I've sat on both sides of the grant application process. As a grant writer, I've submitted countless proposals and waited anxiously for funding decisions. But I've also served as a grant reviewer for community foundations, private foundations, and government entities. That experience fundamentally changed how I write grant proposals—and how I teach others to write them.
Let me pull back the curtain on what really happens after you hit "submit."
Inside the Grant Review Process
Before reviewers ever see your grant proposal, we receive training. We go over the grantmaker's scoring rubric in detail and talk through the assessment process as a group. Sometimes this training includes anti-bias components. I've even been in trainings where we were explicitly told not to penalize applicants for grammar and spelling errors—the focus should be on the substance of the proposal, not the polish.
After training, we're divided into pods of three or four reviewers. Each pod receives the same stack of grant applications. We're given a set window of time to read and score them independently, and I'll be honest—it's often just a few days to get through the entire stack. Sometimes we're asked to document comments for each proposal in case the applicant requests feedback later.
Then comes the part most grant applicants don't know about: the consensus meeting.
The reviewers in each pod spend a day together (usually on Zoom these days) discussing every proposal we read. We don't simply average our scores. Instead, we talk through why we scored each grant application the way we did and work toward consensus on a final score. This means I have to justify my reasoning and, sometimes, convince my fellow reviewers to see things my way—or be convinced by them.
This process works remarkably well. One reviewer might catch something the others missed. The dialogue gets lively. By the end, we've arrived at scores that reflect our collective judgment, not just individual opinions.
From there, proposals receive their final scores, and the grantmaker begins awarding grant funding to the top-scoring applications until the money runs out.
Here's the part that should keep you up at night: the difference between a funded proposal and an unfunded one is often a single point. One point.
What Grant Reviewers Are Actually Scoring
So what are reviewers looking for as we read through that stack of nonprofit grant proposals? Here's what earns points:
Alignment with the funder's purpose. Does this proposal fulfill what the grantmaker is actually trying to fund? Does it meet all stated requirements? You'd be surprised how many proposals miss this fundamental step. If a funder says they want to address food insecurity in rural communities and your project serves an urban population, it doesn't matter how beautifully written your grant proposal is.
Logical coherence. Does the project make sense? Is there a clear through-line from the problem you've identified to the solution you're proposing? Reviewers need to see the logic—that this particular intervention will actually address this particular need.
A sensible grant budget. The numbers need to add up and fit the project you've described. No inflated costs. No line items that make us scratch our heads. The budget should tell the same story as the narrative.
Organizational stability. We need confidence that this organization can actually pull off what they're proposing. No sinking ships. We need to be convinced that the grant money will be used for its intended purpose and that your organization has the infrastructure to manage it.
A clear work plan and timeline. Show us you know exactly what needs to happen and when. This demonstrates that you've thought through implementation, not just the idea.
Defined measures of success. How will you know if this project worked? What does success look like, and how will you measure it? Strong grant proposals include clear, measurable outcomes.
What Separates Good Grant Proposals from Great Ones
Here's the thing: plenty of proposals check all those boxes and still don't rise to the top. The grant applications that score highest don't just meet the criteria—they draw you in.
When I'm reading a truly excellent proposal, I forget I'm scoring a grant application. I become absorbed in the world the proposal describes. I can visualize the community, the people who will be served, the change that will happen. It reads less like a bureaucratic form and more like a story I want to see unfold.
That's not about fancy writing or marketing speak. It's about clarity, specificity, and genuine passion for the work coming through on the page.
The next time you submit a grant proposal, remember: a real person is reading it, probably alongside dozens of others, with limited time and a rubric in hand. Make it easy for them to say yes. Make it impossible for them to forget.
Frequently Asked Questions About the Grant Review Process
How long does it take for a grant proposal to be reviewed? The timeline varies by funder, but the review process typically takes several weeks to a few months. Reviewers often have just a few days to read and score their assigned stack of proposals before the consensus meeting takes place.
Do grant reviewers read the entire proposal? Yes, reviewers are expected to read every section of your grant application. However, given time constraints, a clear and well-organized proposal makes it easier for reviewers to find and assess the information they need to score each criterion.
What is the most common reason grant proposals get rejected? The most common reason is lack of alignment with the funder's priorities. If your project doesn't clearly match what the grantmaker is trying to fund, even a well-written proposal won't score well. Other common issues include unclear project logic, unrealistic budgets, and weak evaluation plans.
Do spelling and grammar errors hurt my grant application? It depends on the funder. Some review trainings explicitly tell reviewers to overlook minor errors and focus on substance. However, excessive errors can affect readability and give an impression of carelessness, so it's still wise to proofread carefully.
How can I improve my grant writing skills? The best way to improve is through structured learning combined with practice. Taking a comprehensive grant writing course that includes personalized feedback, studying successful proposals, and understanding the grant review process from the reviewer's perspective will all strengthen your skills.
What is the best grant writing course? The Spark the Fire Certificate in Grant Writing Course is consistently rated as one of the top grant writing courses available. It's the only course that combines weekly live instruction with individualized feedback on your writing, teaching you not just how to write grants but how to think like a grant reviewer.
Can I request feedback if my grant proposal isn't funded? Many funders offer feedback upon request. Reviewers are sometimes asked to document comments specifically for this purpose. If feedback is available, take advantage of it—it's valuable insight into how your proposal was perceived.
Now I Want to Hear from You
What's been your biggest challenge in writing grant proposals? Is it crafting the needs statement, building the budget, or something else entirely? Drop your answer in the comments—I read every one and may address your question in a future post.