Most organisations answer the same grant questions from scratch, every time

What is your organisation? Who do you support? What difference does your work make? Why now? These questions appear in almost every grant application. And most small charities, CICs and community organisations answer them again from memory each time, in slightly different ways, under time pressure.

AI tools like ChatGPT and Claude can help. But they only produce strong, specific output when they have real knowledge to work from. Without it, the text is fluent but generic - and you end up editing heavily anyway.

This guide shows you how to build up from scratch: starting with a free tool that asks you the right questions, then moving to something you own and can reuse, and finally pointing to what a fully structured system looks like.

Start with the AI Bunny: free, instant, no setup

1
Starting point

The Charity Excellence AI Bid Writer

The Charity Excellence Framework offers a free AI bid-writing tool - the AI Bunny - that works well as a starting point. You register, answer a structured set of questions about your organisation and the project you need funding for, and it produces a draft application of up to 1,000 words.

The questions it asks are a useful prompt in themselves. Thinking through your answers carefully - even before touching AI - is already most of the work.

When this is the right starting point: you want to try AI grant writing without any setup or cost, or you want to test what your answers sound like before going further.

Its one limitation: the AI Bunny has no memory of your organisation. Every time you use it, you start from scratch. The answers you write this time cannot be drawn on next time - which means the work of gathering your information is repeated with every application.

Access the Charity Excellence AI Bid Writer →

Store your knowledge in your own AI project folder

The step up from Level 1 is straightforward in concept: instead of answering the same questions every time, you write them down once, store them where your AI can see them, and draw on them for each new application. Your knowledge builds up rather than starting over.

2
Reusable approach

Five steps to your own grant knowledge folder

A
Which AI tool to use

You need an AI tool that supports a persistent "Project" or "Gem" - a space where your knowledge document stays available across every conversation, so you are not re-uploading it each time. The good news: for a single document like the one in Level 2, the free tiers of several major tools now work reasonably well.

Claude Free or Pro
Free · or Pro ~£18/month · Anthropic
Projects are available on the free tier, with unlimited files per project (up to 30MB each). For a single knowledge document, the free tier works. Pro adds higher message limits and access to stronger models.
Gemini Free or Advanced
Free · or Advanced ~£19/month · Google
Gems (custom AI configurations with uploaded knowledge) are available on the free tier and work well for a single document. A natural fit if your organisation already uses Google Workspace. Advanced adds spreadsheet and code file support and a larger context window.
ChatGPT Plus recommended
Free limited · Plus ~£20/month · OpenAI
The free tier allows only 3 file uploads per day, making consistent project use more cumbersome. ChatGPT Plus is the more reliable option here, with up to 20 files per project and the most widely tested workflow for this approach.
Microsoft Copilot
Included in some M365 plans
May already be available if your organisation uses Microsoft 365. Check with your IT contact - it could mean no extra cost.

Where free tiers start to hit a wall is when you want to store many files across multiple modules - which matters more for a full Funding Knowledge Base (Level 3) than for the single-document approach here. For now, any of the above will get you started.

B
Set it up safely first

Before storing anything, turn off training data sharing. In ChatGPT: Settings → Data controls → turn off "Improve the model for everyone." Gemini and Claude have equivalent settings. This means your content is not used to train the AI.

Never enter:

Names of individual beneficiaries Contact details or addresses Safeguarding records Medical or health information Bank details or financial data Staff personal information

Safe to enter:

Organisation description Activities and services Outcomes and impact Aggregated statistics Anonymised quotes (role only) Published income figures Past successful grant language
C
Build your knowledge document - one section at a time

Create a Project in your chosen AI tool and upload a plain text knowledge document. Use the Charity Excellence question set as your framework - the same four sections their AI Bid Writer uses. Open each section below to see the questions and guidance to follow.

Aim for at least 50 words per answer. Use plain paragraphs and avoid heavy formatting like bullet points. Write what is true and evidenced, not what sounds impressive.

A pre-formatted template is ready to download - all four sections already structured with every question, ready for you to fill in and upload to your AI Project.

Download the knowledge document template

These four content areas are the sections of the knowledge document. Open each one to see what to include.

The funder probably knows nothing about you. Tell them about your charity, what you do and how. Avoid jargon or acronyms they may not understand.

What is your organisation's name? Write: The name of our charity / community group / CIC is…
What kind of organisation are you? Small charity, registered charity, volunteer-led community group? If you are not registered, make sure to say that you have a constitution and trustees or management committee.
How big are you? Something like: our annual income is… Or, if newly set up: we only recently formed and estimate that our income this year will be…
Who does your organisation support and where? Make sure the groups and location are eligible for the funder you are applying to. If you specifically support any groups that are a priority for the funder, make sure to include this.
Write a short statement describing your organisation and the services or support it provides. Tell the funder about your charity, what you do and how. If the bid is for an area or activity in which you have particular expertise, access or capabilities, include this.

You can reuse most of these answers across future bids - write them well once and adapt, not rewrite.

