Blog

The proposal is done. It was researched, drafted, reviewed, revised, and submitted right on deadline. Then it disappeared into a review process you cannot see and cannot influence. And then, one day, an email shows up. An award. Or a decline. Here is the part most organizations do not spend enough time thinking about. The outcome of that email is not actually what determines whether your organization gets stronger at proposal writing over time. What determines that is what you do in the week after you read it.

The notebooks are stacked in store aisles. The backpacks are out. Somewhere, a child is already insisting that last year’s perfectly good lunchbox is no longer acceptable. It must be back-to-school season. Even for those of us who have not sharpened a pencil in years, this time of year can create a familiar urge to get organized, return to a routine, and perhaps purchase office supplies we do not technically need. It is also a good time for proposal teams to revisit a few fundamentals.

Every September, a familiar idea begins circulating: The federal government’s fiscal year is ending. Agencies have money left. Nonprofits need to find it—quickly—before it disappears. It sounds like a clearance sale for federal funding. But that is a significant oversimplification.

September has a particular kind of energy. Vacations are ending. Calendars are filling. Programs are returning to full speed. Meetings that were postponed “until after Labor Day” have suddenly multiplied. And the funding opportunity that seemed comfortably far away in July is now due in three weeks. Before the fall proposal calendar becomes a collection of urgent emails and color-coded panic, take a little time for a reset.

Artificial intelligence can produce a remarkably polished paragraph in seconds. That does not necessarily mean the paragraph is accurate. Or appropriate. Or persuasive. Or even about your organization. And that gets to the heart of the conversation nonprofits need to be having about AI and proposal development.

Many people think of the proposal narrative and the budget as two separate things: the narrative explains the program; the budget shows the numbers. But funders do not read them that way. A proposal budget is not just a spreadsheet. It is part of the story. The clearest answer is this: the budget should confirm the narrative, not compete with it.

A grant opportunity can create a sense of urgency. The deadline is coming up. The amount looks promising. The funder’s priorities sound close enough. Someone forwards the link and asks, “Can we go for this?” Maybe the answer is yes. But before your organization invests time in a proposal, it is worth pausing long enough to ask a different question: Are we actually ready for this opportunity?

When funders ask about sustainability, it can feel like they’re asking you to predict the future. How will this program continue after the grant period ends? Who will support the work next year, and the year after that? The clearest answer is this: funders want to know whether your organization has thought realistically about what it will take to continue, adapt, and support the work beyond one grant period.

With less than a week to go (July 13, 2026) before the comment period closes on the proposed changes to several portions of 2 CFR concerning grants, especially the proposed changes to the existing Uniform Guidance, what are the key arguments and positions that the nonprofit community should be taking?

Most nonprofit professionals spend the majority of their proposal writing time on the narrative. The budget gets assembled at the end, often quickly, often by a different person, and often treated as a formality once the program description is done. Funders don't see it that way.