What a fantastic reminder in Perth last week about the value of trying something new – and what can happen when we do.
I was attending the 2026 WA FIA Forum, which challenged attendees to Be Bold. It’s a concept with a real potential payoff, but being bold also requires courage – to question what’s always been done, to try something new, to have the conviction to back your cause and your ideas, even when it’s easier not to.
This thinking was alive and well in the discussion I was privileged to facilitate between Angel Robins, Social Sustainability Manager at St John WA, and Carina McBurnie, Senior Manager Partnerships at RAC WA. The pair shared the story behind the St John’s Community Impact Fund – a great example of being bold and inspiring change.
The Fund began when Angel noticed the pressure on ambulance sub-station volunteers in regional communities. Alongside their work, family commitments and volunteer responsibilities, many were also spending time fundraising to meet local community needs. She wondered if there was a way to reduce this burden.
Inspired by a microgrants program in India, Angel developed an idea for a new way of funding the needs of regional communities that would also reduce the fundraising burden on volunteers.
While the solution involved some wonderful strategic thinking – here’s the boldness I love: it wasn’t a polished program. Instead, Angel pitched what she calls “an imperfect program” to prospective partner RAC, after several years of slowly building a relationship with their Community Partnerships team.
What followed was truly collaborative. We often hear timing is everything in major gifts, and this was no exception. Turns out, RAC had been exploring the idea of establishing a grant-making program of their own to promote safety in regional communities. Angel’s new idea landed at just the right time.
Together, they refined the idea into a solution that was mutually beneficial for both organisations, working collaboratively to empower the people closest to the challenges to help identify the solutions.
Admittedly, this exact model isn’t going to work for all charities. But what I love about this case study is the thinking behind it. The ideas and principles embedded in Angel’s idea mirrored much of what RAC (and later, Lotterywest) said they valued.
Here are a few key thoughts from the funders in the room.
Treat your funding proposal like a job application – tailor it!
You wouldn’t submit the same cover letter for every role you apply for, yet many organisations continue to send generic proposals to funders and hope they resonate.
Angel’s proposal may have been imperfect, but it was targeted to someone she knew well. So, she knew the fit was right.
Funders shouldn’t have to work hard to understand why your project aligns with their priorities. Make the connection obvious from your first email and at the start of your proposal. If alignment only becomes apparent on the last page, chances are you’ve left it too late.
Think partnerships, not transactions
Strong partnerships are built on a shared commitment to solving a problem and a willingness to challenge each other’s thinking, respectfully.
In our session, Carina encouraged fundraisers to reconsider the fit if securing a partner’s support would compromise the integrity or intent of the project. It may deliver a short-term win, but it will not work for either party in the long term. Don’t force the proverbial square peg into a round hole!
Grant applications start long before the writing
Another reason Angel’s pitch landed was that she understood the need well. There was a clear issue, and she’d come up with a strong solution.
A model for this thinking can be useful – and later in the day, Melanie Bainbridge, Senior Manager Impact Design & Capability at Lotterywest shared a simple but powerful framework:
Evidence of need → Solution → Outcomes → Measurement
This sequence underpins strong funding applications and successful programs alike. As Mel said, poor applications are rarely writing problems… they’re planning problems.
It’s a sentiment we often share with clients at Strategic Grants. Strong submissions are rarely the result of clever wording or persuasive language alone. They come from clarity of purpose and a logical blueprint for change.
Everyone in fundraising knows the importance of data, and how far it can go when demonstrating need. However, data goes well beyond numbers. Melanie’s session reinforced the value of combining quantitative and qualitative evidence to inform project design as well as to communicate need to funders. Put simply: “Data tells you what is happening. People tell us why.”
When I’m helping our clients with grant applications (do reach out if you’d like help from the Strategic Grants team!), I often remind them that data establishes the scale, urgency and significance of a problem. But it’s stories – that qualitative data -that creates understanding, empathy and connection. Statistics may convince someone that an issue exists, but stories are often what people remember. The best applications don’t choose between the two. They use both.
When I left this event, I was reminded once again where impact comes from. It’s rarely from a perfectly formed idea. It’s from a combination of understanding, the right people, collaboration and – very often – just the right dash of being bold.
Yours in grant writing,
Erica
If you would like to speak to us about your grants program and the support we can offer your organisation with our range of consultancy services or our Grants Expertise Management System – GEMS, please do get in touch with our team. [email protected]
About the author
Erica has over 18 years of experience working in the for-purpose sector. She holds a Bachelor of Science (Health Promotion).