It’s Friday afternoon, and the week has been a blur of meetings, calls, and urgent emails. Your inbox is filling with new grant applications, each needing careful review. The team is working at full stretch, and the deadline is looming.
As you start the review, you notice inconsistent scoring sheets, scattered reviewer notes across emails and spreadsheets, and you still need to find a trustee for final comments. The process feels disjointed and frustrating, risking trust in the final decisions.
Now imagine a single, consistent review process: clear criteria, all information in one place, and reviewers knowing what’s expected. Standardising your grant review process can bring clarity, speed, and fairness.
For example, a London Arts Trust managing £500,000 annually could, through a cloud-based platform, unify reviewer scoring, centralise notes, and speed up decisions. This could reduce review times by 40–50%, boost trustee confidence, and enable reporting in minutes instead of days. The time saved could be redirected to supporting grantees simply by removing inconsistencies.
The case for standardising grant application reviews
Small charities (income less than £100,000) account for up to 80% of the UK charity sector. UK family foundations, charitable trusts, and local councils face the same challenge: ever-growing expectations for fairness, transparency, and accountability in grant application reviews, but without the luxury of large administrative teams.
In some councils, one officer might oversee dozens of grant programmes with different or no systems in place. When each application is handled differently, it slows decisions and risks undermining trust.
Therefore, standardising the review process is the right way to go. A clear and dependable review process with built-in checkpoints speeds up decision-making and prevents misunderstandings. In addition, it gives every applicant a fair and consistent assessment.
The hidden costs of manual grant application reviews
According to a study by the Law Family Commission on Civil Society, £900 million is spent by charities per year on grant applications. Public sector grantmakers often operate under austerity measures and cannot simply hire more staff to keep up.
Fragmented processes like this often:
- Create delays that leave applicants waiting in uncertainty
- Cause inconsistencies in how applications are judged
- Reduce clarity for decision-makers
For applicants, the experience can feel disheartening; they may not understand why decisions took so long or why similar projects were treated differently. That is a reputational risk no funder wants.
Why standardisation matters for confidence and impact
In the context of a grant application review, standardisation means:
- Detailed, agreed-upon criteria
- Consistent scoring
- Structured reviewer collaboration
For smaller organisations, the benefits of standardisation include:
- Evidence-based decisions: Reviewers base choices on the same evidence, making outcomes easier to defend if challenged.
- Reduced administrative burden: Teams can leverage technology and work more efficiently without expanding headcount.
For example, a slight shift from free-form trustee discussions to a standard rubric can not only expedite decision-making but also enhance trustee confidence in explaining why a project was or wasn’t funded.
A clear and dependable review process not only speeds up decision-making but also significantly improves the grantee experience, ensuring that all applicants receive fair and consistent assessments. Therefore, such tools for charities must be utilised to standardise the review process across grant applications.
Key elements of a repeatable, intuitive grant application review workflow
A strong grant application review process is consistent, straightforward, and easy for everyone involved to follow. That means having clear criteria, the right tools, and well-structured workflows that make collaboration smooth without adding extra layers of administrative burden.
When these elements are built into your grant management system, your team can make decisions that are informed, transparent, and always tied back to your funding priorities.
The Association of Charitable Foundations mentions that a great grant processing tool is one that best supports strategy, enables effective decision-making in a timely manner, reduces applicant burden, and “tells us if we are doing a good job”. Below are the key components of a review process you can rely on, funding round after funding round.
Clear review criteria and scoring rubrics
Weighted questions aligned with funding priorities reduce ambiguity for both external and internal reviewers. For example, for a climate-focused charity, criteria might include impact on emissions (40%), community engagement (30%), delivery feasibility (20%), and governance (10%). Applicants know the rules, and reviewers judge the grant applications on consistent terms.
Role-based reviewer collaboration
Different reviewers bring different expertise. With grant project management software, permissions and assignments can be tailored for each reviewer based on their role in the review process.
For example, finance teams see budgets, programme staff assess delivery plans, and external panel members view only the sections they need. This streamlining is invaluable for mixed panels that include volunteers, councillors, or partner organisations.
Built-in workflows and notifications
Automated reminders and review deadlines prevent applications from stalling. For councils balancing multiple programmes, this feature ensures that even during busy budget cycles, the grant application review process stays on track without constant manual follow-up.
One centralised system for application materials
Storing all documents, notes, and scores in one place eliminates silos. For public sector teams subject to 360Giving reporting or scrutiny from local government auditors, this centralisation simplifies cross-department collaboration and makes it far easier.
How grant management software supports standardisation
A grant management software provides a purpose-built infrastructure to introduce these key elements into daily practice and make the grant review process more efficient.
UK funders benefit from:
- Custom workflows that reflect local priorities and funding policies
- Reviewer dashboards showing side-by-side application comparisons in a consistent and easy-to-read format
- Audit trails documenting every review action for transparency and accountability
This consistency carries from one funding round to the next, reducing the need to “reinvent the wheel” each year. It also protects the integrity of data for regulatory and public reporting.
Build confidence through better processes
For small UK grantmakers, standardising grant application reviews is about enabling fairness, clarity, consistency, and speed. By adopting clear criteria, role-based collaboration, automated workflows, and a centralised system, you can make better funding decisions without overburdening your team.
If you’re ready to achieve big outcomes with a small team, discover Foundant’s UK-ready grant management software and see how it can help you create a review process your team can trust.
Or get in touch with our team today to learn how Foundant’s UK-ready grant management software can help your organisation streamline reviews, save time, and make confident funding decisions.
FAQs: Grant application review
When it comes to reviewing applications, many funders face similar challenges. To help, we’ve answered some of the most common questions about streamlining and strengthening the grant application review process.
How long does it take to review a grant application?
Review times vary depending on the funder’s process and the volume of applications. For smaller UK funders, it may take a few weeks; for larger programmes, reviews can stretch to several months. Using a structured system helps keep reviews consistent and avoids unnecessary delays.
What is a grant reviewer?
A grant reviewer is the person who checks whether an application meets a funder’s criteria. Here in the UK, this could be someone on the staff, a trustee, an outside expert, or even someone from the community. Their whole job is to make sure every funding decision is fair, crystal clear, and in line with the funder’s objectives.
What’s the success rate for grant applications in the UK?
Local and community grants may have higher success rates, while national competitive schemes can fund fewer than 1 in 10 applicants. Clear guidance and fair review processes help ensure applicants know what to expect.
How long does it take to get a grant application in the UK?
Timelines differ between funders and grant programmes. Some community or local authority grants can be awarded within a month, while national or specialist funds may take three to six months. Applicants should always check the funder’s published timelines to set realistic expectations.
How do you know if you received a grant?
Successful applicants are notified directly by the funder, usually by email or letter. Many UK funders also share outcomes on their websites for transparency. If using an online grant system, applicants can often log in to check their status at any time.
How do you follow up on a grant application?
Applicants should follow the funder’s stated process. Many UK funders outline when and how updates will be given. If timelines have passed, it’s acceptable to politely contact the funder for an update. Clear communication benefits both applicants and funders by managing expectations.