Hello, I am learning the ropes doing fundraising as a volunteer, and hope to progress with this as a career. I often wonder about the perculiar writing style used by professional trust fundraisers, in which "the Trust" and "the Charity" are referred to (which is especially confusing when there are two charities in question), with a big emphasis on Capitals! Why is this? I feel that proposals should be readable, clear, concise and unpretentious. I keep coming across past proposals and correspondence in which "the Trustees" are thanked, requests for funding are made to "the Trust", and so on. Why is this? The proposals end up reading like a legal document, and I wonder if referring to official charity documents during funding research is the reason that this style has been adopted? Isn't it better to refer to "the trustees of the ZYX Trust" and say "thanks for your help" (direct) not "thanks to the Trustees" as if parties A and B are discussing a third P(!)arty.
And finally, so we're in fundraising. So we write applications. The NCVO website offers “Advice on Fundraising Applications”. I keep reading about "Fundraising Applications". Surely this is wrong. We don't apply for permission to fundraise. We apply for funds. Fundraisers write FUNDING applications?
But then I could be confused and ignorant without understanding the correct Fundraising protocol, etc.
Interested to hear others' thoughts and opinions on this.
Thanks all.
RE: English language. T/trust fundraisers' manual of style?
The probable reason for there being no overall style guide is that all funders' requirements are so different. I don't think that this is necessarily a good thing or even, in many cases, strictly necessary.
The funders' own guidelines and website are obviously an excellent indicator for the type of language they prefer.
Generally, it's worth remembering that a foundation's trustees are volunteers - just like yours. They therefore deserve to enjoy their volunteering, and you can make life a lot easier for them by writing an engaging application rather than trying to sound Very Clever. It doesn't impress us by making us think "Wow, they really know their stuff". It's more likely to bore us, frankly.
Strictly correct grammar, spelling and good English are less important than a sense that your charity a) really knows what it is talking about b) is passionate in its belief of the value of its work. If someone has evidently taken care with their application, I'm not going to get pedantic about grocers' apostrophes, excessive capitalisation or other linguistic sin. Especially bearing in mind that we receive many applications from groups for whom English is a second language - there is no way I would be able to do as good a job in their languages.
Having said that, we do of course need to be able to understand what you're talking about. Whatever the format of the application - form, proposal, letter and whatever the content - plain English (www.plainenglish.co.uk), use of active voice, evidence of 'ownership' (talk about what "we are planning/doing") - are all engaging. Jargon, passive voice and referring to your organisation as it/they are turnoffs - if *you* sound disengaged from your work, how can you expect funders, who aren't doing it, to get excited about it?
RE: English language. T/trust fundraisers' manual of style?
Howard is right, of course - there is no style guide, and I find the best way is to write in the way which seems most comfortable for you. Short, sweet and to the point are all good principles.
I have great fun working with a variety of groups, and trying to ensure that each application reflects the organisation and not me - I have a tendency to prolixity which sits ill with many clients and their projects!
Cheers
Gerry
RE: English language. T/trust fundraisers' manual of style?
Well put! I agree that there is some poor use of language in the fundraising sector. Given that communicating accurately and effectively is a key element of successful fundraising, I think this laxity could weaken fundraisers' effectiveness.
Capitals are certainly not required in the example you give, and I think you are right that such a style has been derived from legal or business documents.
The applications that fundraisers write are indeed "funding applications", or applications for funding, and not "fundraising applications" which would, as you suggest, mean applications for fundraising.
I have tried over the years on UK Fundraising to adopt a clear and accurate style, although I can't claim to have achieved conciseness. If you spot spelling or grammatical errors in the site's news items and editorial then do please point them out.
I do not recall having come across a fundraisers' style manual, but should be very interested to learn of one.