The Global State of Grant Management in 2025

Grant management is converging worldwide around three forces: digital platforms replacing spreadsheets, artificial intelligence augmenting human judgement, and a shared push towards proportionate, trust-based processes. Yet how these forces play out varies significantly by region, shaped by regulation, funding culture and the maturity of local infrastructure.

The numbers behind this shift are substantial. In the UK, charitable foundations increased grant-making to a record GBP 8.24 billion in 2023-24, a rise of over 6% in real terms (Association of Charitable Foundations, Foundations in Focus 2025). Across the Atlantic, US charitable giving grew to USD 592.5 billion in 2024, with foundation giving alone reaching USD 109.8 billion (Giving USA 2025). The global grant management software market is valued at roughly USD 2.4-3.2 billion in 2025, depending on the analyst, and is growing at a compound annual rate of 8-10% (Precedence Research, 2025).

These are not abstract figures. They represent millions of grant applications processed, millions of monitoring reports submitted, and hundreds of thousands of staff hours spent on administration. The question every funder faces is the same: how do we move money efficiently, account for it transparently, and demonstrate the impact it creates? The answer increasingly involves technology, but the right technology varies by context.

How large is the global grantmaking landscape?

The scale of organised philanthropy and public grantmaking is enormous and still growing in most regions. In the US, the Giving USA 2025 report recorded total charitable giving of USD 592.5 billion in 2024, the largest annual increase in the report's 70-year history. Foundation giving specifically totalled USD 109.8 billion, surpassing the USD 100 billion mark for the third consecutive year (Giving USA, 2025). In the UK, the Association of Charitable Foundations' Foundations in Focus 2025 report showed foundation grant-making rising to GBP 8.24 billion, while Donor-Advised Funds increased distributions by 20% to GBP 2.1 billion. National Lottery distributors added a further GBP 2.4 billion in grants.

The public sector picture is more mixed. Official Development Assistance from OECD Development Assistance Committee members fell 6% in real terms to USD 214.5 billion in 2024, the first drop in five years (OECD, 2025). The UK remained the third-largest donor at USD 18 billion, though its ODA as a proportion of gross national income has fallen from the former 0.7% target.

With over 86,000 grantmaking entities operating globally (Instrumentl, 2025), the infrastructure required to manage this funding is a sector in its own right. Cloud-based deployment now accounts for roughly 65% of new grant management software implementations, reflecting a decisive shift away from on-premise systems and manual processes.

What does grant management look like in the UK?

The UK grantmaking landscape is characterised by strong regulatory infrastructure, a growing trust-based movement, and rapid adoption of digital tools. The Charity Commission for England and Wales provides a public register that makes due diligence straightforward in ways many other jurisdictions lack. Companies House data, OFSI sanctions lists, and the Fundraising Regulator all create a compliance ecosystem that UK-focused platforms can integrate into directly.

The trust-based grantmaking movement has gained considerable momentum. Over 140 grantmakers have signed up to IVAR's eight commitments to open and trusting grant-making, which include light-touch reporting, clearer application processes, and publishing success rates. IVAR's Better Reporting initiative, developed with 16 charities and funders, has produced six principles for making grant reporting more proportionate and useful.

At the same time, demand is surging. Grant applications to UK foundations have risen dramatically, with foundations reporting increases often in the range of 50-60%, and in some cases rising to 100-400% (ACF, 2025). This pressure is driving adoption of AI-assisted screening and assessment tools. Platforms like Plinth now offer automated Charity Commission, Companies House and OFSI checks alongside AI-drafted assessment summaries, allowing grant officers to focus their time on judgement rather than data gathering.

A significant development in UK data protection came in February 2026, when a new charitable "soft opt-in" exemption took effect, allowing charities to contact existing supporters for charitable purposes without explicit marketing consent (Bates Wells, 2026). This simplifies one area of compliance burden, though GDPR requirements for processing grant applicant data remain unchanged.

How does the US approach differ?

The US grantmaking ecosystem is shaped by its CRM heritage, a strong culture of data-driven decision-making, and an increasingly complex regulatory environment at federal and state level. Foundation giving of USD 109.8 billion in 2024 was driven in part by strong stock market performance, which lifted foundation endowment values (Giving USA, 2025).

The American approach to grant management technology reflects this scale. Large foundations have historically built around Salesforce or similar CRM platforms, customising them extensively for grantmaking workflows. This has created powerful but often expensive and complex systems that require dedicated technical staff to maintain.

A distinctive US trend is the rapid growth of Donor-Advised Funds, which now represent a significant channel for philanthropic giving. DAFs provide a streamlined mechanism for donors but have faced criticism for the gap between contributions received and grants distributed. The regulatory environment around DAFs continues to evolve.

