It is one of the most common words in a funding announcement, and one of the least defined. "We are seeking innovative approaches. Priority will be given to innovative solutions. Describe what is innovative about your program."
Reasonable people read that word and start to panic a little. Does the funder want us to reinvent our program? Do we need an app? Should we mention artificial intelligence somewhere, just in case?
Take a breath. Here is what innovative is usually asking for, and what it almost never is.
What it usually doesn’t mean
It doesn’t mean reinventing your entire program model from scratch to sound new.
It doesn’t mean chasing the latest technology or buzzword because it sounds current, whether or not it fits your program.
And it doesn’t mean borrowing a trend that has nothing to do with the specific needs of the community you actually serve.
Funders reviewing hundreds of proposals in a cycle can spot novelty for its own sake almost immediately. It doesn’t read as strength. It reads as a proposal trying to sound impressive instead of trying to be true.
What funders are typically asking
Strip away the word itself, and most funders are really asking a version of these questions.
How is your approach different from, or an improvement on, the standard response to this problem? What are you doing that reflects current evidence, meaningful community input, or a lesson your organization learned from something that didn’t work as well as hoped?
In a funder’s language, innovative is usually shorthand for show me you have thought critically about this problem. It is not shorthand for surprise me.
How to answer well
Start by naming the standard approach in your field, briefly, so the funder has context for what you are improving on. You cannot show a departure from the baseline if you never describe the baseline.
Then describe specifically what your organization is doing differently, and why. Not differently for its own sake. Differently because it is more effective, more responsive to the community, or more sustainable.
Ground that “why” in evidence or community voice, not in the word innovative itself. A proposal that explains its reasoning clearly rarely needs to label itself as innovative. The reviewer will notice on their own.
A caution
Don’t force innovation language onto a proven, reliable program just because the word appears in the guidelines.
A strong, well run program that consistently delivers results is a legitimate answer to a funder’s needs, even if nothing about it is new this year. Funders can tell when the word innovative has been pasted onto business as usual, and it undermines the credibility of everything else in the proposal. Reviewers read a lot of proposals. They notice when a word is doing work the content isn’t backing up.
A quick self check before you use the word
Before you write the word innovative into a proposal, ask:
- Have we named the standard approach we are improving on?
- Can we explain specifically what we are doing differently, in plain language?
- Is that difference grounded in evidence or community input, not just novelty?
Would this section still be convincing if we deleted the word innovative entirely?
If the answer to that last question is no, the section needs more substance, not a stronger adjective.
It isn’t about being first. It is about being able to explain, clearly, why your approach is the right one for the problem in front of you.
The Grantsmanship Center helps organizations build the planning, proposal development, funder research, and grants management skills needed to pursue funding with clarity and confidence. For more information, visit our website: tgci.com
Get funding. Create change.
