Working the Elevator Pitch: How to Build Funder Relationships Online

Years ago, I left a meeting with a Program Officer who managed about ten different family foundations. As I rode down the elevator, something struck me: those foundation board members—the actual decision-makers—came to this building regularly to meet with him about grant allocations. They rode this same elevator.

I thought: What if there was a sign right here? Just a simple poster showcasing my client's incredible work with at-risk youth. Those board members would see it, realize this organization exists, and understand it aligns perfectly with their philanthropic goals.

It wasn't a crazy thought. It was actually smart. Because here's the truth about funder relationships that nobody talks about: It's not pushiness to make sure the right people know your organization exists. It's strategic visibility.

"Just build relationships with funders" is common advice in grant writing. But what does that actually mean? And more importantly, how do you do it when you can't exactly put up an elevator sign—even though, honestly, that would work?

Reframing Relationship Building

Let's be honest about what makes funder relationship building feel awkward: we're trying to get noticed by people who control resources we need, and there's an inherent power dynamic there. It can feel like we're being pushy or manipulative.

But here's what changed my thinking about that elevator sign fantasy: those foundation board members actually wanted to find organizations doing great work. That's why they had a foundation. That's why they hired a consultant. They were actively looking for worthy causes to support.

My client's youth program was exactly what several of those foundations funded. The board members just didn't know the organization existed.

Funder relationship building isn't about pushiness. It's not about schmoozing or becoming best friends with program officers. It's about being visible in the right places so that when funders are looking for organizations like yours, they can find you.

Think of it this way: If that elevator sign had been smart marketing (and it would have been), then strategic visibility online and in professional spaces is equally smart. You're not being pushy—you're making it possible for the right funders to discover the work you're doing.

Where ARE the "Elevators"?

So if I couldn't put a sign in that actual elevator, where CAN I be visible to funders today?

The good news: there are far more "elevators" now than there were back then. The challenge: you need to be strategic about which ones matter.

LinkedIn Is Your Primary Elevator

I'm connected with quite a few funders on LinkedIn, and if you're not actively building your professional network there, you should be. Hint: connect with me on LinkedIn! This is where program officers, foundation consultants, and even family foundation board members show up regularly.

But here's the key: LinkedIn isn't about constantly posting or promoting your organization. It's about being professionally present. Engage thoughtfully when program officers share updates about funding priorities, new initiatives, or highlighted grantees. Comment when you have genuine insight to add. Share relevant content from your field.

Foundation Websites and Newsletters

Many foundations now publish regular newsletters, blogs, and updates. Subscribe. Read them. When they announce new funding priorities or highlight successful projects, you're learning what matters to them—and sometimes, there are opportunities to engage (application webinars, information sessions, feedback surveys).

Your Grant Proposals Are Your Best Billboard

Here's something people forget: every grant proposal you submit is an opportunity for visibility. Even if you don't get funded, you've introduced your organization to a program officer. A well-crafted proposal demonstrates your professionalism, your mission alignment, and your capacity. That's relationship building.

Building Professional Relationships on LinkedIn

LinkedIn is where you build professional relationships with program officers and foundation staff. This is about you, as a grant professional, connecting with program officers as fellow professionals in the grants ecosystem.

Connecting with program officers:

When you send a connection request to a program officer, keep it simple and professional:

"Hi [Name], I'm a grant writer working in [sector/issue area]. I've been following [Foundation's] work in this space and would value connecting with you as a colleague in the field."

That's it. You're two professionals working in related roles. No pitch. No organizational promotion.

After you're connected:

Engage occasionally and authentically. When they share updates about funding priorities, sector trends, or successful projects, that's valuable intelligence for your work. A thoughtful comment demonstrates you're paying attention to the field.

Think of it like any professional network: you're building name recognition and demonstrating you're a serious, engaged professional in the grants community.

But when you're ready to pursue funding, follow the foundation's directions. If they welcome inquiries or pre-application contact, use it—send your LOI or make that call with your full pitch through their approved channels. Don't just say "hi, see me!" Give them what they need to decide if there's a fit.

Making First Contact: Phone, Email, or Contact Form?

