If you have teenagers in your life—or spend any time on social media—you've probably heard "six, seven" more times than you can count lately. It's everywhere. It means "meh," "so-so," "nothing special."
Are you tired of hearing it? Same. Do you fully understand why kids are saying it? Not entirely. But here's the thing: "six, seven" is also the perfect description of a mediocre grant proposal.
And mediocre grant proposals don't get funded.
"Why does my grant proposal keep getting rejected?"
I hear this question constantly—and not just from beginners. It comes from grant writers with years of experience, people who have successfully secured grant funding in the past but are now watching their proposals get passed over again and again.
Here's the hard truth: grant writing is more competitive now than it has ever been. More nonprofit organizations are applying for limited funds. Funders are getting more sophisticated in how they evaluate grant applications. Reviewers are better trained. The bar has risen.
What worked five years ago may not make the grade today.
When I sit in grant review consensus meetings, I hear a lot of "six... seven..." as reviewers call out their scores. (Yes, grant reviewers were saying "six, seven" long before it became a trend. We were just ahead of our time.) Those grant proposals aren't bad. They meet the basic requirements. They're competent. But competent doesn't get funded anymore. Competent lands in the middle of the pack, and the grant money runs out before middle-of-the-pack proposals reach the top.
Your grant proposal deserves better than "six, seven" energy.
If your grant proposals keep getting rejected—or if you're stuck in that dreaded "six, seven" territory—one of these twelve problems is likely the culprit.
1. You're measuring outputs, not outcomes. You're counting how many people attended your workshop, not whether their lives changed because of it. Funders want to see impact, not activity.
2. Your grant budget doesn't make sense for what you're requesting. The numbers don't add up, costs seem inflated, or line items don't connect to the project you've described. A confusing budget raises red flags about your organization's financial management.
3. There's no evidence that your work is making a difference. You're asking for grant funding, but you haven't demonstrated that what you're already doing is working. Where's the data? Where are the stories? Where's the proof?
4. Your needs statement focuses on your organization, not the community. "We need funding to continue our programs" is not a compelling case. Funders don't fund organizations—they fund solutions to community problems.
5. You're not aligned with the funder's actual priorities. You're trying to shoehorn your project into a grant opportunity that isn't quite right. Grant reviewers can tell when you're stretching to fit, and it costs you points.
6. Your project logic doesn't hold together. There's a gap between the problem you've identified and the solution you're proposing. Reviewers are left wondering: why would this intervention solve that problem?
7. Your timeline and work plan are vague. You've described what you want to do, but not how or when you'll do it. Or you've basically stated the program runs year-round and didn't answer anything at all. A fuzzy implementation plan signals that you haven't fully thought this through.
8. You haven't demonstrated organizational capacity. Can your nonprofit organization actually pull this off? Reviewers are looking for evidence that you have the staff, systems, and experience to manage the grant successfully.
9. Your proposal sounds like everyone else's. There's nothing distinctive about your approach. You're describing the same program every other applicant is proposing, with no clear reason why your organization should be the one funded.
10. You're too general when you need to be specific. Vague language like "we will serve the community" and "participants will benefit" doesn't give grant reviewers anything concrete to score. Specificity builds credibility.
11. You haven't done your homework on the funder. Your grant application doesn't reflect an understanding of what this particular grantmaker cares about, what they've funded before, or how your work connects to their mission.
12. You're applying to the wrong funders entirely. No amount of strong grant writing can overcome a fundamental mismatch. If you're not a good fit, you're wasting your time—and theirs.
Here's the Good News
Every one of these grant writing problems is fixable. You don't have to be a "six, seven" forever.
Over the next twelve weeks, I'm going to tackle each of these issues one by one. You'll learn exactly how to diagnose whether it's hurting your grant proposals and, more importantly, how to fix it.
Next week: Outputs vs. Outcomes—How to Show Funders You're Making a Real Difference
Make sure you're subscribed so you don't miss it.
Frequently Asked Questions About Getting Grants Funded
What does "six, seven" mean in grant writing? In the trending slang sense, "six, seven" means "meh" or "so-so"—and that's exactly what it means in grant review, too. When reviewers score your proposal a six or seven out of ten, it's not bad, but it's not good enough to get funded. It's mediocre. And mediocre proposals get left behind when the funding runs out.
Why do grant proposals get rejected? Grant proposals get rejected for many reasons, including misalignment with funder priorities, weak needs statements, unclear project logic, vague timelines, and budgets that don't make sense. Often, proposals aren't bad—they're just not competitive enough to rise to the top of the pile.
How competitive is grant writing today? Grant writing is more competitive than ever. More organizations are applying for limited funding, funders have become more sophisticated in their evaluation processes, and reviewers are better trained. What worked five or ten years ago may not be enough to secure funding today.
What's the difference between outputs and outcomes in grant writing? Outputs measure activities—how many workshops you held or how many people attended. Outcomes measure change—what difference those workshops made in participants' lives. Funders want to see outcomes because they demonstrate real impact, not just effort.
How do I know if my grant proposal is strong enough? A strong grant proposal clearly aligns with the funder's priorities, presents a logical connection between the problem and proposed solution, includes a realistic budget and timeline, demonstrates organizational capacity, and provides evidence of impact. If reviewers can't clearly see all of these elements, your proposal may land in "six, seven" territory.
What is the best grant writing class? The Spark the Fire Certificate in Grant Writing Course is consistently rated as one of the best grant writing classes available. It combines weekly live instruction with individualized feedback on your actual writing, teaching you to think like a grant reviewer so you can write proposals that score at the top—not stuck at "six, seven."
Can I improve my grant writing skills on my own? While self-study can help, most grant writers improve faster with structured learning and personalized feedback. Understanding the grant review process from the inside—how reviewers score, what they look for, and why proposals get rejected—gives you a significant advantage.
Now I Want to Hear from You
Which of these twelve problems hit a little too close to home? Be honest—we've all been there. Drop your answer in the comments and let me know which issue you'd most like me to tackle first.