Why Grant Applications Fail | ARK Group International

In short

Most grant applications are rejected for one of three reasons: the business or project was not eligible, the application scored lower than others against the funder’s criteria, or the money ran out first. Only the second depends on how well you write, and all three can be planned for before you apply.

A rejection email rarely says much. It thanks you for applying, mentions the high number of strong applications, and leaves you to work out what went wrong.

This guide explains how funders sift and score applications, the seven reasons behind most rejections, and what assessors look for instead. It is written for founders and leaders of small and growing businesses, social enterprises and charities in Africa, applying to foundations, development funds and challenge funds.

Key takeaways

Rejection is the usual outcome. The Tony Elumelu Foundation received more than 200,000 applications for 3,000 places in 2025, and recent GSMA Innovation Fund rounds funded between 1% and 3% of applicants.
Many applications are never scored. They fail an eligibility check before an assessor reads them.
Assessors score your answers against published criteria, and funders pay from the top of the ranking down until the money runs out.
A well-prepared application leaves you with a sharper plan, better evidence and stronger relationships, whatever the decision.

How often are grant applications rejected?

Far more often than they are funded. The Tony Elumelu Foundation, one of the largest funders of early-stage businesses in Africa, received more than 200,000 applications from all 54 African countries (opens in a new tab) for its 2025 programme and selected 3,000 entrepreneurs. That is about one applicant in 70. Each received US$5,000 in seed capital.

Larger grants are just as competitive. The GSMA Innovation Fund, which backs start-ups and small businesses in low- and middle-income countries, many of them in Africa, selected 10 grantees from 413 applications (opens in a new tab) in its Humanitarian Challenges round and 8 from 598 (opens in a new tab) in its Mobile Internet Adoption round.

How many applicants recent African and international funds selected
Fund	Applications	Awards	Share funded
Tony Elumelu Foundation Entrepreneurship Programme, 2025	More than 200,000	3,000	Under 1.5%
GSMA Innovation Fund for Digital Urban Services	335	10	3.0%
GSMA Innovation Fund for Humanitarian Challenges	413	10	2.4%
GSMA Innovation Fund for Mobile Internet Adoption	598	8	1.3%

Percentages are calculated from the published numbers of applications and awards.

The practical point is that a rejection on its own tells you very little about the quality of your application. When far more money is requested than a fund holds, even very good applications go unfunded.

How do funders decide which applications to fund?

Most funders work through the same three stages, and an application can fail at any of them.

Eligibility and scopeRight kind of organisation, country, size, amount and purpose?If it fails hereNot assessed at all
Scoring and rankingAssessors score each answer, and the applications are ranked.If it fails hereOutscored by others
Due diligenceGovernance, finances and capacity are checked.If it fails hereNot ready to hold the grant
FundedFrom the top of the ranking down, until the budget is spent.

Where grant applications drop out

Eligibility and scope. Before anyone scores your application, the funder checks that you are the right kind of organisation, in an eligible country, asking for an amount within the limits, for a project that fits what the fund is for. The GSMA Innovation Fund states that projects which do not meet its eligibility criteria will not be considered (opens in a new tab). Some funds take only private companies as lead applicants, so a charity or non-profit cannot lead the application - and vice versa.
Scoring and ranking. Eligible applications go to assessors, often independent specialists, who score each answer against published criteria. The Tony Elumelu Foundation, for example, has its selection carried out by Ernst & Young (opens in a new tab). Applications are then ranked, and the highest-scoring are put forward for funding.
Due diligence. Shortlisted applicants are checked for governance, financial management and capacity to deliver. The GSMA notes that the number of grantees it finally approves can be lower than the number recommended (opens in a new tab), depending on what due diligence finds.

Knowing which stage you fell at is the most useful thing to find out after a rejection, because each one calls for a different fix.

Seven reasons grant applications are rejected

1. You are not eligible, or the project is out of scope

This is the most avoidable reason on the list. The organisation is the wrong legal form, is registered in the wrong country, is too large or too new, or the project sits outside what the fund exists to pay for.

What assessors look for instead: a project that matches the fund’s stated purpose in the funder’s own terms. If you have to stretch the description of your work to make it fit, it probably does not.

2. You have not shown why you need a grant

Funders want to know what the grant makes possible that would not happen otherwise. If a bank loan, an investor or your own revenue could pay for the work, a grant is hard to justify.

What assessors look for instead: a clear account of what happens with the grant and what happens without it, and why commercial finance alone will not do the job at this stage.

3. Your claims are not backed by evidence

Statements such as “there is strong demand” or “our solution is unique” carry no weight unless something supports them.

What assessors look for instead: numbers, sources and proof. Sales records, pilot results, customer letters, independent research and named partners all count. One figure that can be checked is worth more than a paragraph of adjectives.

4. The plan is unclear or unrealistic

Assessors need to see how the idea becomes a sequence of achievable actions. Applications fail when the plan is unfocused, the timetable is optimistic, or nobody is named as responsible for delivery. Past GSMA grantees advise (opens in a new tab) building on what has already worked with your customers, rather than innovating for its own sake.

What assessors look for instead: milestones with dates, named people with relevant experience, and an honest list of risks with what you will do about each one.

5. The impact is vague

“Improving lives” and “supporting the community” describe an intention, not a result. Funders are accountable for what their money achieves, so they favour applications that say who benefits, how many, by when, and how it will be measured.