AI adoption in US philanthropy is accelerating. According to the Center for Effective Philanthropy, 81% of foundations report some degree of AI usage, though enterprise-wide adoption remains limited at just 4% of organisations. Privacy and security concerns (cited by 55% of respondents), lack of necessary skills (43%), and uncertainty about use cases (40%) remain the chief barriers. Despite this, 91% of funders expect AI to have a positive impact within the next three years (CEP, 2025).

What is happening in European grantmaking?

European grant management sits at the intersection of strong data protection regulation, diverse national charity law, and a public-sector funding culture that tends towards detailed audit and compliance requirements. GDPR, which came into force in 2018, continues to shape how funders collect, store and process applicant data across the EU and EEA.

In May 2025, the European Commission adopted a simplification proposal reducing annual administrative costs by an estimated EUR 300 million for organisations under 750 employees, including targeted changes to record-keeping rules for data protection (European Commission, 2025). This is significant for the many small and medium foundations operating across Europe.

The European Foundation Centre and Philea (Philanthropy Europe Association) have been working towards greater cross-border collaboration, but progress is slow. Unlike the UK, where a single Charity Commission provides a unified register, European funders must navigate dozens of national regulatory frameworks. A funder in Germany making a grant to an organisation in Romania faces a different compliance landscape than one funding domestically.

Public-sector grantmaking in Europe, including EU structural funds and national government programmes, tends to be heavily process-driven, with detailed procurement rules and extensive audit requirements. This creates both a demand for robust grant management systems and a cultural expectation of thorough documentation that can be at odds with the proportionate, trust-based approach gaining ground in the UK and US.

Nordic countries have emerged as leaders in transparent, outcomes-focused grantmaking, with strong traditions of public accountability and open data. The Netherlands and Belgium have active foundation sectors with growing interest in digital transformation, though adoption of dedicated grant management platforms remains uneven across the continent.

How is the Global South reshaping philanthropic practice?

The Global South is not simply a recipient of international funding. It is increasingly a generator of philanthropic innovation, with local giving cultures and community-led models that challenge assumptions rooted in Western grantmaking traditions.

In Africa, approximately 65% of nonprofits receive individual donations from Africans within and outside the continent (EPIC Africa, 2024). The growth of middle-class giving and the rise of African philanthropists are creating a new domestic funding ecosystem. Intermediary organisations that receive large grants from Global North foundations and redistribute them as smaller, locally informed grants are a growing model, though questions about power dynamics and overhead costs persist.

Major commitments continue to flow into the region. The Mastercard Foundation and UNHCR pledged USD 300 million for refugee education, while the Beginnings Fund committed USD 600 million for newborn survival across sub-Saharan Africa. These large-scale programmes require sophisticated grant management, but the technology infrastructure available to local implementing partners often lags behind.

Mobile-first approaches are a defining feature. In contexts where desktop computers are scarce but smartphone penetration is high, grant management tools need to work on small screens and low-bandwidth connections. Verification processes must also adapt: where formal charity registers may not exist or may be incomplete, funders rely more heavily on community references, site visits and relationship-based due diligence.

The shift towards "shifting power" and locally led development has implications for grant management everywhere. It challenges funders to reconsider who designs application forms, who defines success metrics, and who controls reporting timelines. These are questions of system design, not just technology.

What role is AI playing in grantmaking worldwide?

AI is moving from experimental pilots to operational tooling across the grant management lifecycle, but adoption is uneven and the most meaningful applications are often more mundane than the hype suggests.

The most immediate productivity gains come from automating routine administrative tasks. AI can extract structured data from uploaded documents, flag incomplete applications, check applicant details against public registers, and draft initial assessment summaries for human review. These are not glamorous applications, but they save significant staff time. According to the Center for Effective Philanthropy (2025), 81% of US foundations report some AI usage, and 94% express interest in increasing it.

Despite this enthusiasm, nearly 90% of foundations provide no AI implementation support to their grantees, and fewer than 15% plan to increase this in the next three years (CEP, 2025). This creates an asymmetry: funders use AI to process applications more efficiently, while applicants still fill in repetitive forms manually.

Tools like Plinth address both sides of this equation. On the funder side, Plinth's AI reads uploaded governance documents and financial statements, runs automated Charity Commission and Companies House checks, and drafts structured assessment feedback that reviewers can edit and approve. On the applicant side, Plinth can auto-fill application fields from previously submitted data, reducing the repetitive burden that charities face when applying to multiple funders. The platform also generates tailored funder reports from underlying programme data, so grantees report once and the system adapts the output to each funder's requirements.

