Fair warning: we're about to dive into something decidedly nerdy. But if you're a grant professional who has used multiple grant research databases and felt confused about the terminology differences, this matters more than you might think.
What's Taxonomy Got to Do With It?
In grant research databases, taxonomy is the classification system used to categorize funding opportunities. Think of it as the organizational framework that determines whether a grant for "community health education" gets filed under "health," "education," or "community development." A well-designed taxonomy acts as your search compass, helping you navigate efficiently toward relevant opportunities.
When database providers use different terminology and categorization schemes, grant professionals need to adjust their approach for each platform. What should be intuitive navigation becomes a translation exercise—like needing different lightbulbs for different lamps. Each database illuminates the grant landscape, but you need to understand which "bulb" fits which "fixture" to get the best results.
The Great Divide: How Three Major Databases Categorize the Same World
To illustrate these challenges, let's examine my three favorite databases: Instrumentl, Foundation Directory Online by Candid (FDO), and GrantStation. I’ve used all three extensively and seen firsthand how their differences can cause confusion.
Each platform's taxonomy reflects different specializations. Instrumentl's categories are heavily weighted toward community services and sciences, reflecting its unique inclusion of research grants. FDO's categories allow precise targeting and broader exploration. GrantStation's categories streamline groupings for intuitive navigation.
"Types of support" classifications reveal similar specializations. All three recognize fundamental categories like general operating and capital support, but their granularity differs. For example, Instrumentl’s "education/outreach" is FDO's "policy, advocacy and systems reform," and GrantStation’s "advocacy."
What Makes Each Database Special
· Instrumentl takes a broader approach to avoid over-filtering opportunities classified differently by funders. It also includes scientific research grants and integrates project management capabilities alongside grant discovery.
· FDO offers an extensive corporate foundation database, capturing corporate giving programs that often fly under the radar. It also features "regranting" and "participatory grantmaking" as specific support types, increasingly important funding mechanisms.
· GrantStation includes giving circles as a funder category, Canadian funding opportunities alongside US sources, and events/sponsorships as a support category, valuable for conferences, galas, or community events funding. Their accessible pricing makes comprehensive grant research possible for smaller organizations.
A Call for Common Ground
Database providers have an opportunity to better serve the grant community by working toward greater taxonomic alignment. This doesn't require abandoning unique strengths—the goal is interoperability, not homogenization. In other words, coordination, not conformity. It’s not about being the same, it’s about working in sync.
Academic databases share subject headings, and library systems use common classification schemes. Coordination can enhance rather than diminish individual platform value. A shared taxonomy framework would allow grant professionals to develop transferable search expertise and conduct more comprehensive research without getting lost in terminological translation.
Honoring the Hunt
Grant professionals deserve recognition for the detective work they perform daily. They navigate not just the substance of grants, but the structural inconsistencies that make comprehensive research more challenging than it needs to be.
By acknowledging and addressing taxonomic disconnects, database providers can honor the expertise of grant professionals while making their essential work more efficient. Sometimes the most powerful changes happen not in the spotlight, but in the infrastructure that makes everything else possible.
Do you think database providers should collaborate on common taxonomy standards? How would you make the case that this helps the entire grant community?