donors include: ▫️ SOCAP Global - the largest global impact funding convening, where scientists and entrepreneurs can showcase their work and connect with impact investors. ▫️ Neta - connect DAFs to deep tech and help donors discover and invest in impactful technologies and research. ▫️ Candid - create a nonprofit profile in Candid's GuideStar database to get discovered by DAF donors. 3. Structure how you receive DAF dollars ▫️ Startups - you can receive them via grant contracts or via partnerships with existing research institutions, foundations, or nonprofit organizations.  ▫️ Academic researchers - work through your institution's development office. Many universities and research institutions already have established DAF processing infrastructure. Have you raised DAF funding? I'd love to hear how it worked for you and help others learn from your experience. - Edit: See comments for more crowdsourced tips and insights - thank you everyone who contributed. We’re organizing something for those curious about using DAFs to fund science and startups. Stay tuned!

As a Communications Officer in an NGO, targeting donors, funders, and partners on social media requires strategy — not just storytelling. Here’s how I would approach it: 1. Segment Before You Speak Not all audiences are the same. Donors want impact, transparency, and emotional connection. Funders want data, scalability, governance, and measurable outcomes. Partners want alignment, visibility, and shared value. A single generic post won’t convert all three. Content must be intentional. 2. Lead With Impact + Evidence Social media is crowded. Credibility wins attention. I would consistently publish: Before/after impact stories Clear outcome metrics (beneficiaries reached, % change, ROI of intervention) Visual dashboards and infographics Short case studies Numbers build trust. Stories build connection. Together, they build funding confidence. 3. Position the Organization as a Thought Leader Donors don’t just fund projects — they fund competence. I would create: LinkedIn articles on sector insights Commentary on policy trends Reflections on lessons learned from field implementation Data-driven threads on SDG alignment This attracts institutional funders looking for strategic partners — not just implementers. 4. Showcase Partnerships Publicly Tag existing partners. Celebrate collaboration. When organizations see their peers working with you, social proof increases credibility. Partnerships attract partnerships. 5. Clear Call-to-Action Every campaign should answer: Are we seeking grants? Corporate sponsorship? Strategic collaboration? Technical partners? The CTA must be visible and specific — website link, proposal deck, contact email, impact report. 6. Retarget & Nurture Social media is the first touchpoint, not the final conversion. Connect with decision-makers on LinkedIn Send tailored follow-up messages Share quarterly impact briefs via email Invite prospects to webinars or virtual field tours Campaigns convert when communication continues beyond the post. Key Takeaways Targeting donors, funders, and partners on social media is not about posting more. It’s about: Strategic messaging. Evidence-based storytelling. Consistent positioning. Relationship building. Because funding follows credibility. #NGOCommunications #FundraisingStrategy #DevelopmentSector #SocialImpact #CommunicationsOfficer #CommunicationsManager

After securing over $2M in research funding and reviewing 100+ proposals, I've identified the exact elements that make reviewers stop, pay attention, and champion your work. How to write a research proposal that gets funded: (7 moves that make yours stand out) 1. Frame the Problem • Show real-world impact • State one clear issue • Use simple language 2. Command the Literature • Challenge old assumptions • Connect past to present • Map key research gaps 3. Clear Methods • Match tools to questions • Detail data collection • Plan for problems 4. Require Resources Right • List exact tools + people needed • Budget precisely • Show feasibility 5. Map the Timeline • Set clear milestones • Break into phases • Add buffer weeks 6. Style the Writing • Make it scannable • Lead with impact • Cut jargon 7. Follow the Format • Follow guidelines exactly • Check every citation • Submit early Want to know the secret? Good proposals tell stories. Great proposals solve problems. Get my FREE guide from: https://lnkd.in/eev8U5K5 What's your biggest proposal writing challenge? Share it below ⬇️ #phd #research #proposals

LNonprofits using Sales Navigator see up to a 30% increase in corporate engagement within the first six months. Here’s how to make it work for you: 1. Stop cold messaging. Start building trust. If your outreach sounds like: “Can you support our cause?” You’re setting yourself up for crickets. Instead, lead with value: “Hey [Name], I noticed your company’s recent CSR initiative on [topic]. We’re working on something similar and thought you’d find our latest insights valuable. Would love your thoughts!” This shows that you’re informed, aligned, and genuinely interested—l, building credibility from the start. 2. Use Sales Navigator to find the right people fast. Forget the guesswork. Here’s what works: • Advanced Search: Find CSR managers and decision-makers who align with your mission. • Lead Lists: Track potential sponsors and organize them by industry or giving priorities. • Custom Alerts: Stay on top of when your target companies post new content. These features don’t just help you connect, they help you engage meaningfully. 3. Build a pipeline, not just a list. Don’t make the mistake of treating contacts as one-off opportunities. Instead: • Use Tags and Notes to track each conversation and plan personalized follow-ups. • Segment leads by industry, donation history, and shared goals. • Make every interaction count: Comment on their successes, share relevant insights, and be genuinely curious. Nonprofits that follow this approach often report 2x the engagement rate compared to cold outreach. 4. Share data to build trust. Corporate decision-makers are data-driven. Use numbers to make your case: • “We increased corporate donations by 40% in 2024 by prioritizing relationship-building over one-time asks.” • “Nonprofits collaborating with companies on community projects see a 20% boost in employee retention.” • “Last year, we impacted over 1,200 families thanks to partnerships like yours.” Data proves your success and positions you as a credible, results-focused partner. 5. Engage consistently, not just when you need funding. Building relationships takes time. Make it part of your routine: • Spend 10 minutes a day engaging with CSR posts. • Share stories that showcase your mission. • Highlight partner contributions publicly, it builds goodwill. The key is to be visible, consistent, and genuine. Over time, this builds familiarity and trust. ⸻ 6. Involve your whole team. Fundraising shouldn’t rest on one person’s shoulders. Train your team to: • Engage thoughtfully on LinkedIn. • Share content that demonstrates impact. • Follow up with potential partners consistently. When everyone participates, your network grows exponentially. Want to master LinkedIn Sales Navigator for nonprofit fundraising? Join our webinar on May 22nd at 12:00 pm EST Register here: https://lu.ma/wx6m3v0b You’ll also get a special discount to our HUB for participating! With purpose and impact, Mario

