In This Guide
What Barriers Exist in Traditional Applications?
Thousands of organizations and individuals skip grant opportunities because the application itself feels impossible. They may not lack funding-worthy work—they lack access to the application process. Understanding common barriers is the first step toward designing more equitable pathways to funding.
Research from grantee and applicant communities reveals four primary categories of barriers that prevent qualified organizations from applying. Each creates distinct challenges and requires different solutions. When multiple barriers compound, they create significant exclusion that disproportionately affects smaller organizations, organizations led by people of color, and those serving marginalized communities.
How Barriers Compound and Create Exclusion
These barriers rarely exist in isolation. A small immigrant-led community organization might face all four: staff members whose first language isn't English read complex jargon while trying to navigate a confusing online portal within a tight two-week deadline. This isn't a case of individual struggles—it's a system designed in ways that exclude them.
When you acknowledge these barriers, you're not lowering standards. You're not making it "easier." You're simply removing obstacles that have nothing to do with the quality of an organization's work. A strong community health initiative isn't stronger because it's described in jargon. An effective youth program isn't better because it was submitted through a complex portal.
Removing these barriers helps you find the best organizations to fund—organizations you might otherwise miss.
How Do Plain Language and Clear Writing Help?
Plain language isn't dumbing things down. It's respecting people's time and energy by making your expectations crystal clear. When your application instructions are easy to understand, applicants can focus on telling their story, not decoding jargon.
Core Plain Language Principles
- Use short sentences. Average sentence length should stay under 15 words. Long sentences demand more cognitive load and are harder for non-native speakers, people with learning disabilities, and people reading on mobile devices.
- Choose common words over rare ones. Use "help" instead of "facilitate." Use "problem we solve" instead of "organizational pain points." Replace jargon with plain English.
- Be specific, not abstract. Instead of "demonstrate organizational capacity," ask "Tell us about your team's experience running similar programs."
- Use the active voice. "We expect organizations to submit quarterly reports" is clearer than "Quarterly reports are required from all funded organizations."
- Break text into small chunks. Use headers, bullet points, and white space. Dense paragraphs are harder to read, especially for people with dyslexia or visual disabilities.
- Define terms you must use. If you need to use "impact metrics," define it: "Impact metrics: ways you measure whether your program is working."
Before and After Examples
❌ Complex & Jargon-Heavy
Applicants must articulate a comprehensive theory of change that delineates the causal mechanisms through which their programmatic interventions will generate sustainable impact within target communities, including explicit specification of short-term and long-term outcome metrics and their corresponding measurement methodologies.
✓ Plain Language
Tell us: What problem do you solve? What does your program do to solve it? What changes do you expect to see? How will you know it's working?
❌ Vague & Abstract
Demonstrate organizational readiness and requisite competencies for effective program implementation and scalability within regional contexts.
✓ Concrete & Specific
Tell us about your team. Who will lead this work? What experience do they have? What resources do you already have in place?
❌ Passive & Unclear
It is required that comprehensive narratives addressing organizational sustainability be submitted in conjunction with financial documentation, and said documentation must be presented in standardized formats as determined by the funding institution.
✓ Active & Direct
Show us your budget and explain how you'll keep this program going. Use our budget template (link).
Plain Language Tools and Resources
Several tools can help you test whether your writing is truly plain language. Hemingway Editor highlights long sentences and complex words. Readability Score measures grade level. The CDC's Plain Language resource offers checklists for clarity. Most importantly, have actual users—especially people unfamiliar with grant-speak—read your materials and tell you what's confusing.
Should You Offer Multiple Application Formats?
Yes. Absolutely. Insisting on a single format privileges people who are comfortable with that format while excluding equally talented people who communicate differently. Some people think best on paper. Others communicate with clarity and passion through video. Still others excel in conversation. Why would you want to miss the latter two groups?
Multiple formats also help you see different dimensions of organizations. A written application shows writing quality. A video shows charisma and confidence on camera. A conversation reveals thinking on their feet and collaborative energy. You learn more from multiple formats, and organizations get to show their strengths.
Written Narratives
Still valuable, but with plain language and flexibility in length.
- Works for detailed, complex information
- Easy to archive and review
- Good for reflective writing
Video Submissions
3-5 minute videos showing personality and mission-driven work.
- Shows leadership and authenticity
- Accessible to people who prefer speaking
- Can include visual demonstration
Oral Presentations
Phone or in-person conversations, especially valuable for partnerships.
- Enables dialogue and relationship
- Accessible for people with literacy challenges
- Builds funder-grantee connection
Visual Presentations
Infographics, slides, or visual storytelling with minimal text.
- Engages different learning styles
- Can show impact visually
- Works well for multilingual audiences
Implementation Strategy
You don't need to accept all formats for every grant. But offering a choice helps. For example: "Choose one: Write 2-3 pages about your work, submit a 4-minute video, or schedule a 30-minute conversation with our team." This maintains consistency while allowing people to play to their strengths.
Make sure you're evaluating fairly across formats. A strong video submission deserves equal consideration to a strong written one. Train reviewers to look for the same core information regardless of format. Create scoring rubrics that work for all formats, focusing on content and clarity rather than presentation polish.
What Unnecessary Requirements Should You Remove?
Many grant applications include requirements that feel standard—501(c)(3) status, insurance, audited financial statements—without asking whether they actually predict good work. Sometimes these requirements are necessary. Often, they simply exclude smaller or newer organizations.