Now we get to the actual outreach—when you've identified a foundation that's a strong fit and you're ready to explore a funding opportunity.

First step: Follow their directions.

Check the foundation's guidelines carefully. Do they say "inquiries welcome" or "contact us before applying"? Do they list a phone number, email address, or only have a contact form? Some foundations explicitly say "no contact before submitting application." Respect that.

If they DO welcome pre-application contact, here's how to approach it:

The Phone Call Approach

If a phone number is listed and they welcome calls, this can be the most efficient way to determine fit quickly.

Before you call: Read through their guidelines and application form thoroughly. Nothing wastes a program officer's time—and damages your credibility—more than asking questions that are clearly answered in their materials.

During the call: Have your Letter of Inquiry and budget information in front of you. Program officers will ask questions to understand your project and assess fit. Listen carefully, answer confidently, and be prepared to ask your own clarifying questions.

This is a conversation, not a pitch. They're trying to be helpful.

(For detailed guidance on phone calls with program officers, see my article: The Art of the Phone Call: How to Stand Out With Funders)

The Email Approach

If they provide an email address or contact form, here's where my approach might surprise you: Don't just introduce yourself and ask if they want more information. Give them the information.

Write a brief, friendly email in the body:

"Dear [Name],

I'm reaching out from [Organization] because I see strong alignment between your foundation's focus on [specific priority] and our work with [population/issue].

We're seeking funding for [brief project description], and I've attached a Letter of Inquiry with full details about our organization, the project, and why we believe this is a good fit.

I'd welcome the opportunity to discuss this further. I can be reached at [phone] or [email]. Thank you for considering this inquiry."

Then attach a proper LOI (1-2 pages) with the full picture: who you are, what you do, what you're seeking funding for, budget range, and why you're approaching them.

Why this approach? Grantmakers invented Letters of Inquiry. They want a quick snapshot so they can make decisions efficiently. Don't make them ask for basic information—give them what they need to say yes, no, or "tell me more."

(If you need guidance on writing a strong LOI, I've written a comprehensive guide here: How to Write a Letter of Interest for Grant Funding: Complete 2025 Guide)

If They Don't Respond

Here's the reality: many foundations don't respond to inquiries, especially if it's not a fit. That's not personal—they're managing dozens or hundreds of requests.

Wait two weeks. Send one polite follow-up. Then move on.

If guidelines say you can apply without pre-approval, you can submit your proposal directly. Your proposal itself becomes your introduction.

What Strategic Visibility Is NOT

Let's talk about the line between strategic visibility and being annoying, because it matters.

Strategic visibility IS:

·       Having a professional LinkedIn presence

·       Engaging thoughtfully with foundation content when relevant

·       Sending a well-researched inquiry email

·       Submitting strong grant proposals

·       Being known for quality work in your issue area

·       Making information about your organization easy to find

Strategic visibility is NOT:

·       Repeatedly emailing program officers with "just checking in"

·       Connecting on LinkedIn and immediately pitching your project

·       Commenting on every single foundation social media post

·       Asking for meetings without a clear reason

·       Ignoring stated communication preferences

·       Taking up program officer time when you haven't done basic research

The difference? Strategic visibility is about being in places where funders naturally look. Being annoying is inserting yourself where you're not wanted.

Think of it this way: that elevator sign would have worked because foundation board members were already in that elevator. I wasn't chasing them down. I was simply being visible in a space they occupied.

Online relationship building works the same way. Be present where funders already are. Make your work visible. Let them discover you.

Your Reputation Is Your Elevator Sign

Here's what I've learned after 25+ years in this field: Your reputation is the most powerful form of strategic visibility.

That elevator sign I fantasized about? It would have worked for one building, one set of foundation board members, for as long as it stayed up. But your reputation as a grant professional—and your organization's reputation for quality work—follows you everywhere.

How reputation builds visibility:

When you submit strong grant proposals, program officers remember your organization. When you're professional in your communications, they remember that too. When your organization delivers on what you promised in a grant, that matters.

Program officers talk to each other. Foundation staff move from one foundation to another. Consultants who advise multiple foundations take note of which organizations do excellent work.

