A trusts strategy should show how the target will be reached

A charity wants to raise £100,000 from trusts next year.

That is a useful ambition. It is not yet a strategy.

The first question is simple: where is the £100,000 actually going to come from?

It might come from one or two larger grants, several medium sized awards, a wider programme of smaller applications, or a mixture of all three. The answer will be different for every charity. What matters is whether there is a plausible route from the target to the income.

A strategy should make that route visible. It should show what the charity is starting with, where the strongest opportunities may lie, what could get in the way, and what the team needs to do next.

Start with the current position

Before setting an application programme, look at what is already known.

How much has the charity raised from trusts in recent years? Which awards are likely to be one off, and which relationships might be renewed or developed? Are there funders that know the organisation well? Are there lapsed relationships worth revisiting?

Then look at the work the charity wants to fund. Is the need clear? Is there good evidence? Are the outcomes specific enough? Is the budget ready? Can the team provide the information and decisions needed to keep applications moving?

Capacity matters too. A promising list of funders is not much use if nobody has time to research them properly, gather the evidence, agree the ask, write the application and manage the relationship afterwards.

This review may confirm that the target is realistic. It may show that the target needs more time, better evidence or a different mix of opportunities. Either result is useful, because it gives the charity something real to plan from.

Build a plausible route to income

There is no standard formula for dividing a trusts target between large, medium and small grants.

For a £100,000 target, one charity might have a strong prospect for a significant renewal and need to find the balance elsewhere. Another might have no established trust relationships and need a broader programme of carefully chosen applications. A third might be developing a new service that is attractive to funders but still needs stronger evidence and a settled budget.

These are planning examples, not forecasts. Each part of the target should be supported by named prospects or a clear route to finding them.

For each part of the income mix, ask:

1. Which funders are genuinely eligible and a good fit?

2. What is a sensible amount to request from each one?

3. What evidence, budget and approvals will be needed?

4. When could an application be made, and when might a decision arrive?

5. How confident is the team, and what is that confidence based on?

If the total depends on a small number of uncertain awards, the strategy should say so. If a large part of the target still has no credible source, that should be visible too. Hiding the gap does not make the plan stronger.

Make the SWOT earn its place

A SWOT can be useful, but only if it leads to decisions.

A strength might be a clear record of delivery, strong evidence of need or a relationship with an existing funder. A weakness might be an unsettled budget, limited outcome data or a case for support that is too broad. An opportunity might be a new funding programme that clearly fits the work. A threat might be the end of a major grant or a timetable that leaves too little time for good applications.

The important step is what happens next.

A strength could justify a more confident approach to a particular funder. A weakness could become an action to gather evidence or agree the budget. An opportunity could move into the priority pipeline. A threat could lead the charity to revise the timing or reduce its dependence on one uncertain application.

If the SWOT does not change a priority, an action or an assumption, it is probably just taking up space.

Join the strategy to the pipeline

The strategy sets the direction. The pipeline should turn that direction into work.

Every priority funder should have a clear reason for inclusion. The record should show what the charity wants to fund, a realistic ask, the evidence still needed, the likely timing, the level of confidence and the next action. It should also be clear who owns that action.

Confidence is not a promise of success. It is a way of distinguishing a strong, well evidenced opportunity from one that still depends on unanswered questions.

This is where a long list becomes a working plan. The team can see what is ready, what needs development and what should be set aside.

Review the assumptions

A trusts strategy should not sit untouched for a year.

New information will change the picture. A funder may close a programme, alter its priorities or decline an application. A charity may strengthen its evidence, secure part of the target or decide that a project needs to change.

Set regular review points and ask whether the original assumptions still hold. Is the pipeline producing enough credible applications? Are decisions arriving when expected? Is the average ask realistic? Does the team have the capacity the plan assumed?

The purpose is not to keep rewriting the strategy. It is to make timely decisions when the evidence changes.

A twenty minute check

Take the annual trusts target and write down three figures:

1. Income that could reasonably come from current supporters, renewals or relationships already in development.

2. Income linked to credible new prospects that have been researched and prioritised.

3. The remaining gap.

Under each figure, name the likely funders and the next action. Then check whether the team has the time and information needed to carry out those actions.

If the figures do not add up, or too much of the target sits in the unexplained gap, the strategy needs more work before the charity increases the volume of applications.

What a good strategy achieves

A target can focus attention, but it becomes useful only when it is connected to evidence, funder fit, capacity and action.

No strategy can guarantee £100,000, or any other amount. A good one can test whether the target is feasible, show where the income could come from, make the important assumptions clear and give the team a practical plan to work from.