Grant due diligence: what do funders check?

Before collecting attachments, make a list from the application guidance: document requested, period or version required, person responsible and submission route. Treat this as a working list, not a reason to send every record your organisation holds.

For example, “latest accounts” is too vague for an internal task. Record the year end, who has the approved copy and whether the form asks for figures from that same period. If the instructions are unclear, ask the funder which version it needs before uploading a draft.

Check basic eligibility separately. A well-organised document folder cannot resolve a programme restriction on your organisation type. If registration is your concern, start with our guide to applying without registered charity status.

The Community Fund's information-checking guidance looks for consistency between applications, supporting documents and public records. It also expects governing documents to be current, correct and properly signed, and checks trustee or director details against relevant regulators.

For your own review, put the application beside the governing document and any applicable public register entry. Compare the legal name, registration number, address and people responsible for the organisation. Distinguish a project name or everyday trading name from the organisation applying.

Do not silently change an answer to make conflicting records appear to agree. Find out which record is wrong, arrange the appropriate correction, and explain any unresolved discrepancy to the funder. Keep evidence of a correction request if an external record has not yet updated.

When it requests accounts, the Community Fund checks them against other information supplied. Its bank-statement checks include organisational details and whether account management follows the organisation's financial procedures and programme requirements.

A useful preparation step is to write the source beside every financial figure in your draft: document name, reporting period and page or line. Keep past income, current bank balance and the proposed project budget clearly labelled. They answer different questions.

• Accounts: use the requested reporting period and identify the approved version.
• Application figures: trace each figure back to its source and explain any calculation.
• Bank evidence: check the programme's document type and date requirements before obtaining a copy.
• Project budget: check the arithmetic and distinguish requested funding from other contributions.

If you need help separating project costs from shared running costs, use our full cost recovery guide. Do not use a project estimate to fill a field asking for actual annual expenditure.

The Community Fund's risk guidance says named contacts should know about the application and project. It may use their name, home address and date of birth for identity verification through credit reference agencies. It expressly distinguishes this from a credit check: the verification will not appear in a history used when seeking credit.

Before submission, ask each contact to review their own details and the final project summary. Make sure they can find the submitted budget and explain what the organisation proposes to deliver. Use the funder's requested route for personal information; avoid putting it into a widely shared project checklist.

For Community Fund grants, identity checks can also happen during the award, and changes to named contacts must be reported promptly. Build a contact handover into your grant records so an old email address does not become the only route to someone who has left.

In this fictional example, a community group enters £42,000 as last year's income. Its approved accounts show £36,000. The treasurer discovers that the larger figure includes a £6,000 award received after the year end.

The group should first read the form's definition of the reporting period. If it asks for income in the year covered by those accounts, the group should correct the field to £36,000. It can explain the later award separately if relevant, with its receipt date. Changing the accounts to match the draft application would conceal the mistake.

A concise explanation could be: “Our draft included a receipt outside the requested financial year. We have corrected annual income to £36,000 to match the attached approved accounts for [year end]. The £6,000 receipt dated [date] belongs to the following period.” This is an example of a clear correction, not prescribed wording or an accounting ruling.

If the funder asks for clarification, answer each question in order. Use a short log with four fields: question, answer, supporting file and unresolved action. Give an owner and expected completion date for anything outstanding instead of implying it is already fixed.

Before sending your reply:

• Check that each attachment is the version mentioned in the answer.
• Explain corrections and date differences explicitly.
• Confirm that the people named have reviewed the relevant information.
• Keep a copy of the reply and the exact files submitted.
• Ask for clarification where a request remains ambiguous.

Use this review to make the application accurate and understandable. It does not predict an award decision. For help explaining the project itself, see how to write a grant application; for a different funding opportunity, check the funder's own eligibility and evidence requirements afresh.