You don't control all of this, but you influence it every single time you interact with a funder.

What this means practically:

·       Every grant proposal is an opportunity to demonstrate your professionalism

·       Every email to a program officer reflects on your credibility

·       Every report you submit to a current funder builds (or damages) your reputation

·       Every conversation at a conference or webinar is relationship-building

You can't put up a physical sign, but you can be consistently excellent. That's strategic visibility that compounds over time.

The long game:

Funder relationships aren't built in one phone call or one email. They're built over time, across multiple touchpoints, through consistent professionalism and quality work.

Some foundations will fund you on your first application. Others will take years of building familiarity before they're ready to invest. Some will never be the right fit, no matter how good your work is.

That's okay. Keep doing excellent work. Keep being visible in the right places. Keep building your reputation.

Your elevator sign is being built every single day through the quality of your work and your professional presence. That's the kind of visibility that actually moves organizations forward.

Frequently Asked Questions

How do I start building relationships with funders?

Start by being professionally visible where funders already are: LinkedIn, foundation webinars, and sector conferences. Connect with program officers as fellow professionals in the grants field. When you're ready to pursue funding, follow the foundation's guidelines for pre-application contact—whether that's a phone call, email, or contact form.

Should I connect with program officers on LinkedIn?

Yes, but approach it as professional networking between colleagues, not as a way to pitch your organization. Send a brief, professional connection request mentioning your shared interest in the field. Engage occasionally with their content when you have genuine insight to add.

What should I say in my first official contact with a foundation?

Give them the information they need to assess fit: who you are, what you're seeking funding for, and why you think there's alignment with their priorities. If calling, be prepared with your project details and budget information. If emailing, include a Letter of Inquiry so they can make a quick decision about whether to invite a full proposal.

How often should I contact foundation staff?

Only when you have a legitimate reason: an inquiry about a funding opportunity, a question that's not answered in their guidelines, or required grant reporting. Don't send "just checking in" emails. Respect their time and communication preferences.

What if a program officer doesn't respond to my inquiry?

Wait two weeks, send one polite follow-up, then move on. Many foundations don't respond to inquiries that aren't a good fit. If their guidelines allow direct application without pre-approval, you can still submit a proposal.

Is it okay to call a foundation directly?

Times have changed—more often than not, foundations actually want to hear from you before you submit a grant application. If they list a phone number, use it! But first: read their guidelines thoroughly, read the application form, and do your research on their funding priorities and recent grants. Of course, never call if they explicitly state "no contact before application" in their guidelines.

Closing

Building funder relationships isn't about tricks or shortcuts. It's not about becoming best friends with program officers or having some secret insider network.

It's about strategic visibility: being present where funders naturally look, making it easy for them to discover your work, and building a reputation for excellence over time.

You can't put up an elevator sign. But you can be the kind of grant professional and organization that funders notice, remember, and want to fund.

Want to strengthen your grant writing skills and professional presence? Check out our Certificate in Grant Writing Course to build the expertise that makes you stand out in the field.

Now I want to hear from you: What's been your most effective way to get on a funder's radar? Have you had success with phone calls, emails, or something else entirely? Share your experience in the comments below.

Unsolicited Proposals: What Foundation Grant Statistics Really Mean

Quick Takeaway

Candid reports that only 23% of foundations accept unsolicited proposals, but this statistic is based on checkboxes foundations mark on tax forms—often for administrative convenience rather than actual practice. Additionally, when foundations report low acceptance rates (like 10%), that includes the 80-90% of applications that are immediately rejected for being poorly written or misaligned. For well-prepared, mission-aligned nonprofits, your actual odds are much higher than the statistics suggest. Focus on relationships, not percentages.

Imagine This: The Dating Profile Analogy

You're scrolling through dating profiles and see someone who's marked themselves as "single" and "open to meeting people." Does that mean you should show up at their house unannounced with flowers?

Of course not. "Open to meeting people" might mean:

• "Message me first so we can chat before meeting" (letter of interest required)

• "I only go on dates during summer when work calms down" (specific application windows)

• "I prefer meeting through mutual friends" (invitation-only grantmaking)

That's exactly what it's like when Candid reports that only 23% of foundations "accept unsolicited proposals."

