Fundraising and donor relations: strategy, proposals and diversification

1The humanitarian funding landscape

International humanitarian funding is concentrated: about ten public donors provide most of the money, and UN-coordinated response plans are structurally underfunded (often funded at less than half of their requirements in recent years, with a sharp drop in 2024 and 2025). The main sources for an NGO:

Trends to build into a strategy: multi-year and flexible funding encouraged by the Grand Bargain, the rise of anticipatory action (funding triggered by forecasts, before the shock), localisation, and growing demands for evidence of results.

2Resource mobilisation strategy

A resource mobilisation strategy starts from the organisation's strategy: how much must be raised, for what, from whom, with what investment. It includes:

• A portfolio target: for example no donor above 35%, at least 15% unrestricted funds, at least 30% multi-year funding.
• A donor map by priority: strategic alignment, likely amount, probability of success, cost of the effort, compliance requirements.
• A pipeline (opportunity tracking table) with, for each one, the amount, the probability, the decision date and the weighted value = amount × probability.
• An investment plan: development staff, donor management systems (CRM), visibility, compliance readiness.

Pipeline example. Opportunity A: USD 800,000 at 25% = 200,000; B: 300,000 at 60% = 180,000; C: 150,000 at 80% = 120,000. Total weighted value: USD 500,000. If the organisation must find USD 900,000 to cover its minimum budget, the pipeline is insufficient: it needs to generate new opportunities, not just write better.

A rule for leaders: fundraising is won before the call for proposals, in the relationship, the reputation and the presence in coordination. A call discovered on the day it is published is, statistically, a lost call.

3Writing a winning proposal

Evaluators read dozens of proposals using a scoring grid. The first task is to dissect it: criteria, weightings, page limits, mandatory annexes, eligibility conditions. A proposal must answer each criterion explicitly, using the words of the call.

Structure of a solid proposal:

1. Context and needs analysis: recent, sourced and disaggregated data (multi-sector assessments, cluster, your own data), with the gaps in the current response.
2. Intervention logic: theory of change, logical framework, justification of the choice of modalities and areas.
3. Methodology and quality: standards applied (Sphere, sector standards), community participation, protection mainstreaming, gender and disability.
4. Capacities and added value: presence, access, proven experience, partnerships, systems.
5. Risk management: security, fraud and diversion, data protection, with concrete measures.
6. MEAL and accountability.
7. Budget and value for money: consistent with the activities, justified unit costs.
8. Sustainability and exit: what will remain, who will carry it.

What sets a winning proposal apart: evidence (figures from your previous projects, evaluation results), precision (names of localities, numbers, a realistic timeline) and consistency (the same number of beneficiaries in the narrative, the logframe and the budget). A single numerical inconsistency is often enough to lose several points.

4Managing the donor relationship

The relationship with a donor is one of trust based on transparency. Donor programme officers hate surprises: a delay, an incident or underspending announced early with an action plan strengthens credibility; the same facts discovered in a final report destroy it.

• Before: know the donor's priorities (country strategies, guidance notes), take part in consultations and coordination meetings, share your analyses.
• During: reports on time, well-prepared field visits, proactive communication of changes, compliance with visibility rules.
• After: a quality final report, sharing of evaluations and lessons, including failures.

Advocacy with donors is also part of the relationship: flagging unmet needs, rules that hinder action (for example verification requirements incompatible with data protection), or the need for more flexible funding. It is done with data and, where possible, collectively through NGO forums.

5Private funds, cost of fundraising and ethics

Private funds are valuable because they are often unrestricted. Their economics follow the donor lifetime value: a regular donor recruited for USD 150 who gives USD 20 a month for an average of 4 years brings in about USD 960, a return of more than 6 to 1 on the acquisition investment. The key indicators are the cost of fundraising per dollar raised, the donor retention rate and the return on investment by channel.

Partnerships with companies require due diligence: excluded sectors (arms, tobacco, companies involved in human rights violations in the area of operation), no conflict of interest, respect for independence and for the image of the people assisted. Companies can bring more than money: logistics skills, telecommunications, payment technologies.

The ethics of communication is a major reputational issue: informed consent for every image, no images that undermine dignity, protection of children and survivors, and rejection of "poverty porn". The principles of the Code of Conduct for the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs (1994) call for presenting the people assisted as dignified human beings, not as objects of pity.