THE RESULTS ARE IN! Over the past month, as promised, I’ve been conducting a series of interviews with former real estate investment officers from CALPERS, Allstate, Florida State investment Board, CALSTRS, LACERA, Morgan Stanley (outsourced investor account), JPMorgan (outsourced investor account), the State of Connecticut Trust Funds, Utah Retirement System, Alberta Investment Management Corp., Colorado PERA as well as former senior consultants from The Townsend Group, Mercer, Institutional Property Consultants and Pension Realty Advisers (the latter two were the dominant pension real estate consulting firms during the 1980s and early 1990s, prior to the ascendency of The Townsend Group).  The interviews focused on on best and worst practices amongst capital fund raisers, including conducting face-to-face meetings, the development and use of pitchbooks, formal and informal presentations, client servicing, offering documents, and reporting practices. The results of these interviews have been compiled into a PowerPoint presentation and report, which is being delivered shortly to the 100+ sponsors of our publications around the globe. Following is a brief summary of the findings in that report: What Sets Top Investment Managers Apart Authenticity & Emotional Intelligence: The most effective fundraisers are genuine, empathetic, patient, and focused on building relationships—not just transactions. Consistency and sincerity build trust. Tailored Communication: Presentations that are concise, audience-aware, and aligned with investor needs stand out. Avoid rigid scripts; make it a dialogue, not a monologue. Governance & Transparency: Full disclosure, accountability, and a true fiduciary culture are non-negotiable for building trust. Strategic Fit & Leadership: Investors prioritize managers who align with portfolio goals, demonstrate leadership clarity, and have deep, stable teams. Clear, Honest Reporting: Visual, benchmarked, and context-rich reporting is preferred. Overloaded or misleading materials are major turnoffs. What to Avoid: High-Pressure Sales & Lack of Follow-Up: Aggressive tactics, poor knowledge, and neglecting post-meeting engagement erode confidence. Disregard for Junior Staff & Investor Feedback: Respect for all team members and responsiveness to feedback are essential. Opaque Governance & Hidden Fees: Transparency in fees, governance, and reporting is critical. Anything less is a red flag. The Bottom Line: Success in investment management is and always has been built on trust, transparency, and authentic relationships. The best managers listen, adapt, and put client interests first—every time. We will be making a copy of the report we’re going to be presenting to our sponsors available to interested parties in about a month. Please email me if you’d like to be included in the distribution of these reports at g.dohrmann@Irei.com InvestmentManagement #BestPractices #InstitutionalRealEstate #Leadership #Transparency #ClientFocus

🚀 Grantwriting post 🚀 Imagine your reviewer or panel/committee member. It's 9 PM, the night before the review meeting. They've got a toddler on their lap, a glass of wine in one hand, and your proposal in the other. They've been interrupted 5 times while reading and they need to get through 9 more proposals before going to sleep. Can they understand what you want to do? No? Make. It. Simpler. Over the past few months I've been reviewing grants for Cancer Research UK (CRUK), the Research Council of Finland | Suomen Akatemia, and the Lung Cancer Research Foundation. Submitting a grant takes an enormous amount of effort, but so many fail simply because **the reviewers can't understand what you want to do.** A few suggestions applicable to almost any grant ➡️ 1️⃣ Include a sentence saying, "The goal of this project is ________." Ideally make it the first sentence of your abstract and your proposal, but at minimum put it in the first paragraph. If you can't state your goal in one sentence, refine it until you can. 2️⃣ Remove all acronyms. If it's less recognizable than "HIV" or "DNA," then spell it out every time. Acronyms can hopelessly muddle an otherwise strong proposal. 3️⃣ Start with *simplicity* then add *complexity.* First, write a half-length version of your proposal in an extremely simple way that an educated layperson could understand, and test it on a few people. When that's done, use what you wrote as header sentences/paragraphs, and add all the technical details below them. Now, each reviewer can easily skim past the parts outside their field, while still understanding the big picture. 4️⃣ List the central elements of your proposal, then REPEAT THEM. This is important for methods, e.g. - humans or mice? study design? case and control definition? recruitment strategy? sample size? statistical approach? These key facts (without details) can be repeated in the abstract, end of background, methods (here, include the details), and assessment of threats/weaknesses. If you repeat them with perfect consistency, your reviewer will understand what you want to do, and feel reassured that you have a clear plan. Happy grantwriting ✍ 😊