What Candid's Data Says—and What It Doesn't

The Statistic: Candid's recent report notes that roughly 23% of foundations accept unsolicited proposals.

What People Think It Means: Only one in four funders are open to new applicants.

What It Actually Means: Only 23% of foundations have documented their detailed grantmaking procedures on a public tax form. The other 77% may still consider applications—they just didn't want to provide all the details on their IRS Form 990-PF.

As Candid itself points out, the data is easily misunderstood. The statistic doesn't mean that 77% of funders are off limits—it means that many prefer a relationship first, invite proposals through specific channels, or simply didn't complete the detailed disclosure section of their tax form.

What "Unsolicited" Actually Means on the IRS Form—and Why the Data May Be Unreliable

Here's where it gets complicated: foundations check a box on their IRS Form 990-PF that asks, "Do you accept unsolicited requests for funds?"

But this is a compliance question on a tax form, and the answer may have more to do with paperwork than actual practice.

The Tax Form Shortcut

The IRS requires Form 990-PF to ensure transparency and accountability of private foundations. This transparency helps donors, beneficiaries, and other stakeholders assess how the foundation operates and manages its resources. In Part XV of the form, foundations must disclose their grantmaking procedures to help potential grant applicants understand how to approach them.

Here's the catch: If a foundation checks the box saying they "only make contributions to preselected charitable organizations and do not accept unsolicited requests for funds," they're done. They can skip the rest of the section.

But if they leave that box unchecked, they must provide detailed information:

• The name, address, and contact information of the person handling applications

• The required form and materials applicants should submit

• Submission procedures and deadlines

• All restrictions and limitations on awards (geographic areas, funding priorities, organization types, etc.)

Why Foundations Might Check the "No Unsolicited Requests" Box

That's a lot of work on an already lengthy tax form. Foundations might check that box not because they refuse to consider new organizations, but because:

• They have informal or evolving processes that are hard to document

• They're a small operation without dedicated grant management staff

• They change priorities year to year and don't want to commit to specific procedures publicly

• They want flexibility to fund opportunistically

• It's simply easier than completing several detailed fields

...checking that box and skipping the detailed disclosures is the path of least resistance.

The result? Many foundations may check "no unsolicited requests" not because they refuse to consider new organizations, but because explaining their actual process is more administrative burden than they want to take on. Some might:

• Accept applications but only during certain windows (which change)

• Prefer a letter of inquiry first (but not always)

• Want to maintain flexibility in how they find grantees

• Simply not want to commit their informal process to a public IRS document

This means the 23% statistic may be less about actual accessibility and more about which foundations are willing to document detailed procedures on a tax form.

It's like checking "prefer not to say" on a survey—not because you're hiding something, but because explaining is more work than skipping.

Why Award Percentages Are Equally Misleading

Some grant writing experts advise nonprofits to call foundations and ask, "What percentage of applications do you award?" The theory is that you shouldn't apply unless the acceptance rate meets a certain threshold.

This advice sounds logical, but it's fundamentally flawed—and here's why.

Most Applications Are Immediately Rejected for Basic Reasons

The acceptance percentage includes terrible applications. Research on grant proposals reveals a sobering truth: at the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, 80% of grant applications are immediately rejected because applicants didn't do their homework about the foundation's specific priorities. One foundation manager reported that 90% of the proposals they receive are badly organized and don't communicate well.

Think about what this means. If a foundation reports a 10% acceptance rate, that statistic includes:

• Applications that don't match the funder's priorities at all

• Proposals with poor writing and mechanical errors

• Submissions that don't follow basic guidelines

• Requests from organizations that aren't even eligible

Popular foundations get flooded with applications—most of them poor. Well-known foundations like Gates, Ford, or Kellogg receive thousands of applications. A significant portion come from organizations that haven't done basic research, don't fit the funding priorities, or submit substandard proposals. These low-quality applications drag down the overall acceptance rate, making the foundation appear more selective than it actually is for qualified applicants.

