I recently reviewed the 2026 State of Grantseeking Report and the accompanying Benchmarker data. While the findings are presented as trends and benchmarks, for many of us leading small and grassroots organizations, they read less like new information and more like confirmation of what we are already living every day.
Across both reports, a consistent pattern is clear: funding increases with organizational size, age, and capacity. Smaller and newer organizations, particularly those with budgets under $100,000, are operating with significantly fewer resources, receiving smaller grant awards, and often navigating funding cycles with little to no stability.
The Role of Nonprofit Size and Age
The data shows that small organizations report median grant funding of just over $10,000, compared to approximately $200,000 across all respondents. Younger organizations, particularly those in their first five years, receive dramatically less total funding than their more established counterparts. At the same time, a significant percentage of small nonprofits receive either no grants at all or only one per year. Recurring funding, which provides stability and allows for long-term planning, is also largely absent for these organizations.
This is not a small gap. It is a structural reality.
The reports also highlight that success in gantseeking increases with the number of applications submitted. On the surface, this suggests a clear strategy: apply more, receive more. But this finding overlooks a critical factor. Submitting more applications requires time, staffing, and infrastructure, resources that smaller organizations often do not have. The same reports identify lack of time and staff as the most significant barrier to gantseeking. This creates a cycle that is difficult to break: organizations without funding cannot hire staff, and without staff, they cannot compete effectively for funding.
This is not simply a matter of effort. It is a matter of access.
In 2026 alone, our four-year-old organization has submitted 21 grant applications. Five have already been denied, and others remain pending. This level of activity reflects the reality for many small nonprofits. We are applying. We are doing the work. We are engaging the process. And yet, outcomes remain uncertain within a system that increasingly rewards scale and existing capacity. In 2025, we received two small grants totaling $7,000.
Government Funding
The reports also make clear that larger organizations are more likely to access government funding, which tends to provide significantly larger awards. Federal grants, in particular, are both substantial and more accessible to organizations with established infrastructure. Smaller and younger organizations are largely absent from this level of funding, not because the need is not there, but because the entry requirements are often out of reach.
At the same time, the 2026 findings note the impact of federal funding disruptions, which have affected organizations’ ability to apply for expected funding, maintain awards, and sustain programs. In the current funding climate, these shifts are not experienced equally. Smaller organizations, already operating with limited resources, feel these disruptions first and most deeply.
Grassroots and Advocacy Work
Another finding that cannot be overlooked is the minimal level of funding directed toward grassroots and advocacy work. The organizations closest to communities—those building trust, responding in real time, and addressing immediate needs—are often the least funded. This creates a disconnect between where impact is happening and where resources are flowing. When grassroots organizations are excluded from funding, the communities they serve are effectively excluded as well.
These findings, taken together, do not describe a neutral system. They describe a funding structure—one that consistently directs resources toward larger, more established institutions while leaving smaller and emerging organizations to operate with minimal support and limited opportunity for growth.
And yet, these smaller organizations are often the ones doing the most community-centered, culturally responsive, and immediate work. They are trusted. They are present. They are essential.
If we are serious about equity in the nonprofit sector, we must look beyond outcomes and examine the conditions that produce them. This includes reconsidering budget thresholds, expanding access to early-stage capacity funding, and investing in infrastructure for organizations that are still building. It also means recognizing that readiness is not just a measure of organizational maturity, but a reflection of the resources that have been made available.
The question is no longer whether small and grassroots nonprofits are struggling. The data makes that clear. The question is whether the current funding landscape is willing to evolve in a way that includes them.
Because waiting until organizations are “ready” often means waiting until many of them are gone.
