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.

Lifting Each Other Up: Building a Stronger Grant Writing Community

Last week, I received a call from someone who'd been referred by another grant writer. The caller had developed what he described as a "supercomputer that could scale up businesses fast" and was looking for help—though it wasn't entirely clear whether he needed a grant writer, a strategist, or something else entirely.

As he tried to explain his technology, I could hear his growing frustration. From his perspective, I just wasn't "getting it." The product sounded impressive in theory, but when I asked practical questions about applications and target markets, the answers got vague. Since for-profit grants aren't my specialty, I listened politely, thinking I might be able to refer him to someone with that expertise.

But the more he talked, the more familiar this conversation became. Here was someone with sophisticated technology—and genuine passion for what he'd built—but no clear understanding of how it solved real problems for real people. He wanted me to be impressed by the innovation itself, rather than its practical application.

His frustration seemed to stem from the fact that he had a solution looking for a problem, and he expected that I could somehow wave a magic wand to bridge that gap for him.

Sound familiar? We're seeing this same pattern more and more with technology companies targeting our profession. They develop impressive-sounding AI tools or databases promising to revolutionize grant writing, but when you dig deeper, it becomes clear they don't really understand how our work actually functions.

Building Each Other Up Through Action

But here's what I love about our profession: we know how to ask the right questions. We're skilled at digging deeper, evaluating claims, and making informed decisions. Of course we are—we're grant professionals! Research is literally what we do for a living. And we don't do it alone—we support each other through the process.

Take that phone call I mentioned. The referral came from a colleague who thought I might be able to help, even though it wasn't ultimately a fit. When I realized it wasn't my expertise, I listened anyway, hoping to connect him with someone better suited. That's what we do—we lift each other up and share opportunities.

This collaborative spirit shows up everywhere in our work. Just last month, a grant writing firm reached out asking if I had any new graduates to recommend. I did! But their question got me thinking—wouldn't it be valuable for our community to learn more about how grant writing firms operate? I quickly pulled together a webinar, and three firms jumped in to participate. The response was incredible, and we all learned something new about different business models in our field.

I see this same supportive energy when I recommend tools that are genuinely helping our profession. I love championing Grant Frog, new software built by fellow grant writer Hannah Wiginton, because she's created something practical while bringing humor and positivity to everything she does. I'm equally enthusiastic about partners like Instrumentl, whose prospect research tools have consistently delivered results for my clients and who've been genuinely collaborative to work with.

This is how our profession grows stronger—through genuine support, shared knowledge, and celebrating each other's successes rather than competing destructively.

Navigating New Technology Together

As more technology solutions emerge targeting our profession, this research expertise becomes even more valuable. We're seeing an explosion of AI-powered tools and databases promising to revolutionize grant writing, and our natural instinct to dig deeper serves us well.

The key questions we ask haven't changed: What problem does this actually solve? How does it work? What are the costs—not just financial, but in terms of professional relationships and ethics? Who benefits, and how? And here's a crucial one: Do they have grant professionals on staff from the start? Better yet, several with varying perspectives?

These aren't hostile questions—they're professional due diligence. When a new service launches, it's perfectly reasonable to ask about their business model, their data sources, their track record, and how they align with our professional standards. Companies that are genuinely committed to serving our profession should welcome these questions and answer them transparently.

I've noticed that the most successful technology partnerships in our field come from companies that take time to understand our work before trying to improve it. Take Instrumentl, for example—they regularly ask grant writers to weigh in on new features and treat us as the experts we are. They recognize that we're not just users—we're professional partners who bring valuable expertise to the relationship.

When we evaluate these tools collectively—sharing experiences in forums, discussing pros and cons at conferences, and asking the hard questions together—we make better decisions for ourselves and our clients. Our shared professional judgment is one of our greatest assets.

Professional Ethics and Trust

All of this collaborative evaluation happens most effectively when we have strong ethical foundations to guide us. The Grant Professionals Association's standards aren't just guidelines—they're our professional compass, helping us navigate complex decisions about partnerships, tools, and business practices.

I'm particularly encouraged by GPA's commitment to evolving and strengthening these ethical guidelines. The organization's responsiveness to our profession's changing needs shows real leadership. When new challenges emerge—whether from technology, business models, or industry practices—GPA continues to refine its guidance to serve us better.

This is also why I pursued and obtained my GPC (Grant Professional Certified) credential this year. Did I need it after years in this profession? Not technically. But literally anyone can hang out a shingle and call themselves a grant writer. It's only through this kind of certification that we maintain our standards and distinguish between true professionals and those who have no idea what they're doing. The credential represents a commitment to ongoing education, ethical practice, and professional accountability.

But ethics standards only work when we have safe spaces to discuss them openly. Professional dialogue requires trust and confidentiality. We need to be able to ask difficult questions, share concerns, and seek guidance without fear that our private communications will be forwarded or used against us.

