It’s worth pondering if the “artificial” will be evident, and muddy the appeal.
Much has been written about the proper use of AI in education, art and design, and just about every aspect of our modern lives. But what about in fundraising, and specifically as applies to grant writing?
Nonprofit leaders are famously pressed for time—if a magic ChatGPT wand can be waved to alleviate the burden of yet another grant proposal . . . shouldn’t we use it?
Multiple nonprofit groups have asked me about using AI to write proposals, website language, direct mail, and more. When writing for donors (foundations or individuals), AI must remain a tool, not a mission generator. Let me explain.
Nonprofit leaders don’t enter their line of work for lack of passion or care. They know their mission well, but they also need to be able to communicate it well. And authentically. Both in speaking and writing. AI’s greatest danger in this respect is its potential to interfere with a nonprofit staff’s ability to communicate well to donors – and develop relationships with them – and the public by hindering those critical-thinking steps they need to take lest they cause a disconnect between what they write and what they say.
For example, as a donor advisor, I’ll occasionally read a proposal that presents an organization in a clinical way. Jargon and buzzwords everywhere. Then I speak on Zoom with the nonprofit staff and immediately sense their quite-human passion and they express the crisis their mission addresses and exude the urgency of their programmatic needs. The human interaction (albeit via Zoom) can be and should be compelling.
Where was that passion in the proposal? Hence: What’s causing the disconnect?
When developing a general operations proposal or mission statements (what I’ll call “foundational texts”), nonprofit staff must take the time, often a long time, to workshop and write without using AI. They must answer, themselves, a range of important questions: What is the problem their nonprofit is trying to solve? Why should a donor care? How best to describe core programs?
Even if ChatGPT can generate a polished statement or executive summary basically from scratch, where does that leave the staff and their ability to talk about their mission in an occupation where success often comes from humans being relational and creating a camaraderie of belonging?
The process of writing, however imperfect and arduous, is beneficial for its own sake, as it enables the writer a deeper ability to articulate their own mission. This results in the donor, the foundation program officer, and the general public having a better understanding of that mission. It builds trust because there is clarity and unity in the messaging. Trust brings partnership, donations, and growth.
All this to say, AI can still be incredibly helpful—if used as a tool. Here is a practical guideline for using AI as a tool, and for keeping the human at the heart of your mission.
How to keep AI a tool and not the ‘brain’ behind your duties and operation
Step 1. 100% organic human: The first draft of a foundation text, mission/vision statement or general operations proposal needs to come from a human brain. Nonprofit leaders and staff owe it to themselves and to donors to have thought this out (even if it’s clumsily written at first). Again, they'll have to talk about their mission, not just write it, and it’s necessary to go through the ideation and wordsmithing process themselves.
Step 2. ChatGPT away: After the first draft, go ahead and use AI to refine, shorten, suggest, and edit. Find ways to align your proposal with the foundation’s mission, etc.
Step 3. 100% organic human: The finished product should be thoroughly reviewed with human eyes. Remove unnecessary jargon. Debate over terms and land on the right one. Don’t let ChatGPT have the final say. Often, I read proposals that are riddled with "keywords" and typical AI phrasing, and it starts to feel like ChatGPT wrote the whole thing, even if it was just used to edit. This can undermine trust with the donor.
When it comes to mission, efficiency is not the goal
The process of writing creates alignment between what nonprofits say to donors and what they present in a written proposal. It enables them to fully communicate the mission to which they’re devoting their life. The process of writing out these first drafts of foundational texts is good for nonprofit leaders, even if it proves lengthy – it’s time worth taking.
Yes, leaders are busy, but efficiency isn't the goal. The goal is that they know their mission, and relate it well.
And: that donors are confident a human being is behind the page.