The grant management software market reflects this AI-driven shift, growing at 8-10% annually and projected to reach USD 7.4 billion by 2034 (Precedence Research, 2025). Cloud-based deployment dominates new implementations, with AI features increasingly standard rather than premium add-ons.

What are the shared challenges across regions?

Despite the differences in regulation, culture and infrastructure, funders worldwide face a remarkably similar set of operational challenges. Understanding these shared pain points helps explain why grant management practices are converging.

Volume versus capacity. Application volumes are rising faster than staffing levels. In the UK, foundations have reported dramatic application volume increases, in some cases rising to 100-400% (ACF, 2025). In the US, the combination of reduced government funding and growing social need is driving more organisations towards foundation funding. Staff teams are being asked to process more applications with the same resources, making efficiency gains through technology a necessity rather than a luxury.

The reporting burden. Charities applying to multiple funders face a particular challenge: each funder asks similar but slightly different questions, in different formats, on different timelines. The result is that frontline staff spend hours repackaging the same information. This is a system design problem, not an individual funder problem. Initiatives like IVAR's Better Reporting principles and shared outcome frameworks are attempting to address it, but progress requires collective action. For more on this challenge, see our guide on reducing the burden on grant applicants.

Demonstrating impact credibly. Funders want evidence that their money made a difference, but measuring social outcomes is inherently complex. The tension between rigorous evaluation and proportionate reporting requirements is a live debate in every region. Standardised outcome libraries and shared measurement frameworks are emerging, but adoption remains fragmented.

Data interoperability. Grant data typically lives in silos. Each funder's system stores information in its own format, making it difficult to aggregate learning across a portfolio or share data with partner funders. Open data standards for grantmaking, such as the 360Giving standard in the UK, are a partial solution, but true interoperability remains an aspiration for most of the sector.

How are standards and interoperability evolving?

The push towards common data standards is one of the most significant structural changes in global grantmaking, even if progress is gradual. Standards matter because they determine whether the sector can learn from its collective data or remains trapped in organisational silos.

In the UK, the 360Giving initiative has made substantial progress. Over 200 funders now publish their grants data in a standardised open format, making it possible to search, analyse and map funding patterns across the sector. This transparency benefits both funders (who can see what others are funding) and applicants (who can identify potential funders more efficiently). The hidden costs of manual grant management are particularly acute where data standards are absent.

The US has the IRS Form 990, which provides a baseline of public data on foundation grantmaking, supplemented by organisations like Candid (formerly GuideStar and Foundation Center) that aggregate and standardise this information. However, outcome-level data remains largely unstandardised.

Cross-border grantmaking presents the hardest interoperability challenge. A UK foundation funding partners across Europe, Africa and Asia must navigate multiple regulatory frameworks, currency systems, and reporting conventions. Portable data formats that allow grantees to carry their track record from one funder to another remain largely theoretical, though some platforms are beginning to offer export tools that move in this direction.

Real-time dashboards for public accountability are becoming more common. Funders are publishing live grant trackers, open data feeds, and interactive maps. This transparency serves both public accountability and internal portfolio management, but it requires consistent, structured data to be meaningful.

What can UK funders learn from global practice?

The UK has genuine strengths in grant management, including strong public registers, an active trust-based movement, and a growing ecosystem of purpose-built digital tools. But there are lessons to learn from every region.

From the US: data infrastructure at scale. The American philanthropic sector has invested heavily in shared data infrastructure, from Candid's comprehensive foundation database to standardised reporting frameworks. UK funders could benefit from similar investment in sector-wide data assets.

From Europe: cross-border collaboration. As UK foundations increasingly fund internationally, the European experience of navigating multiple regulatory frameworks is directly relevant. The compliance challenges of cross-border grantmaking are not unique to the EU; they apply to any funder working across jurisdictions.

From the Global South: relationship-based accountability. Where formal registers and credit checks are unavailable, funders have developed sophisticated relationship-based verification methods. These approaches, which prioritise trust and community knowledge over documentary compliance, have lessons for UK funders seeking to reduce bureaucratic burden without sacrificing accountability.

From everywhere: proportionate process design. The most effective grant management systems worldwide share a common design principle: controls should be proportionate to the size and risk of the grant. A GBP 2,000 community grant should not require the same due diligence as a GBP 500,000 multi-year programme. This principle is well established in theory but inconsistently applied in practice. For guidance on designing proportionate processes, see our guide on how to run a modern grants programme.

Tools like Plinth are designed around this principle, allowing funders to configure different levels of checks, assessment depth, and reporting requirements based on grant size and risk. The platform's free tier makes this accessible to smaller funders who might otherwise default to either no system or disproportionately heavy manual processes.

What does the future look like?