Conduct an audit of your application. For each requirement, ask: "Does this actually predict whether this organization will do excellent work? Or is it just how we've always done it?" The distinction matters enormously for equity.
Requirement Audit Checklist
Common Requirements to Reconsider
- 501(c)(3) status (or equivalent): If you want to fund a project led by an informal collective, can they partner with an established nonprofit as a pass-through? Can you accept fiscal sponsorship arrangements?
- Years in operation: New organizations often bring innovation and deep roots in communities. Set a lower floor or waive it for promising new efforts.
- Audited financials: Audits cost thousands. Can you accept tax returns, board-approved budgets, and a simple narrative about financial management?
- Proof of insurance: Is insurance truly necessary for your grant? If so, can you help grantees afford it or accept a lower coverage threshold?
- Restrictive timeline requirements: "Timeline of activities for all three years" is hard if conditions change. Can you ask for year one detail and flexibility for years two and three?
- Minimum project budget: Smaller grants sometimes serve communities well. If your minimum is $50,000, you exclude grassroots organizations doing powerful work on a budget.
How Does Translation Support Equity?
If your funding serves communities where English isn't the primary language, your grant should be available in those languages. This isn't just about translation—it's about recognizing that people think most clearly and write most persuasively in their home language. Translation barriers become barriers to funding.
English-dominant grantmaking reinforces systemic inequity. It creates a funnel effect: only bilingual or English-fluent people make it through, so you systematically miss organizations led by people with limited English proficiency, even when they're brilliant at their work.
Professional Translation
Full application documents and instructions in priority languages. Budget for professional translation (not automated) to ensure accuracy and cultural appropriateness.
Interpretation Support
Offer video calls with interpreters for clarifying questions. This helps organizations with complex questions without needing written English fluency.
Bilingual Review
Have at least some reviewers who speak applicants' languages. They can catch nuance and cultural context that monolingual reviewers miss.
Community Partners
Partner with trusted community organizations to share information, answer questions, and help eligible organizations navigate the process.
Practical Implementation
Start by asking your community: What languages are most needed? Survey past applicants and community partners. You might not need every document translated into twelve languages—focus on the languages spoken by significant portions of your funding area.
Translate not just the application form, but instructions, FAQs, definitions, and examples. Poor translation of instructions is worse than no translation. Work with professional translators who understand both your sector and the cultural context of your community.
Budget for translation in your grants program costs. Quality translation isn't expensive compared to the potential of finding and funding organizations you otherwise would have missed.
What Makes Technology More Accessible?
If you're using an online application portal, you're making choices about who can participate. Some of those choices are small and technical. Others are huge for accessibility. The good news: most accessibility improvements are also just... better design.
Core Technology Accessibility Standards
Device & Connection Compatibility
Visual Accessibility
Screen Reader Compatibility
Keyboard Navigation
Time & Cognitive Accessibility
Choosing the Right Platform
If you're selecting a grants management platform, accessibility should be a core requirement, not an afterthought. Ask vendors to verify WCAG 2.1 AA compliance. Test portals yourself using a screen reader or keyboard alone. Better yet, have people with disabilities test your portal and tell you what's hard.
For smaller grants, a simple Google Form can actually be more accessible than a complex platform. For larger ones, platforms like Submittable, FluidReview, and others offer accessibility features—but only if properly configured.
Supporting People Beyond Tech Issues
Not all barriers are technical. Some organizations lack the equipment or internet speed to upload documents. Others have staff who don't feel confident with technology. Offer alternatives: "You can apply online, email your materials, or mail them to our office. All are treated equally."
Consider providing phone support for people struggling with the portal. Have staff available to walk through the process. This extra support signals that you genuinely want their application—not that you're just checking a box on accessibility.
Designing for Equity Takes Intention
Accessible grant applications don't happen by accident. They require asking hard questions about why requirements exist, testing your language and technology with actual users, and being willing to change what you've always done. But the payoff is enormous: you find better organizations and fund more diverse leaders.
Explore More Equity Resources at grants.clubFrequently Asked Questions
Won't removing requirements mean funding lower-quality organizations?
No. Barriers don't measure quality—they measure conformity. A strong community-led organization doesn't become less strong because they're three years old instead of five. An excellent program isn't better because it's described in jargon. Removing arbitrary barriers helps you see actual quality more clearly, not less.
How do I evaluate applications if they use different formats?
Create a scoring rubric that works across formats. You're looking for the same core information: their mission, what they do, why it works, and how they'll measure success. A video, a written narrative, and a conversation can all convey this. Train reviewers to focus on content, not presentation polish. A rough video is just as valid as a polished proposal if the content is strong.
Is translation expensive? Can smaller funders afford it?
Professional translation typically costs $0.15–$0.30 per word. A 5-page application might run $150–$300 per language. While not free, it's a small investment compared to the funding you distribute. Consider starting with the most-needed languages and expanding. Many funders find that translation actually reduces staff time answering questions from people struggling with English-heavy instructions.
Where do I start if my current application is complex and jargon-heavy?
Start small. Pick one section and rewrite it in plain language using the principles in this guide. Test it with people outside your organization—especially people from communities you want to reach. Does it make sense? What's still confusing? Then move to the next section. You don't need to overhaul everything at once. Gradual improvement is progress.