The Question You Should Actually Ask

The question you really want answered is different. What you actually need to know is: "What percentage of well-written, mission-aligned applications from strong organizations get funded?" That's a very different number—and one that foundations can't easily provide.

As Candid itself notes in its analysis: "How many grant proposals submitted by well-run, well-governed nonprofits that perform a valuable service with effective programs actually get funded? Our guess: most of them."

Why Relationships Matter More Than Statistics

The overall acceptance rate statistics are misleading because they don't account for relationship quality or application strength. Here's what the numbers actually mean for your organization:

Three Reasons Why Relationships Matter More Than Statistics:

1.     Overall statistic: Foundation funds only 5% of all applications Your reality: With an established relationship and board connection, your odds improve to approximately 50%—ten times better than the posted rate.

2.     Overall statistic: Foundation reports 25% acceptance rate Your reality: This number includes everyone. Cold applications from unknown organizations have nearly 0% success, while known partners have significantly higher odds.

3.     Overall statistic: 80% of applications rejected immediately for poor quality Your reality: Most rejections are for poor quality or misalignment. A well-researched, perfectly aligned proposal from a strong organization competes in an entirely different pool with much better odds.

The acceptance percentage tells you almost nothing about your chances—because your chances depend on the quality of your proposal, the strength of your relationship, and the alignment of your mission with their priorities.

Reframing the Statistic

Instead of reading, "Only 23% of foundations accept proposals," interpret it as:

"23% of foundations have publicly documented their detailed grantmaking procedures on a tax form—but that doesn't mean the other 77% won't consider your application."

Many of those 77% might be open to proposals—they just didn't want to spell out all the details on their 990-PF.

The Grant Writer's Secret Advantage: How to Read Between the Lines

Strong grant writers know that numbers don't determine access—relationships do.

6 Strategies That Work Better Than Statistics

1. Look beyond the form. Even if a funder "doesn't accept unsolicited proposals," a thoughtful email, board connection, or participation in their initiatives can open doors.

2. Track actual funder behavior. Use tools like Instrumentl or Foundation Directory Online to see:

• Who they've funded in the past 2-3 years

• Geographic giving patterns

• Average grant sizes

• Program areas that receive the most funding

3. Build trust before you ask.

• Attend foundation-hosted webinars

• Comment thoughtfully on their impact reports

• Share success stories that align with their mission

• Connect on LinkedIn (appropriately)

4. Time it right.

• Respect application deadlines

• Lead with letters of inquiry if preferred

• Apply during their active funding cycles

5. Do your homework. The vast majority of rejected applications fail not because they're bad programs, but because applicants didn't dig deep enough into the funder's specific priorities and initiatives.

6. Don't be afraid to have a conversation. Sometimes guidelines seem to disqualify you—but a phone call can reveal unexpected opportunities.

Real-World Grant Writing Example: When Guidelines Don't Tell the Whole Story

The Boeing Foundation changed its funding priorities one year, shifting from providing direct grants to early learning nonprofits to funding only early learning coalitions—regional networks of providers working together.

At first glance, this seemed to disqualify my client, a small early learning provider on an island of just 10,000 people. They weren't a coalition, and they certainly weren't a region. By the letter of the guidelines, they appeared ineligible.

But my client had already been collaborating informally with other early learning providers on the island, identifying gaps in services and working to better serve their community. We had the collaborative spirit Boeing was looking for—we just didn't fit the geographic definition of a "region."

Instead of simply not applying based on the guidelines, I picked up the phone and called the program officer. I explained our situation: we were an island with no access to the mainland except by ferry. In essence, we were a region unto ourselves, with our own unique needs and challenges. We were already doing the collaborative work Boeing wanted to support—just on a smaller geographic scale.

The program officer understood. Not only were we invited to apply, but we also received a substantial grant.

The lesson: relevance and relationships outweigh statistics every time.

Frequently Asked Questions About Foundation Grants and Unsolicited Proposals

Should I apply to a foundation that doesn't accept unsolicited proposals?

Not directly—but don't write them off entirely. First, try submitting a brief letter of inquiry asking if you may apply. Request a conversation with a program officer to discuss your project and their current priorities. Seek an introduction through a board member or mutual contact. Attend their public events or webinars to begin building a relationship. Many foundations marked as "invitation only" will invite you to apply after these preliminary steps demonstrate your alignment with their mission.