What assessors look for instead: specific outcomes, each with a measure attached, and a credible way of collecting the data.

6. The budget does not add up, or match funding is not secured

A budget that is rounded, padded or disconnected from the activities described undermines everything else in the application. Many funds also expect you to put in money of your own: the Africa Enterprise Challenge Fund, for example, requires companies to match the funding it provides (opens in a new tab). Not being able to show that money is a common reason for rejection.

What assessors look for instead: a costed budget in which every line ties to an activity, with quotes or assumptions shown, and written evidence of any match funding.

7. The organisation does not look ready to manage the money

A strong project can still fail at due diligence. Out-of-date accounts, weak financial controls, missing policies or unclear ownership all raise the same question: can this organisation receive, spend and report on donor money?

What assessors look for instead: up-to-date accounts, clear governance, the policies the funder asks for, and a record of delivering what you said you would.

And one reason that has nothing to do with you

Sometimes a fund is simply oversubscribed. When 598 organisations apply for 8 awards, most strong applications are turned down too. This is why it pays to apply to the right funds rather than to the most funds.

The seven reasons, and what to show instead
Reason for rejection	Stage	What assessors want to see instead
Not eligible or out of scope	1	A project that fits the fund’s purpose without stretching
Need for the grant not shown	2	What the grant makes possible that would not happen otherwise
Claims without evidence	2	Figures, sources and proof that can be checked
Unclear or unrealistic plan	2	Dated milestones, named people, risks with responses
Vague impact	2	Specific outcomes with a measure for each
Weak budget or no match funding	2 and 3	Every cost tied to an activity; match funding in writing
Organisation not ready	3	Up-to-date accounts, clear governance, required policies

What do grant assessors look for?

Assessors look for evidence that answers the question asked, set out so that it is easy to score. They often work through many applications against a fixed scoring guide, and they are not looking for beautiful writing. Across most funds, the scoring comes down to six questions:

Fit. Does this project do what the fund exists to do?
Need. Is the problem real, and is the grant necessary?
Credibility. Can this team deliver, and what shows it?
Deliverability. Is the plan specific, realistic and properly costed?
Value. Is the impact worth the money requested?
Legacy. What continues after the grant ends?

The last of these is where many applications are weakest. Funders want to know that their grant is a step towards a business that can sustain itself or attract other funding, not a substitute for one.

Two habits help. First, answer each question in the order it is asked, using the funder’s own headings and terms, so the assessor can find every point. Second, ask someone outside the business to read the application against a scoring criteria before you submit.

What should you do after a grant rejection?

Find out where you fell. Ineligible, out of scope, outscored or stopped at due diligence: each calls for a different response.
Ask for feedback. Not every funder gives it. The GSMA Innovation Fund, for example, gives feedback only to applicants who reached the full proposal stage (opens in a new tab). Even so, it costs nothing to ask.
Check the rules on reapplying. Some funders limit how often the same or a similar application can be submitted, and a new round may have different assessors.
Decide whether to fix or redirect. If the weakness was evidence, budget or clarity, strengthen it and reapply. If it was fit, look for a fund whose purpose matches yours.
Keep what you built. The business case, budget, evidence and policies you put together can support the next application, project proposals and in conversations with investors.

Why a rejected grant application can still pay off

At ARK Group International we work on the principle that fundraising should strengthen a business whether or not a particular grant is won. An application built around the vision for the business, rather than around the money, leaves you with a clearer strategy, tested numbers and new relationships even when the answer is no.

The same preparation pays off later. Freetown Waste Transformers, a waste-to-energy business in Sierra Leone that ARK advised, was one of 10 start-ups selected from 335 applicants to the GSMA Innovation Fund for Digital Urban Services. The case study ARK co-wrote with ODI Global (opens in a new tab) records that the due diligence the company went through for its grant applications helped prepare it for an investor’s due diligence, ahead of a US$3.9 million investment.

The work that goes into a serious grant application is the same work an investor will later ask for.

That is the idea behind what ARK calls disaggregated blended finance: grants first, to prove the model and reduce risk, then investment.

Frequently asked questions

What is the most common reason grant applications are rejected?

Poor fit is one of the most common and the most avoidable. The applicant is not eligible, or the project falls outside the fund’s scope, so the application is rejected before it is scored. Among applications that are scored, typical weaknesses are an unproven need for the grant and claims that are not backed by evidence.

What share of grant applications in Africa succeed?

It depends on the fund, but usually a small share. The Tony Elumelu Foundation selected 3,000 entrepreneurs from more than 200,000 applications in 2025, and three recent rounds of the GSMA Innovation Fund each funded between 1% and 3% of applicants.

Can you reapply after a grant application is rejected?

Usually, but check the fund’s rules first. Some funders limit how many times the same or a similar application can be submitted. If you reapply, act on the feedback where you agree with it, and do not assume the same assessors will read it.

How long does a grant decision take?

Often several months for a competitive fund. Freetown Waste Transformers waited almost four months for the outcome of its GSMA Innovation Fund application, a period that covered proposal development, due diligence and interviews. Plan your cash flow so the business does not depend on the decision.

Should you get help with a grant application?

Help is most valuable before the writing starts: choosing the right fund, testing eligibility and shaping the project. A well-written application to the wrong fund will still fail. ARK’s Built to Scale accelerator helps African businesses position themselves for grants and investment, with guidance on their applications.

Why grant applications get rejected: a guide for African businesses