This is the core of any application. It is not about what you want - it is about what the funder wants and what your beneficiaries need.

Why is your charitable project or activity needed? What is the unmet need you will address? It is not about what you want, but what the funder wants and what your beneficiaries need. Use data and evidence to support this.
What makes funding your project so urgent and/or important? There is huge competition for grant funding - what makes your project particularly urgent and/or important? If there has been any recent media coverage or research reports that make this issue topical, you might reference these.
Tell me about any key dates and, if applicable, how long it will last. Include any key dates, bearing in mind that many funders meet quarterly or even annually.
Describe what your project will involve, how it will be delivered, where and/or by whom, including any partners. Funders want to see that you have a practical, deliverable plan that will address the need they fund. Give them the information needed to show that you do.
Outcomes are the difference your project will make - list these, including who will benefit, the numbers, and how big an impact this will have on them. Funders want to make a difference, so show them that your project will. How many will benefit and how big an impact will this have on their lives?
Will there be other benefits, such as impact on the wider community, helping you make the activity sustainable, or creating best practice that will be shared? Your project may have wider or long-term impact - for example, reducing anti-social behaviour in the local community, or making a change in someone's life that will impact them for the rest of their lives.
How will you know or measure that your project has been a success, and how will you report that to the funder? That might be the numbers who benefit and/or feedback surveys, or some other measure of the change you will have made. Funders like to hear about the impact they have - will you produce a report, or write to them? Will you recognise their support on your website, materials or at an event?

For project-specific questions (dates, partners, particular outcomes), write a version for your current project. For the need and urgency, write something that can be reused and updated over time.

Funders want to know what they will be paying for and that your budget is reasonable. Be clear and proportionate.

What amount of funding are you requesting? If it is only some of the funding you need, write "a contribution of…" - for example: We are seeking grant funding of £3,000, or a contribution of £500 towards the total cost of £3,000. If you have already secured some income, mention that to show others think your project is worth funding.
Provide a simple breakdown of what you will spend this funding on and the amount for each item. Include the main headings and amounts for each budget line. Funders want to know what they will be paying for and that your budget is reasonable.

Never enter bank details, account numbers or payment information in any AI tool. Budget totals and narrative descriptions are safe.

These are the details that move a competent application to a compelling one. Build this section up over time as you gather evidence and feedback.

Is there anything else that will make your funding bid really compelling? Have you won an award, achieved accreditation, work to a quality framework or hold a quality mark that demonstrates the quality of your work? What about facts or data on previous activities or years that shows how effective you are? Or perhaps that demand for your services has increased significantly, or that you have had really positive feedback.
Do you have any quotes that show the impact you have on people's lives? Including a relevant quote can help to engage the funder and demonstrate the impact you have - attribute by name or "anonymous." People give to people. For example: a parent who attended last year's sessions said "It was absolutely brilliant and I made lots of new friends."

For quotes, use role titles or "anonymous" - never include full names or any identifying details about the people you support.

D
Three steps to use every session

The AI does not automatically read your knowledge document when you open a new conversation - even inside a Project. Follow these three steps in order at the start of every drafting session.

First - load your document into context

Paste this when you open a new conversation "Please read [name of your file] from this project before we begin. This is my organisation's grant writing knowledge document - it contains all the context you need. Let me know when you have read it and I will tell you what we are working on today."

Replace [name of your file] with the filename you used. If you downloaded the template here, it will be: Grant Knowledge Document Template.txt

Then - share all the application questions at once

Once the AI confirms it has read your document, paste in the full list of questions from the application form - all of them, in one message. This lets the AI see the complete picture before drafting anything, so it can plan how to distribute information across answers without repeating itself in each one.

Finally - set the rules for how it works through them

Paste this after sharing the questions "Now that you can see all the questions, please read through them as a set before we begin. Plan how to distribute information across answers without repeating yourself. Then work through each question one at a time: before drafting each answer, ask me any targeted questions if the knowledge document does not give you enough to write a specific, evidenced response. Do not move to the next question until we have agreed on the current answer. I would rather go back and forth than receive a full set of vague drafts."

This produces a back-and-forth rather than a single dump of all answers. Each answer gets a targeted exchange - the AI surfaces what it needs, you supply it, and the draft is built on real information rather than plausible filler.

E
Expect iteration - and make it compound

First drafts will still need work. The AI will identify gaps; you supply them; the draft improves. When you add new information to answer the AI's questions, add it back to your knowledge document too. Each application, your document gets richer. Each subsequent draft, less iteration is needed.

A genuine step up from Level 1

Level 2 is a meaningful improvement over Level 1. You are no longer answering the same questions from scratch every time. The AI is drawing on real organisational knowledge, and each application builds on the last rather than disappearing. For organisations with the confidence to set it up and maintain it, this is already a significant shift in how grant work feels.

