Our inaugural Sport Fundraising Summit on Wednesday 26th February brought together 150 global leaders, fundraisers and donors in sport for good to share knowledge and discuss best practices in the ever-changing world of fundraising. As our research consistently shows, community sport organisations worldwide struggle with chronic underfunding and limited fundraising capacity—a challenge the Summit directly addressed through focused discussions and expert panels.

To kick off the day, we invited four speakers to deliver a panel discussion on grant-making trends and practices in Sport for Good. This blog captures the essential insights and strategic advice they shared, offering a comprehensive view of current funding landscapes and future opportunities in our sector.

Vicky Lowe, Chair of the Change Foundation, expertly moderated the panel, while each panellist contributed valuable perspective from their respective organisations: Tom Burstow (Global Director of Development at Laureus Sport for Good), Yvonne Henry (Brands Director at Women Win), Neel Sood (Sport for Change Manager at Comic Relief) and Zenna Hopson (CEO at Dallaglio RugbyWorks). Although the discussion was structured by key themes relating to the fundraising landscape, grant-writing practices and relationship building, the conversation flowed between these headings as they don’t exist in isolation; they work in tandem to amplify an organisation’s likelihood of fundraising success. 

Post-COVID Funding Shifts

The panel began by examining the fundamental shifts in trust and foundation funding in the post-COVID environment. Sharing her experience of grant-making, Yvonne highlighted the notable transition from pre-COVID restrictive, programme-focused funding models toward more flexible approaches that emerged during the pandemic. The panel discussed how COVID evoked a need for rapid, emergency support, leading to an increase in unrestricted funding to enable organisations to utilise grants in the ways they deemed fit. As a result, rigid criteria and narrowly defined project funding are gradually giving way to more flexible arrangements, with funders increasingly recognising and trusting the expertise of organisations and the communities they serve.

The panel identified a transition from grant applications and reporting that focus on KPIs and outcomes to longer-term learning as a primary measure of impact. With the funding landscape shifting power dynamics to organisations and their communities compared to the pre-COVID, outcomes-focused model, there is a rising prevalence of learning and education. Hearing the personal stories of beneficiaries instead of reading about the quantitative impact of an organisation’s work is becoming increasingly preferable to funders; the panel advocated for this to be a strategic focus for organisations moving forward.

Key trends

Building on these shifts, the panel highlighted several current trends in funding that organisations should be aware of.

1. Evidence-based funding

 With increased emphasis on learning and education, funders now seek concrete evidence that knowledge-sharing is occurring at meaningful scale and depth. Grant applications must articulate a clear, well-developed monitoring and evaluation framework that demonstrates prior success and reliable impact measurement methodology. The ability to show that your evidence-gathering approach has proven effective previously significantly strengthens funding proposals.

2. A greater emphasis on place-based programmes

Funders want to see organisations immersing themselves in the communities they support. Understanding the specific challenges affecting beneficiaries enables organisations to tailor their services to maximise tangible, positive outcomes. This is most effectively achieved through place-based programmes that meet communities in their own contexts, fostering a hands-on approach that acknowledges the unique challenges and characteristics of each beneficiary group.

3. Collaboration on all levels 

The panel highlighted funders' growing preference for grantees who actively collaborate by combining complementary strengths and expertise toward shared objectives. Importantly, this collaborative mindset extends to funder-grantee relationships, with panellists advocating for more equitable partnerships rather than traditional top-down funding models. Funders themselves face accountability pressures—they must identify suitable funding recipients and report impact to their own stakeholders or the public. By working collaboratively toward unified community impact goals, both funders and grantees can more effectively achieve their respective missions.

‘There’s definitely a sense from an applicant perspective of needing to work more with others and demonstrate how you're working more with others.’

Demonstrating impact

The panel emphasised a crucial distinction between impact quantity and quality that is frequently overlooked. Zenna articulated this powerfully:

‘I don't actually think it matters how many people you work with, it's how many lives you actually change. You can put a football in the hands of 10,000 young people and only change one, you look good because you worked with 10,000. So I think we have to move away a bit from this numbers-based approach to a real impact-based approach.’

All panellists unanimously emphasized that beneficiary experiences—conveyed through authentic storytelling, personal testimonies, and community consultations—should take precedence over purely quantitative reporting methods. By highlighting the direct, personal effects of programmes on beneficiaries and documenting genuine life improvements, organisations communicate their value far more effectively than through engagement metrics alone. The panel stressed that engagement statistics should not be confused with impact, and grant writers should avoid positioning "lives reached" or "beneficiaries engaged" as primary impact measures.

Standing out in the application process

Expanding on the power of effective storytelling, Neel emphasized the critical importance of clearly articulating organizational mission and vision within funding applications. The clarity and concision with which grant writers communicate their organization's purpose often determines application success. Funders review numerous proposals daily and gravitate toward those that are well-articulated, accessible, and focused. When presenting your organization's narrative, establish a logical progression that clearly defines who you are, why your work matters, and the ongoing impact you create. Applications lacking this clarity leave funders uncertain about an organization's fundamental purpose, as Neel explained:

‘I see organisations and I think I don't know what you guys stand for. What is it that's driving this organisation? I see... Sometimes I check on websites and they're doing a bit of health inequalities or a bit of mental health or a bit of this, that and the other. And there doesn't appear to be some sort of clear vision or delineation.’

