AI for Funders: The Future of Grantmaking

An in-depth look at how artificial intelligence is changing the way foundations and philanthropists allocate funds.

By Plinth Team

AI for Funders: The Future of Grantmaking

Artificial intelligence is already helping funders make fairer, faster and better evidenced decisions across the grant lifecycle.

  • Efficiency: Automate reading, checks and summarising so staff spend more time on strategy and relationships.
  • Consistency: Apply criteria uniformly and capture rationales transparently for audit and learning.
  • Impact focus: Turn narrative reports into portfolio-level insights and stories you can share with trustees and donors.

What “AI for funders” really means

AI in grantmaking refers to machine-learning and natural‑language tools that read applications, check documents, match eligibility, spot risks, and synthesise learning across programmes. In practice, it augments human reviewers with faster analysis and clearer evidence, while keeping people in charge of decisions.

Where AI helps today

Across the workflow, AI helps with:

  • Application intake: classifying by theme/area, flagging missing information, and extracting budgets to reduce back‑and‑forth.
  • Due diligence: checking charity registration (Charity Commission), company status (Companies House), sanctions (OFSI) and policy coverage to speed compliance.
  • Assessment: summarising proposals against criteria, surfacing evidence and drafting feedback notes for consistent reviews and audit trails.
  • Monitoring and reporting: reading progress reports, tagging outcomes and locations, and comparing expected vs actual results to improve portfolio visibility.

Benefits for UK funders

  • Compliance confidence: Automated checks against the Charity Commission register, Companies House, and the UK consolidated sanctions list (OFSI) provide an auditable trail of verifications.
  • Fairness and accessibility: Consistent screening reduces reviewer variability and helps smaller organisations get clear, actionable feedback.
  • Better board reporting: Rapidly convert dozens of narrative updates into a concise pack showing outputs, outcomes and geographic reach.

Risks, governance and how to manage them

AI should be used with strong human oversight. Good governance includes:

  • Clear decision accountability and reviewer sign‑off.
  • A documented data‑protection approach aligned to UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018.
  • Transparent criteria and explainability of scoring assistance.
  • Bias checks on sample decisions; routes to challenge and correct.

Authoritative guidance is available from the Information Commissioner’s Office and UK Government resources cited below.

An implementation roadmap

  1. Define outcomes and constraints: what decisions need to be quicker or more consistent? What must never be automated?
  2. Map data sources: Charity Commission and Companies House records, safeguarding and governance policies, accounts, and reports.
  3. Pilot one high‑volume area first (e.g., eligibility and due diligence) with a human‑in‑the‑loop sign‑off.
  4. Establish documentation: what was checked, by whom, and why – saved to your case record.
  5. Expand to assessment assistance and portfolio learning once the foundations are working well.

Why funders choose Plinth

Plinth brings the capabilities above into a single, secure workflow: automated UK due diligence (Charity Commission, Companies House and OFSI checks), criteria‑aligned summaries for reviewers, and AI‑powered impact reporting. It integrates with existing systems or runs end‑to‑end, and always keeps a human reviewer in the loop. Many foundations report cutting review time while improving the quality of written feedback to applicants and trustees.

Frequently asked questions

Will AI replace human decision‑making in grantmaking?

No. In UK best practice, AI supports reviewers by summarising evidence and performing checks; people retain accountability for funding decisions.

Is AI compatible with UK GDPR?

Yes, provided you have a lawful basis for processing and appropriate safeguards. Tools such as Plinth implement data‑minimisation, encryption and access controls.

How do we explain AI‑assisted scoring to applicants?

Be transparent about the role of AI, publish your criteria, and ensure all applicants receive constructive feedback. Plinth drafts personalised notes for approval.

Can smaller foundations benefit?

Absolutely. Focusing on due diligence and applicant feedback first usually delivers quick wins with minimal change management.

Recommended next reading

Citations and further reading

About the author

This article was produced by the Plinth Editorial Team – product, research and delivery specialists behind Plinth, based in London. Updated August 2025.