The greatest secret regarding the creation of successful funding documents is this: there is no secret. Most foundations have a format for composing funding documents: follow the format. Most have limitations on length: respect these limitations. All have a deadline for submitting copy: honor the deadline. Such glib advice is admittedly reminiscent of the recipe for making elephant soup—“Step one: Find elephant”—but it would surprise most people outside the foundation field to learn how often grantmakers violate these elementary rules. Funding documents are created that deviate from the approved format, go far beyond the prescribed length, and miss the stated deadline for submission. There is no secret about these rules, and it is no secret that they should be followed.
The second great nonsecret is to write for the ultimate audience. If the funding document will be judged by an internal committee, you need to know just how expert the committee members are in the field of the proposal. This will determine how technical the document should be. If it will be judged by a lay board, you would be wise to adjust the level of technicality accordingly. Whether an internal committee or the board makes the decision, it is very important to know at least the basics of each member's worldview. Although there is no need to pander to such views, there is no percentage in egregiously offending them, either. Most of all, there is no point in writing generically, in a one-size-fits-all mode. Funding documents are very much like suits: all of them follow a basic pattern, but each of them requires some custom tailoring for its ultimate wearer.
The third nonsecret is to follow the general rules for effective writing. These have been summarized, in a humorous form, by some anonymous scribe who compiled the “Twenty-Five Rules for Writing Good”:
18.223.149.223