Identify exactly what challenges you solve that distinguish you from other organisations, and why your organisation is uniquely positioned to continue to deliver your work. Answering these questions as an organisation, perhaps in a team meeting, and transferring these concepts into a concise and articulate funding application will elevate the quality of your proposal. When your entire team aligns around these core elements of your organisational narrative, this unity becomes evident to funders.

Trust-based partnerships

Returning to the current funding climate in sport for development with which the discussion began, the panel discussed the ongoing debate between funding unrestricted and core funding over project and capital costs. This reflects an emergence of funders pushing for relationship building with the organisations that they fund, with Tom indicating that at Laureus Sport for Good, they fund an organisation’s vision, mission, and impact rather than offering specific types of funding. When an organisation can clearly articulate these key drivers in an application, whether a grant is restricted or unrestricted is by the by: if a funder likes what they read, and can do so, they are likely to want to develop an evolving relationship with the organisation that leads to further funding in the future. Comments from both Laureus Sport for Good and Comic Relief, two significant funders in the sport for development landscape, indicate that cultivating long-term funder-trusted partnerships is a must. 

Traditionally, funders have been positioned as inaccessible authorities, seemingly elevated above the organisations seeking support. However, Tom, Neel, and Yvonne—all speaking from funder perspectives—emphasized that funders increasingly aim to view funded organisations as genuine partners rather than mere support recipients. As Yvonne memorably stated: 

‘Don’t treat funders as though we’re doing you a favour, treat us as though you’re doing us a favour.’

This mutual relationship can be nurtured by organisations engaging with funders, sharing learning and knowledge, and keeping them in the loop regarding projects, activities, and impact. In line with the gradual move away from rigid restricted funding to a more autonomous and unrestricted grant landscape, funders micromanaging grantees’ programmes, spending, and reporting is slowly becoming a thing of the past. Replacing this, the funding landscape is seeing, and hopefully to a greater degree, the emergence of open dialogue between funders and grantees, with mutually beneficial knowledge sharing and learning opportunities for all. 

Advice for funders/grant-makers

Led by Zenna, who, as CEO at Dallaglio RugbyWorks, spoke from a grant seeker’s perspective, the panel considered how funders could evolve their grant-making process to better support applicants. Zenna suggested funders let applicants know if they’ve been unsuccessful as soon as they’re able to do so rather than keeping them waiting unnecessarily. This way, applicants can direct their focus elsewhere, perhaps adopting a different priority (such as the programme for which they want to seek funding) if they are struggling to secure funding. Additionally, it would create a more positive experience of applying to trusts and foundations for grants, particularly for organisations who are new to the competition that comes hand in hand with grant making. 

“Kill us quickly, so that we can move on quickly”. Zenna Hopson

To streamline this process further, the panel agreed that funders could dedicate more time to supplying feedback to applicants. Although the demand and overwhelm that funders face in applicant numbers is no secret, and resources are stretched, brief feedback that relates directly to the organisation’s proposal can be of immense value. It can help guide future applications by steering organisations’ priorities and writing techniques, potentially initiating a ripple effect across the sport for development funding landscape if more funders act this way. To reiterate, this is not to undermine the pressure and time constraints that funders experience when reviewing applications; however, it is important to vocalise applicants’ frustrations if we are to catalyse long-term improvements to grant making processes.

Advice for grant-seekers

Vicky brought the panel discussion to a close by asking each panelist to share a key piece of advice with the audience. Zenna and Tom focused theirs on application writing and storytelling, with Zenna highlighting the importance of understanding what makes your organisation ‘magic’ and telling this story and Tom expressing the power of ‘clarity, brevity, impact’ in proposal writing. It is crucial to find a happy medium between emotive/powerful storytelling and clear, succinct writing that captures the funder’s attention without losing sight of the specific question or being too verbose. Beneficiary consultations, feedback, and quotations are an excellent way to communicate with emotion without pumping an application with emotive language which may dilute impact. Interspersing your application can help remind the funder that your beneficiaries and the impact you have on their lives are the driving force behind your proposal.

The practical tips offered by Zenna and Tom were balanced by Yvonne and Neel’s guidance relating to mindset and perseverance in the competitive funding landscape. Being brave, staying calm, and knowing the unique value that you bring, even in the face of rejection, are all essential components of strong, resilient organisations. With many funders announcing the closure of grant programmes and funding becoming increasingly competitive, Neel reminded the audience to ‘keep the faith … things will get better’. Grant-making is an ever-changing landscape. Organisations must be aware of this, resilient to the changes that occur, and should keep hold of the mission and values driving their work.

The opening panel of our inaugural Sport Fundraising Summit illuminated the complex, evolving nature of the grant fundraising landscape for sport for good organisations. The discussion underscored that sustainable funding success in this competitive environment requires strategic planning, authentic storytelling, and collaborative approaches that position grant-seeking as a partnership, not merely a transaction.

Our team at Remedy would like to say a huge thank you to the panelists for their insight and wisdom, and to Vicky for facilitating such an engaging and insightful discussion. The panel equipped attendees with invaluable insights into the current fundraising landscape, with plenty of practical advice and guidance.

What's Next?

• Download our2025 Benchmark Report for a deeper dive into the current fundraising landscape

• Assess your organisation's readiness with our free Fundraising Readiness Toolto identify strengths and areas for improvement

• Join us next Monday for our deep dive into the second panel of the day: Building Successful Corporate Partnerships

Written by Lucy Wilkes.