The strongest professional communities are built on this foundation of trust—where members can engage in good-faith discussions about challenges, share experiences honestly, and support each other through complex decisions. When that trust is respected, we all benefit from shared wisdom and collective problem-solving.

Transparency in Professional Relationships

This foundation of trust extends to how we handle business relationships within our professional community. Transparency isn't just good ethics—it's good business. When we're open about our partnerships, affiliate relationships, business models, and potential conflicts of interest, we strengthen rather than undermine our professional credibility.

I'm always upfront when I recommend tools I use and believe in, like Instrumentl or Grant Frog. If I'm genuinely enthusiastic about something because it works well, I explain why. This transparency allows my colleagues to evaluate my recommendations appropriately and builds trust over time.

The same principle applies to any service provider in our space. Companies that are transparent about how they operate, who they partner with, and how they generate revenue make it easier for grant professionals to make informed decisions. Those who are secretive, evasive, or defensive about legitimate professional questions raise red flags.

We have a right to know if someone promoting a service has a financial stake in it. We have a right to understand business models that might affect our work or our clients. We have a right to ask these questions without facing legal threats or professional retaliation.

When transparency is the norm, everyone benefits. Grant professionals make better decisions, ethical companies thrive, and our entire profession maintains its integrity and trustworthiness.

Choosing to Lift Up, Not Tear Down

How we handle disagreements and challenges says everything about our professional character. I've noticed some practitioners in our field take a different approach—building themselves up by putting competitors down, even naming them specifically when comparing grant training services or approaches. But I believe we're stronger when we focus on lifting each other up instead of tearing each other down.

So what does lifting each other up look like in practice? It means celebrating colleagues' successes genuinely. When someone launches a new service, wins a major grant, or achieves a professional milestone, we cheer them on. It means sharing opportunities—like when that firm called looking for new graduates, or when I see a perfect job posting for someone's skill set.

It means offering constructive feedback when asked, and giving credit where it's due. Most importantly, it means responding to challenges with grace and professionalism. There's not one grant writing class that is the best fit for everyone, and I'm truly impressed with some of the new things that my colleagues are coming up with to make their work more sustainable while also helping people learn grants. That's my lane, my passion, and I love seeing the creativity and innovation happening in grant writing education. When students want to deep dive into federal grants, I refer them to Diane Leonard's federal grant training because that's her expertise.

“The grant writing world is big enough for all of us to succeed—when we focus on serving our clients excellently and supporting our colleagues generously. ”

— Allison Jones, Spark the Fire

The grant writing world is big enough for all of us to succeed—when we focus on serving our clients excellently and supporting our colleagues generously. Amanda Pearce at Funding for Good is exceptional at uplifting others. She even has a conference for grant consultants and a great Boot Camp program—and no, I'm not a business affiliate, I just genuinely like what she's doing.

Moving Forward Together

As our profession continues to evolve, we have incredible opportunities ahead of us. New technologies will emerge, business models will shift, and fresh challenges will test our professional standards. But I'm optimistic about our future because I see how we support each other every day.

And if you're a tech company out there genuinely looking to solve problems in our field, here are some real issues that need addressing: We need common grant applications—or at least standardized sections—so we don't have to retype basic organizational information dozens of times. We need grant applications available in advance in Google Docs and MS Word formats—not PDFs—so we can draft them on our desktops first. We need clear, consistent instructions from funders.

Notice what these have in common? They're all about grantmakers improving their processes, not grant professionals needing AI assistance. Grant professionals know what we're doing—especially if they take quality training, like ours at Spark the Fire. It's not that we need AI to find grant prospects for us; we need foundations to get clearer about what they want to fund. It's not that we need AI to help us write grant applications; we need grantmakers to streamline their questions and requirements.

“It’s not that we need AI to find grant prospects for us; we need foundations to get clearer about what they want to fund. It’s not that we need AI to help us write grant applications; we need grantmakers to streamline their questions and requirements.”

— Allison Jones, Spark the Fire

We're a profession built on research, relationship-building, and service to our communities. These core strengths serve us well whether we're evaluating a new AI tool, mentoring a colleague, or navigating industry changes. When we stay true to these values—asking good questions, maintaining transparency, and lifting each other up—we create a professional environment where everyone can thrive.

The conversations we have in forums, at conferences, and in informal networks shape our profession's future. Every time we choose collaboration over competition, transparency over secrecy, and professional growth over personal attacks, we strengthen the entire grant writing community.

I'm committed to continuing this work—through my teaching, my writing, and my daily interactions with colleagues. Whether you're just starting your grant writing journey or you're a seasoned professional exploring new directions, there's a place for you in this supportive community.

Together, we can ensure that grant writing remains a profession marked by integrity, excellence, and genuine care for the causes we serve.