  • The Charity Excellence questions cover roughly 10% of the knowledge a fully structured Funding Knowledge Base holds. That 10% is genuinely useful - but around 90% of the deeper organisational knowledge a complete system draws on is still absent.
  • Repeating yourself remains part of the game. For each new application you still need to guide the AI toward the right angle for that funder, adapt the language, and review the draft. The document reduces repetition but does not eliminate it.
  • Setting up a Project, uploading and maintaining a knowledge document takes some comfort with these tools. Doing it well enough to get genuinely strong output takes practice.
  • There is no funder intelligence built in. The AI does not know what one funder prioritises versus another. You guide it each time.

If any of this feels like more of a lift than your team can manage right now, that is not a failure of the approach. It is a reasonable point at which to get some guidance. A short conversation can help you decide the right next step →

From a flat document to a complete system

The difference between Level 2 and Level 3 is not about which tool you use to store things. Whether that is a Project folder, Notion, or something else is a practical choice, not the point. The difference is the data model: the architecture of what you store, how it is structured, and what an orchestration layer can do with it.

Building a Funding Knowledge Base is a guided process that takes time, effort and expertise. It is not a solo afternoon task. The good news is that most of the raw material already exists inside your organisation: past applications, monitoring reports, evaluation data, impact case studies, funder correspondence. The build is not about creating content from scratch - it is about structuring what you already have into a form the AI can use precisely and repeatedly.

1 From memory
📝
KnowledgeWhat you remember + documents you can find in time
🔄
Per applicationGather from scratch
AI asks for moreNearly always - very little to draw on
Generic output
2 Flat document
📄
KnowledgeOne document with four CE sections
🔄
Per applicationLoad, prompt carefully, iterate
AI asks for moreOften - gaps remain, funder intel missing
Better, needs editing
3 Knowledge Base
🏗️
KnowledgeStructured modules + orchestration layer
Per applicationLoad modules, orchestrate, draft
AI asks for moreRarely - it is already there by design
Application-ready
3
Grant Resource Studio™

What a Funding Knowledge Base is - and why it changes the output

This is what Grant Resource Studio™ builds and maintains with organisations as a guided engagement. A Funding Knowledge Base is not a bigger document - it is a structured architecture of distinct, purpose-built modules, each with a specific job, maintained separately, and usable independently or in combination. Open any section below to go deeper.

Organisational IntelligenceYour mission, Theory of Change, delivery model, outcomes logic, governance, partnerships, policies, systems, working methods and organisational voice, structured as reusable source material.
Case for SupportYour funder-ready narrative, covering evidence of need, activities, beneficiaries, outcomes and impact, measurement and evaluation, track record and added value.
Grant Application Reference InformationPast application responses, successful wording, reusable examples, and requirements from previous funders and application forms, so future bids can build on what has already been submitted.

These modules are held together by an orchestration layer - a set of rules that tells the AI which modules to load for which funder and application type, how to weight them, what the funder prioritises, and how to adapt your voice and evidence to their specific programme. It also gives the AI two operational modes: a fast first-draft mode for lower-stakes applications, and a deeper mode for strategic bids where it reviews modules carefully and asks clarifying questions before drafting.

Why the "ask me questions first" prompt becomes largely unnecessary at Level 3. In Level 2, that instruction is essential because gaps are common in a flat document. In Level 3, those gaps are filled by design. The orchestration layer already knows what a specific application needs and which modules provide it. When the AI does ask for more, it signals the knowledge base needs updating - not that you need to provide more context in the moment.

The Theory of Change and Case for Support are the two components that make the biggest difference to output quality, and the two that take real time, expertise and iteration to develop well. A flat document typically lacks both, or contains thin versions. Getting them right - with the right evidence, the right logic and the right voice - is most of the work of a guided build. Historical applications and funder intelligence then layer on top, turning the system from a strong knowledge base into one that learns and compounds with every application submitted.

The guided build draws on everything the organisation already has: past bids that worked, monitoring data sitting in spreadsheets, evaluations written for funders, strong passages from old applications. None of that is wasted. It gets structured, approved and made reusable rather than left scattered. That is what makes the process less painful than it might sound - and what distinguishes it from starting from scratch.

If you have been working at Level 2 and starting to feel its limits - the repetition that remains, the gaps the AI keeps surfacing, the sense that your knowledge is there but not quite organised enough - a complete Funding Knowledge Base is the natural next step. The raw material is already in your organisation, and nothing you have already written at Level 2 is wasted.

See the output difference concretely - the same funder question answered from memory, pieced together by hand, and from a structured Funding Knowledge Base:

See the difference for yourself →

And what it produced for Early Years Cocoon - a CIC in Barking and Dagenham - in the 18 months since their Funding Knowledge Base went live:

Read the Early Years Cocoon case study →


Want help building something more robust?

If you would like to find out what a full Grant Readiness engagement involves - or just to talk through where your organisation is with its grant knowledge - book a free discovery call.

A free resource from Grant Resource Studio™. Built for charities, CICs and community organisations in the UK.