Several trends are likely to accelerate over the next two to three years, based on the trajectories visible across all regions.

AI will become standard infrastructure. With 94% of US foundations expressing interest in increasing AI use (CEP, 2025), the question is not whether AI will be widely adopted but how quickly. The most impactful applications will be those that reduce burden on both funders and applicants simultaneously, such as auto-populated applications, AI-drafted reports, and intelligent matching between funders and projects.

Shared outcome frameworks will gain traction. The pressure to demonstrate impact, combined with the desire to reduce reporting burden, will drive adoption of shared outcome libraries. When funders agree on common definitions and metrics, grantees can report once and satisfy multiple funders. This requires collective action and compromise, but the incentives are aligning.

Transparency will increase. Open data publishing, real-time grant trackers, and public reporting of funding decisions are becoming the norm rather than the exception. Funders that resist this trend will face increasing pressure from applicants, the public, and peer organisations.

Platform consolidation will continue. The grant management software market is growing rapidly, but the number of viable platforms serving each market segment will likely decrease as funders gravitate towards integrated solutions that cover the full lifecycle. The era of managing grants across six different spreadsheets and an email inbox is ending, replaced by platforms that handle applications, assessment, agreements, payments, monitoring and impact reporting in a single system. For more on how the software landscape is shifting, see our guide to grant management software.

Power will continue to shift. The movement towards locally led development, trust-based philanthropy, and participatory grantmaking will continue to challenge traditional power dynamics. Technology can support this shift by making processes more transparent and giving grantees more control over their data, but only if it is designed with these values in mind.

FAQs

How much money flows through grant management systems globally each year?

While no single figure captures the total, US foundation giving alone reached USD 109.8 billion in 2024 (Giving USA, 2025), UK foundations distributed GBP 8.24 billion in 2023-24 (ACF, 2025), and OECD official development assistance totalled USD 214.5 billion in 2024. The combined figure across all channels runs well into the hundreds of billions.

Are grant management tools interoperable across countries?

Not yet in any meaningful way. Within countries, standards like 360Giving (UK) and IRS 990 data (US) provide some common ground. Cross-border interoperability remains limited, though open data exports and API-based integrations are improving the situation. Platforms like Plinth support data export in standard formats to facilitate sharing.

Is AI adoption in grantmaking uniform across regions?

No. The US leads in breadth of experimentation, with 81% of foundations reporting some AI use (CEP, 2025). The UK is adopting AI rapidly, particularly for due diligence automation and assessment support. European adoption is more cautious, shaped by GDPR considerations. Global South adoption is early-stage but growing, particularly in mobile-first applications.

What can UK funders learn from the Global South?

Relationship-based accountability models, community-led verification, and flexible reporting approaches all offer lessons for UK funders seeking to reduce bureaucratic burden. The Global South also demonstrates that effective grant management does not require expensive technology; it requires processes designed around trust and proportionality.

How is GDPR affecting European grantmaking?

GDPR requires funders to have clear legal bases for processing applicant data, maintain accurate records, and give individuals rights over their personal information. The European Commission's 2025 simplification measures have eased some record-keeping requirements for smaller organisations. In the UK, the February 2026 charitable soft opt-in exemption has reduced one area of compliance burden for charities.

What is the grant management software market worth?

Market estimates for 2025 range from USD 2.4 billion to USD 3.2 billion, depending on the research firm. The market is growing at 8-10% annually and is projected to reach approximately USD 7.4 billion by 2034 (Precedence Research, 2025). Cloud-based deployment accounts for roughly 65% of new implementations.

Will AI replace grant assessors?

No. AI is most effective at automating routine tasks such as data extraction, eligibility screening and initial document review. The judgement calls that define good grantmaking, including assessing organisational capacity, evaluating programme design, and weighing strategic fit, require human expertise. The most effective model is human-in-the-loop, where AI handles preparation and humans make decisions.

How can small funders keep pace with these global trends?

Small funders do not need large budgets or technical teams to benefit from these shifts. Platforms like Plinth, which offers a free tier, provide access to AI-assisted assessment, automated due diligence checks, and structured reporting without requiring a dedicated IT function. The key is to start with the highest-value automation, typically due diligence and report generation, and build from there.

Recommended next pages

• Reducing the Burden on Grant Applicants — Practical approaches to proportionate applications and reporting
• The Hidden Costs of Manual Grant Management — Where time and money disappear in spreadsheet-based processes
• How Covid-19 Changed Grant Management — The pandemic reforms that stuck and what funders kept
• Top Grant Management Software Comparison — Feature-by-feature comparison of leading platforms
• How to Run a Modern Grants Programme — Best-practice guide from applications to data-driven reporting

Last updated: February 2026