Starting a grants programme for the first time involves a series of decisions that will shape how the programme operates for years. Getting these decisions right at the outset — rather than rebuilding systems and processes mid-programme — avoids significant rework and protects the funder from early credibility problems.
This guide covers the key steps and decisions for first-time grantmakers.
Clarify your purpose. The single most important input to programme design is a clear statement of what you are trying to achieve. "Supporting community wellbeing" is not a clear purpose; "funding early childhood literacy programmes in rural areas of Canterbury" is. Clarity of purpose determines who can apply, what you will assess, and what you will measure.
Review your authority to grant. Confirm that the governing document of your organisation — trust deed, constitution, board resolution — authorises grantmaking in the area you are proposing. For charitable organisations, confirm that the proposed grantmaking aligns with your registered charitable purposes. For companies, confirm that the proposed CSR expenditure is authorised.
Decide your governance structure. Who approves grants? Staff, senior management, a committee, the full board? At what levels? Clear delegation authorities — documented before any applications are received — prevent later disputes about who was authorised to make which decisions. For charitable trusts, this is particularly important: trustees have personal liability if decisions are made outside their authority.
Draft your eligibility criteria. Define who can apply: legal status (registered charity, incorporated society, community organisation), geographic location, organisational size, type of work. Be specific: vague eligibility criteria invite ineligible applications and create problems when rejecting them.
Draft your assessment criteria. Define what "good" looks like — the factors that will distinguish strong applications from weaker ones. For credibility and fairness, publish these criteria in your programme guidelines so applicants understand how decisions will be made.
Decide your COI approach. Any programme has potential conflicts of interest — board members who are connected to applicant organisations, staff whose family members may apply. Define your COI policy before applications open: what must be declared, how conflicts are managed, and what records are kept.
Keep the first form short. First-time grantmakers often over-engineer their first application form, requiring extensive documentation before it is clear what level of detail the programme needs. Starting with a simpler form and adding requirements in subsequent rounds is easier than reducing requirements after applicants have prepared to meet them.
Include eligibility screening. Build eligibility questions into the beginning of the application form so ineligible applicants discover early that they cannot proceed — rather than completing a full application that will be declined.
Test the form with a potential applicant. Before opening, ask someone who hasn't seen the form to try to complete it. This reveals questions that are confusing, requirements that are unclear, and technical issues with the form.
Write plain-language guidelines. The programme guidelines applicants read before applying should be in plain language — not legal drafting, not sector jargon. For first-time funders, erring toward over-explanation is better than under-explanation.
Decide who will assess. Staff assessment, external independent assessors, community panel, or a combination? Each has tradeoffs in cost, independence, and consistency.
Brief assessors clearly. Even experienced assessors need to be briefed on the specific criteria and scoring approach for your programme. A calibration exercise — where all assessors score the same practice application and compare results — improves consistency.
Manage COI before assessment starts. COI declarations should be collected before assessors receive access to applications, not during or after. Define the process: declaration form, review by a senior staff member or convenor, documentation of how declared conflicts are managed.
Plan for borderline cases. Before assessment starts, decide how you will handle applications that sit at the boundary of your criteria — "near misses" that would benefit from funding but for which there isn't enough money. Documenting this decision in advance prevents the appearance of post-hoc rationalisation.
Start with the right tool, not the most familiar one. Many first-time grantmakers default to email and spreadsheets because they're familiar. This works for a small initial round but creates technical debt: data is fragmented, there is no audit trail, and switching to a proper system later requires manual data migration.
Consider the compliance requirements early. If your programme has any government funding, public accountability obligations, or formal governance structure, the documentation requirements are real from day one. A grants management platform that creates a proper audit trail is worth considering even for a first small round.
A simple platform with proper structure is better than a complex spreadsheet. The goal for a first programme is not maximum configurability — it is clear records, consistent process, and the ability to demonstrate that decisions were made appropriately.
Opening applications before the programme is designed. Applications will reveal requirements you hadn't anticipated. Designing the programme first — eligibility, criteria, assessment process, timeline — prevents having to change the rules mid-round.
Not communicating about timeline. Applicants who don't know when they will hear about the outcome will contact the programme office repeatedly. Publishing a clear timeline — assessment period, notification date — and sticking to it reduces applicant enquiries and builds credibility.
Approving grants without a signed agreement. A verbal or email approval is not a sufficient legal basis for a significant grant. A formal grant agreement — signed by both parties, setting out the grant purpose, conditions, and reporting requirements — protects the funder and creates clear obligations for the grantee.
Not planning for grant management after award. The first round typically focuses on getting applications in and making decisions. The post-award phase — milestone tracking, progress reporting, payment management — requires planning that should happen before the first grants are approved.
Tahua supports first-time grantmakers with configurable application forms, structured assessment workflows, and post-award tracking in a platform designed for organisations that need a proper system without the complexity of enterprise tools.