Should I avoid foundations with low acceptance rates?

No. Low acceptance rates—like 5% or 10%—are misleading because they include the 80-90% of applications that are immediately rejected for poor quality, misalignment, or not following basic guidelines. If your organization is well-run, your proposal is excellent, and your mission aligns perfectly with their priorities, you're not competing against all those applications—you're competing in a much smaller pool of serious contenders. A foundation that funds "only 5% of applications" might actually fund 40-50% of well-prepared, mission-aligned proposals. Focus on fit and quality, not overall statistics.

How do I know if a foundation is really open to new applicants?

Look beyond the checkbox on their 990-PF and examine their actual behavior. Do you see any new organizations in their recent grants list—organizations they've never funded before? Are they funding in your geographic area? Do they fund organizations your size? Does their website information contradict or clarify the 990-PF data? When in doubt, call and ask directly about their openness to new applicants in your program area.

What percentage of grant applications actually get funded?

This varies widely by foundation, but overall statistics are misleading. While many foundations fund only 10-20% of applications, 80-90% of applications are immediately rejected for poor quality, misalignment, or failure to follow guidelines. For well-prepared, mission-aligned organizations, the real success rate is much higher. You're not competing against all applications—you're competing against the small subset that cleared basic quality hurdles.

How can I increase my chances of getting a grant?

Focus on perfect alignment—only apply when your mission clearly matches their priorities. Do deep research beyond the guidelines to understand their recent funding patterns. Build relationships with the foundation before applying. Submit a letter of inquiry first to test the waters. Follow every instruction exactly. Write clearly and compellingly. Demonstrate strong impact with solid outcomes data. These strategies matter far more than acceptance rate statistics.

Can I contact a foundation before submitting an application?

Yes, and in most cases this is encouraged! Appropriate pre-application contact includes calling to verify your eligibility and fit, asking clarifying questions about guidelines, requesting feedback on a preliminary idea, and submitting a letter of inquiry. What to avoid: don't ask them to read your draft proposal, don't be pushy or demanding of their time, and don't ignore stated preferences (if they say "no phone calls," respect that).

How long does it take to build a relationship with a foundation?

Building a meaningful relationship typically takes a minimum of six to twelve months for initial recognition and trust, one to two years for a strong relationship that improves funding odds, and three or more years for deep partnership and multi-year funding. You can accelerate relationship building by attending their events, sharing relevant success stories without asking for anything, demonstrating mission alignment through your work, and making connections through board members or current grantees.

Key Takeaways: What Grant Writers Need to Know

Your Action Plan

✓ Research funders based on their actual giving patterns, not their 990-PF checkboxes
✓ Start with a letter of inquiry or phone call—even to "invitation only" foundations
✓ Build relationships over time through authentic engagement
✓ Only apply where there's strong mission alignment
✓ Make your proposal exceptional—eliminate yourself from the 80% who get immediately rejected
✓ Be patient and strategic, not desperate and scattered

The Bottom Line

Candid's data isn't wrong—but the way it's collected and read often is. The 23% statistic is based on checkboxes on tax forms, where foundations may be choosing the easiest path rather than accurately describing their practices. Numbers can inform your strategy, but they shouldn't define it. Behind every statistic is a story of people, values, and alignment.

The "23% accept unsolicited proposals" figure is like someone checking "single" on a form. It's technically accurate, but it doesn't tell you how to actually connect with them—and it might not even reflect their real openness to meeting new people.

Don't let acceptance percentages scare you away from strong prospects. A 10% overall acceptance rate means very little if your organization is well-run, your proposal is excellent, and your mission aligns perfectly with their priorities. You're not competing against all applicants—you're competing against the small subset of qualified, well-prepared organizations.

And sometimes, you're not competing at all—you're having a conversation that opens a door you didn't even know existed.

Grant writing isn't about chasing odds—it's about building trust, one relationship at a time.

This post responds to insights from Candid's recent analysis: Do foundations accept unsolicited requests for funds from nonprofits?